User:Derild4921/Adoption/Part 3 Introduction

This is an introduction to part 3 of my adoption program which features the maintenance work or Wikipedia.

Deletion
Deletion of pages is required when an article does not comply to Wikipedia's notability standards. Generally, an article is notable if the is topic is covered by reliable secondary sources. There are three deletion process, speedy deletion, proposed deletion and articles for deletion.

Speedy deletion
An article can be speedy deleted if it complies with the CSD criteria. These criteria prevent editors from creating pages that are obviously no suitable for the encyclopedia, un-notable people like your brother who created a new word, a new band in your town, random gibberish and more. As a standard rule, if in doubt do not tag for speedy deletion, instead choose one the other choices below.

Proposed deletion
So an article is not applicable for CSD, but you still think it should be deleted? Try putted a proposed deletion tag on it stating why you feel the article should be deleted. The criteria for an article to be deleted this way is stricter than CSD, but looser than AFD as outlined below. After seven days an administrator will come and see if it should be deleted and decide what to do. If they decline it, but you still feel this page is should be deleted, visit articles for deletion.

Articles for deletion
Articles for deletion is the place for articles that look notable with some sources, but does not comply with policy. The criteria here is the guidelines provided for various topics, books, movies and more. Editors come and !vote delete or keep and after seven days an adminsitrator come and closes the debate, keeping or deleting the page. If only one or two editors participate the debate can be relisted only more time unless it is a BLP article. Note than an article can still be speedy deleted while at AFD if it meets any of the criteria.

Fighting vandalism
Let's face it, manly people come on Wikipedia and decide to vandalize it. As a result, more and more vandal fighters have appeared using new tools such as huggle, igloo and more. These tools are extremely useful, but powerful so they are only granted to users with rollback. This right allows users to revert an edit with only one click as opposed to two clicks with the undo function, but may ONLY be used on BLATANT and OBVIOUS vandalism. Abuse will cause it to be revoked.

Identifying vandalism
Vandalism can be harder to understand than it seems. Sometimes it can be hard to separate vandalism from good-faith edits from new editors who don't understand rules on Wikipedia. On Wikipedia vandalism is defined as "any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia". Anything else is not vandalism and should not be rollbacked. Besides using anti-vandalism tools, editors can also visit Special:RecentChanges and click on "diff" for each edit and manually check it for any vandalism. When it is found warn the user appropriately with one of these. The easiest way is to install twinkle. However it does not work on Internet Explorer, but editors can still use Dazzle for warning.

Block and ban
So what happens when a user goes past the maximum 4 warning we allow? Report them to AIV where an administrator will see if the report is valid and block the user. Note that a block is not a punishment, but rather trying to prevent further harm to the encyclopedia. A block is different than a ban which is punishment and social measure to stop an editor from editing a certain topic or just editing in general. A block can be used to enforce a ban.

Protection
If a page suffers an edit war or continued vandalism, an editor can file a request to request for page protection where an admin can decide to protect to page for a while. Semi-protection disables editing for IP editors and unconfirmed editors. Full protection is rarely used and limits editing to admin. Another type of protection is creation protection where if an un-notable article has been created repeatedly, an admin can Salt it.

RFX
When an editor thinks that they are experienced enough to handle the block, protect and delete tool as described above, they can apply for adminship. However, if you have less than 5000 edits, you will rarely be successful. Adminship is NOT a PROMOTION OF ANY KIND. Please refer to WP:ANOT for more information. The community has 7 days to vote either support, oppose or neutral. If the % support over the total number of votes EXCLUDING neutrals is 75 the candidate is considered successful. Between 70-74 a bureaucrat may have a discussion with other bureaucrats for advice.

When an editor feels they can handle tools to correctly judge consensus in and RFA, they can file a request for bureaucrat. The procedure is similar, but the support % must be above 85. 80-84 can call for another bureaucrat discussion. Not that non-admins will almost never succeed.

Note that only the candidate themself can translude the nomination!

Voting
Even if you are not running for a position you can still vote as long as you are logged in. As a new voter it would be better to wait until 20 some editors vote before and weigh in their opinions. Some key characteristics an admin needs is experience, knowledge in policies, a cool temperament, maturity, civility and ability to communicate clearly. You may respond to any support, oppose or neutral you want, but remember to stay civil. Questions may be asked to better evaluate the candidate, but try not to overwhelm them.