The Counter-Vandalism Unit (CVU) is a Wikipedia project whose aim is to help detect and remove vandalism on Wikipedia by using tools and experience, and to provide advice on dealing with vandals. All members of the Wikipedia community can revert vandalism at any time. Active vandalism patrollers who join this project will receive occasional newsletters with information on training, software updates, and new or modified policies and guidelines.
Some active members have volunteered to train other editors in countering vandalism. If you would like to learn more about the process or if you think you would like to train others, please see the Counter-Vandalism Academy.
A:Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia.
Am I allowed to get in an edit war while reverting vandalism?
A: I'm not sure . . . I probably would not rvert more than a half dozen or vandalism edits . . at that point I would request a page to be temporarily protected.
Technically, per WP:3RR, you are allowed to engage in an edit war while reverting obvious vandalism. However, after some time, it's a good idea to request semiprotection of the page.
What should I do after I spot vandalism? (3 steps)
A: Revert, Warn, Watch
Nice. However, don't forget to report (usually, at WP:AIV ) :) — ΛΧΣ21 20:20, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Please list 3 ways how to spot vandalism.
A: Recent changes patrol, watch list, keeping an eye on edit history
If an entire article is vandalism, what should you do?
Why should new users be given level 1 warnings when possible?
A: New users should usually be given level 1 warnings for several reasons . . . a new user might simply be curious to see if they can edit Wikipedia, making an arbitrary edit but not with malicious intent. Also, when people are new to Wikipedia, it's important to instill in them an understanding of how Wikipedia works, and how we do not tolerate arbitrary/malicious edits. With proper instruction, we can hope a new user accepts the social rules guiding wikipedia.
What level(s), if vandalism persists after the warning, can a user be reported to AIV and blocked for disruptive editing for vandalizing
A: Level 4
What level warning(s) mention that an editor could be blocked?
A: Level 3 and level 4.
Please name which edit warning you would issue to a user in the following scenarios
A new user blanking sections.
A: Level 1 page blanking, level 1 test edit or level 1 new user edit.
Nonsense/Repeating characters.
A: Vandalism if the user has been making edits on Wiki for weeks/months. If they have only 1-5 edits, I would consider test edit, depending on the nature of previous edits.
Replacing an article with obscenities.
A: First warning would be level 3 page blanking or level 3 vandalism.
How should vandalism be reverted (without Rollback)?
A: First, determine which edit was the first vandalism edit by means of comparing article versions in the 'history' tab of an article. Once the first vandalism edit has been identified, the edit immediately prior can be selected and subsequently restored.
Should section blanking-edits be reverted?
A: This would be situation specific. I would check the users edit history and talk page to see if they have a history of section blanking and/or vandalism.
Should test edits be reverted?
A: Yes.
What is the difference between a test edit and vandalism?
A: A test edit is someone coming to wikipedia to find out if its true, that 'anyone' can edit this encyclopedia. The changes made to an article can very wildly from a single letter to blanking an article. Vandalism is the intentional alteration of a wiki page with malicious intent.
Here is your second test. Good luck! — ΛΧΣ21 21:50, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
Nice! Good answers. I will give you more comments about the test and about other things soon :) — ΛΧΣ21 21:32, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
