User:Brambleberry of RiverClan/Adoption/Missionedit
Brambleberry's Adoption Homepage • Discussion || Current Adoptees: OcelotHod • Khan Tiger • Austinuity • Yashowardhani • CORREZE || Recent Graduates: Missionedit
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 (1) Would you prefer to be called Missionedit, Anastasia, or something else? I personally would prefer if you called me Brambleberry.
(1) I would personally like to be called Anastasia (2) I have only a few specifc questions:
(3) What do you mean by picture to represent me?
I would like a gray/silver cat for my picture, similar to Silverstream of RiverClan from the Warriors series, if possible :)
Thanks! The picture is great! Um, I think I would like to learn some of the basic WikiMarkup first and then maybe I can take everything alot better. lol
Lesson 1: Wiki markup[edit]One thing that you should know about my lessons is that they are usually taken from detailed Wikipedia policies and are made so that a novice can understand them. It's not exactly dumbing down, but more like not hearing Wiki-jargon. This one is taken from WP:MARKUP. I don't touch on everything that the page does, only the basics that you'll probably be using. If you need something else, you're free to venture out to the page. Headings[edit]You can see how the Lesson 1 has two equal signs to either side of it and so it shows up big on the page. This subheading is a little smaller and has three equal signs. You can use anywhere from two to six equal signs to show different headings and subheadings. You can't get smaller than six, but there is no reason you should be using it in the first place. On any article, having at least four headings and subheadings of any kind generates a table of contents, which is why one shows up right now. Line breaks[edit]I explained this just a little already. Pressing "Enter" once changes nothing visibly, but can make it easier to see and change things when you edit. Entering twice causes a new paragraph. You can use Indenting[edit]Much like increasing the number of equal signs on either side of a word causes different levels of subheadings, increasing the number of colons before a response increases the amount of indentation. You use indentation (as I have) to respond to someone. For example, you use no colons. I use one colon before my response and it is indented. This means I respond to you. If you then respond to me, you would generally use two colons. If I were to respond to that, then I would use three colons. If a third party then decided to respond to the original question, they would use one colon. The idea is to always use one colon more than what you're responding to. Lists[edit]There are two main kinds of lists: bullet points and numbered. Numbered lists are generally for anything ranking or order-related, and everything else would be a bullet. You use an asterisk for a bullet and a number sign/pound sign for a numbered list. Like with colons, adding more asterisks or number signs will cause indentation. Text formatting[edit]This is probably one of the most helpful parts of the section. Adding two singular apostrophes to either side of a phrase will make it italic. Adding three single apostrophes to each side will make it bold. Adding five to either side will make it bold and italic. We generally use italics in lieu of underlines, so underlines are rarely, if ever, needed. I stress that you use single apostrophes, because some people put quotation marks when they think it will make italic text, and it doesn't. You shouldn't be using other text formatting on article space except in special circumstances. Links[edit]To link to something on Wikipedia, simply put two brackets to either side. Like if I want to link to Fiona Kelleghan, I would put Don't worry about tacking on an extra ending; the link will just cover the whole world. For example, There are also external links, links to something outside Wikipedia. To do that, you only put one bracket to either side and paste the URL. Then you put a space and say what you want it to be called. For example, linking to the official Warriors page would mean posting End of Lesson 1[edit]Pictures, citations, and templates will be covered shortly. Do you have any questions on these?
Lesson 2: Pictures[edit]This lesson is mostly taken from WP:PICTURE, which is already mostly for beginners, but I've only taken the really important stuff. Adding pictures[edit]Adding a picture on Wikipedia is a relatively easy thing to do. To get a simple picture, you simply put two brackets to either side of a file much as you would with an internal link and the picture will show up where you put it, much as your Silverstream-esque picture looks. When adding an infobox (which you will learn more about in lesson 3, though judging by your userbox you know how already) and you want to put a picture in, you generally find where it says "image" and add it there without the brackets or the prefix "File:" or "Image". You do, however, add the suffix ".jpg", ".png", etc. If an infobox is different, it will say so on the infobox page. Thumbnails and adding a caption[edit][[File:Kot22.jpg|thumb]]. This would put a light gray box around the picture and a double rectangle icon ( ) to the bottom right. You can add a caption by putting another pipe after "|thumb" and before the right brackets and then putting what you want to caption it after the pipe. For example, to achieve the appearance to the right, you would put [[File:Kot22.jpg|thumb|Silverstream]].
Do not add a thumbnail to a picture in an infobox. To add a caption, there will generally be something that says "image caption" underneath where it says "image". That would, as it suggests, be where you put the caption. Placement[edit]When you add a thumbnail to an image, it automatically aligns to the right. If you do not add a thumbnail to it, you will have to put "|right" after the file name and before the right brackets. If you want it to align to the left, whether or not it is a thumbnailed image, you will add "|left" right before the right brackets. This will generally put it either right after the file name or right after "|thumb" depending on if you use it or not. It's important to make sure that not every image is aligned to the right, as if they all are it can lead to a stack of images messing up the text placement. Size[edit]If you add a thumbnail to an image, it will automatically be 220 pixels. The amount of pixels that we are referring to is width, not length. To change the size, you put "|(# of pixels)px" before the right bracket and then set it to whatever size you want. Typically it's good to use "show preview" to see how large the image is going to be. The "show preview" button shows how your changes will look. It will help you set the pixel size to whatever size you want. Sometimes an infobox will have a separate area for image size where you wil type in the amount of pixels, e.g. 250px. Most don't, however. They will generally default to something, but if you're unhappy with the default, you will add "|250px" or whatever amount of pixels you want it to be after the file name in the "image" portion. For example, End of lesson 2[edit]Do you have any questions?
Why does it have words and numbers at the top and bottom?
Lesson 3: Citations[edit]This lesson is mostly taken from Wikipedia:Citing sources. Types of citation[edit]There are five kinds of citation on Wikipedia:
When and why to cite sources[edit]We cite sources to maintain credibility on Wikipedia. Sources should not be included for common knowledge (e.g. "Snow melts in winter"), and should always be provided for controversy. We will go over this more in lesson 6, reliable sources. Inline citations[edit]We use inline citations so that we don't clutter up the actual article. All of the information is shown at the bottom in a section called "References". To make this succeed, we put Studies indicate that providing a sense of "flying" for a fighting cricket increases its drive.[1] == References == What information to include[edit]Simply, anything that you can! Citation style[edit]Wikipedia has a strange style, so it's best not to try to use MLA or APA. Instead, look at Template:Citation Style 1. Pick the one that you need. Let's go with Text-source integrity[edit]To maintain text-source integrity, do not place information so that it is construed that the information came from a source it doesn't. Consider the following. Assume the source is the one we've been using. Studies indicate that providing a sense of "flying" for a fighting cricket increases its drive.[1] Now consider the following sentence: Studies indicate that providing a sense of "flying" for a fighting cricket increases its drive, especially the field cricket.[1] Nowhere in the book does it mention that the field cricket is especially affected by this, so you would need to move the reference or the added information so that it does not appear that way. Citation overkill[edit]Sometimes people add the same source over and over so that twenty instances of it in a row show up. That's when you use "ref name". In the opening ref tag, you replace it with End of lesson 3[edit]Any questions? It can be confusing, I know.
Can you teach me some stuff about copyediting next?
Lesson 4: Copyediting[edit]This lesson is mostly taken from the GOCE (Guild of Copy Editors) page. Guild of Copy Editors[edit]The Guild of Copy Editors (which I can see on your user page you have already joined) is a collaborative effort to copy edit everything that needs it. To "copy edit" basically means going through and checking spelling, grammar, wikilinks, formatting, etc. etc. It means that you're making an unreadable page readable. How to copy edit[edit]The best way to copy edit is to fix all of the spelling, grammar, and basic formatting first. Then you look at the Manual of Style (which we'll talk about later) page for that topic to see if every heading is in the proper order. For example, if I was copy editing a novel, I would go to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Novels to see what order the headings were supposed to be in. The "Manual of Style" is basically a guide for how the ideal article of that topic would look. The order in which to copy edit[edit]
Different kinds of English[edit]Sometimes you'll see A quick reference for these different kinds of English is available at American and British English spelling differences. Things you don't need to fix[edit]Although using a passive voice, splitting infinitives, using the restrictive which, beginning a sentence with a conjunction, and ending a sentence with a preposition are all big no-no's in the professional grammar world, they do not have to be fixed if they would cause consequences. For example, changing a passive voice to an active voice can inappropriately change the topic of a paragraph. GOCE special requests[edit]The Guild of Copy Editors has a list of requests people made for copy edits. Pick one that you like, tell me which one you picked, and I'll monitor your copy editing and tell you how you did at the end.
Today it says on the editing Parineeti Chopra page that all edits to the page are subject to review because of a violation of the biography of living persons policy. I'm pretty sure this wasn't there yesterday. Is this something is should be concerned about?
It looks like I'm mostly finished. What do you think?
Lesson 5: Templates[edit]I took this one partially from my own experience and also all over the place, since templates are a diverse topic. This lesson mostly deals with the important templates. Others I'll go over in case you want to know them, but are not major. Inserting templates[edit]To insert a template, you must go to the appropriate template page and find where it says either "Parameters" or "All parameters", or something to that effect. You copy all the information in the little gray box under that heading and paste it where you want the template to go. Then you fill in all the parameters you can fill in and delete the rest, as it causes unneccessary cluttering of article space to leave unused parameters. You always use curly brackets to insert a template, and you don't need the Template: prefix. Infoboxes[edit]Infoboxes are little boxes to the side of articles that give quick details about the article. For example, on Justice (sculpture), the box to the side shows a picture and tells you the artist, year, type, material, dimensions, location, and owner. On José Maria Larocca, the box to the side shows a picture and tells you his full name, nationality, discipline, birth date, birth place, height, weight, and horses. Not all infoboxes need a picture. You can find a grand list of every infobox at Category:Infobox templates, where you can narrow it down to what you're looking for. A hint, instead of, say, "Infobox plant", the infobox for a specific species is at Template:Taxobox. This goes for animals, plants, bacteria, fungi, Archaea, and protists. Template:Infobox animal is for a specific animal. Navboxes[edit]Navigational boxes, or "navboxes", are templates placed at the bottom of a page that allow you to easily jump between related articles. Examples are Template:Warriors (Erin Hunter), Template:Peter Laufer, and Template:Disney theatrical animated features. These are also the easiest to create. You can follow the instructions at Template:Navbox to create one by filling in the parameters and then putting the result at Template:(what you want to call it). Then you would put {{what you want to call it}} at the bottom of the articles listed at the navbox. I created Template:Peter Laufer and Template:Daughter of Smoke and Bone that way. Stub templates[edit]
Tags[edit]If you see a problem with an article, like that it has no citations or contradicts itself, you can "tag" it with one of the article message templates provided. They go at the top of the article, and you add "date=" followed by the month and the year after it but before the closing brackets. Twinkle templates[edit]There are a variety of templates (user warning, talkback, AfD, CSD, etc.) that are used with the semi-automatic tool Twinkle, which we will go over in lesson 8, right after the Five Pillars of Wikipedia and Wikiquette. I chose this order because I believe it's necessary to know the prior two subjects before jumping into semi-automatic tools like Twinkle and HotCat. Don't worry about them yet. End of lesson 5[edit]
Any questions? This was a short lesson, I know, but there are many templates, and I could only go over the important manual ones. If you have questions on other templates, don't hesitate to ask.
Lesson 6: The Five Pillars of Wikipedia[edit]There are five "pillars" to Wikipedia, or principles by which we operate. I've reworded them a little from the original to further explain.
Any questions?
When you are partial to a point of view of a certian topic, I guess you probably shouldn't create an article about that subject as it would be hard for you to be neutral. Also, I have an unrelated question - How did you put that navigational bar on the top of your user page (Can I have one? :) )?
Lesson 7: Wikiquette[edit]At the end of this one there will be a test. This test will probably be more or less copied from User:Go Phightins!'s test, as, without any specific questions, I have to base some of my curriculum off of an average one. There will only be tests after some lessons. If any specific questions do come up, I can make a lesson of what you want that probably won't have a test. Don't worry about being graded; if you get it wrong I'll just nudge you in the right direction. My goal is not to get it finished fast, but completely correct. "Wikiquette" is, as I'm sure you've guessed by now, a portmanteau of "Wikipedia" and "etiquette". There are three main points of Wikiquette: assuming good faith, threading, and avoiding common mistakes. Assuming good faith[edit]There are two fundamental points of Wikipedia. One is that we are here to build an encyclopedia. The other is this. This will come up again and again because it is so important. Always assume that every member of the community you come across is trying to do the right thing. The exception to this would be somebody who already has four plus vandalism warnings and who is making more malicious edits; they probably aren't acting in good faith. Apart from that, don't jump straight in to assume somebody is malicious. Whenever I come across someone's first edit that isn't particularly helpful, I have a system. I'll use a recent example. Somebody's first edit was that they changed the numbers in Bernese mountain dog to say that the dog was between five and sixty feet tall at the withers. I reverted the edit, explaining why, and then left a note on their talk page describing what their edit meant and that mistakes were okay, but that if they meant to do it, then it could be considered vandalism, which they could get blocked for. Then I invited them to the Adopt-a-user program. Whenever I'm confronting a new editor, I like to begin with "Welcome to Wikipedia, (user name)!" and end with "Happy editing!" Threading[edit]You've pretty much got the hang of this already. When you're responding to something I write, you use one colon. When I then respond to you, you use two colons. When you then respond to me, you use three colons. The tricky thing is when you want to respond to the original post, but there's already a long line of threading. Then you just go back to using one colon. Think of it this way: whatever you want to respond to, preface it with one more colon than what it had already. Avoiding common mistakes[edit]It's pretty easy to come across a faux pas in the Wikipedia editing world. Try not to create autobiographical articles or articles about someone close to you, company articles, dictionary-type articles (we have Wiktionary for that), articles that are too short to have any encyclopedic value, and redundant articles. For the last one, it's easy to figure out if you're creating something redundant; just type in the search term into the search box and see if what comes up covers your topic. Whenever you delete content, be sure you give an explanation as to why. Even if you revert vandalism, say that it's vandalism. I saw once that somebody removed vandalism without saying that they were, and ClueBot NG reverted THEIR edit, thinking it was vandalism. Also, try not to delete valuable content just because it's poorly written and biased; instead, just rewrite it. (If it's about a living person and has no references, however, then it's time to delete.) Try to properly structure a lead section (more on that later), consistently style text (once again, more on that later), avoid self-referencing (referencing the Wikipedia project in article space), avoid external links in places other than the external link section, and avoid adding a signature any place but a talk page, but always remember to use your signature on talk pages. Edit instead of criticize, don't forget to be bold, don't over-capitalize articles, and don't add too many internal links. Try to remain level-headed in arguments (if you feel you're getting too heated, walk away and bring in a third party), always keep talk pages on topic, and don't get annoyed when you see bad articles or drastic edits (or even deletion) of your work. Signatures[edit]I thought I should touch on this because I got busted for a mistake I didn't know was a mistake. There are also Wikiquette rules for signatures. You can customize a signature any way you want (for example, mine is in Segoe Script and I use the colors dodgerblue and silver). There are a few no-nos, though. First, do not copy another editor's signature. Even making it look somewhat like another editor's signature is wrong. Linking to someone else's user page on your signature is a big mistake. Second, try not to make your signature too big. That can effect the way surrounding text displays. Be sparing with your superscript and subscript, too. It can sometimes cause a similar problem. Keep your signature a decently big size, too; if it's too small, we won't know who you are. When you use different colors, make sure that color-blind people will still be able to read it okay. Do not include horizontal rules in your signature (I don't know why, it isn't explained). Third (and this is the one I got busted for), do not include images in your signature! It's wrong for a number of reasons, including server slowdown, distraction, comment displacement, and cluttering up the "File links" section every time you comment. You can use webdings or wingdings to get an image effect, though. For example, I use the webdings cat icon in my signature because it's technically a font, not an image. Fourth, keep your signatures short enough that they don't take up a whole line of text when you comment. Fifth, make sure that your signature always links to at least your user page, talk page, or contributions page. Sixth, don't include any external links at all or internal links that have no purpose to building the encyclopedia. Finally, assume good faith when approaching someone who has these problem signatures and be polite. End of lesson 7[edit]Whew, that was a lot of reading (and writing on my part)! Do you have any questions or are you ready for the test?
Test[edit]1.) Q- Explain in your own words what good faith means.
2.) Q- You come across a mythical creature article and see that it has been labelled as a cryptid, so you change the "grouping" from "legendary creature" to "cryptid". An editor removes the whole infobox, including the picture, telling you not to pollute Wikipedia with pseudo-science jargon. What is your course of action? (This is based on a true story.)
3.) Q- Take a look at the following wiki-conversation (forget that they aren't contributing helpfully to Wikipedia with these edits): What's the best cat breed in the world? -Abraham
Who is Edgar responding to in position A? What about position B? (Note: Abraham Lincoln, Robert E. Lee, Winston Churchill, and Edgar Allan Poe were all avid cat lovers, and Dwight D. Eisenhower was a cat hater.)
4.) Q- Your best friend was third in the graduating class of 2008 at USC, and when you perform a Google Search for him that's the only thing that comes up, apart from his blog about pictures of his guinea pig. Name everything that would be wrong with writing that article.
5.) Q- Someone in clear association with George R. R. Martin wrote a paragraph explaining why he was the best author ever, using clear facts as sources. Should you delete it? Why or why not? If not, what should you do?
Short quiz, but all of this is important.
Lesson 8: Semi-automatic tools[edit]What to do[edit]There's no test for this one, just something that I want you to do for me. I want you to go to "Preferences", and then "Gadgets". There are two that I want you to add. The first is Twinkle, fourth from the bottom in "Browsing". The second is HotCat, fourth from the top in "Editing. Now I'm going to explain to you what each one does to make your life easier. Twinkle[edit]Twinkle pretty much does it all semi-automatically. To the left of the search box, you will see the letters TW and an arrow. Click on that arrow and you'll be presented with a variety of options:
I encourage you to experiment with these as long as they are responsible (see "Responsibility", below) HotCat[edit]HotCat is an easy category editor. Once you have it implemented, look where the categories are at the ending of a page. It will now look something like this: Categories (++): French equestrians (-) (±) | (+) The double-plus next to categories allows you to add several categories at once. The (-) after French equestrians allows you to remove that category, while the (±) allows you to modify it. The (+) at the end allows you to add one new category. It comes in handy. Responsibility[edit]I encourage you to explore with Twinkle and HotCat, but don't forget to be responsible with them. Don't tag articles just because you think it's fun; do it to better the encyclopedia. User talk:Sandbox for user warnings allows you to test out warning, welcoming, and talkback, while since you do a lot of new page patrolling, you'll likely be tagging and using the CSD and XFD buttons soon and frequently. End of lesson 8[edit] 
Lesson 9: Reliable sources[edit]Now, you may know a little about this already, and if you do then it will be a breeze for you. Reliable sources are a good thing to know about. There is a test after this lesson, but there will only be tests after some lessons. If any specific questions do come up, I can make a lesson of what you want that probably won't have a test. Wikipedia uses the word "source" to mean three different, interchangeable things: a piece of work, the writer of the work, and the creator of the work. Therefore, a reliable source should be published materials from a reliable publisher (you can pretty much guarantee that a press coming from a university is reliable), authors who are known for the subject that they are covering, like L. David Mech talking about wolves, or a fiction author being interviewed about their own work, or both, like a book about wolves by L. David Mech published by the University of Chicago Press. And while a source may be considered reliable on one topic, it may not be on other topics. Like that L. David Mech book (which is a real book called Wolves: Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation), which only talks about real wolves. While it's great when talking about wolf behaviors and conservation, it may not be the best authority for talking about Little Red Riding Hood. Most self-published sources are considered unreliable because no publisher had a say in what goes in and what comes out. However, this doesn't apply to self-published sources talking about themselves. Like let's say that Mercedes Lackey wrote a post on her website about her inspiration for the Elemental Masters series. Because it's coming straight from the horse's mouth, you can add that information in a section called "Inspiration and origins". Mainstream news sources are generally considered reliable, like The New York Times. However, some of these news sources get information from Wikipedia, so it can get trapped in cyclic sourcing. Wikipedia cites an article that cites Wikipedia! In addition, anything that is commonly accepted by the public can be put in without a source, just like in a reference paper. Saying that snow melts when it gets warm outside is not going to need a source. Any questions?
Test[edit]1.) Q- A friend just told you that Mitt Romney has been appointed Chancellor of Harvard University. Can you add this to Romney and/or Harvard's pages? Why or why not?
2.) Q- The Daily Telegraph has published a cartoon as part of an article that you see to be blatantly racist. Can you include this as an example of racism on the newspaper's article? What about on the racism article?
3.) Q- You find an article claiming that socialists are more likely to get cancer than capitalists, but capitalists are more likely to get diabetes than socialists. Can you include this information on the socialist, capitalist, cancer, or diabetes page?
4.) Q- Would you consider FOX News to be a reliable source for information on MSNBC or Sarah Palin? Why or why not?
5.) Q- Would you consider Ben and Jerry's official Twitter page as a reliable source? Why or why not?
6.) Q- An unnamed "forum official" from the Chicago Tribune community forums comments on the newspaper's stance on world hunger. Would this be a reliable source? Why or why not?
7.) Q- Would you consider the "about us" section on Burger King's website a reliable source for information on the history of Burger King? Why or why not? (Hint: The "about us" page actually gives a pretty detailed history of BK).
8.) Q- Everybody knows that the sky is blue except for one editor, who says that it's bronze. Do you need a source? Why or why not?
This, I think, is one of the longer tests.
Lesson 9: Wikitables[edit]Creating a Wikitable[edit]Wikitables are basically charts that can be created to organize data better, like a wikitable for horses on an equestrian page or for awards a movie or book has received. To create one, look at your toolbar (the same one with Cite). Click on "Advanced". Now look all the way to the right of the toolbar that appears under it. You should see a picture of a wikitable. Click on it and look at what comes up. From there you can choose to make the table sortable or not (helpful when creating filmography, but not for others), whether or not to have a header row (always good), and to style with borders (a must, unless you want floating text). Then you can choose rows and columns. Press "insert" and it shows up, with "Example" in everything. Then you just fill it in accordingly. The top row (the one with the !! instead of ||) is the header row. I recommend using "Show preview" quite frequently to make sure you're not messing up a lot. Combining columns or rows[edit]Sometimes you'll have to combine a column or row for some reason, like if people tie for a position at an Olympic event. If that's the case, then for the first one that you do you put either "rowspan" or "colspan" and then how many rows or columns to span. For the ones after, you would put a || instead of an opening. I know this sounds confusing, so I provided an example. | rowspan="32"|1 || {{flagIOCathlete|[[Jur Vrieling]]|NED|2012 Summer}} || Bubalu || align="center"|0 || align="center"|0 || align="center"|0
|-bgcolor=ccffcc
|| {{flagIOCathlete|[[Alvaro Alfonso de Miranda Neto]]|BRA|2012 Summer}} || Rahmannshof's Bogen || align="center"|0 || align="center"|0 ||
align="center"|0
|-bgcolor=ccffcc
|| {{flagIOCathlete|[[Nick Skelton]]|GBR|2012 Summer}} || Big Star || align="center"|0 || align="center"|0 || align="center"|0
|-bgcolor=ccffcc
|| {{flagIOCathlete|[[Simon Delestre]]|FRA|2012 Summer}} || Napoli du Ry || align="center"|0 || align="center"|0 || align="center"|0
|-bgcolor=ccffcc
|| {{flagIOCathlete|[[Cassio Rivetti]]|UKR|2012 Summer}} || Temple Road || align="center"|0 || align="center"|0 || align="center"|0
Further information[edit]Further information can be found at Help:Table. Most of wikitables is trial-and-error, so go out and play with it. End of lesson 9[edit]Any questions?
Break: Personal interest[edit]Congratulations on making it halfway through my adoption course! As a reward, I'm giving you a break right now. These are all personal interest questions for you to fill out. They will come in handy later on. 1.) Q- Why did you begin editing Wikipedia? Why did you decide to be adopted?
I was really cautious and paranoid when I first started and I think I made a lot more mistakes than I realized at the time. Skamecrazy123 greeted me on my talk page with "Welcome to Wikipedia" and I looked around on his user page and learned stuff from that. While looking around, I found a reference to adoption and found out what it was. It was just what I needed to find out everything I wanted to know, so I signed myself up. 2.) Q- How did you decide on your username?
3.) Q- What are your major interests? What type of things do you like to do on Wikipedia?
4.) Q- What are you main goals on Wikipedia for the future?
By the way, thanks for signing my guestbook!
Lesson 11: Manual of Style[edit]The Manual of Style is a style guide for all Wikipedia articles. It is basically a list of guidelines—not necessarily rules—to abide by when you are on Wikipedia. Here are the main points of it: Article titles, headings, and sections[edit]
Spelling and grammar in different forms of English[edit]There are many different kinds of English. Sometimes, using an invisible template such as {{Use American English}}, {{Use British English}}, or {{Use Irish English}}, you can tell what you should use. Otherwise, guess based on what the rest seems to be written in and keep it standard. Capital letters[edit]
End of lesson 11[edit]Any questions? I have included only the very basics; there is much more at Wikipedia:Manual of Style.
Test[edit]1.) Q- Capitalize the following accordingly:
A Farewell to Arms
2.) Q- Put the following in the correct order:
3.) Q- Name everything that's wrong with this if it were an article title:
4.) Q- What English should you use if this is a sample sentence?
5.) Q- Capitalize the following accordingly. If correct, write "correct":
Rather short in terms of numbers, but there's more than one part to 4/5 of the questions.
Lesson 12: Vandalism[edit]Ah, vandalism. It really is the bane of most editors' existence on Wikipedia. Fortunately, if you keep a good eye, you should be able to fix it. Looking for vandals[edit]I'm not a vandal hunter, but if you have a few pages watchlisted, you'll likely run into some vandalism. If you're looking at your watchlist, see if an editor whose talk page is still redlinked made an edit without an edit summary. This could be vandalism, as most new editors think that Wikipedia is just a place to post junk. However, whenever you see an editor who you don't now, I would check out the edit to make sure it isn't vandalism, as some editors have talk pages that are nothing but warnings. The missing edit summary is always a sign that something may not be right, which is why I've gotten into the good habit of putting in my edit summaries. Reverting vandalism[edit]To revert vandalism, you would go to "View history" on a page. Now see the button with "Compare selected revisions." Press that and find the vandalism reversion. Since you have Twinkle, you should see three options: "Rollback (AGF)", "Rollback", and "Rollback (VANDAL)". The first one you shouldn't use unless it's obviously good faith, and we're not talking about that. The third one you should only use if it's a repeat offender who has a significant amount of vandalism under their belt. Usually for new editors you will use the second one. Warning vandals[edit]There are different ways to warn vandals. This is Brambleberry's warning guide. Be sure to use Twinkle for everything. The first step will be under "Wel", while the rest will be under "Warn":
If someone has a level 3 warning on one charge (such as vandalism), but doesn't have one on another (like using a talk page as a forum), start with a level 1 warning on the new charge. I've found that some vandals have multiple charges. Different vandals[edit]There are multiple kinds of vandals. Scared vandals. There are those kinds of vandals that make one kind of unhelpful edit (like replacing a heading with "muahaha" or some type of gibberish) thinking that everyone on Wikipedia does that. They then get a warning and are scared straight immediately. They either choose not to edit ever again or become upstanding editors. Repeat vandals. The repeat vandals are bored and looking for a little fun. Once again, most of their vandalism is gibberish replacing good text. You can give them as many warnings as you want, but they won't bother. Once you get past the level 4 warning for them, you report them to WP:AIV and the admins deal with them. Belligerent vandals. These vandals are similar to the repeat vandals, except the belligerent vandals will often leave a nasty note on your talk page or vandalize your user page when you give them a warning. They then build up two warnings: vandalism and personal attacks. Malicious vandals. These are sneaky vandals that add seemingly-true information, add shock sites, or add hidden and offensive comments. They may also do multiple quick vandalism, such as moving as many pages as possible, or blanking many pages, or replacing all the content with the same sentence. In this case, you give them {{uw-vandalism4im}}. If they continue vandalizing (which they probably will), report them to WP:AIV. WP:AIV[edit]WP:AIV, or Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism, is what you do when people won't stop vandalism. You can report them by Twinkle, as Twinkle has the option "ARV", which allows you to fill out a form that sends the user to WP:AIV. Once it gets sent there, there is no more left for you to do; let the admins handle it. However, if I were you, I would keep track of the editor and what the admins decide on for punishment. End of lesson 12[edit]Any questions? I recommend looking at Twinkle and your various warnings, as that is the majority of the test. Look at User talk:Sandbox for user warnings and do a little warning. However, do not report that to ARV.
Test[edit]1.) Q- Define vandalism in your own words.
2.) Q- What are some of the hints that an edit may be vandalism while watching recent changes?
3.) Q- What warning template is appropriate for a user who has blanked a page and has already been given {{welcomevandal}}?
4.) Q- You warned someone for, oh, let's say messing with taxonomy templates. He came to your talk page and unleashed a range of expletives on you and your parents. He was on his third taxonomy warning and his second for adding spam links, but has had none for personal attacks. What template would you use?
5.) Q- What is WP:AIV and when should you use it?
6.) Q- What warning template would you use for the various situations (assuming that they are all on level 1 warnings):
{{subst:uw-chat1}}
Lesson 13: Dispute resolution[edit]Dispute resolution goes hand-in-hand with vandalism as one of the most important things to know when interacting with editors. This one is mostly from User:Go Phightins!'s dispute resolution adoption lesson. What is dispute resolution?[edit]Even if you are always on top of your Wikipedia game and try to edit Wikipedia in the best ways possible, you are going to become involved in a dispute with someone. It's not a question. As you become a more well-known editor, it will happen even more. When you do become involved in a dispute with someone, dispute resolution is how you come to a peaceful end to this and avoid flame wars. Simple resolution[edit]You obviously believe what you are saying, but keeping a dispute going forever is never the best option. Here are a few resolution tips:
Dispute resolution process[edit]If the simple resolution tips don't help your situation, try the Wikipedia methods of dispute resolution in this order.
Reports[edit]If another editor has dropped to name-calling or other offensive and unprofessional methods, try looking at these boards to let people know: You could be wrong![edit]You will not always win the dispute resolution process, but as long as you made good points, there is nothing wrong about disagreeing. End of lesson 13[edit]Any questions?
Test[edit]1.) Q- Explain, in your own words, each level of dispute resolution:
2.) Q- Editor A adds something that he believes is helping Wikipedia. Editor B disagrees and reverts it, so Editor A re-adds the content only for Editor B to revert again. What should the two editors do instead of this "edit warring" (repeatedly adding and removing content)?
3.) Q- You're editing an Articles for deletion page and vote that a particular article should be deleted. The creator of the article says you are an incompetent, intellectual snob that has no right to edit Wikipedia. How should you react?
4.) Q- You find information saying that the island fox is making a comeback and another editor reverts it as patent nonsense. What should your next step be?
5.) Q- When you are in the middle of a dispute with someone, they insult you on the basis of gender and religion. What should you do?
6.) Q- OPINION: Is there any way to make the dispute resolution process easier?
Lesson 14: Deletion[edit]Deletion is a big part of Wikipedia, and since you're a recent changes patroller, it will come in handy quite often. WP: CSD[edit]WP:CSD, short for "Criterion for speedy deletion", is what you post on an article that needs to go ASAP. (This lesson is full of initials). These are the following criterion for article space (you rarely have to use any other space):
You should wait at least ten minutes before tagging an article with either A1 or A3, because the author may add more information in that time that would render the CSD templates void. WP:AFD[edit]WP:AFD, short for "Articles for deletion", is where you go if you think something should be deleted but want to be sure. You list it at AFD using Twinkle (it will be listed as XFD on the Twinkle toolbar, though) and say why you think it should be deleted. Then the public goes and votes on what to do with it. You can also vote on many of these. I've been trying to up my AFD participation recently. If you ever want to be an administrator, it's one thing that you should really get involved in. WP:PROD[edit]WP:PROD, short for "Proposed deletion", is like a fallback for CSD. If something doesn't meet specific CSD requirements but would still be an uncontroversial delete, you list it at PROD. Someone can always contest your PROD, in which case you should take it to AFD. In my 5+ years of editing Wikipedia, I have never used PROD. I'm not sure it's all that common practice. End of lesson 14[edit]Any questions?
Test[edit]1.) Q- Explain a scenario where you would use PROD.
2.) Q- You tag an article for CSD under A7. The creator then blanks the page. What should you do?
3.) Q- Why should you wait before tagging an article for A1 or A3?
4.) Q- (4-7 are hypothetical scenarios. You have to say what you would tag it as under CSD). Joe Garrison is so nice and awesome and the best person I've ever met! He always has a beer and a hot dog for you! His fiancée Ashley is really cool too!
5.) Q- ajdflajsdlfjalghaiefjalsfj
6.) Q- Mike Smith is a trumpeter in the Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra. He used to be in the Boston Pops. He likes to read and swim when he's not playing the trumpet.
7.) Q- On the night of 22 April 1941, during the the blitz, over 70 civilians were killed, including a mother and her six children, when a bomb fell on the shelter near the Planetarium. The bomb shelter consisted of a series of underground tunnels which many had long-presumed lost but were rediscovered in 2006. The bomb blast was so big that human remains were found in the tops of trees. In 2006 an appeal was made to raise money for a public sculpture to honour those who lost their lives. (This one's a tricky one, but ask yourself: do you know what they're talking about? What does it fall under if the article doesn't say what the subject is?)
A pass with flying colors! I'll get lesson 15 up soon. Lesson 15: Consensus and !votes[edit]Since Wikipedia is a collaborative encyclopedia, when we have a disagreement on something, we go by consensus. You can add your opinion to the debate by a !vote, which is basically a bolded vote saying your opinion, like Support or Oppose. However, it technically means "not vote". !votes[edit]A !vote is like a vote, but it's read as "not a vote". This is because, while it is counted as supporting or opposing, just saying "Support" is different than saying "Support - User has been a loyal host at the Teahouse since its inception, shows a good article track record, and has enough experience in the administrative work she intends to participate in that I have no concerns with her use of the tools." In other words, the reasons why you are voting the way you are show more importance than the actual !vote. Articles for deletion[edit]These are the following !votes you can have on AfD:
Requests for adminship/bureaucratship[edit]These are the following !votes that you can have on RfAs and RfBs:
You can also add "Strong" or "Weak" to "Support" and "Oppose", or you can go for a more humorous approach, like "Oh my goodness yes". It's usually in better taste to have a humorous !vote for a support than an oppose. Bad arguments[edit]There are many bad arguments that you should avoid on Wikipedia when !voting. There are two links you should look at for this.
End of lesson 15[edit]There's no test on this one, just an assignment: vote in 3 AfDs and in any RfAs or RfBs that they have to get around !votes.
Lesson 16: WikiProjects[edit]I apologize ahead of time for any typos that may be in this lesson. I burned my index and middle finger at the first joints today, and the Band-Aids are impeding on my typing. What is a WikiProject?[edit]A WikiProject is best described as a group of individuals collaborating to improve every article that falls under a particular topic. There are many of these across Wikipedia, relating to many topics. How do I join a WikiProject?[edit]You can join a WikiProject simply by adding yourself to the member list. It's good to add a userbox that says you have joined that WikiProject as well. What WikiProjects should I join?[edit]Well, you're already a member of the Guild of Copy Editors and WikiProject Cleanup, so those are taken care of. Before this, you answered questions about your interest. Using that and things you have already told me or that I saw on your talk page, here are some WikiProjects that you might like to join:
End of lesson 16[edit]Any questions? No test for this one. Just join any WikiProjects you wish. It doesn't even have to be the ones that I listed.
Lesson 17: Copyright[edit]This is not my forte, which is why most of it was taken from Go Phightins! It is also one of the hardest topics on Wikipedia, which is why it isn't my forte. (I'm more of a content adder, copyeditor, and deletion !voter than a copyright officer). No test on this one, since it's your own choice. However, since other adoption schools teach it as a required lesson, I think I'm going to do that with my other adoptees. When, you know, they're active. Glossary[edit]
Image copyright[edit] Free images are pictures that can be used anywhere on Wikipedia. They are either public domain or released under a free license, which means that the author (used here to mean the person who uploaded the picture) retains some rights, but overall releases the picture to the public. An example is Creative Commons, which says that you are free to share and adapt the work as long as you attribute the original author. Free images can be used anywhere where they will build the encyclopedia. For example, I didn't photograph File:Norwegian forest cat.jpg, but I added it to the Norwegian forest cat page to build the encyclopedia. Anything that is old enough to be considered by U.S. standards to be in the public domain, such as Shakespeare works, is considered among free images. Non-free images, on the other hand, are trickier. There are some cases where non-free images must be used. For example, book covers are non-free because they are owned by the publisher, but what other image would you use on a book article? They are used sparingly for the reason that there are certain criteria one must have:
Number two is a little confusing, but it basically means that the image is at a size that people can't pirate it. Now let's look at two examples: a magazine cover photo of Aaron Tveit and the cover of Eragon. The photo of Tveit would instantly fail #1 in that anyone can take a picture of him and put it on Wikipedia as long as it's high-quality. The cover is another story. There is no free equivalent (#1) and is useful in that it shows what the cover looks like (#8). As long as it is small enough that it can't be used to sell fakes (#2), used on as few pages as possible (#3), low-res while still conveying the image (#3), meets our standards (#5 & 6), used on Eragon (#7), only used on articles like Eragon (#9), and has all the proper information (#10), it's okay. Commons[edit]"Commons" is Wikimedia Commons, a free material repository. You can upload things to Wikimedia commons and they can be used on every language Wikipedia. Because all different countries have different copyright laws, fair use and non-free images are not permitted on Wikipedia. Copyright and text[edit]Obviously, you must include text from various sources in your writing. You know all about the dangers of not having reliable sources. Well, with text, you have to make sure that you're loosely paraphrasing it and sourcing it. For example, in Dogs: A Startling New Understanding of Canine Origin, Behavior & Evolution, the authors say "The transition dog, the 'missing link', between wild and domestic fox was a piebald, floppy-eared, diestrous, tame animal, in many ways identical to the so-called mongrel street dogs."
You see, this kind of close paraphrasing in the second example is almost as wrong as full-out plagiarism. This would be a better alternative: The transition between wild and domestic fox resulted in a "missing link" that was pied, diestrous, and tame with floppy ears, not unlike so-called "mongrel street dogs".[1] End of lesson 17[edit]Any questions? I can't guarantee that I can answer them. I'm better with copyright and text than I am with images.
Lesson 18: Policies, guidelines, and essays[edit]Policies[edit]A policy is a page describing a topic whose views have wide acceptance among editors and describe standards that editors should normally follow. Examples of policies are WP:NOT, describing things that Wikipedia is not and therefore should not lead to pages of, and WP:Verifiability, saying what counts as a reliable source. These are commonly described as being "rules". There are usually exceptions. Guidelines[edit]A guideline is a page describing a best practice as supported by consensus. Editors should attempt to follow guidelines to the best of their abilities, although exceptions may apply and everything should be treated with common sense. Examples of guidelines are WP:Assume good faith, which tells you to always assume that editors are working for the good of Wikipedia, and WP:Citing sources, which tells you the best way to cite sources on Wikipedia. Essays[edit]An essay is a page describing the opinion of an editor or group of editors. Essays are not rules or even guidelines to follow, and they do not represent the entire community's view. They are, however, worthy of consideration when you are editing. Examples of essays are WP:Existence ≠ Notability, which says that just because something exists doesn't mean that it deserves a Wikipedia page, and WP:Just drop it, which says that if things get heated, you shouldn't continue arguing. Misconceptions[edit]
Ignore all rules[edit]The fifth pillar of Wikipedia is "Ignore all rules". It says that you should ignore a rule keeping you from improving the encyclopedia. Some people try to apply it in bad situations, and it rarely works to their favor. There's an essay about it called Wikipedia:What "Ignore all rules" means. It basically says that if rules keep you from wanting to enjoy participating in the wiki, ignore them and go about your business. I have my own interpretation, and soon you will too. End of lesson 18[edit]Any questions before the test?
Test[edit]Remember when I said I would get the test up ASAP? Absentminded professor forgot about it. This test is mostly opinion. 1.) Q- Explain, in your own words, the difference between a policy, guideline, and essay.
2.) Q- Can policies change? If you wanted to change a policy, what would you change?
3.) Q- Which policy do you think is the most relevant in your current work on Wikipedia?
4.) Q- Wikipedia:Nobody cares is a popular essay. Do you agree with it? Why or why not?
5.) Q- What does "Ignore all rules" mean to you specifically?
Yeah, so about 1 ½ actual questions. Like I said, a breeze.
Lesson 19: Fun on Wikipedia[edit]A little poem about fun[edit]Sometimes we all get a little stressed We wish that we had a Wikipedia place Department of Fun[edit]Okay, so obviously I'm no poet, but you get the idea. Fun on Wikipedia is how we all keep from giving each other death threats and getting blocked. There's a whole department for it at Wikipedia:Department of Fun. There are all kinds of games that you can play. My favorites are The Longest Wiki-Story, Word Association, Three Word Story, and The Odd Editor (okay, I made that one, but we need more people to do it.) You can also add to the Wikipedia movies, where I play a part. I warn you, in this movie I have a few outbursts of vulgarity or obscenities, which I know you don't like. Personal fun[edit]You can make your own fun if nothing at the DoF helps you. User:Double sharp, among others, have made chess games. If you don't know how to play that, I'm sure that there's a way to make a checkers game. End of lesson 19[edit]Any questions? I thought I'd throw this in right before the final exam so that you'd have a chance to relieve stress there.
Lesson 20: Conclusion[edit]Okay, so this isn't really a lesson. Your training has come to more or less of an end, at least under my adoption. I first contacted you about adoption exactly four months from today. Your final exam will let me know that you're ready to strut off into the world of Wikipedia with confidence that you know what you're doing. There's still much to learn. I've been here five years and I'm still learning something new every day. I hope that we can keep in contact with each other. Now, the final exams for other adopters are usually somewhat like an actual final, which is super secretive and over e-mail. Mine, on the other hand, will be posted here, same as everything else. I have two reasons for this. First, I don't like using e-mail. Second, I have to look things up constantly, especially in AfD. In the real Wikipedia, you will have to look things up, so you should have the opportunity to do so here as well. Do you have any questions before the exam?
Final Exam[edit]1.) Q- Why must one assume good faith whenever possible?
2.) Q- Your boyfriend just so happens to have a Blogger blog about skate tricks (you don't date someone like that, right?) That's pretty much all that comes up in Google and Bing searches except for a short video of him on YouTube doing the cinnamon challenge. Name everything that would be wrong with writing an article about him on Wikipedia.
3.) Q- The new Warriors book is in, and you find a review on Kirkus Reviews. You add it to the Wikipedia article, and someone reverts your edit saying "KIRKUS REVIEWS IS A SOCIALIST PLOT TO MAKE EVERYONE READ ONLY NONSENSICAL CRAP!!!" What should you do?
4.) Q- What are some things you shouldn't put in signatures?
5.) Q- Would Stephen Sondheim's books Finishing the Hat and Look, I Made a Hat be the best authority on the article Hatmaking? (Hint: Stephen Sondheim writes musicals)
6.) Q- @SimonDelestre is a new Twitter account claiming to be the French equestrian. He mentions getting a new horse from José Maria Larocca named Okidoki. You can't find anything about that anywhere else. Should you include it in either the Delestre or Larocca articles? (Hint: read about Okidoki on the Larocca page.)
7.) Q- One editor is trying to say that average humans have six fingers on each hand instead of five. Do you need a source? Why or why not?
8.) Q- Fix everything wrong about capitalization in this article:
9.) Q- What process should you go through in terms of warning templates with a vandal who continues doing the same thing?
10.) Q- What warning template should you use for these (assuming they are all on level 1 warnings)?
{{subst:uw-disruptive1}} (is there anything more specific?)
11.) Q- You place a CSD tag on a user's article, and he then gives you a handful of vulgar insults. What should your next step be?
12.) Q- A certain editor appears to be following you and reverting everything you post as "patent nonsense". How should you confront her?
13.) Q- What CSD would this fall under? "If you live in the Greater Chicagoland area, come on down to BOB'S CANDLEWICK OUTLET! Our prices are so outrageous, we're almost giving this stuff away! Tell all your friends about Bob's candlewicks!"
14.) Q- What CSD would it fall under if someone copied everything from Roy Halladay and pasted it on Awesome Phillies pitcher?
15.) Q- Will breaking a policy always result in an indefinite block?
16.) Q- What do you think you got out of my adoption process? Is there anything that you think I should change?
I wish you the best.
Congratulations on being the first official graduate of Brambleberry of RiverClan's adoption course! I wish you all the best in your Wiki travels, and may our paths cross again! |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
