I initially wanted to oppose based on the fact that on-the-spot editing is a founding principle (as at least one other editor stated). As of now, WP:mostv only clarifies it an be done from the main article. Sixteen years and 5 million articles later, we can do fairly well without the editors who decline to create a completely anonymous account simply because they have an aversion to registration of any kind (or, dare I say. It certainly is not what User:Risker defines as a 'massive amount to lose' (but I agree that some will/may be lost). They are generally considered "safe" as only interface-administrators may make changes to them. It was such a small amount of edits that it went under the radar, and they never got blocked. So, prior to this bot breaking links to it, there may have been as many as a thousand perfectly valid instances where I used it, that still pointed. Furthermore, such a file might serve as a good basis for extending from points into polygons via other tools, such as 14 or 15 (or perhaps there is a geojson editing tool somewhere in the innards of Mediawiki?).
Bobbychan193 ( talk ) 18:25, (UTC) Prefer. The only advantage to IP editing I can think of right now is the common abuse by registered editors who sock to perform actions forbidden at Wikipedia. It still won't mention font size or accessibility, but it would be more accurate. Any help is appreciated. Sdkb ( talk ) 02:44, (UTC) What is the point of this Vital articles anyway? I only see articles where the IP has accidentally broken the date ( recent example ) so there are many more changes. There's no way having an account "snares people deeper into the social side of Wikipedia" if they don't want it to - this is just nonsense. The only thing so far I have seen is complaints about the process here, and a refusal to address the arguments presented. Epicgenius ( talk ) 16:57, 7 November 2019 (UTC) Oppose....
Singles groups in Charlotte - Meetup Meet New Friends Sites Meetups near Charlotte, North Carolina Meetup We would like to show you a description here but the site wont allow. Find groups in Charlotte, North Carolina about Singles and meet people in your local community who share your interests. Meet New People Site 10 Ways to Meet Singles in Charlotte, NC (Dating Guide) MeetMe - Chat and Meet New People Meet New Friends Sites - If you are looking for love then you've come to the right place. Our online dating service can help you find the man or woman of your dreams.
Eharmony Online Dating Site for Like-Minded Singles Wikipedia:Village pump (all) - Wikipedia Find Meetups and meet people in your local community who share your interests. Start a new group. Find a group in Charlotte Imagine what you could do with the right people by your side. Planadultereparis eu wil / Esort toulouse Check out groups in the Charlotte area and give one a try. New Places and New Faces. Meet New People Site - If you are looking for love then you've come to the right place.
Thai - Shemales Time - Porn videos More than 80 of singles on the site have earned at least one degree from a higher education institution (e.g., bachelors, masters, and/or doctorate). Mature men and women who are ready to settle down are also drawn to the site 90 are 30 years old or over, and 100 want marriage or a long-term relationship. MeetMe helps you find new people nearby who share your interests and want to chat now! 'film erotique' Search Video De, sexe, et Extraits Porno Gratuits! Its fun, friendly, and free!
Meet on site place liberti e
Meet on site place liberti e
No MOS explicitly states what WP:anime is doing is incorrect or wrong. Much of what we do on Wikipedia is not explicitly stated. Blue Pumpkin Pie ( talk ) 20:50, 1 November 2019 (UTC) Not subordinate - interconnected. For those who live under repressive regimes, the ability to distribute their edits across different IP addresses and not centralize their contributions under a single identity makes it harder for those regimes to gather evidence and persecute them for helping build our encyclopedia. S am W alton ( talk ) 09:37, 6 November 2019 (UTC) The essay at Wikipedia:Systemic bias attempts to address a wide variety of biases. Also, requiring registration would more like than not discourage actual good-faith editors while doing nothing whatsoever to thwart vandalism, especially since we already get a lot of accounts that register just to vandalise/have a laugh at our expense, and that is before autocon/EC-buster socks. Xaosflux Talk 22:20, (UTC) @ Xaosflux : They were a mixture of very old, old, and new. A very small number of editors has been inspired by it in the past, but that's all. On a distinct tack, if a RS says it's an endorsement and it isn't blatantly vague, then that should also suffice.
I really had to step out of my comfort zone, Erin wrote in an article for. These often suffer vandalism (or otherwise harmful edits) that goes unnoted for very long periods. It was 50KB worth of removals and certainly a bold edit by size alone, so I reverted them (temporarily) based on WP:BRD. WP:anime creates franchise articles first before making the respected list. We can't afford to close down the major conduit that brings us new editors, particularly given the (generally evidence-based) barriers that have been put in place for account creation. QuackGuru ( talk ) 19:50, (UTC) Oppose as counterproductive and yet more "Fuck Tha IPs" bullshit. Some can be renamed, others should be redirected or merged. Citizendium wanted more than just registration. It seems to me that GreenC's justification that vandals could hide bogus improper links in archive-url fields would only be true for those short, obfuscated links.
Or maybe I'm over-thinking this! This is clearly not the case. It should only make the list when an independent third party thinks the endorsement is significant enough to report. Maybe because in a private window there's no cookie to say I've seen it already? The language, mathematics, and literature example I gave. Postdlf ( talk ) 16:27, (UTC) Although I'm not in support of outright registration, I think it's naive to assume making it harder to vandalize wouldn't have a noticeable impact.
Site rencontre libertine du pas de calais lens net echangeWhat X is I don't know? However, without registering you can create a draft article at any time and submit it through AfC, but you will not have the benefits of a registered account. Blue Pumpkin Pie ( talk ) 11:58, 3 November 2019 (UTC) I don't feel the need to respond anymore because i don't consider any of your points valid. Kudpung ( talk ) 04:21, (UTC) Kudpung, I think you have reminded me at least five times of autoconfirmed now being required to create a mainspace page. 21:55, (UTC) I think a registration nag/limitations till registered is n't like captchas. Restricting that ability and forcing readers to commit to an identity within the community before they are ready is not a good idea. Especially when a news story breaks, anonymous editors are the lifeblood of content creation; TonyB meet on site place liberti e points out other areas of advantage. Again, use a bit of common sense. It is a situation where both parts of the MOS have to work together, MOS:anime for the anime aspects of the article and MOS:TV for the television aspects, just as the article also has to work with WP:V, WP:OR, MOS:access etc. I humour you here by answering your loaded question and you write "how often do you think it's a problem for the readers who will never see this discussion"?
Meet on site place liberti e
|Meet on site place liberti e||310|
|Meet on site place liberti e||537|
|Meet on site place liberti e||287|
|Meet on site place liberti e||760|
|Blog rencontres seniors st johns||Sexe hard français escort girl bourg en bresse|
This is the second time you've conflated the two. G 18:33, (UTC) this refers to standalone information, and not information itself - Hmm. The locator on Pomoan_languages but it is a painstaking process of tracing in Inkscape. As an oversighter, I can say that the majority of edits that require suppression are made by registered accounts, with a quick review indicating that less than 20 of suppressed edits involve IPs (and a good chunk of those involve registered. So to say nothing changes is absolutely not true. Many of us have the experience of regretting our choice of user-name or at least considering preferable alternatives. They tend to have less history and consequently their perspectives have the potential of being new and unencumbered. Wikipedia was first and had already attained a level of popularity that Citizendium had to compete with.
But even that tiny bit of extra work will stop tons of deliberate vandalism. Plus if you're committed to this level of trollery, I image you'll just register an account. So i dont understand why you claim this is "absolutely" incorrect. Its a flirting technique thats been around for centuries. Czar 16:00, 3 November 2019 (UTC) Support per above, but also make DiscussionCloser a gadget too. I certainly wouldn't want to, especially given their invasiveness - this would make Wikipedia similar to sites like Quora and Pinterest, which would force people to log. I feel sure that some enterprising programmer can figure out a way to control those parameters outside the reflist template for those editors enamored with those formats. The lede, for example, doesn't comply with MOS:lead. safemode1 did not solve the problem, suggesting it's not a problem with my scripts.
Many thanks in advance! At the same time, I've seen IPs clearing vandalism and doing gnoming stuff. Xyl 54 ( talk ) 22:53, 5 November 2019 (UTC) PS: Also, I've been told there is a condensed version of WP provided by google; can you tell me what (or where) that is? Not requiring registered accounts allows people to more easily make pests of themselves. I don't find this pattern far-fetched given the growing restrictions we've already been placing on anonymous users in the last few years such as prohibition from mainspace page creation. Leviv ich 01:07, (UTC) I think the proposal as written isn't too helpful. (I can't duplicate this one).
Feel free to to start an RfC on that and change. Kerry ( talk ) 22:12, 3 November 2019 (UTC) Interesting. I would expect the French language Wikipedia to have more participation by French speakers than Spanish speakers, but is it an established fact that this is a real problem? Izno ( talk ) 03:16, 2 November 2019 (UTC) Try this safe mode edit link to see if it works without scripts. If you want to dismiss that context, its up to you and you are welcomed to. SportingFlyer T C 08:28, 7 November 2019 (UTC) Discussion of criterion 3 Please give an example of an equivocal or inexplicit endorsement, and why that disqualifies the notability assumed by Criterion. Risker ( talk ) 05:26, (UTC) The recent Canadian election featured several candidates and even a major political party claiming endorsements that hadn't actually been given, mi"ng notable people to imply that an endorsement had been given, and. See meta:Conflicting Wikipedia philosophies for examples. Were Here For You, signing up for eharmony is the first step in finding your next great relationship. They were only very minor correction to grammar or obvious typos, but if I had been required to register due to the importance of Wikipedia I would have done.
That said 'Only' about 27 of those edits are reverted out of 17 of edits that are from IPs is still tens of thousands of edits and too much and does not account for the vandalism of the kind. IJBall ( contribs talk ) 17:34, (UTC) There's nearly 900 pages in the "Lists of anime episodes" category, and my quick inspection indicates that nearly all of them follow the practice of the manga/franchise page being the primary page for the anime adaptation. I would like to place an article edit where I plan to use Youtube as the source. Keep ideas coming, esp. If IP vandalism is both serious and takes months to repair, that would mean that the active editor count per article has fallen below a threshold, and it marks the senescence of Wikipedia as we new.