Bureaucrats, checkuser, interwiki, staff, Administrators
9,160
edits
WikiIndex talk:Spam control policy: Difference between revisions
→spam - do you 'undo' or 'rollback' on existing valid articles: : ''I don't understand this. Let me try to reflect back what I think you are saying. If you use rollback, then the spam is removed from the history of the page? Best, ~~~''
Hoof Hearted (talk | contribs) |
MarkDilley (talk | contribs) (→spam - do you 'undo' or 'rollback' on existing valid articles: : ''I don't understand this. Let me try to reflect back what I think you are saying. If you use rollback, then the spam is removed from the history of the page? Best, ~~~'') |
||
| Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
An interesting consideration . . . looking at some edit histories of articles I update, I notice that when spam has been discovered, the edit gets reverted by using the 'undo' function. This can have a problem, in that the spam is still there in the article (by using either the 'diff' or the timestamp). This may not be a big problem to generic trivial spam, but for more contentious spam (such as illegal activities, child porn images, etc) this can be a real problem. So can I suggest that when spam is added to existing articles, the admins use the 'rollback' function instead - as this then permanently deletes the offending spam edit, and wont then show up in the articles edit history. --[[User:Hoof Hearted|Hoof Hearted]] • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 01:39, 26 January 2012 (PST) | An interesting consideration . . . looking at some edit histories of articles I update, I notice that when spam has been discovered, the edit gets reverted by using the 'undo' function. This can have a problem, in that the spam is still there in the article (by using either the 'diff' or the timestamp). This may not be a big problem to generic trivial spam, but for more contentious spam (such as illegal activities, child porn images, etc) this can be a real problem. So can I suggest that when spam is added to existing articles, the admins use the 'rollback' function instead - as this then permanently deletes the offending spam edit, and wont then show up in the articles edit history. --[[User:Hoof Hearted|Hoof Hearted]] • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 01:39, 26 January 2012 (PST) | ||
: ''I don't understand this. Let me try to reflect back what I think you are saying. If you use rollback, then the spam is removed from the history of the page? Best, [[MarkDilley]]'' | |||