User:Cassiopeia/CVUA/Thatoneweirdwikier

Hello, welcome to your Counter Vandalism Unit Academy page! Every person I instruct will have their own page on which I will give them support and tasks for them to complete. Please make sure you have this page added to your watchlist. Your academy page has been specifically designed according to you and what you have requested instruction in - for that reason, please be as specific as possible when under my instruction, so that I know the best ways to help you (and do not be afraid to let me know if you think something isn't working). If you have any general queries about anti-vandalism (or anything else), you are more than welcome to raise them with me at User talk:CASSIOPEIA/CVUA/Thatoneweirdwikier.

Make sure you read through Wikipedia:Vandalism as that's the knowledge which most of the questions I ask you and tasks you do will revolve around.

How to use this page

This page will be built up over your time in the Academy, with new sections being added as you complete old ones. Each section will end with a task, written in bold type - this might just ask a question, or it might require you to go and do something. You can answer a question by typing the answer below the task; if you have to do something, you will need to provide diffs to demonstrate that you have completed the task. Some sections will have more than one task, sometimes additional tasks may be added to a section as you complete them. Please always sign your responses to tasks as you would on a talk page.

Once you graduate I will copy this page into your userspace so you have a record of your training and a reference for the future.

Good faith and vandalism

1. Twinkle is a very useful tool when performing maintenance functions around Wikipedia. Please have a read through WP:TWINKLE.
Enable Twinkle (if haven't already) and leave a note here to let me know that you have enabled it.

Answer: Done. Thanks, Thatone~~weird~~wikier Say hi 07:58, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

When patrolling for vandalism, you may often come across edits which are unhelpful, but not vandalism - these are good faith edits. It is important to recognise the difference between a vandalism edit and a good faith edit, especially because Twinkle gives you the option of labelling edits you revert as such. Please read WP:AGF and WP:NOT VANDALISM before completing the following tasks.

2. In your own words, why it is important to WP:AGF

Answer: Because it is important to remember that most editors are trying to help and contribute to Wikipedia, instead of vandalise it. Thanks, Thatone~~weird~~wikier Say hi 08:12, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:26, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

3. Please explain below the difference between a good faith edit and a vandalism edit, and how you would tell them apart.

Answer: As an example, good faith edit may be adding original research into an article unknowingly, but vandalism may be the deliberate blanking of a section or article. Vandalism also usually contains insults. Thanks, Thatone~~weird~~wikier Say hi 08:12, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

How do you tell them apart? The key here is intention. As long as a user intends to help Wikipedia, but the edits are might be disruptive, they are still considered a "good faith" editor and should be dealt with differently from a vandal. Vandalism is a deliberate attempt to harm Wikipedia. Just because an edit adds incorrect or unsourced information does not necessarily mean a user is a vandal; they key is their intention. A non constructive edit is a little different from disruptive. A disruptive edit could be adding info without source (place unsourced warning message on editor's talk page), bold phrases which not adhere to MOS:BOLD guidelines and etc. However, non-constructive would have the indication (not always though) of doing something once should not do. Looking into the editors' contribution log history is a good way to find out. Do note, if an editor remove the content of a page without edit summary, and we are not sure if it is a vandalism. However, even edits are not considered vandalism but an editors continue to make disruptive edits after many warnings are received would subject to a block. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:26, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

4. How do we deal with a bad faith registered user and how do we deal with a bad faith IP editor?

Answer: For a registered user, give the appropriate warning for the offence. For an IP editor, tracking down of the address may be required to confirm whether separate IP addresses are being used by the same person, then a warning. Thanks, Thatone~~weird~~wikier Say hi 08:12, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

. You dont need to track the IP addresses. We deal with registered or IP editor in the same way. CASSIOPEIA^(talk)

5. Please find three examples of good faith but unhelpful edits, and three examples of vandalism. Please revert and provide reason/explanation and hist diff(s).

Answer i:

While I was copyediting the article Monkey Thieves, a user by the name of Mikilnarayani1 added an edit while a template was up that asked fellow editors not to edit the article. I reverted it for this reason. Here is the diff.

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:26, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Answer ii: While using STiki, I found an edit that did not seem like vandalism, but it had changed things that shouldn't have been changed. I reverted it and left a note on the user's talk page.

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:26, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Answer iii: While using STiki, I found an edit that seemed to break a track listing table. I reverted it and let the user know.

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:26, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism

Answer i:

While I was working on VRChat a user by the IP address Special:Contributions/108.184.112.159 blanked an entire section. I was forced to revert it 3 times, then took him to WP:AIV, as he had already been blocked. He was then blocked for 2 days and 7 hours. Diffs: 1, 2, 3.

good work. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:26, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Answer ii: While using STiki, I found an edit on Marcinho (footballer) that appeared as vandalism and an insult. I reverted it and gave the appropriate warning (level 2).

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk)

Answer iii: While using STiki, I found an edit on Deborah Fritz that seemed unconstructive and insulting. It was reverted and a warning was given.

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk)

Thatoneweirdwikier Good day. Any question regrading the assignment, please let me know here. For other questions not relating to the assignments, ping me on the talk page of this subpage Here. See above the first assignment. Ping me here when you are done and ready for review. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:46, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, unfortunately, my 'Recent changes' tab does not seem to be working, so I am unable (at the moment) to most efficiently answer question 5. I have answered all the other questions though. Thanks, n 5?Thatone~~weird~~wikier Say hi 08:23, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, see Special:RecentChanges and click "live update" to see if you could access to the log. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 08:49, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, that's the problem. The page doesn't load, so I can't view it at all. Thanks, Thatone~~weird~~wikier Say hi 09:12, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi CASSIOPEIA, I've given it a few days and I'm still unable to access the tab, even after waiting until the request times out. How else is it possible to complete question 5? Happy New Year! Thanks, Thatone~~weird~~wikier Say hi 08:09, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier You could see help at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) and let them know you problem as they might able to help. If not, come back here again and let me know for we will find a way. Happy New Year. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 11:48, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Hey CASSIOPEIA, just to let you know, I've started an ongoing discussion at the Village Pump. I'll let you know when it's finished. Thanks, Thatone~~weird~~wikier Say hi 18:52, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, Understand the tech team is helping on the issue stated above and seems it has yet to be sloved. STiki is one of counter vandalism tools which required a user must have any one of: (1) the rollback permission/right, (2) at least 1000 article edits in mainspace. Since you less than 1000 edits in mainspace What you could do is try to get permission to download Wikipedia:STiki in Wikipedia talk:STiki and let them know that (1) you have problem to load recent changes (provide link please) and you are taking the CVUA program (state my name as they might ask for verification). Cheers. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 23:04, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, STiki is granted. Pls download it and you can use it to view recent edit and also revert and place warning messages. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:43, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA,

Completed all questions: Feel free to mark them. I hope I did well. Thanks, Thatone~~weird~~wikier Say hi 09:45, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, See above comments. If you have any questions, then list them here and if you are ready to move on to next assignment, then let me know. Best. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:26, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, thanks for the comments. I'm ready to move on! Thanks, Thatone~~weird~~wikier Say hi 10:31, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Warning and reporting

When you use Twinkle to warn a user, you have a number of options to choose from: you can select the kind of warning (for different offences), and the level of warning (from 1 to 4, for increasing severity). Knowing which warning to issue and what level is very important. Further information can be found at WP:WARN and WP:UWUL.

Please answer the following questions

(1) Why do we warn users?

Answer: To (hopefully) deter them from the wrong thing they were doing (e.g. vandalism, test edits, promotion, etc.), and block them if they continue.

. very well. Right. the purpose is to "educate" the editors on constructive editing, especially those who are new to Wikipedia and to "deter" them of such actions with stronger warnings leads up to a block. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:06, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

(2) When would a 4im warning be appropriate?

Answer: Extreme and/or persistent disruption from an account.

. 4im is only for widespread and particularly egregious vandalism and for use lower warning for less egregious vandalism. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:06, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

(3) Should you substitute a template when you place it on a user talk page, and how do you do it?

Answer: Substituting allows a template to become text, in both the visual and source editor. To do it, add {{subst: at the beginning of the template.

. We subst to ensure that the message on the talk page will not change even if the template is changed. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:06, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

(4) What should you do if a user who has received a level 4 or 4im warning vandalises again?

Answer: Take them to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism.

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:06, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

(5) Please give examples and please do the substitution (using {{Tlsubst|''name of template''}}) of three different warnings with three different levels (not different levels of the same warning and excluding the test edit warning levels referred to below), that you might need to use while recent changes patrolling and explain what they are used for.

Answer i:

Hello, I'm Thatoneweirdwikier. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.

This is used a good faith caution for using an advertisement in an article.

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:06, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Answer ii:

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you.

This is used as a caution for blatant vandalism.

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:06, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Answer iii:

This is the only warning you will receive about ownership of articles. The next time you continue to disruptively edit Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.

This is used as a very bad faith warning for ownership of articles.

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:06, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier Greetings. Pleas see assignment 2 above. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:34, 11 January 2020 (UTC) CASSIOPEIA, perfect. I'll start as soon as possible. Thanks, Thatone~~weird~~wikier Say hi 10:42, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, Havent seen you edit/answer the questions for a week. Do you need help? CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 05:14, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, don't worry! I've been busy doing other things, and I'm trying to find different levels of warning to give for the last question. Thanks, Thatone~~weird~~wikier Say hi 05:57, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, You dont need to revert any edit on any page for the 3 question. All you need to do is to place the template for 3 different warning of 3 different level. The exercises are designed for you to subst the templates and in warning messages and levels. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:19, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, ah. Thanks for pointing that out. I'll stick them in when I get a minute. Thanks, Thatone~~weird~~wikier Say hi 06:46, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA,

Completed all questions: Let me know if there are any problems. Thanks, Thatone~~weird~~wikier Say hi 12:15, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, See Answer 5(i) and pls do the same for 5 (ii) and (iii). Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:27, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA,

Is this better? Thanks, Thatone~~weird~~wikier Say hi 05:59, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, See comment above. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:06, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Tools

Wikipedia:Recent changes patrol#Tools includes a list of tools and resources for those who want to fight vandalism with a more systematic and efficient approach.

What you have been doing so far is named the old school approach. As well as manually going through Special:RecentChanges, it includes undos, "last clean version" restores, and manually warning users.

There are a large number of tool which assist users in the fight against vandalism. They range from tools which help filter and detect vandalism to tools which will revert, warn and report users.

Twinkle

Twinkle, as you know, is very useful. It provides three types of rollback functions (vandalism, normal and AGF) as well as an easy previous version restore function (for when there are a number of different editors vandalising in a row). Other functions include a full library of speedy deletion functions, and user warnings. It also has a function to propose and nominate pages for deletion, to request page protection to report users to WP:AIV, WP:UAA, WP:SPI, and other administrative noticeboards.

User creation log

In my early days of fighting vandalism on Wikipedia, one of the strategies I would use to find vandalism was to patrol the account creation log. This is located at Special:Log/newusers, and it logs every time a new user account is created on Wikipedia. You'll notice that new accounts with no contributions so far will have a red "contribs" links, whereas new accounts with some contributions will have blue "contribs" links. One great way not only to find vandalism, but welcome new users to Wikipedia is to check the blue contribs links that come in.

Rollback

See rollback, this user right introduces an easy rollback button (which with one click reverts an editor's contributions). I'll let you know when I think you're ready to apply for the rollback user right.

STiki

STiki is an application that you download to your computer, and it provides you with diffs which either it or User:ClueBot NG have scored on their possibility of being uncontructive, and you are given the option to revert it as vandalism, revert it assuming good faith, mark it as innocent, or abstain from making a judgment on the diff. In order to use STiki, you need one of the following: (1) the rollback permission, (2) at least 1000 article edits (in the article namespace, not talk/user pages), or (3) special permission via Wikipedia talk:STiki.

Huggle

Huggle is also an application you download to your computer which presents you diffs (orders them on the likelihood of being unconstructive edits and on the editor's recent history) from users not on its whitelist. It allows you to revert vandalism, warn and reports users in one click. The rollback permission is required to use Huggle.

Make sure you keep in mind that some edits that seem like vandalism can be test edits. This happens when a new user is experimenting and makes accidental unconstructive edits. Generally, these should be treated with good faith, especially if it is their first time, and warned gently. The following templates are used for test edits: {{subst:uw-test1}}, {{subst:uw-test2}} and {{subst:uw-test3}}.

I just wanted to make sure you know about Special:RecentChanges, if you use the diff link in a different window or tab you can check a number of revisions much more easily. If you enable Hovercards in the Hover section of your preferences, you can view the diff by just hovering over it. Alternately, you can press control-F or command-F and search for "tag:". some edits get tagged for possible vandalism or section blanking.

Find and revert some vandalism. Warn each user appropriately, using the correct kind of warning and level. Please include at least two test edits and at least two appropriate reports to AIV. For each revert and warning please fill in a line on the table below

#	Type	Diff of your revert	Your comment - If you report to AIV please include the diff	CASS' Comment
Example	Unsourced	0	Delete of sourced content without explanation - give {{subst:uw-unsourced1}}
1	Test edit	diff	Using different wiki mark-ups like a test - use {{subst:uw-test3}} (as user had already been warned twice)	N. see notes section for explanation. Cassiopeia^(talk) 11:45, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
2	Test edit	diff	Changing the inbox - use {{subst:uw-test1}}	N. see notes section for explanation. Cassiopeia^(talk) 11:45, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
3	Vandalism (report to AIV)	diff	To be honest, there are many other diffs that I could show here. The page has been reverted many times. The vandal was 186.89.255.65. You can see the report here, but it wasn't made by me because there was an edit conflict between me and User:JavaHurricane, who also tried to report the editor. The user was banned for 31 hours.	Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 11:47, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
4	Vandalism (report to AIV)	diff	There were multiple disruptive edits from this IP address on the article, including promotion for a Snapchat account. The vandal was reported by me here and blocked for 12 hours.	Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 11:47, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
5	WP:NPOV	diff	Un-neutral statement about Hong Kong - use {{subst:uw-npov1}}	Y Cassiopeia^(talk) 11:54, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
6	WP:Fringe theories	diff	Changing of name without explanation (possible fringe theory) - use {{subst:uw-disruptive1}}	N. As per here cant find anything that Angad Rangar has anything related to Atacama skeleton, as such it is a vandalism edit. Cassiopeia^(talk) 11:54, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
7	WP:SPAM	diff	Spamming 'poop' - use {{subst:uw-vandalism1}}	N this is a vandalism edit and not spam. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:09, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
8	Talking on the article	diff	Talking about Krishna Edwards "lov[ing] vagina" - use {{subst:uw-vandalism1}}	N. Talking on the article example " Hi, how are you? I am so bored and I think tonight channel 10 has a good movie, wanna watch wit me?" Cassiopeia^(talk)
9	Unsourced	diff	Addition of unsourced content in a link - use {{subst:uw-unsourced1}}	N - see notes for explanation. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:09, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
10	Blanking / redirect	diff	Removing whole article and leaving a redirect without an edit summary - use {{subst:uw-delete1}}	Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:09, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
11	Unexplained disruptive editing	diff	Unexplained removal of content - use {{subst:uw-disruptive1}}	Y I do not know of the bus services to comment and i will take your edit as disruptive. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:09, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
12	Random changing of letters (it is a test edit)	diff	Changing parts of the words without explanation - use {{subst:uw-vandalism1}}	Y it is a test edit. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:09, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
13	Disruptive editing	diff	Changed word from "acoustic" to "autistic" - use {{subst:uw-disruptive1}}	Y could be a vandalism edit actually. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:09, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
14	WP:NPOV	diff	Changed "Concord Group" to "Concord amazing guys changed" - use {{subst:uw-npov2}} (as user had already been warned)	N it is a vandalism edit. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:09, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
15	Blanking	diff	Blanking approximately 500 bytes of content without explaining why – use {{subst:uw-delete1}}	I think you provide the wrong hist diff. Kindly provide again. (reply: Done.) Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:58, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
16	Test edit	diff	Changing of single character – use {{subst:uw-test1}}	Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:58, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
17	Test edit	diff	Changing of characters – use {{subst:uw-test1}}	Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:58, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
18	Unsourced	diff	Addition of unsourced content - use {{subst:uw-unsourced1}}	Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:58, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
19	Talking on the article	diff	Talking about sending an examination to the school – use {{subst:uw-vandalism1}}
20	Spam/promotional	diff

Thatoneweirdwikier Greetings. Pleas see assignment 3 above. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:09, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi CASSIOPEIA, sorry for the delay in my answers. I haven't found many vandals that fit in to the categories! Thanks, Thatone~~weird~~wikier Say hi 12:00, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, Good day. I understand it is hard to find vandaslism just looking a new edit log or normal editing. There is a counter vandalism tool in Wikipedia -Wikipedia:STiki where by the tool may only be used by editors who meet requirement of having at least 1000 edits in main space. Although you have 1194 edits in total but your main space edit is only 464 as per to date - see here. Try to ask for permission at Wikipedia talk:STiki, attention to user West.andrew.g. Let them know you are a student at CUVA and mention my name in case they need to verify you are indeed a student at CVUA. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 00:37, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, I believe I've already installed it. Thanks, Thatone~~weird~~wikier Say hi 07:11, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, If have already installed, then you would not have problem to find the edits needed. All you have to do is spend some time to find them. Cheers. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 07:46, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, Good to know you have returned and are working on the assignment. Stay safe and best. Let me know if you need any assitance. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia,

Completed all questions. Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 08:52, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, see comments above and the notes below. Kindly answer additional questions on the table. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:09, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, thanks for the feedback – working on it. I think I got desperate towards the end of the table as I couldn't find the specific edits I needed. Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 12:19, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, Let me know if you need further assistance or explanation. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:25, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, Hi you have only 2 more questions to go, do you need any help? Cassiopeia^(talk) 11:28, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, I am still reverting edits, but I have not found any edits that could be confidently classified as spam or talking. Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 17:38, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, OK. I have reviewed 3 answers. Keep on finding them for talking on the article and spam. Let me know when you find them. I will post next assignment in my next edit. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:58, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia,

Thank you. Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 12:22, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Notes:

1. Test edit - test edit is the first edit or first two edits (make in a quick succession) from an editor who "try" to make an edit and wanted to know if they "can actually" make an edit in Wikipedia (note: Most sites, besides the social media sites), we can make an edit in the site). We usually see a "new" editor make an test edit in the following forms (1) add or remove a character/alphabet of a word, (2) add a space(s), (3) add no nonsensical squabble such as "skfjsofjso" or just state "hi" (if the editor has been edit for some time and state hi then it is not a test edit). Sometimes, an editor try to make a test edit (removed an alphabet from a word), then add it back on their second edit. In Huggle we have a template "self revert test edit" that we could place in the editor talk page.

2. WP:NPOV - neutral point of view - when we add/change a content in the Wikipedia page, we need to write the content in neutral point of view which means no enhancing of any form of the content especially the subject. Example, we could place Jessica Alba is an Amemrican actress, but if we put "Jessica Alba is the most beautiful actress in American" then that the content is not ahered to NPOV. Another example, if India beats Australia in cricket with the scoring of 115 - 70. We just put India won the match or India won the match with the scoring of 115-70. If we put India smasch Australia, or India took the victory and put Australia to shame as the match was in Sydney then it is considered not adhere to NPOV. We mainly report the fact, simple without put all the promotional words to enhance the info. The info speaks the fact in "plain manner"

3. Disruptive - it not a vandalism edit but it continues disruptive then the editor could be reported to AIV. Pls note, vandalsim 9back to Assignment 1 : is an blatant act to harm Wikipedia. We also ask ourselves when revert a vandalsim edit, is the editor trying to harm Wikipedia or being disruptive because not aware/refuse to listen to advice.

4.Warning level - in Assignment 2 - we also place level one warning and if the editor continue the same fashion of edit then we increase the level subsequently (back to assignment 1 - assume good faith especialy with new editors) unless their edits are so prevalent or place extreme damage to the article such as extremely disguising langues the we place higher level of warning at first.

5.Unsourced is adding body text without the support of source/inline citation.

Shared IP tagging

There are a number of IP user talk page templates which show helpful information to IP users and those wishing to warn or block them. There is a list of these templates

{{Shared IP}} - For general shared IP addresses.
{{ISP}} - A modified version specifically for use with ISP organizations.
{{Shared IP edu}} - A modified version specifically for use with educational institutions.
{{Shared IP gov}} - A modified version specifically for use with government agencies.
{{Shared IP corp}} - A modified version specifically for use with businesses.
{{Shared IP address (public)}} - A modified version specifically for use with public terminals such as in libraries, etc.
{{Mobile IP}} - A modified version specifically for use with a mobile device's IP.
{{Dynamic IP}} - A modified version specifically for use with dynamic IPs.
{{Static IP}} - A modified version specifically for use with static IPs which may be used by more than one person.

Each of these templates take two parameters, one is the organisation to which the IP address is registered (which can be found out using the links at the bottom of the IP's contribution page. The other is for the host name (which is optional) and can also be found out from the links at the bottom of the IP's contribution page.

Also, given that different people use the IP address, older messages are sometimes refused so as to not confuse the current user of the IP. Generally any messages for the last one-two months are removed, collapsed, or archived. The templates available for this include:

{{OW}} for when the messages are deleted from the talk page.
{{Old IP warnings top}} and {{Old IP warnings bottom}} for collapsing the user warnings and leaving them on the talk page.
{{Warning archive notice}} for when the messages are archived, and that archiving follows the usually naming sequence (that is, /Archive 1).

NOTE: All of the templates in this section are not substituted (so don't use "subst:").

Hi Thatoneweirdwikier, Posted Assignment 4 above. No exercises for this assignment but only some reading material. Once you have done reading, pls let me know so I would post Assignment 5 for you. Cheers. Cassiopeia^(talk) 11:03, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia,

Finished reading. Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 14:45, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Dealing with difficult users

Harassment and trolling

Occasionally, some vandals will not appreciate your good work and try to harass or troll you. In these situations, you must remain calm and ignore them. If they engage in harassment or personal attacks, you should not engage with them and leave a note at WP:ANI. If they vandalise your user page or user talk page, simply remove the vandalism without interacting with them. Please read WP:DENY.

Why do we deny recognition to trolls and vandals?

Answer: Because recognition encourages vandalism. Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 10:20, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

. The main point/goal of the trolls is that they want attention. We dont feed them and dont get mad by denying them the recognition that they seek is critical to countering them. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:13, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

How can you tell between a good faith user asking why you reverted their edit, and a troll trying to harass you?

Answer: Usually, a troll will vandalise your page or ask you in a mean way. However, a good faith user might, for example, patiently ask "Hi. I'd like to ask why you reverted my edit, as I thought it was a good-faith edit." Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 10:20, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Do note sometimes good faith editor do get upset when we reverted their edit and place a warning message and convey their message which might not be pleasant for your standard. Many times troll might not use personal attacks but being rude, condescending, put down, name calling and etc. To check on the editors past edits/talk page would help; however, the bottom line is that trolls want to annoy you and good faith editors annoyed at you and that is the subtle different. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:13, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Emergencies

I hope this never happens, but as you participate in counter-vandalism on Wikipedia, it is possible that you may come across a threat of physical harm. In the past, we have had vandals submit death threats in Wikipedia articles, as well as possible suicide notes. The problem is, Wikipedia editors don't have the proper training to evaluate whether these threats are credible in most cases.

Fortunately, there's a guideline for cases like this. Please read Wikipedia:Responding to threats of harm carefully and respond to the questions below.

Who should you contact when you encounter a threat of harm on Wikipedia? What details should you include in your message?

Answer: The Wikimedia Foundation (via emergency@wikimedia.org) and an administrator (privately). Include where the threat was made, as well as a diff. Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 10:24, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:13, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

What should you do if an edit looks like a threat of harm, but you suspect it may just be an empty threat (i.e. someone joking around)?

Answer: Still send the above email (but you may want to add your suspicions of the empty threat). The Foundation will make the decision as to whether it is empty. Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 10:24, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:13, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Sock pupperty

Please read Wikipedia:Sock puppetry and answer the question below

What forms socks puppetry usually takes? and where to report it?

Answer: There are multiple:

Logging in on separate accounts to make edits to similar subjects.
Creating a new account to circumvent a ban.
Using someone else's account.

Just to name a few. To report it, go to WP:SPI. Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 10:29, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:13, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Thatoneweirdwikier, see Assignment 5 above. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:11, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia,

Seen and working on it. Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 10:15, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia,

Completed all questions. Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 10:29, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Thatoneweirdwikier, See above review and let me know if you have any question or you are ready to move on to next assignment. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:13, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, I am ready for the next assignment. Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 11:06, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Protection and speedy deletion

Protecting and deleting pages are two additional measures that can be used to prevent and deal with vandalism. Only an administrator can protect or delete pages; however, anyone can nominate a page for deletion or request protection. If you have Twinkle installed, you can use the Twinkle menu to request page protection or speedy deletion (the RPP or CSD options).

Protection

Please read the protection policy.

1. In what circumstances should a page be semi-protected?

Answer: When there is consistent vandalism from IP addresses or significant media interest for the subject of the article. Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 13:46, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

. To prevent IP's and new editors from editing an article/template page of high level of vandalism, edit warring. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:44, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

2. In what circumstances should a page be pending changes level 1 protected?

Answer: When there is a high amount of IP vandalism, but a general low amount of editing activity. Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 13:56, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

good. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:44, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

3. In what circumstances should a page be fully protected?

Answer: When there is a high amount of vandalism from extended confirmed accounts. Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 13:56, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

It is also applied to highly visible pages like the Main Page, templates and only admins can edit these pages. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:44, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

4. In what circumstances should a page be creation protected ("salted")?

Answer: When there is a page that is considered "bad" but is consistently recreated and redeleted. Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 13:56, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:44, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

5. In what circumstances should a talk page be semi-protected?

Answer: In severe cases of vandalism. Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 13:56, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

. An Article talk page is rarely protected except in cases of extreme vandalism. User Talk pages are most often protected when they experience vandalism or abuse, usually from trolls or upset editors that have been reverted for performing vandalism on articles. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:44, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

6. Correctly request the protection of two page (pending, semi or full); post the diff of your request (from WP:RPP) below.

Answer I: Mohamed Salah – indefinite semi-protection. Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 15:46, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:44, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Answer ii: Human tooth – temporary semi-protection (originally asked for indefinite protection but I changed it in the next edit). Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 15:46, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:44, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

Please read WP:CSD.

1. In what circumstances should a page be speedy deleted, very briefly no need to go through the criteria?

Answer: When there would be strong consensus for deletion if the page/article was to appear at WP:AFD.

2. Correctly tag four pages for speedy deletion (1 promo, 1 copyvio and 2 can be for any of the criteria) and post the diff and the criteria you requested it be deleted under below. For COPYVIO pls check the text vs the source by using Earwig Copy detector

Answer i: Stykz – G11 – diff on page – warn on user talk page

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:44, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Answer ii: Draft:Knipselkrant Curacao – G11 – diff on page – warn on user talk page

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:44, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Answer iii: Draft:Cricketer The Legend – G11 – diff on page – warn on user talk page

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:44, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Answer iv: Adeyemi Oduwole – G7 – diff on page

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:21, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, See Assignment 6 above. Cassiopeia^(talk) 11:15, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, I have seen the above assignment and will being working on it soon. Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 11:29, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

~~Cassiopeia, what is meant by "pending changes level 1" for the second question on the protection section? Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 13:47, 24 May 2020 (UTC)~~

Never mind. I figured it out. Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 13:49, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, pending changes 1 protection = vandalism edits usually by different editors in a page where by the volume is low but persistence over a period of time ( a few days to a few weeks). We need to look at the article history log to find out of such edits. Hope this help. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 05:07, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, Good day. Havent seen you working on the questions for the last five days, do you need any help? stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:51, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, I've been looking for pages to speedy delete. There was one that I tried to speedy delete, but it was deleted under a different criteria, so I didn't include it. What's the easiest way to find pages that are likely to be candidates for speedy deletion? Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 06:06, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, You can find promotion and copyvio pages at new page patrol and article for creation. For other CSD only find the in new page patrol section - important. Best and see notes below. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:09, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, perfect. Thanks for the help! Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Say hi 06:11, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, Good day I was waiting for you to ping me for review and thought you might need some time to complete due to covid-19 situtation. I have reviewed and see comments above. You have missed "=Speedy deletion - Answer iv". When you have done with answer iv, pls ping me. I will post the assignment 7 and let me know if you have any questions. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:44, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, I was waiting to complete the task before pinging you. User:Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Conversations and Contributions 05:48, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, Ok thank you for informing. Btw I have posted Assignment 7 and you would start working on the assignment. Cheers. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:01, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, I wasn't planning on finding a fourth speedy-deletable article so quickly, but the first article I found on the page feed was a G7. I'll start working on Assignment 7 now. User:Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Conversations and Contributions 06:19, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, Reviewed. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:21, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Notes

G11 (promo) - What constitute a G11? At times it is hard to define. Although if a article is blantly promote or adverstise about the subject then it is a G11. Sometimes, the it is a little subtle and that would be a judgement call. As a rule of thumb, if article about an entertainers (actor/singer/DJ/artist and etc) in dept of how hard they work, how motivated they are, using all the puffery/flowery languagues and especially the subject does not meet notability guidelines. For a corporation, we would see they list down all they product/services, their directors/key person in the company, they mission, their client, they are the influencer in their industrial, all the words/phrased to enhance/market the company and no substantial info that is supported by independent reliable sources. If you look at the this version of Zapp Scooters which you tagged G11, I have to agree with the editor who removed the tag that it is not a G11 and unsourced info can be removed.

G12 (copyvio) -

Copyright violation addresses the use of original expression without permission of the holder which is a violation of laws even the credit is given to the source. For articles, the Copyright Law gives the copyright protection to the “original works of authorship fixed in in a tangible medium of expression” in the newspaper, magazine and freelance article at the moment of their creation, for the life of the creator plus 70 years after, and 95 years for corporation publication or 120 years from date of creation, whichever is shorter.

A “fact” is not considered an original work of authorship; but how the ways facts are recorded where the style of the writing, choice and/or arrangement of words are copyrightable. An infringement of copyright is committed when a person uses the “exact words /almost exact words in a consecutive manner” of the author/holder. To note, as a guideline, a few words copies from the original works and an idea of expression such as "weather the storm", 'crossing the Rubicon" "as dead as a doornail" and etc. proper nouns, document/event/treaty/person/title/ names are generally acceptable and so is a direct quote of speech. However, any longer phrases which would be expression in a number of ways are copyright protected. To use one of two short sentences on a large article generally is ok but it will considered infringement if the edit entry is consists of big percentage of the original work and yet for some (such as newspaper/press/journalism that takes their work very seriously - anything more than 4 exact consecutively words would considered copyvio). To avoid copyright infringement, one needs uses his/her own words to convey the source’s information. Paraphrasing could minimise the the copyright violation; however, "threshold" ultimately, court judgement would determined the if copyright violation has been made.

Copyvio for texts or images shared the same notion that it is not a copyvio if the verbatim texts or images are taken from free licence and Public domain sites/specific page/image. I have indicated to you on Assignement 3 - section 3.3 - Q5, Q6, Q7 that always check the "original source" even if in WikiCommon the editor who upload the image claim taken from a PD site, we need to check the link provided and if the site indicate the image taken from another source, then we check the source. For texts, we need to check the sites if it is a PD, sometimes the disclaimer of PD is not on the page, but on the home page or "about" page or FAQ page. Secondly, for older article (no in NPP Feed), any copyvio texts found, we will revdel it as it is almost always it is not the first versions. If a small amount of verbatim texts found in NPP Feed articles, we would revdel them; but large amount of verbatim texts we will tag G12.

Lastly, here are a few examples where the German car maker Audi was sued for copyright breach.

1. Audi infringed copyright violation over Eminem’s song “Lose Yourself” in their commercial advertising. [1]

2. Audi was fined US $ 965,000 over copyright infringement for using 10 words from Brian Andreas’s story of “Angel of Mercy” - [2]

I think I just had a wake-up call, and it was disguised as a car, and it was screaming at me not to get too comfortable and fall asleep and miss my life. (Audi commercial) Some people don’t know that there are angels whose only job is to make sure you don’t get too comfortable & fall asleep & miss your life.(Brian Andreas’ print)

Hope the above help. Note the above doest not substitute the Wikipedia links I provided above. Please make sure you read the reading material as well. Thanks.

Usernames

Wikipedia has a policy which details the types of usernames which users are permitted to have. Some users (including me) patrol the User creation log to check for new users with inappropriate usernames. There are four kinds of usernames that are specifically disallowed:

Misleading usernames imply relevant, misleading things about the contributor. The types of names which can be misleading are too numerous to list, but definitely include usernames that imply you are in a position of authority over Wikipedia, usernames that impersonate other people, or usernames which can be confusing within the Wikipedia signature format, such as usernames which resemble IP addresses or timestamps.
Promotional usernames are used to promote an existing company, organization, group (including non-profit organizations), website, or product on Wikipedia.
Offensive usernames are those that offend other contributors, making harmonious editing difficult or impossible.
Disruptive usernames include outright trolling or personal attacks, include profanities or otherwise show a clear intent to disrupt Wikipedia.

Please read WP:USERNAME, and pay particluar attention to dealing with inappropriate usernames.

Describe the what you would about the following usernames of logged in users (including which of the above it breaches and why).

DJohnson

Answer: Misleading username – possible impersonation of Dwayne Johnson.

. This could be a real person's name, who just happens to have a name similar to Dwayne Johnson - it could be anything as such the user name is allowed unless the user is editing articles about "D. Johnson", in which case it could be a misleading username or a conflict of interest. If this is the case I would leave {{subst:uw-coi-username}} or {{subst:uw-username}} on their talk page. The key is that they are not claiming to be someone famous, such as Dwayne Johnson. As long as their edits look fine, we would take no action. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:14, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

LMedicalCentre

Answer: Promotional username – could be used to promote a company.

2 parts questions. Part 2 answer: Write to the user and info and guide them about Wikipedia username policy and advise the user to change his/her name. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:14, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Fuqudik

Answer: Disruptive username – sounds like "fuck you dick".

2 parts questions. Part 2 answer: Would immediately report to UAA without warning. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:14, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

ColesStaff

Answer: Promotional username – could be used to promote Coles.

2 parts questions. Part 2 answer: Except for the most egregious cases, write to the user and brief him/her about Wikipedia username policy and advise him/her to change the username should the user edits are constructive and not violate NPV. (b)If the user edits is aimed to advertise and promote Coles then I will report it to WP:UAA. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:14, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

~~~~

Answer: Misleading username – name is the Wikipedia signature.

Nowadays, these types of usernames are automatically disallowed, so you won't stumble across them. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:14, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

172.295.64.27

Answer: Misleading username – name sounds like an IP address.

Nowadays, these types of usernames are automatically disallowed, so you won't stumble across them. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:14, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Bieberisgay

Answer: Offensive username – offensive to Wikipedians who like Justin Beiber.

2 parts questions. Part 2 answer: Report to WP:UAA

Thatoneweirdwikier, See review Q3 on Assignment 6 and Assignment 7 above. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:47, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia,

Completed. User:Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Conversations and Contributions 11:56, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, See comment. When we review an edit, we need to know why the edit is constructive or reconstructive, any violation is made and "what kind of action/no action" is taken and why since counter vandalism is no only know the guidelines but what we are going to do about it and at times we do certain judgmental call based on our experience and knowledge/guidelines. One thing to bare in mind, if we are not sure, leave the edit alone and let other more experience editor / editor who know about the subject to action. Thank you. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:14, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Progress test

Congratulations, now have mastered the "basics" so we can move on. Please complete the following progress test, and I'll tell you what's next.

The following 3 scenarios are based on WP: VANDAL, WP:3RR, WP: REVERT, WP: BLOCK, WP: GAIV, WP: WARN, WP:UAA, WP:CSD, and WP:UN. Make sure to provide link to guidelines,explanation/justification of your action and guidelines used on your answers. Good Luck!

Scenario 1

You encounter an IP vandalising Justin Bieber by adding in statements that he is gay.

Would this be considered vandalism or a good faith edit, why?

Answer: This would be considered vandalism – without a reliable source, the information is intentionally misleading.

. Unsourced and it is intentional vandalism in regardless the edit is made by an IP or registered editor (vandalism is vandalism) by adding controversial (and deliberately false) information to a Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons article.

Which Wikipedia policies and/or guidelines is it breaching?

Answer: WP:NPOV and WP:UNSOURCED.

. WP:NPOV is usually added words/phrases to enchance/degrade the subject such as "extremely poplar", "the most beautiful woman in the world", "extremely innovative technology", "MIT is education is trash" etc. Onother Wikipedi policy is breached is Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons . Cassiopeia^(talk) 04:11, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

What would be an appropriate warning template to place on the IP's user talk page?

Answer: {{subst:uw-biog1}}

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 04:11, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

The user has now added offensive words to the article 3 times. You have reverted three times already, can you be blocked for violating the three revert rule in this case?

Answer: No. 3RR only applies if you revert more than 3 times.

. Do note if the information is purely unsourced (example: XXX is 6"0" while the existence content stated xxx is 6"1"), then it is not considered vandalism edit and it would subject to 3RR violation if revert more than 3 times. Cassiopeia^(talk) 04:11, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Which of the following reporting templates should be used in this case: {{IPvandal}} or {{vandal}}?

Answer: {{IPvandal}}

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 04:11, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

What would you include as the reason for reporting the editor?

Answer: Consistent vandalism to Justin Bieber (as well as diffs showing offending edits).

(do explain/elaborate/justify and support with guidelines with your answer pls especially in the final exam.) The report will include:

1. Vandalised page name (reversion history if possible)

2. IP Vandal

3. User vandalised page after lv4(or 4im)

Cassiopeia^(talk) 04:11, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Scenario 2

You see a new account called "Hi999" that has added random letters to one article.

Would this be considered vandalism or a good faith edit, why?

Answer: Vandalism – this would be classified as a test edit.

. It is a test edit for such assuming good faith, considering that the user is new. It should be considered as vandalism if the user continues doing this, after being properly warned. Test edit is not a vandalism edit. Pls read WP:V. Cassiopeia^(talk) 04:11, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

What would be an appropriate warning template to place on the user's talk page?

Answer: {{subst:uw-test1}}

. If this is not the first edit, after proper warnings, adding vandalism template. Cassiopeia^(talk) 04:11, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Which of the following Twinkle options should be used to revert these edits: Rollback-AGF (Green), Rollback (Blue) or Rollback-Vandal (Red)?

Answer: Rollback-Vandal

. Rollback-AGF (Green) for enabling us to add comments and explain the reason behind the revert. Cassiopeia^(talk) 04:11, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

The user now has a level 3 warning on their talk page. They make a vandal edit, would it be appropriate to report this user to AIV? Why or why not?

Answer: Strictly speaking, no. There is still one last level of warning before the final warning is breached.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 04:11, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

If this user keeps on vandalizing, can this user be blocked indef.?

Answer: Potentially, if the user has been blocked before.

. Vandalism-only accounts usually be blocked indef. Cassiopeia^(talk) 04:11, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Which of the following reporting templates should be used in this case: {{IPvandal}} or {{vandal}}?

Answer: {{Vandal}}

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 04:11, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

What would you include as the reason for reporting the editor?

Answer: Consistent vandalism past final warning (including diffs of offending edits).

Scenario 3

You see a new account called "LaptopsInc" which has created a new page called "Laptops Inc" (which only contains the words "Laptops Inc" and a few lines of text copied from the company's website). The user also added "www.laptopsinc.com" on the Laptop article. You research Laptops Inc on Google and find that is a small company.

Should you revert the edit to Laptop, if so which Twinkle option would you use?

Answer: Yes – use Rollback-Vandal.

. It is a blatant promotion from a user with a promotional username. Cassiopeia^(talk) 04:11, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

If you do revert which warning template would you use?

Answer: {{subst:uw-advert1}}

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 04:11, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Would you tag the article they created with a speedy deletion tag(s). If so which speedy deletion criteria apply to the article?

Answer: Yes – the article would be tagged with G11.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 04:11, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Would you leave a template on the user's talk page regarding their username? If so which one and with which parameters?

Answer: Yes – {{subst:uw-username}} with the reason parameter "Promotional username – used to promote Laptops Inc."

. Would also use {{subst:uw-coi-username}} to indicated the username suggests a conflict of interest. Cassiopeia^(talk) 04:11, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Would you report the user to UAA? If so what of the four reasons does it violate?

Answer: Yes – username is promotional, could imply shared use by other members of the company.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 04:11, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, See Assignment 8 above. Make sure to provide link to guidelines,explanation/justification of your action and guidelines used on your answers. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:20, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

@Cassiopeia: I have completed all 3 scenarios. User:Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Conversations and Contributions 17:14, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, See comments above. Test edit (first edit by new editors) is not a vandalism edit. Adding unsourced content (as long as not in the crieteria of vandalsim) is not a vandalism edit. We can report to ANI if the editor keep on adding unsourced content to the article after receiving warnings. If the track history of the editor is adding unsourced content, then we could use distributive warnings and we could report to AIV and that would subject to admin to act upon it. (a lot of admin would not block editor just because editor adds unsourced content unless the editor has been warned many time in a perior of several months). Finally do explain/elaborate/justify and support with guidelines with your answer pls especially in the final exam for some of the answer would based on "if xxxx then yyy and if zzz then aaa". Cassiopeia^(talk) 04:11, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Rollback

Congratulations now for the next step. The rollback user right allows trusted and experienced vandalism fighters to revert vandalism with the click of one button. Please read WP:Rollback.

Describe when the rollback button may be used and when it may not be used.

Answer: Rollback may be used when you need to revert an edit that is blatant vandalism and/or needs no explanation for reverting.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 05:25, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Answer: Rollback may NOT be used when the reason for reversion is not immediately clear.

{{cross}. Rollback may NOT be used when reason(s) is needed for reverting, for good faith reverts and content disputes. Cassiopeia^(talk) 05:25, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

What should you do if you accidentally use rollback?

Answer: Self-revert your edit, with an edit summary like "Self-revert – accidental use of rollback".

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 05:25, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Should you use rollback if you want to leave an edit summary?

Answer: No. Use Twinkle or the undo function instead.

. As rollback tool provides its own short edit summary. Cassiopeia^(talk) 05:25, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, See assignment 9 above. Cheers. Cassiopeia^(talk) 04:21, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia,

Completed. User:Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Conversations and Contributions 05:13, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, see comments above. Cassiopeia^(talk) 05:25, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Monitoring period

Congratulations! You have completed the main section of the anti-vandalism course. Well done! Now that we've been through everything that you need to know as a vandal patroller, you will be given a 7-day monitoring period. During this time, you are free to revert vandalism (and edit Wikipedia) as you normally do; I will monitor your progress in anti-vandalism. If there are any issues, I will raise them with you and if you have any problems, you are free to ask me. After seven days, if I am satisfied with your progress, you will take the final test; passing this will mean you graduate from the CVUA. Good luck!

If you have any problems or trouble along the way please leave a message on below this section. If you make any difficult decisions feel free to post the diff below and I'll take a look.

Thatoneweirdwikier, Greeting. The next phase of this course is Assignment 10 - "monitoring period", see above. Cheers. Pls make about 30 counter vandalism edits and I will check your contribution log for those edits. (If you make hundred of counter vandalism edits, I would not able to check them all). Final exam will follows after the monitoring period. Do raise any questions if you have any. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 05:28, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, quick question: am I allowed to ask for Rollback and cite you as the reason? User:Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Conversations and Contributions 06:28, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, Good day. Cite me when you request for rollback right after you have finished and passed your CVUA final exam. I advised all my trainees who graduated from the CVUA and they all got approval and not before. Thank you. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:34, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, good to know. User:Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Conversations and Contributions 08:35, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, You 7 day monitoring period has shown no major issues. See below you Final exam question. All the best and pls note the below. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:07, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Notes

Ppending page protection - (low volume but consistent over a period of time (days to weeks) that means you need to check the articles's history log page
(3RR) - Do note you need to warn the involved editor on their talk pages first after the have made their 3 revert on the same article within 24 hour which deemed edit warring with another involved editor(s). If the any of the involved makes the 4th revert then you can report them. When reporting you need to provide the hist diffs and some reason. Make sure you provide all the 3RR hist diff when reporting.
For (copyvio) - you can check on the New Pages Feed) and look for articles in either New Page Patrol or Article for Creation. Use [https://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios/ Earwig's Copyvio Detector to see if the articles violate copyvio (make sure only report if the copyvio percentage is high and the content is NOT taken from public domain (free to use) sites. So you need to check if the sites are copyright). All proper nouns, document, event name and etc are not considered copyvio. Between New Page Patrol or Article for Creation, you can find much higher changes of articles violate copyvio in Article for Creation section.
Flexible counter vandalism system in English Wikipedia - As a rule of thumb we give level one warning to the editor of their first offend of the month; however, it is subject to the vandal fighter to determine the severity and the prevalent of the vandalism edits made by the editor where by the vandal fighter could start the warning level from 2/3/4 as they see fit. In practice we then to give warning 1 and let up to a block as some admin would not block an editor if warnings message are too few.

Final Exam

GOOD LUCK!

Part 1 (15%)

For each of these examples, please state whether you would call the edit(s) described as vandalism or good faith edit, a reason for that, and how you would deal with the situation (ensuring you answer the questions where applicable).

1 & 2. A user inserts 'sfjiweripw' into an article. What would you do if it was their first warning? What about after that.

Answer 1: It would be considered a test edit. I would revert it and give the warning {{subst:uw-test1}}.

Answer 2: Issue the warnings from there – {{subst:uw-test2}}, {{subst:uw-test3}}, etc. If necessary, take them to WP:AIV.

3 & 4. A user adds their signature to an article after one being given a {{Uw-articlesig}} warning. What would you the next time they did it? What about if they kept doing it after that?

Answer 3: Because it is a single-use warning, a different type of warning needs to be used (possibly something like {{subst:uw-vandalism2}}).

Answer 4: Take them to WP:AIV.

5 & 6. A user adds 'John Smith is the best!' into an article. What would you do the first time? What about if they kept doing it after that?

Answer 5: Revert and warn with {{subst:uw-npov1}}.

Answer 6: Continue to raise the level of the warning. If necessary, report at AIV.

7 & 8. A user adds 'I can edit this' into an article. The first time, and times after that?

Answer 7: Revert and warn with {{subst:uw-test1}}.

Answer 8: Continue to raise the level of the warning. If necessary, report at AIV.

9, 10 & 11. What would you do when a user removes sourced information from an article, with the summary 'this is wrong'. First time, and after that? What would be different if the user has a history of positive contributions compared with a history of disruptive contributions?

Answer 9: Revert and use {{subst:uw-delete1}}.

Answer 10: Continue to raise the level of the warning.

Answer 11: A history of positive contributions makes the editor more trustworthy, making their edits more reliable. Disruptive contributions make the editor less trustworthy, making their edits less reliable.

12. An IP user removes ~~removes~~ unsourced article, what would you do?

Answer 12: Revert this and use {{subst:uw-delete2}}.

13. An IP user removes a sourced content and stated "not relevant", what would you do?

Answer 13: Revert it and use {{subst:uw-delete1}}.

14. An IP user adds My parents do not love me. I going to jump out the balcony and kill myself", what would you do?

Answer 14: Revert the edit and send an email to emergency@wikimedia.org; include the diff of the edit.

15. An IP user adds "I going to kill the editor who have reverted my edit", what would you do?

Answer 15: Revert the edit and send an email to emergency@wikimedia.org; include the diff of the edit.

Part 2 (15%)

Which templates warning would give an editor in the following scenarios. If you don't believe a template warning is appropriate outline the steps (for example what you would say) you would take instead.

1. A user blanks Cheesecake

Answer 1: {{subst:uw-blank1}}

2. A user trips edit filter for trying to put curse words on Derek Jete

Answer 2: {{subst:uw-attempt1}}

3. A user trips edit summary filter for repeating characters on Denis Menchov

Answer 3: {{subst:uw-efsummary}}

4. A user puts "CHRIS IS GAY!" on Atlanta Airport

Answer 4: {{subst:uw-biog1}}

5. A user section blanks without a reason on David Newhan.

Answer 5: {{subst:uw-delete1}}

6. A user adds random characters to Megan Fox.

Answer 6: {{subst:uw-test1}}

7. A user adds 'Tim is really great' to Great Britain.

Answer 7: {{subst:uw-vandalism1}}

8. A user adds 'and he has been arrested' to Tim Henman.

Answer 8: {{subst:uw-biog1}}

9. A user blanks Personal computer, for the fifth time, they have had no warnings or messages from other users.

Answer 9: Take them to WP:AIV.

10. A user blanks Personal computer, for the fifth time, they have had four warnings including a level 4 warning.

Answer 10: Take them to WP:AIV.

11. A user blanks your userpage and replaced it with 'I hate this user' (you have had a number of problems with this user in the past).

Answer 11: {{subst:uw-upv}}

12. A user adds File:Example.jpg to Taoism

Answer 12: {{subst:uw-image1}}

13. A user blanks your user page and replaced it with 'Idiot Nazi guy' just because you reverted his vandalism and he got angry with you.

Answer 13: {{subst:uw-upv}}

14. A user adds "Italic text to Sydney

Answer 14: {{subst:uw-test1}}

15. A user adds "he loves dick" to Chris Hemsworth

Answer 15: {{subst:uw-vandalism1}}

Find and revert some vandalism. Warn each user appropriately, using the correct kind of warning and level. Please include at least two test edits and at least two appropriate reports to AIV. For each revert and warning please fill in a line on the table below

#	Type	Diff of your revert	Your comment - If you report to AIV please include the diff
Example	Unsourced	0	Delete of sourced content without explanation - give {{subst:uw-unsourced1}}
16	Test edit	diff	Changed some characters – give {{subst:uw-test1}}
17	Test edit	diff	Changing a letter – use {{subst:uw-test1}}
18	Vandalism (report to AIV)	diff 1 diff 2 reporting diff	Constant blanking. I wasn't the one to revert all of the vandalism but I did revert some and reported the vandalism to AIV. The user was banned for 31 hours.
19	Vandalism (report to AIV)	diff 1 / warn diff 2 / warn diff 3 reporting diff	Consistent vandalism on several articles. Again, I did not revert all of the user's vandalism but I reverted some and reported the vandalism. The user was banned for 31 hours.
20	WP:NPOV	diff	Saying about how the district has "racist ideals" – use {{subst:uw-npov2}} as user had already been warned once
21	WP:Fringe theories	diff	Claiming that person in article is a family member of professional thieves – use {{subst:uw-unsourced1}}
22	WP:SPAM	diff	Your comment
23	Talking on the article	diff	Labelling editors as "commie NYT sycophants" – use {{subst:uw-nor4}} as user had been warned at level 3 previously + they were defending the use of original research
24	Unsourced	diff	Addition of unsourced content – use {{subst:uw-unsourced1}}
25	Unexplained removal	diff	Unexplained removal of sourced content – use {{subst:uw-delete1}}
26	Vandalism	diff	Random change of name – use {{subst:uw-vandalism1}}
27	Unexplained removal	diff	Unexplained removal of source – use {{subst:uw-unsourced1}}
28	Unsourced	diff	Unsourced addition to the article – use {{subst:uw-unsourced1}}
29	Unexplained removal	diff	Unexplained removal of a source – use {{subst:uw-delete1}}
30	Unsourced	diff	Changing info with no change of source – use {{subst:uw-unsourced1}}

Part 3 (10%)

What CSD tag you would put on the following articles (The content below is the article's content).

1. Check out my Twitter page (link to Twitter page)

Answer 1: G11.

2. Josh Marcus is the coolest kid in London.

Answer 2: A7.

3. Joe goes to England and comes home!

Answer 3: A1.

4. A Smadoodle is an animal that changes colors with its temper.

Answer 4: A11.

5. Fuck Wiki!

Answer 5: G10.

What would you do in the following circumstance:

6. A user blanks a page they very recently created

Answer 6: Tag the page as G7.

7. After you have speedy delete tagged this article the author removes the tag but leaves the page blank.

Answer 7: Assume good faith and use another deletion method if you still believe the page needs to be deleted. In addition, inform the user that it is unconstructive to remove speedy deletion tags without instead contesting.

8 & 9. A user who is the creator of the page remove the "{{afd}}" tag for the first time and times after that?

Answer 8: Re-add the tag and warn them with {{subst:uw-afd1}}.

Answer 9: Continue to warn them with the increasing warning levels – if necessary, take them to WP:AIV.

10. A draft page which is last edited more than 6 months ago.

Answer 10: Tag it with G13 and notify the user on their talk page if they wish to prevent the draft's deletion.

Part 4 (10%)

Are the following new (logged in) usernames violations of the username policy? Describe why or why not and what you would do about it (if they are a breach).

1. TheMainStreetBand

Answer 1: Misleading username, does not represent contributor as an individual – use {{subst:uw-coi-username}} on their talk page to inform them.

2. Poopbubbles

Answer 2: Possibly offensive username – quite ambiguous though, so I would likely ignore unless their edits appear nonconstructive.

3. Brian's Bot

Answer 3: Misleading username, masquerading as a bot – leave {{subst:uw-uall}} or a similar message on the user's talk page.

4. sdadfsgadgadjhm,hj,jh,jhlhjlkfjkghkfuhlkhj

Answer 4: Confusing username, lengthy/spammy – obvious violation, so report them to WP:UAA.

5. Bobsysop

Answer 5: Appears to be no issue here, so ignore.

6. 12, 23 June 2012

Answer 6: Misleading/confusing username, name is a date that usually goes at the end of a signature – obvious violation, so report to WP:UAA.

7. PMiller

Answer 7: Possible misleading username (appears to be an impersonation of Master P), but could be a coincidence, so leave {{subst:uw-coi-username}} unless their edit history shows that they are a frequent editor of the Master P page.

8. OfficialJustinBieber

Answer 8: Misleading username (a clear impersonation of Justin Beiber) – report to WP:UAA.

9. The Dark Lord of Wiki

Answer 9: Possibly disruptive username; report to WP:UAA.

10. I love you

Answer 10: No issue here, leave it.

Part 5 (10%)

Answer the following questions based on your theory knowledge gained during your instruction.

1. Can you get in an edit war while reverting vandalism (which may or may not be obvious)?

Answer 1: If it is obvious vandalism, no. If it is not obvious, one may wish to seek the opinion of another Wikipedian to check whether they just have a different point of view to the other editor.

2. Where and how should vandalism-only accounts be reported?

Answer 2: WP:AIV. Use the following template: {{IPvandal|IP address}}/{{Vandal|Example user}} – brief reason for listing ~~~~.

3. Where and how should complex abuse be reported?

Answer 3: WP:ANI. In your report, describe what the user has done. Ensure to use {{subst:AN-notice}} on the user's talk page.

4. Where and how should blatant username violations be reported?

Answer 4: WP:UAA. Use the template {{user-uaa|1=username}} – reason ~~~~.

5. Where and how should personal attacks against other editors be reported?

Answer 5: WP:ANI. In your report, describe what the user has done. Ensure to use {{subst:AN-notice}} on the user's talk page.

6. Where and how should an edit war be reported?

Answer 6: WP:AN3. Give the page being warred on, the user(s) warring on it, and the diffs where the edit warring has taken place.

7. Where and how should ambiguous violations of WP:BLP be reported?

Answer 7: The BLP noticeboard. Make the title of your discussion the name of the page. Describe the issue and provide a diff.

8. Where and how should a sockpuppet be reported?

Answer 8: WP:SPI. Follow the instructions on the page and complete the provided form.

9. Where and how should a page need protection be reported?

Answer 9: WP:RPP. Press the "Request protection" button and fill in the appropriate text to be accurate to your situation.

10. Where and how should editors involved in WP:3RR be reported to

Answer 10: WP:AN3. Give the page where the reverting is happening, the user(s) reverting on it, and the diffs where the reverting has taken place.

Part 6 - Theory in practice (40%)

1-5. Correctly request the protection of five articles (2 pending and 3 semi/full protection); post the diffs of your requests below. (pls provide page name and hist diff of the RPP report)

Answer 1: Tariq Masood – semi-protection – diff of report

. Cassiopeia talk 20:24, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Answer 2: Ismail ibn Musa Menk – semi-protection – diff of report

. Cassiopeia talk 20:24, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Answer 3: Maryam Nawaz – semi-protection – diff of report

Answer 4: The Kid Laroi – pending changes (was protected with semi) – diff of report

Answer 5: Home Alone – pending changes (was protected with semi) – diff of report

6-7. Find and revert one good faith edit, one self-revert test edit, one test edit and warn/welcome the user appropriately. Please give the diffs of your warn/welcome below.

Answer 6: Betting shop – diff

Answer 7: Neerja Bhanot – diff – warn

8, & 9.Correctly report two users for violating of 3RR to ANI). Give the diffs of your report below. (Remember you need to warn the editor first)

Answer 8:

Answer 9:

10-14. Correctly nominate 5 articles for speedy deletion; post article names and the diffs of your nominations below. (for promotion and copyvio- you can look for articles in Article for Creation. Pls use Darwig's Copyvio Detector. CSD 12 only if huge portion of the article is copyvioed.

Answer 10 promotion:

Answer 11 copyvio violation:

Answer 12 copyvio violatio:

Answer 13 Your choice:

Answer 14 Your choice:

15-20. Correctly report five username as a breach of policy.

Answer 15: BigFukkinPoop – diff

Answer 16: F.u.c.k Now Cumshot je Boh – diff

Answer 17: AFACommunication – diff

Answer 18: AERONAUTICAL RESEARCH & ENGINEERING ORGANIZATION – diff

Answer 19: Pussymyach – diff

19 & 20. Why is edit warring prohibited? What leads to edit warring?

Answer 19: It leads to confusion for the reader and a lack of consensus.

Answer 20: A dispute between editors on a certain part of the article.

21. In your own words, describe why vandalism on biographies of living people is more serious than other kinds of vandalism

Answer 21: Vandalism on biographies of living people can be detrimental to that person's image, depending on what is changed.

22& 23. What would you do if a troll keeps harassing you? What must you not engage with the trolls?

Answer 22: Leave a note at WP:ANI.

Answer 23: So that you deny recognition from them, which is what they want.

24. What is the difference between semi and full protection?

Answer 24: Semi-protection only prevents unregistered/newly registered accounts from editing, whereas full protection prevents everyone except admins from editing a page.

25. In your own words, describe why personal attacks are harmful.

Answer 25: Personal attacks can make editors feel depressed or bullied, and they may be convinced to follow through with what the troll says.

Thatoneweirdwikier, See Final exam above. All the best! Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:10, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, I'll being working on this as soon as possible. User:Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Conversations and Contributions 10:35, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, would you mind clarifying what Question 12 in Part 1 means? User:Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Conversations and Contributions 08:10, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, I have remove the duplicated word. Thank you. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:32, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, thanks, but there's one last bit of clarification I need on the question. When it says about "remove[ing] unsourced article", is it referring to an actual article or the template? User:Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Conversations and Contributions 11:23, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, It refers to "actual Wikipedia main space article". Thank you. Cassiopeia^(talk) 11:35, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, Havent seen you worked on the final exam. Kindly inform if everything is ok with you.Thank you. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:05, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, apologies for my absence as I have been rather all over the place with my work recently – I am currently on holiday, so I will try to answer some more questions, but I hope you can understand if I don’t. Many thanks, User:Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Conversations and Contributions 18:38, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, No worries as I was just checking if everything is ok with you since I havent seen you work on the assignment and it would great to have you complete the final exam as you have work so hard and so long to come to this stage. It is hard to go anywhere these days due to Covid-19. In Australia, we are not allow to travel within the states or go overseas as well as banned anyone from coming here for more than 6 months now. So do enjoy your holiday at the fullest since you have the chance to do so. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:52, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, Believe you are well and welcoming 2021. You have only the final exam questions to answer and it would be ashamed that you dont finish them since you come so far. When you have a little time, try to finish a few questions here and there and you will eventually get them all done. Happy new year and stay safe. Best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 22:30, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Cassiopeia, I'm going to try to get this whole exam done in the next few weeks depending on how long it takes to find things for the exam. I recently wrote out some of my plans for 2021 regarding Wikipedia. I can't apologise enough for the radio silence I've had for the last few months regarding this exam, but rest assured I'm back in the driver's seat. User:Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Conversations and Contributions 19:11, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, Good to know. Most of the questions are easy except 3RR and page protection which would take time to find those editors involved and articles to meet the requirements. Looking forward to seeing answer some final exam questins. stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:17, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, Hi, Havent heard from you since my last message 6 weeks ago and hope all is good. You have only final exam to go, when you have time, answer one or two questions and you will get them done in no time. Looking forward to see you finishing the fina exam. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 00:55, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Cassiopeia! I've been stuck on the end of part 2 for a while now – I can't find any edits that qualify for these remaining criteria. I will try to get the rest of the exam done as soon as possible. User:Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Conversations and Contributions 13:06, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, Thank you for informing. Answer the remaining parts first and you will find those edits in time. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 05:57, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, You have only the final exam to complete the program and it would be a waste for you have coming so far. Pls complete the program and answer the remaining question. Thank you. Cassiopeia^(talk) 03:53, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, apologies once again for the inactivity. Life's not dealt me the best cards recent, so I've been off Wikipedia for the most part for a good while now. Will try my damndest to get this done soon, but I hope you understand if it takes a little while. User:Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Conversations and Contributions 14:08, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, Sorry to know that recent life situation and I understand at times we all need to seat back and relax awhile and ourselves back to best self. It is good to know that you are back and I do understand it will take a while to get the final exam done. Some of my students would answer one question at a time when they found the right edit to report. As long as you work on them and in time, all the questions will be answer. Stay safe and good to hear from you. Cassiopeia^(talk) 22:13, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, hey! It's been a while. I think I've finally figured out everything I needed to about how to stay motivated and keep going without going completely off the deep end – a part of me reckons that the lack of any vandalism that I need to finish the end of the second part probably stopped me from getting anywhere productive. I won't go into much more rambling because I'd probably be here for a while, but considering that it's actually been nearly a year now since I started the final exam, it'd definitely be a waste to not finish it, so I'm gonna just go past the end of part 2 for now and try to fill those edits in when they come. Thanks for the eons of patience you've shown me throughout this entire thing, and I hope to graduate from the CVUA soon! All the best, User:Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Conversations and Contributions 16:54, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Thatoneweirdwikier, Good to know you are back and I hope your life, whatever situation you were in, is getting better. Most participants found Assignment 3 and Assignment 6 particular hard and quite the program and some quite the program in the Final exam. What you can do is working the section/part you are comfortable with first and move on to the next section/part and always look out on edits that albe to be used in part 2 (questions in the table) for some of the edits are a little difficult to find and it will take some time. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 00:47, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, yup, that's the plan. User:Thatone~~weird~~wikier | Conversations and Contributions 07:00, 29 July 2021 (UTC)