User:WormTT/Adopt/Test/MelbourneStar

Final Exam for MelbourneStar
Congratulations on reaching your final exam. Please follow all instructions carefully.

'''This exam was begun at 13:13, April 3. It will end at 13:13,''' .

Practical Test
Following are your tasks for the practical exam. When a task is completed, replace the Not done template with Done. You may also use Doing to indicate a task that is currently underway. All tasks must be marked completed before the time stated above. Even if you have done these tasks in the past, please do them again during this exam period.


 * Patrol at least 4 pages in new page patrol Diffs:
 * - Good patrolling, though I'd use WP:BLPPROD.
 * - Great spot of an A7! well done!
 * - G12 is correct, well done
 * - another A7, you've got them down!
 * Not perfectly perfect... I don't 100% agree with your first, but the rest were good. 9/10.

In the event you attempt to do a task above but a bot beats you the the task a ridiculously obscene number of times, please make a note of that here. I've tried to do similar tasks before and been incredibly frustrated by the automatic bots. You should be able to demonstrate that you put an honest effort into completing the task.
 * Participate in at least two AfD debates with reasoned comments. Diffs:
 * 
 * 
 * Both look good, 10/10
 * Cleanup at least three articles (i.e., resolve at least one noted problem on at least three articles and remove that tag) Diffs:
 * - sorting linkrot is a great thing to do
 * - good cleaning
 * - great
 * All very well done. 10/10
 * Make at least 5 anti-vandal reversions and warn the vandals appropriately. Diffs:
 * - Blanking, warned appropriately
 * - Ah... now it becomes something different. That's not vandalism. That's a good faith, but incorrect edit.
 * - And so's that - I have even taken it to the admin to review the block.
 * - vandalism correctly identified and user warned
 * - pretty borderline - could be good faith, though probably not. User welcomed, so that's good.
 * I've got to say, 5/10. Not too keen on the fact that a new editor's been blocked for a silly mistake.
 * Join a project associated with your interests. Diffs: ~ I joined this back in January ...2011. I do not wish, at this stage, to join anymore WikiProjects.
 * "I don't wanna" isn't how this works :P Tell you what, I don't wanna give you points. so we'll compromise at 5/10.

Practical test - 39/50.

Written Test
Please leave your response to each question where indicated. Worm That Turned will check your responses at the end of the exam. Note that for some questions there may be multiple correct answers - as long as a response is in accordance with Wikipedia policies and guidelines, it will be marked correct.


 * 1) What is consensus, and how does it apply to Wikipedia policies?
 * A: Consensus is the communities discussion. It is where the community may discuss new ideas; current or future issues; or just simply descision making. Consensus may *include* !voting; (AfD; RfA) but does not generally rely on it. It is the merits in arguments, presented by editors, that should ultimately resolve the issue - abiding by Wikipedia's policies, and guidlines.
 * Hmmm, yes, I suppose so. It's generally the outcome of the community's discussion, rather than the discussion itself, and should apply to all topics on the encyclopedia (even if it is only consensus implied by silence). 4/5
 * 1) You add a PROD tag to an article as it doesn't seem to be notable, but it gets removed by the author ten minutes later. You don't believe he's addressed the notability concerns, so what is one step you could take from here?
 * A: Communication is crucial, and generally should not be avoided. This helps you understand where the other user believes that a Prod is insufficient. However, that been said, if you still are not satisfied, maybe go even a step further, and get a fresh pair of eyes (uninvolved user) to make a judgement. That way, you'll get more opinions on it. If you are still not satisfied, an AfD discussion is by all means, appropriate.
 * Sounds great to me. 5/5
 * 1) Flip that situation around. You come across a PROD that you don't think should be deleted, and remove the tag. Your edit is reverted and you get a nasty note on your talk page. What do you do?
 * A: I'd rather the nasty note, than no excuses - any day of the week. As I said, communication is crucial, and should not be avoided. If the discussion is going absolutely balogni's, there is another way - new pair of eyes, always helps!
 * Another way, would be to improve the article - even if you don't think it does need to be improved, that way when an administrator does come by, they are able to decline the PROD, on the grounds that it is an insufficent excuse, if the article has clearly been improved.
 * Sounds like two very viable options. well done. 5/5
 * 1) When is it appropriate to report a vandal to administration?
 * A: For AIV, a general rule, is when the editor has surpassed their final warnings; has had multiple warnings every month for a while now (still continues); or if the account is clearly a vandalism-only account. It may vary on the issue, however - no user is the same! unless they are a sock - which is a different matter
 * Very good. It does depend on a lot of things, and you have some good poitns there. 5/5
 * 1) You mark a non-notable article for speedy deletion under CSD A7. Moments later, you notice in Recent Changes that the page has been blanked by the author. What do you do?
 * A: CSD > G7: "Author requests deletion, or author blanked" - This only applies to articles that have no lengthy history with many editors in it - In other words: only applies with one or few editors (those few others not adding content as such) and that "one" being the author.
 * I'm nodding here. 5/5.
 * 1) You revert something thinking it's vandalism, but you get a rather irate reply on your talk page: "That's not vandalism! This is a serious fact covered my many research articles! How dare you accuse me of (insert type of vandalism here, as well as more complaints)!" You check, and sure enough, he's right. What do you do?
 * A: Obviously reverting my edit would be a good step. Now, I have a terrible conscience. Apologies hardly work, but it always is the second-most important step to do, fixing the issue. You should explain why you did it. And that all editors may have a slip of the finger, where they revert and warn - when they are actually in the wrong.
 * Exactly, talking about things help. You don't need to actually apologise, though it's good if you do, just need to make sure you don't ignore the problem. 5/5
 * 1) I found an image on a website of a person that could be really useful in an article I'm writing about them. The website doesn't say the image is copyrighted, so what should I do to upload it to Wikipedia?
 * A: Being sometimes too hasty can lead into all sorts of problems - so the best way I'd go about this (and have gone about this) - is visiting the WP:MCQ board. All your questions and or queries are answered - the editors there may even be able to upload the image (if it is allowed to be used) onto the encyclopedia. Bottom line, is that it doesn't hurt to ask someone else.
 * What a great answer! 5/5
 * 1) You've been a frequent contributor to an article and have helped get it so it's almost ready for nomination as a featured article. You log in one day to find that it's just been put up for AfD by a new user. Nobody has commented on the debate yet, so what should you do?
 * A: Smash the computer screen and take 10 deep breaths I'm not interested in edit warring at this stage - IF the user has transcluded (done the appropriate steps to create this AfD) I'll take the bait and play their game. I will kindly just outline the obvious facts as to why the article should be kept, and how it has been improved so much that it was to be considered for a nom. as a FA.
 * If this keen new editor has not created the AfD properly, I will just simply revert, and ask them as to why they nominated the article for deletion. It can't hurt to ask, and not always do new editors intend on nominating an FA nominated article, for deletion - they may have accidentally pressed the wrong button.
 * Very good, talking to the editor is not a bad thing, they may withdraw their nomination, even if it was intentional. If not, outline the facts, and if it's that good, it'll probably be speedy kept!
 * 1) If I wrote a template "foo" with this code, what would be displayed when I called it like this: Thanks again! ? Thanks for helping with ! It's a great help.
 * A: - ❌ at all - this is one thing I still can't pick up on, as much as I try, it turns out to complete mush.
 * Wuss ;) 0/5
 * 1) You're working with an new editor to cleanup a page they created. During the course of your discussions, you realize that the content of the article is an exact copy of a textbook the other editor is reading off of. What should you do?
 * A: I would kindly point out our policy on copy violations and explain to them, that this encyclopedia is the free encyclopedia, and that these violations can be harmful to it.
 * I would remove all the content in the article that is a clear copy-vio. I would then proceed with an appropriate "new articles" maintenance template that would inform all editors who click on the article, that it is currently undergoing a major edit, and asks of them not to AfD (etc.) the article at this stage.
 * Sounds like a good solution. If it was a complete copyvio, maybe a csd would be the best option, but given your practical test, I think you know that. 5/5.

Written test - 44/50.

Questions and excuses
If you have any problems during the exam, please post them here. Good luck!
 * Thank you for the exam, and no thank you for question 6. Grrr.
 * By the way, my answers above are not all complete - please don't read any because I have some yuk answers that I don't like :| Thank you, -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 13:13, 3 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Could I pretty please have an extension? Please? I have commitments atm... <- you can't say no that face --  MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 10:14, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 * pffft. Go on then. How long would you like?  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 10:19, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I must be gunning for "Worst Adoptee 2012" - unless I'm the worst adoptee already? -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 05:32, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Overall: 83% - PASS