User:Vermont/CVUA/Afootpluto

Hello Afootpluto, and 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 in your answers, 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 my talk page.

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

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 and WP:NOT VANDALISM before completing the following tasks.


 * In the space below, please explain the difference between a good faith edit and a vandalism edit, and how you would tell them apart.

Good faith edits are edits that can be unhelpful but is done in good faith. We assume all edits are done in good faith unless there is evidence to the contrary.

Vandalism is unhelpful edits done in bad faith. Repetitive "test" edits are a good sign that it is vandalism. Using foul language is also another. It is hard to explain how to determine if an edit is vandalism or not because there is a lot of caveats.


 * Although you have generally the right idea, the main difference between vandalism and good faith editing is the intention of the user who made the edit. If their edits are done (WP:AGF) with the intention of contributing constructively, it's a good faith edit. If it's purely destructive, it's vandalism. Vermont (talk) 23:06, 3 May 2018 (UTC)


 * 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

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Louis_Braille&oldid=838981257 this edit was assumed to be a test edit, and test edits are generally done in good faith.
 * It was originally a test edit, but once they continued it became vandalism. Especially considering they edited that page 5 times. Vermont (talk) 22:18, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Less_than_truckload_shipping&oldid=838394010 this edit was in good faith, because the user could have been trying to remove information that they believed to be incorrect, but didn't cite a reason for the deletion.
 * ✅ Good, although they did cite a reason for the deletion in their addition of "Needs sources and references" to where they deleted the content. Vermont (talk) 22:18, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nenitzescu_indole_synthesis&oldid=839272096 looks like the user was trying to fix a typo but they broke a couple things on the page when they did it.
 * ✅ Good. Vermont (talk) 22:18, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jet2.com&oldid=839180025 multiple times this person added unsourced information, which was incorrect, after warning not too. Thus I knew the user wasn't trying to make constructive edits, and I treated them as vandalism.
 * Vandalism
 * ✅ Good. Vermont (talk) 22:18, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Russ_(rapper)&oldid=839180267 This was vandalism because the user changed the name to "Russ the Rartard"
 * ✅ Good. Vermont (talk) 22:18, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Afootpluto&oldid=838825622
 * ✅ Good. Vermont (talk) 22:18, 2 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Please complete the section above that you missed about explaining the difference between good faith and vandalism. Also, in the future, please use diffs rather than permanent links to certain versions. Vermont (talk) 22:18, 2 May 2018 (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.

To inform them that their behavior isnt allowed on wikipedia. And hopefully they will change their ways.
 * Please answer the following questions:
 * Why do we warn users?


 * When would a 4im warning be appropriate?

Extreme case of vandalism like linking to porn and mass amount of vandalism.

Yes, Copy the template from Template messages/User talk namespace and add the article name to it. like article and increase the warning level every time they vandalize until they get to the fourth and final warning.
 * Should you substitute a template when you place it on a user talk page, and how do you do it?


 * What should you do if a user who has received a level 4 or 4im warning vandalises again?

report them to Administrator intervention against vandalism


 * ✅ Good. Vermont (talk) 14:55, 8 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Please give examples (using ) of three different warnings (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.

blanking pages without explanation

Deleting content without explanation

really any type of vandalism

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


 * Note: You should use more descriptive warnings than the general disruptive editing ones for every revert. Vermont (talk) 21:35, 8 May 2018 (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:").

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.

Lupin's Anti-Vandal Tool
Lupin's Anti-Vandal Tool monitors the RSS feed and flags edits with common vandalism terms. It's a very simple tool, but which is useful for not having to go check each and every diff on Recent Changes.

Twinkle
The first tool I want to mention is Twinkle, it's a very useful and I strongly suggest you enable it (in the Gadgets section of your preferences). 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 (which we'll get to later).

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.

STiki
STiki consists of (1) a component that listens to the RecentChanges feed and scores edits on their possibility of being uncontructive; and (2) An application which scans through the most recent revisions on pages and scores the possibility of them being uncontructive.

Huggle
Huggle is a Windows program which parses (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.

Dealing with difficult users
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?


 * How can you tell between a good faith user asking why you reverted their edit, and a troll trying to harass you?

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.


 * In what circumstances should a page be semi-protected?


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


 * In what circumstances should a page be fully protected?


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


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


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