User:Obtund/CVUA/LlamaDude78/archive

Hello LlamaDude, welcome to your Counter Vandalism Unit Academy page! Every person I mentor 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. If you have any general queries about anti-vandalism (or anything else), you are more than welcome to raise them with me here. I will check this page at least once a day while we're working together.

Just some basic info about the course
LlamaDude, the course I teach consists of six parts. Which are, learning how to identifying vandalism, learning which warning templates to use, rolling back edits, page protection, speedy deletions and new page patrolling. The course has a midterm and a final exam after three lessons. I check the page a least twice a day or more. I give a test every lesson so expect them. If you get less than 64% on that test, you fail that course, and we go to a more intense approach, which can take twice as long. Ob tund Talk 22:13, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

How to use this page
This page will be built up over your time in the Academy, with new sections being added as you complete old ones. As well as giving you important information, each section will contain various tasks, 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 as part of the task, please 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. There is a status bar above at the right. You can see that it is currently orange in each lessons but that will change. When the lesson is in progress the bar is yellow, when you pass it, it will turn green and if you fail it, it turns red. The exams are black and will change to green once you pass that course.Please always sign your responses to tasks as you would on a talk page. Indicate below when you've read this and we'll get started! Ob tund Talk 22:13, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm ready to start. I also like the set up of this page as it is very organized and easy to look through. LlamaDude78 (talk) 11:28, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Identifying Vandalism and Good Faith edits
Okay Llamadude, if you're already familiar with some of this, it will go pretty quickly, though if you're not, there is no need to rush (the vandalism will still be out there when we finish!). I'm going to make an assumption here that you use Twinkle, but if you don't, just let me know whether you want to or not. I can teach you the techniques either manually or with Twinkle. Once you get Rollbacker status, you can use a tool like STiki or Huggle.

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. The first step is to make sure you've read: WP:AGF and WP:VAND. Just indicate below when those have been completed, and feel free to ask ANY questions you may have! Ob tund Talk 14:26, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I do everything through the undo button or manually if it is more tricky than a simple undo. I have nothing against Twinkle but I don't think I would be able to use it at the computer that I edit from. I have read both WP:AGF and WP:VAND and have no immediate questions. LlamaDude78 (talk) 15:30, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * You will be able to use twinkle. You do not have to download anything. Ob tund Talk 19:42, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I will look into it sometime (not right now as I am about to go for my swim in a half hour). LlamaDude78 (talk) 20:24, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Test

 * 1) Below, please write out an example of what would be vandalism and an example of what would be a good faith edit.
 * Vandalism Edit: For something that I would consider vandalism, it would be these edits where an individual redirected the wikilinks or words to inappropriate Wikipedia locations. Also, these edits, that spammed unrelated external links throughout an article, I would consider vandalism, especially since the individual continued to do so on other articles after being informed on their talk page.
 * ✅ Ob tund Talk 21:20, 6 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Good Faith Edit: I actually dealt with an edit today that if I didn't look at it closely, I could have misconstrued as an unconstructive edit rather than the good faith edit it was. Yo Sushi was added into List of fast food restaurant chains. I thought at first it was something like the "yo " slang with sushi replacing with a name. However, upon some investigating, I discovered that it was actually the name of a restaurant in the UK. LlamaDude78 (talk) 20:19, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * ❌ A good faith edit is also an unconstructive edit or an edit that is unneeded at the current time and there are others too. For more info please read WP:AGF. After you read that I will test you again on AGF edits. Ob <em style="font-family:Courier;color:#009ACD">tund <em style="font-family:Courier">Talk 21:20, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Mea culpa for not picking an example clear enough to demonstrate. I will re-read WP:AGF and get back to you later. LlamaDude78 (talk) 11:42, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay! <em style="font-family:Courier;color:green">Ob <em style="font-family:Courier;color:#009ACD">tund <em style="font-family:Courier">Talk 16:31, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Alright, I am ready. LlamaDude78 (talk) 11:31, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Retake
'''Please label if this a AGF edit or not. (No explanation is needed.)'''
 * 1) Personal attacks
 * 2) Unsourced information
 * 3) Adding random works such as bfdssbhx  to the page
 * 4) Not following Wikipedia's policies
 * 5) Edit warring


 * I would say AGF for all five of them. I know that explanations are not needed but number 5 was a bit tricky. I know that 3RR can be a blockable violation but I feel that, such as with number 4, someone that is new to Wikipedia may not neccessarily be familiar with all of Wikipedia's policies yet or someone may have simply forgotten. I admit that even I may not know every single detail of every policy here and I would want someone to AGF in return if I made a mistake. LlamaDude78 (talk) 11:52, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Result
Well not exactly:
 * AGF edit - ✅
 * AGF edit - ✅
 * Not a AGF edit -
 * AGF edit - ✅
 * Not a AGF edit -

Your retake score is a 60%, which averaged to your test score would be 55%. This means you have failed to meet the 64% threshold to pass. This time I would really like you to readover WP:AGF to see what is a good faith edit. <em style="font-family:Courier;color:green">Ob <em style="font-family:Courier;color:#009ACD">tund <em style="font-family:Courier">Talk 21:57, 13 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I guess I am not cut out for this. Sorry for wasting your time. LlamaDude78 (talk) 11:17, 14 September 2012 (UTC)


 * It is so sad to see you go, but if you ever want to continue your training just message me on my talk page! <em style="font-family:Courier;color:green">Ob <em style="font-family:Courier;color:#009ACD">tund <em style="font-family:Courier">Talk 20:02, 14 September 2012 (UTC)