This is a continuation from another thread where the sidenote about Wikipedia being better if it had forced anonymity got more attention than the more central topic.
What is forced anonymity? 4chan is an obvious example to how it works. In Wikimedia terms, this means there is no identity - no one can see your IP except the site operators. You can't see anyone elses' either.
The goal of forced anonymity is to prevent persona building. Personas do have some small benefit on the current Wikipedia, in that people are scared of damage to their personas reputation, but overhwhelmingly this makes Wikipedia worse in my matter, because contributions are no longer valued based on their own merit, but based on who made it. This makes it too easy for POV pushers with sockpuppets to make themselves appear hugely popular and capable of destructive edits without repercussions - because no one can call them on it.
Sure, there would be vandalism in forced anonymity. But vandalism can always be reverted. Except when it's done by a high-power cabal member persona. That's right, you can't undo all vandalism if it's done by a high power editor. With forced anonymity, every bit of vandalism can be undone.
To put it short, it would remove any and all MMORPG aspects from Wikipedia.