User blog comment:Unownshipper/A Serious Consideration/@comment-1330314-20161014205626

I might not be as up-to-date on the vandalism situations here, but looking at this, it feels like most of the issues pushing towards this come from an extremely small subset of users, who are likely determined enough to not be stopped by a relatively straightforward account creation process, especially since they can change their IP. Testxyz has been an issue for quite some time, and when I was much more active on this wiki, I had to deal with a few particularly nasty vandals, some of which tried to use sockpuppeting to bypass bans.

From experience, vandals usually fall into two groups: those in Group 1 are one-timers who have fun writing obscenities on a page, or who might even spread to several articles, but who quickly get bored and stop. These are usually not too difficult to deal with, and I feel are about as prominent as anon users who do actually contribute positively. Those in Group 2 usually have some kind of a grudge or agenda, and are willing to do anything to bypass the system during their sprees, which includes changing their IP and their account. In the case of Group 1, Login-Only doesn't really provide any essential benefits besides cutting down on some occasional annoyance (and, even then, it might just hurt the wiki at least as much as it would help it), and in the case of Group 2, Login-Only is unlikely do do all that much to stop vandals, and the better way to deal with them is to try and cast a wide enough IP ban or lock a page until they move onto something else.

TL;DR: I am personally opposed to Login-Only. However, as a mostly inactive user here, I am fairly out of touch with the wiki's most recent goings-on, and may have missed some more recent vandalism sprees. However, from the time where I was much more active, I haven't run into many situations that Login-Only would have drastically improved.