Community
Participate
Working Groups
Looking at the wiki I found bogus links on the GSoC page. They appear to have been introduced by two different accounts. http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php?title=Google_Summer_of_Code&diff=288125&oldid=287850 (Ronaldrock56.gmail.com) http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php?title=Google_Summer_of_Code&diff=287850&oldid=285612 (Ah6806499.gmail.com) Now the links are part of the history ... :( Is there a way to purge them?
Apparently the users only spammed the GSoC page. However, you might want to scan the wiki for more links/spam. Not sure if it's doable in an easy way.
For the last couple of years, the frequency at which we get spammed is steadily increasing -- here on Wiki, and on the Forums. Bugs not so much. With the wiki this is problematic... Removing content from history is difficult, and therein lies the appeal for spammers -- their spam links persist. I'm not sure what the solution is.
> Now the links are part of the history ... :( Is there a way to purge them? recaptcha on the account creation page would help... But then again, we'd have to recapcha the entire wiki... *sigh*
I like that any authenticated user can edit the wiki. My hope/belief is that this gives us more value than we lose to the spammers. Having said that, I am concerned that spammers open us to potential for misleading information. I've undone a couple of changes that an uninitiated observer might mistake for legitimate content. Is it time to consider restricting access? Here are my thoughts. These are just thoughts, not anything intended to be any sort of plan. In the extreme, we could limit write access to committers. I don't like this idea as the ability to crowdsource is pretty powerful. It might be a reasonable short-term fix while we sort this out. Do we have any means of gathering statistics regarding how many people outside of the committers actually do author content? Is crowdsourcing actually happening? Does MediaWiki have any means of moderating changes? Some thoughts regarding moderation: * All committers and those individuals otherwise deemed as trustworthy can just write to the wiki. * Some number of editors will have to approve content changes made by non-committers * Editors can declare a non-committer contributor as trustworthy In my mind, this can only work if we can identify a handful of mostly non-EF staff editors to help with moderation and automate everything else. Webmaster involvement in moderation would be a fail IMHO.
This bug hasn't had any activity in quite some time. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet. If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant. -- The automated Eclipse Genie.
I'm going to close this as 'fixed' simply because the spam content in the original request has been removed. At this time since nobody aside from Jesse W. has requested the power to help resolve spam I think it's simply going to fall on Webmaster to deal with it as it's reported. While that isn't ideal it does have the upside that we can also remove access to other parts of eclipse.org(bugzilla) while cleaning up. -M.
