These lessons are to be used by John F. Lewis' adoptees. In order for an adoptee to successfully pass the adoption process, they must complete the required courses, and at least once optional course. After the completion of the required courses, and the optional the adoptee will receive a test, tests will vary from student to student depending on the optional courses that took, and the level of editing experience they have. You must pass the test with an 85% or higher to pass, if you fail the test you are welcome to re-take another version after you complete the other optional classes you did not do before. Once the adoptee has passed the test they are not finished with the program, but instead done with the in class part of the adoption process and now will be "free to roam about the project". I will be monitoring their contributions and giving them constructive criticism along the way. I hope that they will use some of the skills taught in my classes, to demonstrate they actually learned something. Once they have demonstrated (through their edits) a clear understanding of Wikipedia's core policies, and have proven to be able to effectively and civilly communicate with other users, they will graduate from my course. They are always welcome to continue to ask me questions, and stay in contact once they have graduated.
Vandalism is the intentional destruction of someone's property.
Y Though relating to Wikipedia would be much better!
List 3 situations where an edit which could be considered vandalism, may not actually be vandalism.
Someone makes an edit with the intention that the edit is constructive in some way to the encyclopedia-building project.
Someone deletes a seemingly useless post on someone else's talk page in order to clean up the talk page.
Someone engages in an edit war, thinking that he holds the correct opinion on the subject, while simultaneously, the other editor feels exactly the same way about his opinion on the subject. The edit war continues, because neither party are willing to discuss on the talk page, and both parties are editing the page incessantly. If one or both partners are IP addresses, then they are largely suspect of committing vandalism on the article.
Y 1 is about 50 - 50 while 2 and 3 are more or less correct here.
What are obvious indicators of a vandalism edit while watching recent changes?
Mass deletion of text that sounds sensible and relevant to the topic
Inclusion of text or pictures that are irrelevant or insensible to the topic
Inappropriate, offensive remarks targeted at a specific person while speaking in second person or first person
You are listing ways while looking at the edit. List ways to tell while at Special:RecentChanges. However the above three are not wrong.
How do you revert vandalism?
Click on View History. Go to the previous unvandalized version. Edit the page. Save. The edit may be marked as a "minor edit".
? Could there be a button/link you could use?
What warning template would you use if a user removed or blanked all the content from a page?
What warning template would you use if a user add the words "i really hate wikipedia!" to an article?
How do you add an article to your watchlist?
Click on the star in the upper righthand corner.
Y No comment.
If you misuse such tools as WP:TW or WP:VPRF what could happen?
