User:Cassiopeia/CVUA/GoldRomean

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/GoldRomean.

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

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.
 * How to use this page

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

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.

I have Twinkle enabled already. GoldRomean (talk) 19:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * thank you for informing. Cassiopeia  talk  08:25, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Good faith and vandalism
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 recognize the difference between a vandalism edit and a good faith edit, especially because Twinkle gives you the option of labeling edits you revert as such. Please read WP:AGF and WP:NOT VANDALISM before completing the following tasks.


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

Answer: A vandalism edit is a deliberate attempt to damage Wikipedia, while good faith edits might be harmful, but are made with the intention of helping the encyclopedia. You can tell them apart because good-faith edits are genuine attempts to improve Wikipedia, but they may violate some guidelines or policies that the editor doesn't know about/isn't familiar with. On the other hand, a vandalism edit is clearly trying to hurt Wikipedia and vandals probably know that their edits are bad but are doing it anyway.
 * ✅. The key here is "intention". If an editor intends to help Wikipedia, and the edit is considered disruptive, they are still considered a "good faith" editor especially the new editor does not aware their edits are disruptive. Vandalism is a "deliberate attempt" to harm Wikipedia. Editor might edit adds incorrect or unsourced information and this does not necessarily mean a user is a vandal; the key is their "intention". If we are not sure about their intention, then we can check their contribution log, talk page message (makes sure to check their talk page history log, as they might delete some of the messages on their talk page), to gauge their edits behavior and patterns. Cassiopeia   talk  08:25, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Answer:
 * 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.
 * Vandalism
 * Vandalism


 * 1) [1 ] A little confusing (maybe could've been a test edit?) but I think this is vandalism because of this edit summary and this edit filter false positive report. Reverted and warned. GoldRomean (talk) 19:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅. Good. Cassiopeia  talk  08:25, 11 June 2024 (UTC)


 * 1) [2 ] Unexplained removal of a lot of content. Reverted and warned. GoldRomean (talk) 19:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅. Cassiopeia  talk  08:25, 11 June 2024 (UTC)


 * 1) [3 ] Unexplained removal of a lot of content, and attempts to change details of infobox without reason. Reverted and warned. GoldRomean (talk) 19:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅. Cassiopeia  talk  08:25, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Answer:
 * Good faith


 * 1) [4 ] Referenced addition to a biography of a living person. Reverted and notified. GoldRomean (talk) 19:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ I guess you meant, the editor was unsourced. Cassiopeia  talk  08:25, 11 June 2024 (UTC) | Yes, haha, sorry. GoldRomean (talk) 01:49, 12 June 2024 (UTC)


 * 1) [5 ] "EM Forster" appears and is linked in the article already in a previous section. A second link is not needed. Reverted and notified. GoldRomean (talk) 19:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅. Cassiopeia  talk  08:25, 11 June 2024 (UTC)


 * 1) [6 ] Looks like a misguided attempt to cite a source. Manually reverted and notified. GoldRomean (talk) 19:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅. Good. Cassiopeia  talk  08:25, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

-


 * Any questions regarding 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.
 * You need to provide reasons, hist diffs - see diffs for instructions, of the/your edit and communication/warnings messages of the involved editor talk page for your answers.
 * (IMPORTANT) - Do not revert more than 3 times within 24 hours on the same article unless the edits are absolutely considered blatant vandalism for you will be blocked from editing. If you are not sure about the edits (whether it is a vandalism or not), pls do nothing and let other more experienced/counter-vandalism editors take action.
 * Pls do not revert more than 3 times in 24 hours on the same page if the edits are not considered blatant vandalism for you will be blocked (important to note).
 * If you mistakenly give a warning to any editor wrongly, pls remove the warning and apologize. There is a assignment on communication with editors and we will discuss the topic on a later date.
 * Pls bookmark this page on your computer for easy searching
 * Pls note that the motto of CUVA is "Civility – Maturity – Responsibility." Welcome to CUVA. Stay safe and best.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FF8000"> Cassiopeia</b>  talk  01:58, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Cassiopeia Am I allowed to use examples already reverted by other users? (And I don't want to ping you twice but I left some messages on the talk page too. I can ping you there next time if you want also). GoldRomean (talk) 19:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Okay, Cassiopeia, I'm done. GoldRomean (talk) 19:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the late reply. For assignment 1, you can use other editor edits' for the assignment but not for the remaining assignment. I have reviewed and commented. You can just ping me here when you finished your assignment and if I do not review your assignment after a week, then ping me on my talk page in case I miss the ping. Btw, do leave spaces after each answer/question for the ease of viewing. Let me know if you have any questions or you are ready to move on to the next assignment. Stay safe and best.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FF8000"> Cassiopeia</b>  talk  08:25, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Cassiopeia Okay, thanks for grading. Sorry about the spacing. I'm ready for the next assignment now. PS can you take a look at the questions on this pages' talk page? I didn't want to ping you too much as there are a lot of questions but if you want to I can. GoldRomean (talk) 01:46, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Usually, I would ask the participants to ask the question in here "the communication section" if the questions are related to that particular assignment. I saw you have posted many questions and some of them are related to the future assignments. I like you ask questions, that is a good sign that you really want to know more on how to response to the edits and how to apply the Wikipedia guidelines. If you want to ask the questions in the talk page, I am OK with it; however, do ping me to let me know. I have posted assignment 2 below for you. Stay safe and best.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FF8000"> Cassiopeia</b>  talk  04:56, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

--

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


 * Please answer the following questions
 * (1) Why do we warn users?


 * Answer: We warn users so that they know that they're doing something wrong. For example, a good faith editor might not know about certain Wikipedia rules. They may continue to do something wrong on other articles, leaving more work to clean up because they don't know that they're doing anything wrong and think they're contributing to Wikipedia positively. Also, reverting their edits without warning them might make them think that Wikipedia doesn't want them there and it's impossible to actually edit it. It also might discourage them from making an account/continuing to work on Wikipedia constructively.


 * ✅. The purpose is to "educate" the editors on constructive editing, especially those who are new to Wikipedia and to "deter" them of such actions with stronger warnings leads up to a block.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FF8000"> Cassiopeia</b>  talk  02:08, 24 June 2024 (UTC)


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


 * Answer: A 4im warning would be appropriate if a user/IP is very obviously acting in very bad faith and have made many very disruptive vandalism edits to Wikipedia.
 * 4im is only for widespread and particularly egregious vandalism and for use lower warning for less egregious vandalism.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FF8000"> Cassiopeia</b>  talk  02:08, 24 June 2024 (UTC)


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


 * Answer: You should always substitute a template when you place it on a user talk page so that the template doesn't change (and possibly mean something else) after the user has seen it. You can do it by doing.
 * ✅ Good.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FF8000"> Cassiopeia</b>  talk  02:08, 24 June 2024 (UTC)


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


 * Answer: If a user who has received a level 4 or 4im warning vandalizes again, I would report them to WP:AIV.
 * ✅ Right.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FF8000"> Cassiopeia</b>  talk  02:08, 24 June 2024 (UTC)


 * (5) Please give examples and please do the substitution (using ) 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.

Hello, I'm GoldRomean. 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. GoldRomean (talk) 01:33, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Answer i:

This would be used if a user removed content from an article without saying why they did it in an edit summary or somewhere else (unless the content was obvious vandalism or spam or something). And they haven't gotten any recent warnings. This could be/is likely their first edit.


 * ✅ <b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FF8000"> Cassiopeia</b>  talk  02:08, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. GoldRomean (talk) 01:33, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Answer ii:

This would be used if a user is adding biased content to an article (like "Joe is also the best basketball player in the world.") and they have already recieved a warning on their talk page from recently.


 * ✅ <b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FF8000"> Cassiopeia</b>  talk  02:08, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. GoldRomean (talk) 01:33, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Answer iii:

You would use this if a user has been vandalising even after 3 warnings from recently on their talk page.
 * ✅ <b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FF8000"> Cassiopeia</b>  talk  02:08, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

-

See assignment 2 above.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FF8000"> Cassiopeia</b>  talk  04:52, 12 June 2024 (UTC)


 * @Cassiopeia Thanks! I thought the way you substitute was not  ? Are the instructions like that in #5 just because Wikipedia would read it as Wiki Markup and put a template there? GoldRomean (talk) 01:32, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'm done. GoldRomean (talk) 01:33, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Reviewed. See above and will post assignment 3 at below.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FF8000"> Cassiopeia</b>  talk  02:08, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Notes  1. We treat new and registered editors the same when it comes to vandalism. However, we will explain the warning at times, we for the new editors for they do not know the guidelines if the edits is not blandly vandalism.

2. Unsourced or disruptive edits are not considered vandalism. However, after final warnings of unsourced and disruptive and the editor still continuing in the same manner, then we can report the editor to AIV.

3. If we happen to warn the editor who makes the edit or we place vandalism warning message instead of unsourced warning message or in any way we are the one who makes the mistake, then pls strike out or remove the warning message on the editor page and "apologies".

4. If we are not sure of the editor intention that the editor's edit is a vandalism edit, do check they contribution log/history edit log, talk page and talk page history log to gauge the editor past edit pattern and understand their edit intention.

5. If we think the warning message do require further explain why the edit is not constructive or inappropriate or not adhere to the Wikipedia guidelines, then pls "always" post a separate message after the warning message and explain, educate the editor the issues of the edit along include the link of Wikipedia guidelines.

6. Other than vandalism edits, pls do not revert more than 3 times in 24 hours in regardless how disruptive the edits made by the editor, for you will be blocked. I have seen many times, counter vandalism editors who spent so much of the time, effort to protect Wikipedia and revert more than 3 times on the same page within 24 hours were blocked and they felt so disappointed and left Wikipedia for good. Pls also know that not all admins know all the areas of Wikipedia work as they choose what they want to patrol, so when we report an editors, we at times need to justify our action via links of the edits and explanation and the admin will act which they see fit.

Pls let know you have read the above.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FF8000"> Cassiopeia</b>  talk  09:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅! Ready for next.  thetechie@enwiki  :  ~/talk/  $  00:53, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

--

Tools
Recent changes patrol 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.

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:, and.

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

--
 * See assignment 3 above. Good day. If Twinkle does not show the template in the drop down list, then manually subst it. Pls provide article name, hist diffs, editor talk page where you place the warning message, reports hist diffs and any links that is applicable. Also, pls provide the reasons/justification/explanate of your answers. Pls provide the hist diff for question states "report to AIV" and for question "Your Choice", pls sub the edit in nature - example sub "Your Choice" to "vandalism/unsourced".  Stay safe and best.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FF8000"> Cassiopeia</b>   talk  02:11, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you very much. Just letting you know that I'll probably be taking a WikiBreak for the next 2-4 months so I probably will not be doing CVUA until then. Thank you! Cheers, GoldRomean (talk) 20:45, 24 June 2024 (UTC)


 * See you when you are back.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FF8000"> Cassiopeia</b>  talk  00:59, 25 June 2024 (UTC)