14 ms·

Yes, this is unfortunately a very big issue and one of the reasons I didn't develop it further.

• layer8 4y ago
  Why are you posting it again then?
  • s1artibartfast 4y ago
    In case you don't realize, I want to let you know that your post comes off as entitled and hostile. It might not be a perfect tool, but it is interesting and freely given. Tools need not be perfect to be shared freely
    • layer8 4y ago
      I found it bewildering that, if they see a “very big issue” with it, so much that they abandoned the project for that reason, that they would repost it again on HN without mentioning that upfront. One thing I missed is that the project hadn’t been open previously, which does explain the repost now, but still it would have been appropriate to mention the insight about its limitations in the submission. Personally I felt misled by the submission text upon reading the GP comment, hence my reaction.
      • akolbe 4y ago
        An IP-based tool is still useful to catch casual malfeasance. The various Twitter bots logging edits from various government IP address ranges for example did highlight interesting edits sometimes. It's just important to remember that this is only the tip of the iceberg. Ultimately it's the structural weakness of Wikipedia that limits how much you can know about the contributors.