Wikipedia has long done the same thing for Tor relays, anonymous VPNs, and other ISPs that do this kind of proxy acceleration. It is a tricky issue, but I have

Wikipedia has long done the same thing for Tor relays, anonymous VPNs, and other ISPs that do this kind of proxy acceleration. It is a tricky issue, but I have a lot of sympathy for the folks at Wikipedia trying to deal with absolutely massive amounts of spam and malicious editing. I'm not an admin there, but I read it a lot and lurk a bit behind the scenes, and maybe fix a few typos every now and then. If you've ever moderated a forum or a comment section with even just a bit of popularity, you know how hard that can be. They're a top 10 website globally, so getting spam on a popular Wikipedia article even for just a few seconds can get you massive pageviews. Then to add to the challenge, Wikipedia is one of the only user-generated content sites that *do not require you to register an account.* Unthinkable in today's internet. From what I understand, this is what the OP is concerned about: people editing without having to register an account. I have no idea why this is so important to some Wikipedia folks. You don't have to give your real name or personal info when you register an account. You don't even have to give an e-mail address, much less validate it. Editing without an account is incredibly generous in the first place. So I see the reason behind the restrictions on anonymous editing from IPs like Tor relays, VPNs, open anonymous proxies, and ISPs with proxy acceleration where large-scale long-term campaigns have been launched from across the /32 block. It might take a little work to find an internet connection on another ISP or to have a friend or family create it for you. But I don't see it as some huge injustice.