User:Cassiopeia/CVUA/Twotwofourtysix

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/Twotwofourtysix.

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 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 enabled Twinkle.

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 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, WP:VANDALISM and WP:NOT VANDALISM before completing the following tasks.

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

A good faith edit is made with the intention of improving an article on Wikipedia, or at least what the editor thinks what a Wikipedia article is, while a vandalism edit is made with the intention of decreasing the quality of an article on Wikipedia.

I would tell them apart by looking at how destructive (or not) the edit is, ie. if there is removal of encylcopedic content (blanking) which reason isn't obvious by looking at the content removed and without a sufficient edit summary, I'd consider it vandalism. Second, I would check if there are any words or letters which meaning can't be deciphered. If so, I'd consider it vandalism. Third, I would check if there is added content that is not relevant at all to the article (even if the editor considers it as a forum, they likely wouldn't consider it as a relevant platform to talk about anything). If so, I'd consider it vandalism. Otherwise, I wouldn't immediately consider it as vandalism, necessarily.
 * A good faith edit is that an editor, usually newcommers, makes which they are not aware that they are doing wrong where they do not understand Wikipedia guidelines . However, the intention towards a good faith edits is never towards malice. On the contrary, vandalism edits are a result of deliberate and malicious attempt towards damaging/harm Wikipedia. The key is seperate the a good faith and a vandalism edit is the editor's "intention ". Cassiopeia(talk) 03:29, 22 March 2021 (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.
 * Good faith

(1) Special:Diff/1012365848/1013190684

The edit is considered as a Good Faith edit because the edit might indicate that the editor wanted to add some useful relevant information and boldly edited it. However, it's unhelpful because it is unsourced.
 * ✅.Note: adding good faith but unsourced content is not a vandalism but we could place unsourced warning template in user talk page. However, if editors continuing adding many unsourced content event after received many warning message, that is considered disruptive edits and that could reported. Cassiopeia(talk) 02:12, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

(2) Special:Diff/1012842289/1013394331

The edit is considered as a Good Faith edit because the edit might indicate that the editor resonably believed that the words added would improve the readers' knowledge about those involved and boldly edited it. However, it's unhelpful because the claim that "anarchic terrorists" are involved isn't supported by any of the sources cited.
 * . to improve the clarity of the content might be good faith; however, to use the words "such as terrorists" is another, for it label something extremely negative where by source is not found which could be vandalism. We can check on the editor talk page an their contribution log to see the the behaviour of the editor and their "intention" to determine if the edit(s) is good or bad faith or constructive or vandalsim.02:12, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

(3) Special:Diff/1012638581/1013370165

The edit is considered as a Good Faith edit because it's reasonable to believe that the editor wanted to add what they considered to be a defining characteristic of Vsauce and boldly edited the article. However, it's unhelpful because it doesn't belong to the "History" section and is unsourced.
 * ✅. This is the subject utube channel -here and here-2 that is what he always says. However, since the channel is belonged to the subject is it considered not independent source. Cassiopeia(talk) 02:12, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

(4) WP:MOS Special:Diff/1012058462/1013282823

This edit is a good faith WP:MOS issue because, while the edit added a dot which might be apparently necessary, the edit also unnecessarily added a space or separated the line that includes the dot from the previous sentence.
 * ✅. Cassiopeia(talk) 03:22, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Answer:
 * Vandalism

(1) Special:Diff/1012699709/1012760475

This edit is considered as vandalism because it removed most of the lead section (blanking) without an explanation and apparent justification by examination.
 * ✅. Not only the editor removed a sourced content but also adding promotional info which is also a vandalism act.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 02:12, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

(2) Special:Diff/1012987483/1012988034

This edit is considered as vandalism because not only does it remove most of the lead section and one of the sections below it (blanking), but it also breaks the infobox.
 * ✅. Breakin gthe infobox, if intentionally is not a vandalism box) but removed sourced content and adding "Murder of Selena. Selena was nice more people need to talk about her. yolanda needs to dieeeeeeeeee. she is a brat.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! steeling her money they gone kill her. ugh smh. she is dumb" is.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 02:12, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

(3) Special:Diff/1011669764/1013197389

This edit is considered as vandalism because, while it may be a good faith edit because the editor may consider it as a talk page, the edit also replaces content in the infobox; talk pages and forums aren't usually appropriate to have its content publicly removed as well.
 * ✅.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 02:12, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

-


 * Good day.
 * (1) 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.
 * (2) Do note, you need to provide the hist diff as per diffs guidelines and not you usual hist diff link.
 * (3) pls note (important) - do not revert more than 3 times within 24 hours on the same article unless the edits are absolutely considered blatant vandalisms for you will be blocked from editing.
 * (4) If you are not sure about the edits (whether it is a vandalism or not", pls do nothing and let other more experience/counter vandalism editors to take action.
 * (5) Pls provide your justification/reasons/analysis which supported by the guidelines to all your answers.
 * (6) When you have done with the assignment, pls ping me. If you have any question while working on assignment, pls let me know.
 * (7) 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:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 00:57, 20 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Cassiopeia, I have done the assignment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twotwofourtysix (talk • contribs) 02:11, March 22, 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi see my comment above. Please provide additional answer for question 4 under "Good faith" specifically under WP:MOS guidelines. Let me know if you have any questions and ping me when you have done. Stay safe and best.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 02:12, 22 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Cassiopeia, I have answered Question 4 regarding WP:MOS guidelines.Twotwofourtysix (talk) 03:07, 22 March 2021 (UTC)


 * . Reviewed Q 1 and Q4 (MOS).<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 03:22, 22 March 2021 (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:
 * To inform them that one or more of their previous edits are disruptive or unhelpful
 * To teach good-faith editors to differentiate between helpful and unhelpful edits or deter vandals from editing in a bad-faith manner
 * In some cases, to direct good-faith editors' test edits or relevant commentary into the sandbox or the article's talk page, respectively.
 * ✅. 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:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 08:34, 24 March 2021 (UTC)


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


 * Answer: A 4im warning is appropriate when a user or IP address has continuously vandalised articles and/or vandalised in an excessively inappropriate and grotesque way.
 * ✅. 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:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 08:34, 24 March 2021 (UTC)


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


 * Answer: Yes, I should substitute a template when I place it on a user talk page. I can do it by adding "subst:" before template names and inside the curly brackets. I can also do it by using tools like Twinkle if the template is a warning.
 * ✅. Because if the template is changed the the message on the users talk page which placed prior of the template change will remain the same.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 08:34, 24 March 2021 (UTC)


 * (4) What should you do if a user who has received a level 4 or 4im warning vandalises again?
 * Answer: I should report the user to administrators by entering the user and the reason ("the user vandalised again after receiving a level 4 or 4im warning") in the WP:AIV, either manually or using the WP:ARV tool which is embedded in Twinkle.
 * ✅.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 08:34, 24 March 2021 (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.


 * Answer i:

This template is used for warning users for adding relevant commentary to a Wikipedia article (such as opinions or suggestions) and directing them to the article's talk page.
 * ✅.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 08:34, 24 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Answer ii:

This template is used for warning users when they enter edit summaries that don't reflect the actual edits that they made (eg. summarising adding pictures as fixing typos) and especially if they have done so multiple times.
 * ✅.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 08:34, 24 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Answer iii:

This template is used for warning users when they remove content and/or blank pages in an obviously bad-faith manner and/or after getting warned about it twice.
 * ✅.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 08:34, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

-

See assignment 2 above. For question 5 - use (example)  subs three different templates (different warning and different level of warning}} see example below.  Stay safe and best

Hello, I'm Cassiopeia. 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 Teahouse. Thanks.

Stay safe and best.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 03:34, 22 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Cassiopeia, I have finished assignment 2. Twotwofourtysix (talk) 05:01, 24 March 2021 (UTC)


 * see comment. Let me know if you have any questions or you are ready to move on to next assignment. Stay safe and best.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 08:34, 24 March 2021 (UTC)


 * , I should be ready to move on to the next assignment. Kind regards. —Twotwofourtysix(My talk page and contributions) 06:44, 27 March 2021 (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

--


 * Good day. See assignment 3 above and do note this is the hardest assignment in this program, so do that your time. 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. Aslo, pls provide the reasons/justification/explanate of your answers. Stay safe and best.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 07:05, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I plan on filling the rest of the table tomorrow; I've only partially done assignment 3 for now. Kind regards. —Twotwofourtysix(My talk page and contributions) 13:57, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi. I've finally gotten around to finishing assignment 3. Kind regards. —Twotwofourtysix(My talk page and contributions) 13:55, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi! I'm wondering what's the status of the assignment as of currently, since there hasn't been any updates for about a week now.  — Twotwofourtysix (My talk page and contributions) 12:36, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry for missing your previous ping. Will review late in the evening when I am back from work.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 22:35, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * See above comments and 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:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 10:24, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm ready to move on to the next assignment.  — twotwofourtysix (My talk page and contributions) 13:44, 17 April 2021 (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, Posted Assignment 4 above. No exercises for this assignment but only some reading material. Once you have done reading, pls let me know so I would post Assignment 5 for you. Cheers.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 08:41, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Alright, I've read the text above.  — twotwofourtysix (My talk page and contributions) 11:17, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

-

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: We deny recognition to trolls and vandals because they actively seek recognition from other users and to do otherwise would encourage them to disruptively edit Wikipedia more in the future.
 * ✅. If editor asks questions, we should reply but in a mechanical way and not engaging in their troll behaviour, repeating the same mechanical answer if needed. The main point/goal of the trolls is that they want attention. We dont feed them and dont get mad by denying them the recognition that they seek is critical to countering them.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 04:35, 26 April 2021 (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 user usually only said why they edited the way they did on top of them asking why their edit was reverted, A troll usually uses words or sentences that are deliberately chosen to stir up controversy or anger.


 * . Sometimes good faith editors would get upset/annoyed as well and convey their message which might not be pleasant for your standard. Many times troll might not use personal attacks but being rude, condescending, put down, name calling and etc. To check on the editors past edits/talk page would help; however, the bottom line is that trolls want to annoy you and good faith editors annoyed at you and that is the subtle different.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 04:35, 26 April 2021 (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 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: I should email emergency@wikimedia.org or email User:Emergency through the Wikipedia feature. I should include the threat itself, when and what page it was made and the diff link of the threat.
 * ✅.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 04:35, 26 April 2021 (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: I should still email the user mentioned above if I'm not really sure but if it is likely look like an empty threat, it should be treated as harrassment and be reported at WP:ANI.
 * ✅.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 04:35, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Sock pupperty
Please read Sock puppetry and answer the question below
 * What forms socks puppetry usually takes? and where to report it?

Answer: Sockpuppetry usually takes in the form of logging out to an IP address or using another account (either an old account, a brand-new account, or another person's account) to make problematic edits and evade bans, blocks, and detection. Sockpuppets should be reported at WP:SPI.


 * ✅. The various form could be taken place as


 * 1) IP-edit : Logging out to make problematic edits as an IP address (very likely to be caught attempting it though).
 * 2) New Account : Creating new accounts (to avoid detection or sanctions).
 * 3) Piggybanking : Using another person's account (to save one's own account from being caught or to make a stand).
 * 4) Sleepers : Reviving old unused accounts (to present them as different users)
 * 5) Meatpuppetry : Creating accounts for friends or colleagues by persuading them (to use them to support one side of a dispute)
 * <b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 04:35, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

---


 * Hi, see Assignment 5 above. Stay safe and best.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 11:49, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, I've done the assignment above.  — twotwofourtysix (My talk page and contributions) 14:26, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, I've done the assignment above.  — twotwofourtysix (My talk page and contributions) 14:26, 25 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi, See comment above. <b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 04:35, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

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: A page is semi-protected when there has been several disruptive/unhelpful edits by IP or new users.
 * Semi-protection applies to pages that constantly attract a large amount of vandalism or disruptive edits.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 02:24, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer: A page is pending changes protected when edits by IP or new users have been mostly disruptive but the number of edits or edit rate is relatively low.
 * ✅. The key is low volume vandalism but persistence over a period of time (a few days to a few weeks).<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 02:24, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer A page is fully protected when there has been contentious editing or edit warring between multiple users, especially extended-confirmed users, that forces users to apply the change(s) through the talk page.
 * ✅. Full protection prevents anyone except administrators from editing the page.. This applies when there is serious disruption that cannot be addressed by using a lower level of protection or blocking the involved users, such as due to large scale edit warring or content disputes, or persistently being vandalized by users who have gamed the extended confirmed system.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 02:24, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer: A page is salted when a page has been repeatedly recreated, despite repeatedly being deleted.
 * ✅.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 02:24, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer: A talk page is semi-protected when the talk page itself is repeatedly affected by vandalism.
 * ✅.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 02:24, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer 1: Semi-protection of Nancy Juvonen RPP Diff Protection log
 * Pls provide hist diff where you request for RPP on WP:RPP page.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 02:24, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 01:42, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Answer 2: Semi-protection of Lady Dimitrescu RPP Diff Protection log
 * Pls provide hist diff where you request for RPP on WP:RPP page.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 02:24, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 01:42, 29 June 2021 (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: A page is generally speedily deleted when it seems that it would be uncontroversial or have broad consensus to be deleted.
 * .<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 02:24, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

. Pls answer the question again and this the question is a 2 part question. Pls also provide the answer for the second part and go throught every CSD criteria in your own words.


 * Answer again:
 * A page is speedily deleted when it meets one of the criteria for speedy deletion in which there is broad consensus to delete pages that meet said criteria because it means that the page blatantly shouldn't be included on Wikipedia. The criteria includes:


 * G1: Pages that were created with text that is purely incomprehensible
 * G2: Pages that were created to test or experiment editing on Wikipedia.
 * G3: Pages that were created as a vandalism with an obvious bad-faith intent and/or an obvious hoax
 * G4: Pages that were deleted via a deletion discussion and recreated, despite being substantially similar to the deleted version and does not address/solve the issues raised in the discussion.
 * G5: Pages that were created by a banned or blocked user where the ban/block was intended to prevent creations of such pages, including where the banned/blocked user evidently used a sockpuppet to create the page.
 * G6: Pages where it would be uncontroversial to delete them, including pages created in error.
 * G7: Pages where the sole author or substantial editor requested deletion of the page
 * G8: Pages dependent on a page that doesn't exist
 * G9: Pages deleted by the Wikiedia Foundation itself
 * G10: Pages created to attack a subject
 * G11: Pages created to advertise/publicise a subject
 * G12: Pages created with an unambiguously significant copyrighted material
 * G13: Drafts or such that haven't been edited within 6 months
 * G14: Supposedly disambiguation pages that are unnecessary
 * A1: Articles without enough context to identify its subject within the last several minutes
 * A2: Non-English articles that exist on another Wikimedia site
 * A3: Articles without [enough] content within the last several minutes
 * A5: Articles with content that have been moved to another wiki
 * A7: Articles with a subject, with some exceptions, that doesn't credibly state that it's significant
 * A9: Articles about musical recordings that doesn't state that it's notable and without contributing artist(s) with their own article(s)
 * A10: Articles created recently talking about the same topic as an article that had existed before and is not a plausible redirect
 * A11: Articles with a subject that doesn't credibly state that it's notable and unambiguously coined by the author or someone close to the author
 * R2: Redirects from the main namespace to any namespace other than the main, category, template, wikipedia, help, and portal namespaces
 * R3: Reidrects recently created that directs to an implausible typo or misnomer
 * R4: Redirects in File namespace with the same name as one in Wikimedia Commons and no file links
 * F1: Unnecessary duplicate or lower-quality copies of another Wikipedia file
 * F2: Files that are empty or corrupt
 * F3: Files with an improper license
 * F4: Files without sufficient information regarding licensing within the last seven days
 * F5: Files without a free license or those not in the public domain and unused within any articles
 * F6: Non-free files claiming fair use but without a rationale
 * F7: Non-free files with an invalid fair-use claim
 * F8: Files available as a copy on Wikimedia Commons, with some exceptions
 * F9: Unambiguously copyrighted files
 * F10: Redundant non-media files
 * F11: Files with no evidence that it's permissible for the file to be uploaded
 * C1: Categories that are empty wthin the last seven days, with some exceptions
 * C2: Categories that are speedy renamed or merged
 * U1: Pages in user namespace, except for user talk pages, that are requested to be deleted by the user themself
 * U2: User pages of non-existent users, except for redirects and IPs with contributions
 * U3: User pages with a gallery of non-free files
 * U5: User pages which violate Wikipedia's rule on not being a web host
 * P1: Portals that meet criteria for speedy deletions of articles
 * P2: Portals without sufficient content


 * ✅.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 01:42, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

2. Correctly tag two pages for speedy deletion (with different reasons - they can be for any of the criteria) and post the diff and the criteria you requested it be deleted under below.

Diff, CSD log, Deletion log
 * Answer 1 Criteria G5 :
 * Pls provide hist diff /info of your CSD log: Example: User:Twotwofourtysix/CSD log May #2 and the page name.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 02:24, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * User:Twotwofourtysix/CSD log June #44, Draft:Rumel Ahmed


 * ✅.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>)

Diff, CSD log, Deletion log
 * Answer 2 Criteria G11 :
 * Pls provide hist diff /info of your CSD log: Example: User:Twotwofourtysix/CSD log May #2 and the page name.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 02:24, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * User:Twotwofourtysix/CSD log June #3, Farhan Rana Rajpoot Official


 * ✅.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>)

Hi, see Assignment 6 above. Stay safe and best.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 04:39, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, for the request for page protection and tag for speedy deletion, can I use the diffs that I have already done a while ago?  — twotwofourtysix (My talk page and contributions) 04:01, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Unfortunately no. You need to provide ones you are going to tag. Stay safe and best.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 04:56, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I just realised. If the page has been tagged for speedy deletion and removed, how can I post the diff here?  — twotwofourtysix (My talk page and contributions) 10:25, 5 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi ,
 * Please do the following
 * Pls set up your CSD log by installing MYCSD so I could review your CSD nomination. After saving, you have to bypass your browser's cache to see the changes - see instruction at Bypass your cache.
 * Bookmark Earwig's Copyvio Detector in computer; and install Earwig Copyvio Detector script. (The "copyvio" will appear on the left panel under "Tools" section on every page in Wikipedia.


 * For WP:G11 and WP:G12 articles you would nominate them from Special:NewPagesFeed ("New Page Patrol"  and "Article for Creation" (AfC /draft) but for G1-G10 pls nominate the articles only from "New Page Patrol"  ONLY.). Pls provide the article names and the Your CSD info (Example: May CSD #3). You can find the "New Page Patrol"  and "Article for Creation" articles at New Page Feed   here.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 10:34, 5 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi, Havent seen you working on the assignment for about 10 days. Pls let me know if yo need any help.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 22:58, 14 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Alright I've completed this assignment,, apologies for the very long wait.  — twotwofourtysix (My talk page and contributions) 15:11, 16 June 2021 (UTC)


 * See below.
 * (1) For question 6 under page protection : Pls provide hist diff where you request for RPP on WP:RPP page.
 * (2) For question 1 under CSD: pls answer the question again and also answer the second part of the question
 * (3) For question 2 under CSD: Pls provide hist diff /info of your CSD log: Example: User:Twotwofourtysix/CSD log May #2 and the page name.
 * When you have done the above, pls ping me. Thank you.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 02:24, 21 June 2021 (UTC)


 * , I've done those following 3, although I think I had provided the RPP diffs before.  — twotwofourtysix (My talk page and contributions) 08:14, 25 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Reviewed.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 01:42, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

---

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: Please read WP:USERNAME, and pay particluar attention to dealing with inappropriate usernames.
 * 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.
 * Describe the what you would about the following usernames of logged in users (including which of the above it breaches and why).


 * DJohnson

Answer: As there are many notable people with the name D. Johnson, the username doesn't match with a specific, identifiable person and may be appropriate and may not be misleading. However, if I see the user editing articles on people named D. Johnson, especially if promotional, I may warn the editor using {{subst:Uw-username}} or report them at the conflict of interest noticeboard
 * ✅.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 05:15, 9 July 2021 (UTC)


 * LMedicalCentre

Answer: I would report this to UAA as a username implying shared use, since a medical centre is usually an organisation with multiple people that may be using the account and a promotional username, especially if the user edits articles with titles similar to "L Medical Centre".
 * ✅. "Violation of the username policy as a username that implies shared use".<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 05:15, 9 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Fuqudik

Answer: This is not blatantly inappropriate as it may be a string of letter that the user doesn't realise to match slurs, (especially when it's apparently a real word in Maltese), but when the user vandalises, especially when it's a vandalism-only account, the username is likely bad-faith and intended to provoke offence and so I would report this to UAA.
 * . It might be a username in translation but it is unlikely a user name is based on the words "on it". However, it is also probably a deliberately mis-spelled profanity and would be against both offensive and disruptive username policies. Report WP:UAA would be a right choice.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 05:15, 9 July 2021 (UTC)


 * ColesStaff

Answer: I would report this to UAA as a username implying shared use, since the word "staff" may denote a group that can be used by multiple Coles employees.
 * ✅. Wait and  see if they started that type of editing and if they did report the violation of WP:Username policy to WP:UAA if not, then consider asking them to change username because the staff part of the name would still be inappropriate.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 05:15, 9 July 2021 (UTC)



Answer: I would report this to UAA as a misleading username since it is confusing within Wikipedia's signature and makes the user seemingly impossible to be pinged, likely disruptive if the user has vandalised.
 * ✅.This type username is automatically disallowed in Wikipedia now, thus you won't stumble across it.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 05:15, 9 July 2021 (UTC)


 * 172.295.64.27

Answer: I would report this to UAA as a misleading username since it resembles the username of an IP user which is not logged in, even though this user is actually logged in.
 * ✅.This type username is automatically disallowed in Wikipedia now, thus you won't stumble across it.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 05:15, 9 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Bieberisgay

Answer: I would report this to Global stewards as an offensive username violating the BLP policy since it contains contentious material (I would consider one's sexual orientation as contentious) about a living person and this is especially true when the name "Bieber" usually only refers to a specific person, Justin Bieber, especially when the word itself redirects to an article about him specifically because "one individual is the most likely topic sought by this surname".
 * ✅.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 05:15, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

---


 * , See review Q3 on Assignment 6 and Assignment 7 above.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 01:45, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , I have done assignment 7.  — twotwofourtysix (My talk page and contributions) 04:49, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Reviewed. See comments above.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 05:15, 9 July 2021 (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. Answer:
 * Would this be considered vandalism or a good faith edit, why?

Answer:
 * Which Wikipedia policies and/or guidelines is it breaching?

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

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

Answer:
 * What would you include as the reason for reporting the editor?

Scenario 2
You see a new account called "Hi999" that has added random letters to one article. Answer:
 * Would this be considered vandalism or a good faith edit, why?

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

Answer:
 * Which of the following Twinkle options should be used to revert these edits: Rollback-AGF (Green), Rollback (Blue) or Rollback-Vandal (Red)?

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

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

Answer:
 * What would you include as the reason for reporting the editor?

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. Answer:
 * Should you revert the edit to Laptop, if so which Twinkle option would you use?

Answer:
 * If you do revert which warning template would you use?

Answer:
 * Would you tag the article they created with a speedy deletion tag(s). If so which speedy deletion criteria apply to the article?

Answer:
 * Would you leave a template on the user's talk page regarding their username? If so which one and with which parameters?

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

--


 * , See Assignment 8 above. Cheers.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 05:17, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

---