User:Cassiopeia/CVUA/The4lines

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/The4lines.

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.

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.

Got it. (Had it already)

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

Answer: A good faith edit I would say is an edit that the editor has good intention to help the page but does not, and it is unhelpful in the page. A vandalism edit is a intentional edit that is supposed to mess up the article or sometimes just saying things or just spamming. But vandalism edit in general is to mess up an article.

Right. 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 huge chunk of unsourced content of a page that is not a vandalism but we could send send a message to the editor's talk page and ask why the content is removed especially there is not edit summary provide and advise them to add edit summary on their edit by placing {{subst:uw-es}} } on their talk page. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:53, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

3. Please find three examples of good faith but unhelpful edits, and three examples of vandalism. You don't need to revert the example you find, and I am happy for you to use previous undos in your edit history if you wish. (pls provide hist diffs)

Good faith

Answer i: [1]

since this is the editor's first edit, we would considered a test edit and WP:AGF that the editor does not know the name of the info box should reflect the article name. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:53, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Answer ii: [2]

, it would be also {{subst:uw-unsouced}}. However, if the editor continue s to add back the info after the warning, then it would considered disruptive edit. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:53, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Answer iii: [3]

dont need to revert actually. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:53, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism

Answer i:[4]

. the is no "University of Chocolate Fountains" could be found on the internet. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:53, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Answer ii: [5]

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:53, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Answer iii: [6]

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:53, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

The4lines 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) 10:14, 23 November 2019 (UTC) @CASSIOPEIA: Done.

Hi The4lines, For external link (URL) such as hist diff, pls nest the URL with " [ " and close it with " ] " see 3i in source editing mode. Also you only 200+ main space edits, which means you would not install/download STIKI tool which would be very difficult for you for assignment 3 and final exam. I encourage you to increase you main space edit to 1000 before the final exam. There are many ways to contribute to Wikipedia, such as copy edit (fixing grammar), spelling, adding sub sorting, adding WikiProject, translations and etc - see Wikipedia:Maintenance and pick those area you are interested in. Let me know if anything else I could help. cheers. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:01, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi The4lines, Have you done with the assignment? Let me know so I may review them. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:27, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

@CASSIOPEIA: yes I'm done The4lines (talk) 03:49, 25 November 2019 (UTC)The4lines

Hi The4lines, see the comment above and let me know if you have any question or you are ready to move on to next assignement. Btw pls add additional " : " (one indentation to the right" from the messaga thread one above yours prior starting you message as this is the protocol of communication in Wikipedia. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:53, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

@CASSIOPEIA: Yes I'm ready to move on. The4lines (talk) 14:22, 25 November 2019 (UTC)The4lines

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 give them a notice that they are doing something wrong. And try to make them not do unconstructive editing again.

New users may not be aware that their edits are nonconstructive such as adding unsourced content and some editors do make bad faith vandalism edits purposefully. To warn the editors is to "educate" them on constructive editing and to "deter" them of such actions with stronger warnings leads up to a block. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:15, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

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

Answer: When the disruptive edit was very severe, or lot of unconstructive in a little time span.

. 4im is only for widespread and particularly egregious "vandalism" in a short time span / over many pages. Use lower warning for less egregious vandalism. Do note disruptive edits are not considered vandalism, however, continue disruptive editing after several warning would also lead to a block. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:15, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

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

Answer: Yes you should, because when the template changes it won't. You do it by put in a subst before the uw in the template.

Like this: Hello, I'm The4lines. An edit that you recently made seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want to practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks!

Instead of Hello, I'm The4lines. An edit that you recently made seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want to practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks!

. Right. To substitute {{uw-test1}}, we place "subst" before the "uw" - {{subst:uw-test1}}. We always subt as the message on the talk page will not change even if the template is changed. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:15, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

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

Answer: Report them to AIV.

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:15, 26 November 2019 (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: 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. The4lines (talk) 21:35, 25 November 2019 (UTC)The4lines

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:15, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Answer ii: Please stop your disruptive editing.
If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. The4lines (talk) 21:35, 25 November 2019 (UTC)The4lines

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:15, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Answer iii: You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. The4lines (talk) 21:35, 25 November 2019 (UTC)The4lines

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:15, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

The4lines Greetings. Pleas see assignment 2 above. Pls ping me hen you have done the exercises and you want the review. Cheers. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 14:34, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA I'm done. The4lines (talk) 21:39, 25 November 2019 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines Q3 is a 2 part question. You have yet to answered 2nd part. Kindly answer.02:43, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA Fixed, and done.

The4lines See the review and let me know if you have any question or you are ready to move on to the next assignment. Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~).. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:15, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA I'm ready. The4lines (talk) 04:24, 26 November 2019 (UTC)The4lines

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

#	Diff of your revert	width=10%Your comment - If you report to AIV please include the diff	!CASS' Comment
Example	0	Delete of sourced content without explanation - give {{subst:uw-unsourced1}}	Y. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
1	[7]	Vandalism because they tried to put Random stuff on the article since it was the first vandalism I gave them {{subst:uw-vandalism1}}.	Y. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
2	[8]	Vandalism as because they said that they put the “Added technical and Latin terms for the school” quote to quote but they put peepoo and some other vandalism things, as first warning gave {{subst:uw-vandalism1}}	Y. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
3	[9]	Vandalism as they put very incorrect and vandalism type info and no references, as first vandalism I gave {{subst:uw-vandalism1}}	Y. The page is about a campaign and the editor stated a wild caterpillar has herpes has the kiss of death ability. Just plainly fault and intention to vandalism the page. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
4	[10]	Test edits at it's most, because it is repetitive characters it is often sign that it is a test edit, gave {{subst:uw-test1}}	Y. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
5	[11]	Vandalism as they put random things in the reference area, since first vandalism gave them {{subst:uw-vandalism1}}	Y. The editor's intention is to harm Wikipedia and that is a vandalism edit. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
6	[12]	Again easy vandalism to spot because they put incorrect and vandalism type things in the article since first vandalism gave them {{subst:uw-vandalism1}}	Y. Silly vandalism. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
7	[13]	Vandalism as because they did Jo mama which is very very easily vandalism since fist vandalism gave them {{subst:uw-vandalism1}}	Y. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
8	[14]	Very straight vandalism, since they wanted to put some thing out because they put Must be stoned as a "rule" since first vandalism gave gave them {{subst:uw-vandalism1}}	Y. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
9	[15]	Clear vandalism on the page as they put he is his "Brother" which is fake most likely and is not suppose to be in Wikipedia, since he was warned by cluebot on the same page gave them {{subst:uw-vandalism2}}	Y. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
10	[16]	Looked more like a test when I saw it since they wanted to deform the page by removing info and putting None of this is true, since first vandalism gave them {{subst:uw-vandalism1}}	Y when an editor removed a sourced content and state it is not true/is false/not correct - we first have to check the content claimed as per the sources in the article to determine if the statement of the editor is correct or not. This apply to IP or registered users. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
11	[17]	Vandalism because they put incorrect info and was reverted by cluebot with the same incorrect info, could not warn as was banned when I checked.	Y. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
12 (test edit)	[18]	My opinion was a test edit because it looked more like a test then full blown vandalism because they put 25,000 rigged votes, which is incorrect, gave them {{subst:uw-vandalism1}}	N. The editor's intent was not "trying to see if they can actually make an edit in Wikipedia" (we go back to Assignment one here), but the editor made a statement of the vote. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
13 (test edit)	diff [19]	Test edit because they put hi thanks I can pick you and so I gave them, gave them {{subst:uw-vandalism1}}	N. editor removed content and state"Hi thanks so I can pick you" - that is a vandalism edit. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
14 (vandalism - report to AIV)	[20] [21]	Vandalism and Aiv report	Y. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
15 (vandalism - report to AIV)	[22]	Aiv report	Y. The admin blocked the editor for 12 hrs - see HERE but it doest not show on editor talk age.04:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
16 (test edit)	[23]	Test edit since they put hello.	N. The delete a chunk of sourced content and that is not the intention to see if they would make an edit in Wikipedia. It is a vandalism edit. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:04, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
17 (test edit)	[24]	Test edit	N. The editor has been edited since 2017 and this is not their first or second edit. The editor intention is not a good faith edit. It is a vandalism edit. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:04, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
18 (test edit)	[25]	Did it as a GFR but looks like a test.	Y. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 02:00, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
19 (test edit)	[26]	test	Y. Good. This is a classic test edit. (1) First edit by the editor (2) change a character of the word to see if they can actually made an edit in Wikipedia. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 02:00, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
20 (test edit)	[27]	test	N. Even though is the first edit but the editor "intention" was not trying to see if they can make an edit. "RIP" is a tribute to the death of the subject and this is a personal statement. It is a good faith edit but should be removed form content as it is destructive.

The4lines Good day. You need to apply the what you learn into practice for this assignment. Twinkle does not have all the templates and if Twinkle does not show the template in the drop down list, then manually subst it. Most participants find this assignment a little difficult and if you need help do let me know. When you have done with the assignment and want me to review them, pls ping me. Cheers. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:58, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

The4lines Hi, could you pls provide a brief explanation why you give the type of warning on the "Your comment" column. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 02:01, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

The4lines Hi, You need to provide more than just first vandalism - do state why you think it is a vandalism instead in other words why you give that particular warnings (there are a lot of edits are considered vandalism not only different type explain the nature of the edit which you think is constitute vandalism. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 02:22, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA I think I fixed them. The4lines (talk) 03:10, 5 December 2019 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines Hi, you didnt answer the question. Pls read what is required of you and pls read Wikipedia:Vandalism again and state what type and why you think it is a vandalism of the type you stated. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 07:26, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA I still need help. The4lines (talk) 18:10, 9 December 2019 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines Hi, you need to specify what help you need. For one, you need to descript why you think those edit you reverted and place the warning message is considered vandalism/unsouced/test/etc and not just stated "really easy vandalism to spot" or "If you read it you can tell that it is vandalism pretty easily" or etc. Something like "Te edit blanked two sourced sections of the same article and the summary suggests state "typo" suggests non-constructive intent and give a "delete" warning or "the editor states XXX is a gay and would like to funk the subject" for such is a vandalism edit where by it is fault and disturb act indication. Gave a "vandalism" warning, and etc. As for test edit - look for edit that makes by new user (their first or second edit" where by the editor is "trying" to make an edit to make sure they could actually make an edit in Wikipedia. Usually, the removed a character or add "hi" and something they revert their own edit. As for report to AIV, an editor make the next blatantly vandalism edit after they have warned 4th times, you can report the editor to AIV. Pls read the all page and the links in the Wikipedia:Vandalism page again to familiar yourself on what is vandalism and not and how to apply it. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:13, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

/. I think I'm done, if I'm not I don't know how to do this The4lines (talk) 02:34, 12 December 2019 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines Hi good improvement. pls provide 2 more test edit on Q16 and Q7 for I think you have missunderstand what test edit is. I have left the comments on the table and let me know if you have questions. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

The4lines Exampes of test edits as below:

1. HERE-1 - editor removed the last name of the subject of their very first edit and then replaced it back on the next edit (2nd edit) - HERE -2 - This is called "self revert test edit" - editor tried to an edit to see if they could actually make an edit in Wikipedia.

2.Same here - self revert test edit HERE-3] adding random character and self revert here - HERE-4

3.HERE-5 the editor adding random (look like typing on right hand site of the keyboard) on their fist edit - this is test editing.

Hope the above examples help. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 05:15, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA All done. The4lines (talk) 17:20, 12 December 2019 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines, All the test edit revert are wrong. Pls reread my comment and example again and go through each word carefully in this message thread and ask yourself, is the editor trying to find out if they actually could make an edit in Wikipedia in good faith? We go back to Assignment one here what is the editor intention?. Info and guidelines are given but you have to make the right judgement call in practice and know how to apply them and why you think what type of edit the editor made. Rework the test edits again - pls answer Q17-Q20. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:04, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA Not to be bossy but you are making me do 3 test edits unlike the 2 tests you said at the top The4lines (talk) 04:16, 13 December 2019 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines, Your answers were vandalsim edits and not even a disruptive that is far from understanding and making right judgement call. When you do vandalism work you need to know what you are doing and responsible for your edits. Since you are struggling with test edit questions then more questions and exercises should be worked on by you to ensure you make the right judgement call. I have trainees provided more examples without my instructions to make sure they understand what test edits are and make the right calls and get me to review them and that is the spirit of a leaner to ensure they comprehend the subject in hand and not doing the bear minimum and then still dont get the answer correct. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 05:30, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA Could you check it? The4lines (talk) 16:29, 13 December 2019 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines, You provide the same hist diff for Q18 and Q19. Please provide another example of test edit for Q19. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 17:18, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA Done The4lines (talk) 18:29, 13 December 2019 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines, Reviewed and please see comment for Q19. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 02:00, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

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 The4lines, See Assignment 4 above. No exercises for this assignment but only some reading material. Let me me know once you have done reading. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 02:03, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA Done. The4lines (talk) 03:14, 14 December 2019 (UTC)The4lines

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 they want attention and that is their goal, by not giving recognition they might stop since they want attention but they don't get it.

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 11:36, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

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

Answer: A good faith editor will be annoyed because you reverted and will state a good reason and it is over quickly. A troll will try to annoy you and just keep doing it.

Do note that sometimes good faith user also get upset when we reverted their edit and placed a warning message on their talk page. To check on the editors past edits/talk page would help as well. The different is troll not only angry at your but also annoyed at you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 11:36, 18 December 2019 (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:You immediately email emergency@wikimedia.org with details of the threat

In addition, do contact an administrator for revision deletion as well. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 11:36, 18 December 2019 (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: Ask an admin to help since better to be safe then sorry.

. Do report the incident as well. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 11:36, 18 December 2019 (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: Normally to avoid a block, or/and Vandalize quicker, or to vandalize on account and then fix it in a other one. Persuading friends or colleagues to create accounts for the purpose of supporting one side of a dispute (Meatpuppetry), and Using another person's account Piggybacking. You report them to SPI.

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 11:36, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi The4lines, see Assignment 5 above. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:18, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA Done.

Hi The4lines, For "Sock pupperty" - Pls provide at least 5 forms of socks pupetry and the question is a 2 part question. You forgot to answer the second part. When you have done, pls ping me if you want to me to review. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 00:17, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA Done. I can't think of more.

Hi The4lines, You need to read the links for all the assignments - see Wikipedia:Sock puppetry and also read other links in the page. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 01:55, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA Done. The4lines (talk) 02:32, 17 December 2019 (UTC)The4lines

Hi The4lines, See above and let me know if you have any questions or you are ready to move on to Assignment 6. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 11:36, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA Sorry for the slow response my Wi-Fi was down. Yes I’m ready to go on. The4lines (talk) 16:22, 18 December 2019 (UTC)The4lines

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: To stop Ip and new ediors form vandalism most of the time. Also if there is a lot of conflict from Ip and New ediors.

. A page be semi-protected if they receive persistent vandalism, disruptive editing or policy violations from IPs and new users, including sockpuppets. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:59, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer: If there is vandalism but low and persisent over time.

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:59, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer: Used for extremely high risk pages/templates or if there is vandailsm from Extended confirmed users users. Most of the time it is not for a long time

. Also for serious disruption that cannot be addressed by using a lower level of protection or blocking the involved users or due to large scale edit warring or content disputes. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:59, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer: In case people keep making a unworthy page on wiki, it stops them.

Salting prevents users from re-creating after deletions of a page with a given title. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:59, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer: In case there is a lot of offensive Ip vandailsm.

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:59, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 1 (pending):[28] Montgomery bus boycott

. Please do provide the from and to date of the vandalism/serious disruptive edits made next time. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:59, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Answer 2 (pending):[29] 2019 Amazon rainforest wildfires

. Please do provide the from and to date of the vandalism/serious disruptive edits made next time. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:59, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Answer 3 (two semi or full): Billy Murdoch [30]

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:59, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Answer 4 (two semi or full): American Football [31]

.Good. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:59, 15 February 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: In case it is inappropriate for Wikipedia, like a hoax or Vandalism.

The4lines pls provide at least 10 CSD and briefly state the criteria. Kindly rework. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:59, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

2. Correctly tag four pages for speedy deletion (with different reasons - they can be for any of the criteria). You can tag promo and copyvio on both New Page Patrol and Article for Creation pages at Special New pages Feed but for A7/A9/A11 you could nomination/tag the article in New Page Patrol but NOT in Article for Creation pages. Please post the diff and the criteria you requested it be deleted under below.

Answer 1: (promotion)

[32] G11

See here that admin comment. What constitute a G11? At times it is hard to define. Although if a article is blandly promote or advertise about the subject then it is a G11. Sometimes, the it is a little subtle/ borderline promo and that would be a judgement call. some admin will consider the article you tagged is a promo draft article. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:59, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Answer 2: (copyvio) [33] G12

it was deleted 3 times for G12 - see here. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:59, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Answer 3: (A7/A9/A11)

[34] A7

A7, A9, A11: Credible claim of significance - If the subject content do have such claim, then it is not a A7 even the article at the stage is not notable. Example: XXX is a high school math teacher who loves his students" or "XXX band is from Toronto and was founder by Tom, Jim, Mary and Alan who are the students of YYY High School. The practice the jam sessions every Tuesday and Friday at Tom's parent garage". and etc - these will consider NO credible claim of significance. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:59, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

The4lines pls provide anthor example of (A7/A9/A11)

Answer

Answer 4 : (Your Choice) [35] G11

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:59, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

The4lines, See Assignment 6 above. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 18:47, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA I won’t on Wikipedia until after New Years. I will see you then. The4lines (talk) 16:24, 20 December 2019 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines, Thank you for informing. Happy New Year!. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 02:52, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA Thanks! You too! The4lines (talk) 15:33, 21 December 2019 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines Kindly install copyvio script to check copyvio content in Wikipedia. Once you have install, you can find "copyvio check" on the left side bar. Go do New Pages Feed and check "Article for Creation" where you igh find some copyvio text. Note: only huge percentage take that is copyvio should be tagged. Hope this help. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 02:12, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Ok. The4lines (talk) 16:25, 10 January 2020 (UTC)The4lines

CASSIOPEIA I need help to install it. The4lines (talk) 18:14, 10 January 2020 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines see the steps below

1. remove (blank the page - User:The4lines/common.js ) the history edits here

2.go to copyvio script page and look for "install" at the top of the page and click "install".

3. go back to Your/common.js page and see if the script has been install (it should look something like "importScript( 'User:The Earwig/copyvios.js'); // Backlink: User:The Earwig/copyvios.js"

4. then you need to Wikipedia:Bypass your cache - follow the instructions as it depends which search engine you use.

5. Once you done all the above steps, you show see "copyvio check" on the left vertical panel on page.

Let me know if this work for you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:10, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA I don't see install? The4lines (talk) 04:29, 11 January 2020 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines - see here here somehow you have made your js page as a script page I think. Pls go to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) for help. You need to let them know (1) what you want to do (2) the problem (3) provide all links (your js page, the script page) in "details" and they can help you. Give me the hist diff of the help request on village pump technical when you write to them. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:42, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

The4lines You can use the tool via web HERE. However, you still need to fix your js. page. Pls contact the technical team to help you or you can seek help from User:Oshwah who is very technical, friendly admin, helping me on this issues before; however, he is not online daily but if you leave a message on his talk page, he will reply and help you. Best. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:48, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA I will be back in a while I got school test and I am busy be back in a week or two. The4lines (talk) 16:45, 21 January 2020 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines OK. thanks for informing. See you in two weeks. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 02:38, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA Hello I am done with the tests and I am ready to go back on Wikipedia. Sorry for my inactivity in the past month, but I will try to make it up. Thanks for your patience with me. The4lines (talk) 17:23, 4 February 2020 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines, Greetings and welcome back. You have yet to answered Q6. For protection, look for sudden increase of multiple editors vandalizing/disrupting a page and it is usually because of the editors disagree of the content or certain issues of the subject provoke emotions in people such as a scandal, sudden death of a famous person or large scale death (terrorist attacks/natural disaster etc.), sport team/sportspeople just won or lost in a match in devastating fashion especial against they biggest rivals, a band just split up, a negative/racial comment makes by a famous celebrity, and etc. When you have done answering Q6, kindly ping me. Best. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 14:57, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA Hello, I need help with the pending changes protection questions. Thanks The4lines (talk) 01:58, 13 February 2020 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines, Pending changes protection is when vandalism is low in volume but persistence over time (say a few days to a week). You need to look at the history page of an article. Some edit warring could be the reason (which the editor does not violate the WP:3RR rules as they reverting other editors edit every other day, or multiple editors vandalize a page persistence but over a period of time. Edit warning and pending protection are the hardest to sport/answer in the this program. The key is to check the history page of the article. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 05:19, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA Hello, I am done with the part. Thanks. The4lines (talk) 02:38, 15 February 2020 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines, See comments above and pls provide another example of A7/A9/A11 at Speedy deletion Q3.

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: Would be fine, unless they were to impersonate some one. Then report to UAA

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:32, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

LMedicalCentre

Answer: Seems like a promotional username, if they are just adding for the company report to UAA. If they are acting in good faith than we would ask them to please change there username.

{{tick}. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:32, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Fuqudik

Answer: Well, this one hard but it looks like a misspelled piece of profanity. The username could be offensive, so report to UAA

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:32, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

ColesStaff

Answer: Looking at it the staff at the end might be misleading. If they were vandalizing report to UAA. If acting in good faith, then ask them if they could change there username.

. Good to wait to see their edits first. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:32, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

~~~~

Answer: Is confusing as it is the wikipedia sign out sign. Don't think you can find them.

This type of username is automatically disallowed, so you won't see them. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:32, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

172.295.64.27

Answer: Like the top don't think you can find them, but if you do report to UAA.

This type of username is automatically disallowed, so you won't see them. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:32, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Bieberisgay

Answer: Clear violation of BLP and also offensive. Report to UAA. violating

This is an offensive username. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:32, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

The4lines, Good day. See Assignment 7 above. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:02, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA Hello, am done with the part. The4lines (talk) 16:10, 15 February 2020 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines, Reviewed. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:32, 17 February 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 2 scenarios each have 5 questions that are based on WP: VANDAL, WP:3RR, WP: REVERT, WP: BLOCK, WP: GAIV, WP: WARN, WP:UAA, WP:CSD, and WP:UN. 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: Vandalism as he is saying he is gay which is fine, but it is misinformation and may be a insult.

It is intentional vandalism, irrespective of if the user is a IP editor or registered editor. The editor is adding controversial (and deliberately false) information to a Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons article. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:41, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Which Wikipedia policies and/or guidelines is it breaching?

Answer: Blatant Vandalism

It is a WP:BLP vandalism. It contains a personal attack on an individual. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:41, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer: It would be this one. {{subst:uw-biog}}

If it is the first offense then {{subst:uw-biog}} and increase the warning level with the subsequent same type of edits.04:41, 18 February 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 as it does not count if it is vandalism.

You won't be blocked due to [[WP:3RR] guidelines. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:41, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer: {{IPvandal}}

The vandal is IP editor so {{IPvandal}} should be used. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:41, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer: They have all ready vandaliszed 4 times and since there is no good edits it is almost certain that it is a vandalism only account.

. The need to make the "fifth" or after 4im warning vandalized edit to report editor and if all their edits are vandalism edit then we also state in the report "vandalism only account". CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:41, 18 February 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: We would take good faith and call it a test edit. Because it is not too harmful, not like full blown vandalism

. If this is their first edit, then it is considered a test edit and we would Wikipedia:Assume good faith. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:41, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer: {{subst:uw-test1}}

. Good. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:41, 18 February 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-AGF (Green)

Rollback-AGF (Green) should be used, this will enable us to add comments and explain the reason behind the revert such as "test edit" on the edit summary field. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:41, 18 February 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: No not yet, we would wait until after the forth warning.

We should give the level 4 warning first (in most of the cases), unless their edits are all extremely offensive and unconstructive they can be blocked indefinitely as a vandalism-only account, if he continues vandalism after the level 4/4im warning, then we could report to WP:AIV. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:41, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer: Yes as the only edits the editor make are vandal or/and disruptive.

.Vandalism-only accounts usually be blocked indef. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:41, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer: {{vandal}} since it is not a Ip user.

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:41, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer: Vandalism-only account.

. And/Or Vandalised after lv4(or 4im) warning. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:41, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

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: The blue rollback option.

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:41, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

If you do revert which warning template would you use?

Answer: Hello, I'm The4lines. 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.

Both {{subst:uw-advert1}} and {{subst:uw-spam1}} can be used. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:41, 18 February 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: G11 would be the right one.

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:41, 18 February 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: uw-coi-username

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:41, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer: Violation of the username policy since it is a promotional username, WP:ORGNAME, WP:NOSHARING, and editing for promotional purposes only.

. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:41, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

The4lines, See Assignment 8 above. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:34, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA Done. The4lines (talk) 19:14, 17 February 2020 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines, See above comments. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:41, 18 February 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 button may use: For reverting obvious vandalism, and unhelpful edits. (Note: when I mean unhelpful edits I mean as in vandalism not good faith.)

It can also be used on your own edits and in your own user space. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:51, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Rollback may NOT be used when

Answer: Edit that was in good faith.

. (1)revert edits that you disagree with other users and (2) revert edits that need a summary edit. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:51, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

What should you do if you accidentally use rollback?

Answer: Reverting accidental rollback. Best if you do it with the blue rollback not the flag rollback.

You should revert or click the undo button yourself with an edit summary explaining that the use of rollback was accidental. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:51, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer: No it puts one its self.

Y

The4lines See assignment 9 above. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:50, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA Done. The4lines (talk) 05:06, 18 February 2020 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines. See above. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:51, 18 February 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.

The4lines, Greeting. The next phase of this course is Assignment 10 - "monitoring period", see above. If you do hundreds of counter vandalism edits then I would not be able to check them all, so if possible keep it less to 50 counter vandalism edit. Follow the monitoring period is the Final exam. The exam questions will be similar that of all the exercises you have done. Go back to read all the necessary topics and check through all the comments made by me. Most student find it difficult to provide 3RR, pending changes level 1 protected and CSD examples, so make sure you familiar in this area.

Additional note: For reporting 3RR - pls see current and past (achieves - at the right side) at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Pls note you need to send 3RR warning message first to the involved editor and if the involved editor(s) violate the 3RR within 24 hours of their then you could make the report. It is very hard to find 3RR, and usual, same as other vandalism edits or pending level one protection, it happens either some breaking news of certain subjects or in the weekend when Wikipedia traffic is at its highest of the week. Hope this helps. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:53, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA I think the time is up. Thanks The4lines (talk) 01:56, 25 February 2020 (UTC)The4lines

Final Exam

When responding to numbered questions please start your response with "#:" (except where shown otherwise - with **). You don't need to worry about signing your answers.

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: # We would take it as a test edit if the editor was new to wikipedia as they are trying to find out if they can edit or not.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer 2: # After that it would be considered vandalism.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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: # We would give them a Vandalism 2 warning as it is considered vandalism at least in the template.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer 4: # Keep giving warning until the last, then report to AIV.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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: # If it was the first time, probably give them a Npov warning.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer 6: # Keep giving waring until the end, then report to AIV

. I would use {{uw-vand}} with increasing levels if they continue to do it. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 7: # We would assume good faith and called it a test edit.

. {{uw-test1}} Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer 8: # After we can call it vandalism.

{{Tlsubst|uw-vandalism1} Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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: # First check the source, if it is wrong well leave it, but otherwise if it is correct it depends on his contributions. ( See 10 and 11)

If the information was correct, I would give the user {{uw-delete1}} and write an edit summary indicating that the content is supported by the source, and that if the user thinks the source is wrong they should discuss it on the talk page.

Answer 10: # If it is a GF editor we would ask him on his talk page and try to figure out why he did it.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer 11: # If it is a disruptive editor we would leave a Disruptive 1 (Or whichever one is needed) on his talk page.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 12: # It’s a GF edit due to WP:UNSOURCED, but If it is a big chunk of the article, ask the Ip about it.

It's generally okay to remove unsourced content, especially in a WP:BLP. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 13: # Would revert first then warn him with Disruptive 1 (Or whatever is needed) similar to 9, 10, and 11.

. First check the source against the content. If the content was obviously relevan then revert and warn the user with {{uw-delete1}}. If you are not sure whether or not the content was relevant due to lack of knowledge of the content/subject then leave the edit alone and wait for someone more familiar with the subject to decide if it should be reverted. If the content that was removed was was obviously irrelevant then it's a good edit and no action should be taken. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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: # We would contact the WMF and a admin and take it as personal harm.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 15: # Take it like number 14.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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: # Hello, I'm The4lines. I noticed that you recently removed all content from a page. Please do not do this. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. As a rule, if you discover a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If a page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you wish to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 2: # Hello, I'm The4lines. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been disallowed by an edit filter because they did not appear constructive. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page, which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Also feel free to ask for assistance at the Help Desk whenever you like to. Thank you.

.{{uw-attempt2}} because the edits are bad faith. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 3: # Your recent edit contains an edit summary that appears to have triggered the edit filter. The summary may have contained inappropriate text such as a highly repetitive character sequence, profanity, gibberish, or all-caps. Please use appropriate edit summaries to tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. If your summary did not contain such text, please report it to the false positives page and remove this message. Thank you.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 4: # Hello, I'm The4lines. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Thanks..

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 5: # Hello, I'm The4lines. I noticed that you recently removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

6. A user adds random characters to Megan Fox.

Answer 6: # Hello, I'm The4lines. An edit that you recently made seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want to practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! for new editors Hello, I'm The4lines. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Thanks. for the rest.

If it is the first edit by new user then it is a {{uw-test1}}. If not then it is {{uw-disruptive1}. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 7: # Hello, I'm The4lines. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Thanks. but if “Tim” Is mentioned Npov.

.{{uw-test1}} if first edit. {{uw-vandal1}}</nowki> if Tim is not in the content of the article. <nowiki>{{uw-NPOV}} if Tim is in the content of the article. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 8: # Hello, I'm The4lines. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you!

or {{uw-unsourced1}}

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

Answer 9: # This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 10: # Report to AIV.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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: # Revert and WP:DENY.

Since you had a number of problems with the editor then report to WP:ANI for behavioral issue. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 12: # Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your image was inserted successfully but because it appeared to be irrelevant to the article or violated the image use policy, it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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: # Revert and WP:DENY

{{tick}. Or you could report the editor to AIV as calling an editor Nazi is considered personal attack. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

14. A user adds "Italic text to Sydney

Answer 14: # revert and just tell them on there talk page about MOS:NOITALIC.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 15: Hello, I'm The4lines. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Thanks.

or nowiki>

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.</nowiki> as this is in bad faith

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 - Pls provide his diff (your revert and report such as AIV and et)	CASS' Comment
Example	Unsourced	0	Delete of sourced content without explanation - give {{subst:uw-unsourced1}}
16	Test edit	diff https: [36]	Your comment	Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
17	Test edit	diff [37]	Your comment	Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
18	Vandalism ( report to AIV)	diff [38]	AIV Report	Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
19	Vandalism ( report to AIV)	diff [39]	Your comment	Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
20	WP:NPOV	diff [40]	Your comment	Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
21	WP:Fringe theories	diff [41]	Your comment	N is is a vandalism edit. Cassiopeia^(talk)
22	WP:SPAM	diff [42]	Your comment	N. It is a not reliable source. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
23	Talking on the article	diff [43] [44]	Your comment	N They are NPOV and unsource. Talkin gon the article would be (example) " I am so bored tonight, wanna have a chat?" or " I know what I am talking about so please send me message on my talk page and I show you why". Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
24	Unsourced	diff [45]	Your comment	Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
25	Your choice	diff [46]	easy Vandalism, give vandalism 1 to them.	Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
26	Your choice	diff [47]	Your comment	Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
27	Your choice	diff [48]	Your comment	Y. More like disruptive. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
28	Your choice	diff [49]	Your comment	N. More like unsourced. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
29	Your choice	diff [50]	Your comment	Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
30	Your choice	diff [51]	Your comment	Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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 Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

2. Josh Marcus is the coolest kid in London.

Answer 2: # A7 Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

3. Joe goes to England and comes home !

Answer 3: # A1 and maybe A7

More so a A7. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 4: # G3

. Cant find Smadoodle in the internet.. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

5. Fuck Wiki!

Answer 5: # G3

.Vandalism. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

What would you do in the following circumstance:

6. A user blanks a page they very recently created

Answer 6: # Would tag it with G7

. Check the edit history. If the user is the only major contributor to the page then tag G7. I usually would ask the new editor if their action is to delete their article prior tag G7. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 7: # do {{Db-blanked}} and put Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. on his talk page.

Adding Tlx so that the page is not included as a speedy deletion page. Regards. --Titodutta (talk) 01:50, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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:# Give them Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer 9: # Keep warning them until the end, then report to AIV.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 10: # G13

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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: # If they are promoting "TheMainStreetBand" report report to UAA, if not ask them to change there name.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

2. Poopbubbles

Answer 2: # May be slightly offensive to some editors, but not too bad and not breaching poilcy. But if they are making bad faith edits then take action.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

3. Brian's Bot

Answer 3: # Check if it is a real bot, if not report to UAA

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

4. sdadfsgadgadjhm,hj,jh,jhlhjlkfjkghkfuhlkhj

Answer 4: # Ask them to change there username as it is hard to read and may be for other editors, but not breaching poilcy. (Or if making bad fiath edits.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

5. Bobsysop

Answer 5: # If it is a real sysop then leave it, but if not report to UAA as it is misleading for editors.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

6. 12, 23 June 2012

Answer 6: # Is a misleading name as it indicates a time frame, report to UAA.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

7. PMiller

Answer 7: # Not wrong, but if trying to impersonation of PMiller then report to UAA

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

8. OfficialJustinBieber

Answer 8: # Is a mislading name as editors may think it is a real justin Bieber. Report to UAA

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

9. The Dark Lord of Wiki

Answer 9: # Does not violate username policy.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

10. I love you

Answer 10: # Like the one above, leave it.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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: # No as said in WP:3RR you can not get a edit war.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 2: # Should be reported at AIV with Twinkle.

. or via any other vandalism tool or manually report the editor at AIV. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

3. Where and how should complex abuse be reported?

Answer 3: # ANI where they should be reported

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 4: # they should be reported at UAA with Twinkle.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 5: # they should be reported at ANI

If the account making the personal attacks is vandalism only it should be reported to WP:AIV. If it is not, you should open a case about the user's behaviour at WP:ANI. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 6: # They should be reported at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring.

. Report should be included with diffs of the user's reverts, the edit warring warning on their talk page, and any attempts to discuss the changes on the article talk page. Users involved in the report should be notified on their talk pages. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 7: # They should be reported at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

8. Where and how should a stock puppet be reported?

Answer 8: # Report them at SPI with Twinkle.

. via manually report and should include the suspected sockmaster and sock puppet(s) plus diffs showing the suspicious behavior. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 9: At RPP with Twinkle.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 10: Report them at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring.

. Report should be included with diffs of the user's reverts, the edit warring warning on their talk page, and any attempts to discuss the changes on the article talk page. Users involved in the report should be notified on their talk pages. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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: [52] PC

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer 2: [53] SP

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer 3:[54] PC

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer 4: [55] SP

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer 5: [56] SP

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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:[57] Self revert [58] Welcome.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer 7: [59] Good faith edit (In seems Italian) [60] His talk page where I warned him.

. The editor made only 2 edits and believe they dont understand the Wikipedia guidelines for removing the infobox and adding unsourced content. However you message on editor talk page states the content is non English which is contrary to the content added. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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: [61] Some one beat me to the warning part.

This is 1RR article - see here. Well-done. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer 9: [62]

Again someone beat me.

. Well-done. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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: [63]

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:25, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer 11 copyvio violation: diff is gone, here is the talk page warning [64]

. good. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer 12 copyvio violatio: Same as above, [65]

. good. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer 13 Your choice: copyvio: [66]

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer 14 Your choice: copyvio: [67]

. You didnt provide the copyvio site for such I cant check. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 15: [68] Promotional username implying shared use

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer 16: [69] Promo Username.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer 17: [70] Promo

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer 18: [71] promo

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer (Forgot this one.): [72] Username Vio.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 19: It’s prohibited as unconstructive, and makes making consensus harder.

. Besides being nonconstructive, it causes users to waste time on petty disputes or and creates animosity between editors rather than improving the article where editors should work together to reach a consensus; reverting each other does not help to resolve any of the issues. Users who engage in edit wars can be blocked or even banned. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer 20: It leads with two editors disagreeing on something and each one keeps undoing each other edits.

.Or it could also occur if users are trying to discuss the changes through edit summaries rather than doing so properly on the talk page. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 21: Becuase people might look up the BLP and take info from it, but if there is incorrect info people that are unfamiliar with the subject might think it is true.

. Because it can affect the subject's personal life and career where at times it might have legal implications as it can violate laws on libel, slander, or controversial claims that are unsourced or cited to unreliable sources, use of POV language, or information that may violate the subject's privacy. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 22: First stay clam, as if I don’t I might feed the trolls. Then keep wearing them, until the max where you Report them to AIV.

Trolls should treated with WP:DENY. If persist then report to WP:AIV.Note: we the vandal fighters often receive offensive messages from editors who we have placed warnings on their talk page. Sometimes the message is down right disgusting. Remember to always keep a cool head. If you find you emotion is affected by the messages, then take a break - get yourself a copy and or go out for a run. If editor asked a question of why the revert/message was placed, do reply and answer in a mechanical manner. Do not involved in 3RR if they place disruptive edit and not vandalism edit, I have witnessed some long term regular vandal fighters accidentally revert more than 3 times and were blocked and some their user right were taken away. They felt so frustrated and angry and retired for good. Sad cases. - see User talk:Jim1138 and here. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Answer 23: Becuase trolls want recognition, and if you don’t engage, they won’t get the recognition they want.

. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 24: Semi is for pages with a good amount of vandalism, while Full is for Very high risk pages.

Semi-protection prevents IPs and non-autoconfirmed users from editing a page usually applied to articles that receive large amounts of unconstructive/vandalism edits , while full protection prevents anyone except admins from editing to prevent further edit warring and content disputes. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Answer 25: They are harmful becuase it makes Wikipedia a bad atmosphere place which is not good for the wiki. Also it might defer Wikipedia editors from editing as they might be offended.

.Personal attacks create resentment and rivalries that prevent effective collaboration among editors. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

The4lines See Final exam above. You can download WP:Huggle since you have a rollback user right. Huggle is an excellent tool for counter vandalism. Once you have done with the exam, kindly ping me. Good luck!. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 05:47, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

The4lines Hi, havent see you work on your exam since I posted a week ago. Kindly power through as this will be your last assignment for graduation. Let me know if you need help. Best. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 23:02, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA Sorry, I have been busy with life and stuff but I will start tomorrow. The4lines (talk) 01:56, 5 March 2020 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines Ok. get them done and the final exam is a little bit difficult. You need to report 1 3RR successfully (do notify the editor before making the report if they continue to revert (edit warring) and 4 RPP (2 pending - low volume but persistent vandalism over time (days to weeks) and 2 normal RPP). Read through the links provided. See you soon. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 02:06, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

The4lines Hi, this is you final and kindly power through it. It is considered a merit for you especially in the future if you request for certain user right or providing you have accomplished something you set out/request of participant. By the way, I have changed my user name to sentence case. Cassiopeia^(talk) 00:49, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia I give my greatest pardon to you, I have been busy with school more than I ever imagined. But since my school was canceled due to Covid-19, I will be more active. Thanks. The4lines (talk) 14:33, 18 March 2020 (UTC)The4lines

Cassiopeia Now here the hard part, finding all of the things...The4lines (talk) 21:46, 18 March 2020 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines Hi, The important is how to apply the guidelines we learnt.

To find vandalism edits are not hard, but the hardest are question find pending page protection (low volumn but consistent over a period of time (days to weeks) that means you need to check the articles's history log page
The hardest would be question 8 and 9 (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.
For question 10-14 (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. This is your last assignment, so get them done to be one of the CUVA graduate. Hope this help and let me know if you need any help. Btw, I have change my username to sentence case. Best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:37, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia Thanks, I like your name better that why but let me get back on topic, ok I will try to do that later or tomorrow. Thanks The4lines (talk) 00:46, 19 March 2020 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines good day. note: pls give not only the report of AVI/RPP?3RR /etc hist diffs but also the article which you revert (you can find it in the article history log) and as well as the articles' talk pages or user talk pages if you have send them a message/notification. Also do provide comment/reason/justification when you revert an edti and/or make a report n comment section (example Q15). Thank you. Cassiopeia^(talk) 22:58, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia Hello, long time no see. Hope you are well. Would you want me to take a break from the assignment, as it seems you are busy. Or are you fine and would like me to continue on.? Thanks The4lines (talk) 02:03, 22 April 2020 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines Good day. I still check Wikipedia daily, but I make less edits. Please continue and finish the exam asap. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:03, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia I am done, about the 3RR I can’t find any and it has been a long time so please check it. P.S Also with the talking on article I cant find any. Thanks The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 18:25, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

The4lines, Good day. Good to know that you almost finish working on the final exam. "alking on article" is not hard to find at all example would be "I saw xxx and she is beautiful", "I add the right info, please do not remove it, what is wrong with you" or "my schoold is the best school in United States, Come and see it yourself. As for the 3RR it is not easy to find but you would find it during weekend (including Friday night US time) especially editors disagree with the content. Do note you need to place a 3RR warning on the involved editor talk page on their third revert within 24 hours of their first edit and if editor revert the fourth time and you have made a report on them. I will review what you have done so far and please give yourself another week to compete it as no answer will mark as "wrong/0 mark". Let me know if anything else I could help. Stay safe The 4lines and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:21, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia ~~I got one 3RR reported but not the other one.~~ Update:I got all of the test done please check. ThanksThe4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 17:13, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

The4lines Ok thanks for informing and give me a few days to review it. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 11:17, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Cassiopeia When do you think I can become a CVU trainer? Thanks Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 01:48, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

The4lines Hi, To be a trainer, you need to do a lot more vandalism related work as many situations/circumstance you will help you to understand how to handle the situations as some of the decisions are judgement calls and also you need to able to explain not only your why you make counter vandalism edits but also need to explain in details and provide example to the trainee (example you didnt provide the comments section for final exam part 2, for such I can not know why you made the decision even thought the your answer might be right. Also every trainee has different needs and different way of editing or reasons of their edits, a trainer not only need to understand the vandalism related guidelines well, able to explain the guidelines and how to apply them but also need to able to communicate their needs accordingly. I have about 30K counter vandalism edits prior I became a trainer. To say that most trainer would join as a trainer with lesser counter vandalism edits as compared to mine. I suggest you to have more counter vandalism work (at least 10K counter vandalism edits for about one year) first prior become a trainer. Let me know if you have further questions. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:25, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Final score

Part	Total available	Your score	Percentage weighting	Your percentage
1	15	14	15%	14%
2	30	24.5	30%	24.5%
3	10	9.5	10%	9.5%
4	10	10	10%	10%
5	10	10	8.5%	9.5%
6	25	22	40%	22%
TOTAL	100	88.5	100	88.5%

Completion

Congratulations from both myself and all of the instructors at the Counter Vandalism Unit Academy on your successful completion of my CVUA instruction! You have now graduated from the Counter Vandalism Unit Academy and completed your final exam with 88.5%. Well done!

As a graduate you are entitled to display the following userbox (make sure you replace your enrollee userbox) as well as the graduation message posted on your talk page (this can be treated the same as a barnstar).
{{User CVUA|graduate}}:

This user is a Counter-Vandalism Unit Academy graduate.

Hi The4lines It's been a pleasure to work with you over the past month. I hope you gained something from this CVUA program. You could go to Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback to request your rollback user right and do inform you have graduated from CVUA program. once it is approved you can download WP:Huggle as this is a great vandalism tool to use. I use both Twickle and Huggle but they do not have all the warning templates install in the system. So when require, manually subst them. to Do drop by my talk page you have any questions as I am here to help. Best of luck, and thank you so much for your willingness to help Wikipedia in this role. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:25, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Acknowledgements: I would like to thank Callanecc, who has graciously published his training methods on-wiki. As I thought his methods were of higher quality than anything I could achieve on myself, I used his materials for your training, with a few minor tweaks and additional questions.