User:Theodolite/coaching

Okay, right.

Here's a situation.

You are in #wikipedia-en-vandalism and another user satys that 192.186.78.12 is vandalising and needs a block. He has no warnings. What do you do? --Cel es tianpower háblame 21:25, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Before anything, I'd check Special:Contributions/192.186.78.12 to see exactly what he's done, checking all the diffs of recent edits. If the user indeed committed real vandalism, then I would drop an appropriate subst'd template from Template:TestTemplates, most likely on User_talk:192.186.78.12, depending on the number, severity, and freshness of vandal edits.  If vandalism continues after the warnings (or if it's especially bad - eg, massive POV edits on a prominent page or WoW-style page moves), I would keep adding test templates until I've reached level 4 or if the vandalism shows no sign of stopping.


 * I'm not sure if I'm supposed to be myself or an admin in this situation; if I'm a regular user, I'd list the vandal at WP:AIV at this point. If not, I'd go ahead and block for a relatively short period of time (a few hours) and keep an eye on the user.


 * Anything else? I'm not expecting to do too well on these tests, since this is "admin coaching" after all.  I'm hoping to learn, not get things 100% correct.


 * Thanks for the short assignment, in any case!


 * Snurks T C 00:53, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
 * In all these assignments, you are assuming you're an admin. Yes, that's the right answer by the way - congratulations (these tests I'm haoping to make gradually harder, so that I can work out what part of your knowledge is weakest).

Assignment 2: After reverting vandalism, you go to the talkpage to give a warning to the user and find he has a bv template attatched. What do you do? --Cel es tianpower háblame 09:07, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The fun thing about bv is that it's an instant shortcut to test4/test5, so I'd either add the "final warning" test4 template or just go straight to the block and add test5. Of course, I'd do a quick contrib check to see if the original bv was warranted, but if the user is still making blatantly harmful edits, it's probably pretty clear that he needs a few hours of chill-out time.


 * Snurks T C 16:24, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Question. Have you in your wikitime found yourself in conflict because you were actually following the rules? -- ( drini's page &#x260E;  ) 00:31, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * No, I've been pretty lucky in that regard. I've seen it happen, though.  Snurks T C 23:28, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Question What's the best and the worst you've experienced so far on wikipedia? -- ( drini's page &#x260E;  ) 00:31, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The best is watching any kind of process (writing an article, voting on an arbitrator, arguing an AFD) go right, complete with a nice civil debate complete with supporting evidence and consensus and so on. The worst is when the opposite happens, and a process goes bad.  Additionally, one of my least favorite things about Wikipedia is how magnificently anal-retentive as well as vindictive some people get.  It happens all over the internet, but it can be especially bad here.  Snurks T C 23:28, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Questino If you were able to change a policy, which one would you change and why? -- ( drini's page &#x260E;  ) 00:31, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * It's not really a policy, but I think that some project pages are a little unsuited to the wiki format, especially AFD and the other deletion pages. Unfortunately I can't think of much that can be done about that, short of coding an entirely new system for specific project pages which would be an enormous job.


 * In terms of actual policies, I think blockings should be distributed a little more liberally. Nobody's going to go nuts if somebody's unfairly blocked for a couple hours, and I believe streamlining the process would cut down on a lot of vandalism.  Snurks T C 23:28, 5 March 2006 (UTC)