137ben wrote:Is there a way to determine who changed the template?
The template was edited in part of a long string of vandalism that appears to be from the same source, but comes from varying IP addresses (likely through open proxies). I think it might be difficult to track down the computer from which the vandalism originated.
Extrementhusiast wrote:We may need to impose some additional requirements for signups on the wiki, such as a signup on the forums
I think that this would be too restrictive. We want the wiki to be as open as possible to editing while not inviting too much vandalism. Making the signup process too difficult may deter more casual editors from contributing.
ssaamm wrote:Is there some way to make it so edits and articles have to be approved to be made?
It would be far too much work for one person or a small group of people to approve every edit to the wiki (especially when many edits may be minor, such as correcting typos).
Extrementhusiast wrote:a lot of the IP addresses start with "173.234". What does that mean?
This indicates that these addresses are in the same block, and so are all owned by a single local internet registry, such as an internet service provider. This isn't necessarily the fault of the service provider, as many spammers operate covertly through other people's networks.
For now, I would suggest a moratorium on editing without an account, which would prevent much of the recent vandalism. I am not sure how to prevent the vandalism that has been made through actual accounts and has gotten through the simple anti link-spam measures currently in place; however, Wikipedia has done a lot to prevent vandalism, so if anyone is sufficiently interested, he or she may want to look through Wikipedia:Vandalism
and Wikipedia counter-vandalism tools
A final note on vandalism: Edits made to the wiki in good faith
are not considered vandalism, even if they are misinformed or incorrect (essentially any edits actually about cellular automata would not be considered vandalism).