User:Jackson Peebles/Adoption/PantherLeapord Exam 3

I'm going to try to keep this test short...that was a lot of reading you just did (or hopefully just did ). There is a practical aspect to this test, so if you don't have Twinkle turned on, I would recommend doing so now.

1.) Q- In your own words, define vandalism.
 * A- Vandalism is a deliberate attempt to undermine the encyclopedia through malicious actions. PantherLeapord (talk) 00:22, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * 5/5 Very good. I think that's an excellent way to phrase it.

2.) Q- What are obvious indicators of a vandalism edit while watching recent changes?
 * A- That has to be a trick question; there are no obvious indicators! PantherLeapord (talk) 00:22, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * 5/5 A reasonable answer. You're right that there aren't any true obvious indicators.  When watching recent changes, though, I do like to look for some things.  Even though we assume good faith, edits with huge changes in data (especially to major pages) by IP editors do trigger my attention.  However, you're right, this isn't proof of vandalism or an "obvious indicator;" it's merely something to look for.

3.) Q- What warning template would you use if a user removed or blanked all the content from a page?
 * A- Template:uw-delete1
 * 5/5 Yup.

4.) What if I came to your talk page and called you a !@#$!#$!@#$!#$!#$!#$!#$!#$!@#$!@#$!@#%#$^$%^#@$~#$@#$%!@#$!@#? Then what warning template would you use?
 * A- That's a tricky one... Probably Template:uw-disruptive1
 * 3/5 That one would work. There are quite a few templates, and some of them are overlapping in usage; calling you a foul name would, indeed, be disruptive.  However, the more accurate template would be  .  I might also ask another user to assist in this so that we aren't "feeding the trolls."

5.) What is WP:AIV and when should you use it?
 * A- WP:AIV is an administrative noticeboard designed to facilitate administrator intervention in cases of repeated vandalism. It is to be used after several recent warnings have been given to a user (Or a single level 4im warning in extreme cases) yet despite these warnings they continue their vandalism.
 * 5/5 Perfect explanation of usage.

6.) Find three instances of vandalism, revert them, warn the users appropriately, and post the diffs below (the diffs of the vandalism will suffice, I will go ensure that you warned them appropriately and don't need diffs to do so).
 * 
 * Very good. I'm not sure they could've blanked a more obvious page.  Good job warning the user.


 * 
 * I think it's safe to assume that's vandalism - nonsense replacing good text with no edit summary. Nice find.


 * 
 * This one's the most iffy, but I do think that you're correct to assume it's vandalism. A dumb edit with a long page history of vandalism. 5/5 on these answers.0

Once you have finished, please notify me on my talk page, then proceed to Lesson 4: Twinkle.
 * ✅ 28/30 Great work! You seem very good at anti-vandalism efforts.  This may be your thing, if it interests you (it's what I'm most interested in).  Check out WP:CVUA and WP:STiki - they may interest you. --Jackson Peebles (talk) 19:24, 7 July 2013 (UTC)