Help talk:Talk pages/Anonymous talk pages proposal

Defining X (days)

• I would like a larger X. At least 30. They often come back every few weeks and do the same things. It's inconvenient to have to force people to go through the anon's history to see if they censored their own criticism. Hell, why are people allowed to censor their own criticism at all?? - Omegatron 18:04, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
• I also would like a much larger X. Some anon IPs are associated with repeated vandalism. When a vandal starts attacking multiple pages, often the only way to find and fix them all is to use the "user contributions" link and evaluate each edit made by the anon user(s). When I get done, I want to record that "I've investigated all edits from xxx date to yyy date and reverted the inappropriate ones" so that when the vandal returns, the next poor editor doing cleanup can start where I stopped and won't have to investigate each of the edits already checked. That recordkeeping about vandalism should be kept for a very long time. (If I had my druthers, I'd never remove those comments.) Rossami (talk) 16:54, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
• I'm generally in favor of the sentiment presented in this proposal, but my first thought for X was 5 days. Anywhere between 5 and 10 days seems reasonable to me. But, I also don't think comments should necessarily be removed after a week, as some IPs can be widely shared among anons, such as in a university computer lab or in a public library. slambo 17:14, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
• I think it's a good idea, and don't particularly care for the exact value of X. Radiant_>|< 17:44, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
• I would be happier with a longer "stay" time than 7 days. I was thinking at least a month, as many vandals make seemingly regularly scheduled return visits. Also, as far as I can tell, this isn't a proposal about when comments SHOULD be cleared. It's about when an anonymous user CAN wipe them. Joyous (talk) 17:49, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
• I'm not particularly attached to any given X. I'm hoping to avoid the creation of unmanageably large talk pages, but X could probably be a month without serious ill effects. As Joy says the intent is to prevent premature removal of comments, not to force their removal. (Her point about recurring long-term vandals and the need for a larger X is also well taken.) I expect that the only situation where this policy would actually be called upon is when a vandal is trying to whitewash his User Talk page. If a good but anonymous editor blanks a welcome notice or removes a polite and productive discussion after its completion, I doubt that there would be any objection. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 18:41, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
• Personally, I'm inclined to a smaller "X"- perhaps 5 or 7 days. I feel this way because many IP addresses are shared by multiple users (especially AOL IP addresses). When a new anon user comes on and sees the messages, s/he will feel inclined to wipe the slate clean. Thus, if we force the comments to stay on for more time, the user will feel disgruntled, IMHO. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 16:17, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
• I think a midrange X would be good; 15 days perhaps? (Half of 30, rougly double 7.) Also, and more importantly, I'd like to see an amendment of the text that says something along the line of "As an anonymous user, you have no right to control the content of this page." A lot of IPs remove comments from the pages or add nasty notes, then scream about removal because it is "thier" talk page. Registered users are allowed to control the content (within limits) but anons shouldn't have content control. I have no problem with them removing notices under this proposal, unless it is abused to allow removal of sockpuppet notices, IP templates, etc. -- Essjay · Talk 02:43, August 11, 2005 (UTC)