File talk:Breakable equipment.jpg
Times this page has been spammed: 3
Now we know what happens when we protect the page that spambots like. This seems to be the new spambot page. ;) --Bale 21:29, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Times this page has been spammed: 5 --Bale 06:56, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Times this page has been spammed: 7 --Heeheehee 23:54, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Times this page has been spammed: 9 --Bale 19:14, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Times this page has been spammed: 10 --Heeheehee 04:13, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Times this page has been spammed: 11 (That's ridiculous. It's not even funny. Seriously it isn't)----Icon315♕ (☎|♤) 23:22, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- You're right that it really isn't funny, but thanks to your "seriously it isn't" comment, I spit tea out my nose. So I guess it was funny after all. Either that or I just have a bad case of reverse-schadenfreude where I take delight in my own misery. --Bale 23:31, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Times this page has been spammed: 12. Ok first of all, why would you spam here? Secondly, should we block this page?----Icon315♕ (☎|♤) 19:54, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- NO! We should not block this page. There was another page on this wiki (whose name escapes me since it was weird) which was spammed exclusively. We didn't use that page for anything, so we deleted it every time the spambot created it. We finally decided to protect that page 3 days before this page became the new spam lightening rod. If we protected this page, the new spambot favorite page might be one that actually gets used. That would be BAD! --Bale 20:53, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- (ASHRM) String Handling Routines or something like that? But yeah, I had originally protected the page but was convinced to unprotect it because of the cool analogy (lightning rod!). It was eventually StD who reprotected it because he got sick of the spam problem. But since it's resurfaced, we really should learn to stop protecting pages. If it spreads to a new page while this one's still unprotected, then we might consider protecting pages en masse (alternative solution, pester Fewyn to restrict editing to logged-in users only, but we'd have to wait for him to respond). But okay, it's been hit 12 times in a row without any other targets coming into sight. Guess we'll have to wait another 25 before being really sure that spambots won't target any other pages. --Heeheehee 21:23, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- Isn't there a way to make it so that only registered users can edit pages? That would keep away lots of spam bots----Icon315♕ (☎|♤) 22:00, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- It seems that only fewyn can change permissions. --Bale 23:49, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yep. "(alternative solution, pester Fewyn to restrict editing to logged-in users only, but we'd have to wait for him to respond)" --Heeheehee 05:56, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- (ASHRM) String Handling Routines or something like that? But yeah, I had originally protected the page but was convinced to unprotect it because of the cool analogy (lightning rod!). It was eventually StD who reprotected it because he got sick of the spam problem. But since it's resurfaced, we really should learn to stop protecting pages. If it spreads to a new page while this one's still unprotected, then we might consider protecting pages en masse (alternative solution, pester Fewyn to restrict editing to logged-in users only, but we'd have to wait for him to respond). But okay, it's been hit 12 times in a row without any other targets coming into sight. Guess we'll have to wait another 25 before being really sure that spambots won't target any other pages. --Heeheehee 21:23, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
