User:Adam mugliston/Adopt/Test/RexRowan

Final Exam for RexRowan
Congratulations on reaching your final exam. Please follow all instructions carefully.

'''This exam was begun at 16:42, July 29. It will end at 16:42,''' .

Practical Test
Following are your tasks for the practical exam. When a task is completed, replace the Not done template with Done. You may also use Doing to indicate a task that is currently underway. All tasks must be marked completed before the time stated above. Even if you have done these tasks in the past, please do them again during this exam period. If you have time and you have finished all compulsory questions, you can do some more, however you may only submit the amount written in the question. I will assume you are submitting the diffs that are at the top, so for example if the question requires 4 diffs and you leave 5, I will mark the first 4 unless otherwise instructed by a note left somewhere by the question.


 * ✅ - Patrol at least 4 pages in new page patrol Diffs:
 * - That was a way of solving it, but probably should've been CSD'd under A7.
 * - No problems, well done.
 * - As above.
 * - I think it should've been deleted really, but it doesn't qualify for CSD, so I think you should've PRODed.


 * Overall 8.5/10

Generally well done, but you did not give a clear decision on what should be done, but you have reasoned comments. 8/10
 * ✅ - Participate in at least two AfD debates with reasoned comments. Diffs:
 * 
 * 


 * ✅ - Cleanup at least three articles (i.e., resolve at least one noted problem on at least three articles and remove that tag) Diffs:
 * Deleted extra photos and removed the tag - You addressed the problem, but maybe a gallery like you did for the one below?
 * Created a gallery and removed the tag Great, well done.
 * CSD, no need for this article Good decision, but wrong category. This article was not about a living person.


 * Overall: 8.5/10

In the event you attempt to do a task above but a bot beats you the the task a ridiculously obscene number of times, please make a note of that here. I've tried to do similar tasks before and been incredibly frustrated by the automatic bots. You should be able to demonstrate that you put an honest effort into completing the task.
 * ❌ - Make at least 5 anti-vandal reversions and warn the vandals appropriately. Diffs:
 * Revert: - Wasn't exactly vandalism, more like disruptive editing, but ok.
 * Warning: - Good warning, well done.
 * - Again, disruptive editing more like, but ok.
 * [subst:uw-vandalism1] Good warning.
 * - Good you removed the link, but removing the picture was unnecessary.
 * [subst:uw-spam1]adding spam link - Good warning.
 * Good, well done
 * [subst:uw-vandalism1]Section blanking Appropriate warning, well done.
 * I cannot see a NPOV problem here.
 * [subst:uw-npov1] Not adhering to neutral point of view Unnecessary warning.
 * Overall: 7/10
 * ❌ - Join a project associated with your interests and perform a task which that project needs to be done, e.g. clean up a related article. A list of required tasks can be found on the project's page (If you have already joined a project, you can use the diff from joining that, however you must perform a new task.) Diffs:
 * Joining the project:
 * A task for the project: Advertised the existence of this project on this page's talk page
 * Proof of task being requested by project: To Do list, No.2.
 * Overall: All good. 10/10

Overall score on practical test: 42.5/50

Written Test
Please leave your response to each question where indicated. Adam Mugliston will check your responses at the end of the exam. Note that for some questions there may be multiple correct answers - as long as a response is in accordance with Wikipedia policies and guidelines, it will be marked correct.


 * 1) What is consensus, and how does it apply to Wikipedia policies?
 * A:Consensus is the way how Wikipedia makes decisions, it is created through discussion by members of the Wikipedia community. It is not decided by the number of votes but rather the clarity of the reasoning. Consensus applies to everything, from simple article edits to large policy decisions.
 * F:Perfect. 5/5
 * 1) You add a PROD tag to an article as it doesn't seem to be notable, but it gets removed by the author ten minutes later. You don't believe he's addressed the notability concerns, so what is one step you could take from here?
 * A:Assume good faith. I would put it to my watchlist, ask the author on his/her talk page whether he/she is still writing the article and can provide sufficient evidence for the notability. If the author later on can provide a sound result with correct references then it's fine. But if the author does nothing then I will assume he/she has read the note and is inactive, the article will be deleted by the end of the time limit. If the author is new and is not aware of the policies and guidelines then I will send him/her the link, especially A7. I may offer help myself or advise the author seeking adoption.
 * F:Yes, pretty good. Make sure you put back the PROD and ask the author not to remove it until the issues are addressed. 4/5
 * 1) Flip that situation around. You come across a PROD that you don't think should be deleted, and remove the tag. Your edit is reverted and you get a nasty note on your talk page. What do you do?
 * A:I don't think the other editor should revert the PROD because that would be engaging in editing war. I think he/she should open a debate in AfD after I removed the PROD. But I would ask the other editor for the reason of the PROD and calmly explain my logic. If it makes sense then fine. If not, I shall follow Wikipedia dispute resolution process and ask for assistance.
 * F: Yes, pretty much, but you would AfD something you don't think should be deleted?! 4/5
 * 1) When is it appropriate to report a vandal to administration?
 * A:Depends on how severe the incident is. Normally, vandals who ignore final warnings can be reported but repeated vandals who ignores warnings can be reported without going through all the levels of warnings. Malicious vandals,'On Wheels' vandals with multiple sock puppets and anything serious can be reported straight away.
 * F: Good. Severe vandalism acts and repetitive vandals can be reported any time. 5/5
 * 1) You mark a non-notable article for speedy deletion under CSD A7. Moments later, you notice in Recent Changes that the page has been blanked by the author. What do you do?
 * A:It meets Number 7 'Blanked the page' of G3 Vandalism, under the Criteria for Speedy Deletion. I would delete the article and copy the code of CSD and paste it on the user's talk page.
 * F: Yes, perfect. 5/5
 * 1) You revert something thinking it's vandalism, but you get a rather irate reply on your talk page: "That's not vandalism! This is a serious fact covered my many research articles! How dare you accuse me of (insert type of vandalism here, as well as more complaints)!" You check, and sure enough, he's right. What do you do?
 * A:Acknowledge the truth and apologize. Undo my mistake and correct the article, add all the supporting evidence he provided as references.
 * F: Very good. 5/5
 * 1) I found an image on a website of a person that could be really useful in an article I'm writing about them. The website doesn't say the image is copyrighted, so what should I do to upload it to Wikipedia?
 * A:If it's a living person then I will ask for written permission. If dead, I'd still ask whoever is responsible for the website just to be sure, in case his/her offspring or a third party still holds the copyright. If no living person holds that copyright, then I'm able to upload it under the fair use rationale.
 * F: The person holding copyright is the author not the person pictures, so your rationale for the 'dead' option is correct in all cases. 4.5/5
 * 1) You've been a frequent contributor to an article and have helped get it so it's almost ready for nomination as a featured article. You log in one day to find that it's just been put up for AfD by a new user. Nobody has commented on the debate yet, so what should you do?
 * A:I would keep calm, assume good faith. Ask the other editor for the reason of the AfD. If I am not convinced then we should open a debate and let the consensus decide what will become of it.
 * F: Yes, very good. You could explain FA to the editor and ask them to withdraw the AfD. 4.5/5
 * 1) If I wrote a template "foo" with this code, what would be displayed when I called it like this: Thanks again! ? Thanks for helping with ! It's a great help.
 * A:Thanks again for helping with Lorem Ipsum! It's a great help. Thanks again! Adam Mugliston  Talk
 * F: So close, but you forgot the date with the signature!!! 4.5/5
 * 1) You're working with an new editor to cleanup a page they created. During the course of your discussions, you realize that the content of the article is an exact copy of a textbook the other editor is reading off of. What should you do?
 * A:Send him the link about copyright. If it's an exact copy then it has to be either deleted or rewritten immediately due to copyright violation, but if it can be saved by rewriting then we should rewrite it immediately with correct citations and references.
 * F: Perfect. 5/5

Overall written test: 46.5/50

Overall result: 89% PASS

Very well done.

Questions and excuses
If you have any problems during the exam, please post them here. Good luck!