Wikipedia talk:Vandalism won by 2009

WP:DENY
Not to exaggerate too much, but I have a big, giant, immensely fat doubt that this article is at all WP:DENY friendly. If the collection of page blankers, WoW wannabes, etc see this, it's only going to cause swelling egos, eventually more vandalism, and ultimately more work for us. If you're going to reply, please throw a talkback template on my talkpage. Thanks. ♠ The Ace of Spades ♣ ♥ ♦   04:43, 10 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Also it is flat our wrong on at least two fronts. Firstly if you measure vandalisms success by how long it stays up for, vandalism is losing - mainly because of bots, we are cleaning things up faster than we used to. Secondly the idea that most edits are vandalism or vandal reversion - I can see how a huggler might think that if tey didn't realise that huggle targets likely vandalism.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  10:52, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

And blocks have become a lot more common. How can you vandalise without an account? TomBarker23 (talk) 13:03, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Part of this page seems to violate WP:NPOV...
Surely the section on How To Reduce Vandalism constitutes a NPOV violation? FOr example, it begins with In My Humble Opinion... TomBarker23 (talk) 13:02, 5 January 2018 (UTC)