User:WormTT/Adopt/Test/Porchcrop

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

'''This exam was begun at 10:12, April 18. It will end at 10:12,''' .

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.

(I hope you don't mind if I put them as internal links)
 * ✅ - Patrol at least 4 pages in new page patrol Diffs:
 * Luck of the Draw (2007 film) - Tags appropriate. Did not notify or welcome creator, external links remain within article
 * Nyland The ODS - Cannot see deleted edits, but does not appear to have notified creator. (correct me if I'm wrong)
 * User:Sandzacademy - Not a new page, does not fall under NPP
 * Why does it not fall under NPP?
 * That's a good question. New Page Patrol limits generally itself to the article space. It does check the Wikipedia space too, but does not cover User space. I'm certain you did the right thing as it's been removed, but it's not removed under NPP.
 * Nanjundi Kalyana - tagged 3 minutes after creation possibly bitey. Tags appropriate.
 * Overall - Probably not your strongest area - 3/10.


 * ✅ - Participate in at least two AfD debates with reasoned comments. Diffs:
 * - agree with reasoning, and good spot on the "unofficial manga" bit.
 * - Does not look notable? What did you do to check that? Not really a reasoned comment.
 * I meant that looking in the article, notability is not asserted. -Porchcrop (talk 08:01, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I can see that, and you are probably right, however to actually participate I would expect a bit more work.
 * Overall 5/10


 * ✅ - Cleanup at least three articles (i.e., resolve at least one noted problem on at least three articles and remove that tag) Diffs:
 * - A nice easy one, good job
 * - No, I'm afraid not. That's not wikified, there's no wikilinks within the text, it doesn't flow like a wikipedia article. Going to have to replace that tag.
 * You did indeed resolve the issue, though that's quite a rubbish article ;)
 * Overall 6/10

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.
 * ✅ - Make at least 5 anti-vandal reversions and warn the vandals appropriately. Diffs:
 * Almost perfect. this wasn't vandalism though, only a test edit. You handled it perfectly... but I'll have to knock you down to 9.5/10.
 * ❌ - Make an informed judgement on an WP:RfA, giving your reasoning.
 * Times up: 0/10

Note that if you were to look into being an admin, experience in these areas would be helpful - so feel free to carry on after finishing the test ;)

Practical Test: 23.5/50

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 community discussion.
 * Well, it's the outcome of community discussion, and you haven't answered how it applies to Wikipedia policies. 2/5
 * 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: You could take the article to AFD.
 * Good answer: 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: You tell the person that reverted your removal of the PROD tag is against the deletion policy and must be taken to AFD. You also tell that person to be civil.
 * You're right, technically - but "telling" a person what to do in this situation is only going to escalate the issue. 4/5
 * 1) When is it appropriate to report a vandal to administration?
 * A: When the vandal has vandalized after his final warning. Or for other serious issues that the vandal has to be reported.
 * Yep. I would have preferred a few more examples though. 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: You tag the article using G7.
 * That would work 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: You admit that you are wrong. But you must tell him to stay calm.
 * Good answer. I also think here you should ask or remind, not tell, but I'm happy to give you 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: You have to make sure it complies with No original research, WP:BLP and Image use policy. If the image is not attacking, then you may upload it on Wikipedia provided that you release it under GFDL, CC-BY-SA or any other free licenses.
 * You find an image, which doesn't say it's copyrighted? Well, it is. If you didn't take the picture, you don't own the copyright. You need to get permission to use it. 1/5 for being right if you owned the image.
 * 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: You put an explanation on why that AFD nomination is unjustified.
 * Yep. Being near to an FA makes it harder, but that's good. 5/5
 * 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: Thanks for helping with Lorem Ipsum! It's a great help. Thanks again! ~
 * Well, not quite - the nowiki tabs wouldn't be there ;) 5/5
 * The nowiki tabs I used deliberately because it would include a signature. I used the nowiki tabs to define the signature. (While actually the template would put your signature but not include the nowiki tabs.) -Porchcrop (talk 08:01, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I know you did, which is why I didn't mark you down, and why I put a ;) at the end :P.
 * 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: You can tag the article using G12. (Otherwise you can use copyvio)
 * 4/5 for not talking to the editor - otherwise good.

Written test 41/50

Overall - 64.5% - Did not pass Sorry Porchcrop, you've fallen a little short this time. Let's keep working for a month and have another go :)  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 14:51, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Questions and excuses
If you have any problems during the exam, please post them here. Good luck!
 * 1) If an article is an exact copy to a copyrighted book, magazine, newspaper, etc. What do you with the article?
 * Follow steps at Cv101
 * 1) What does "informal judgement at RFA" mean?
 * informed, not informal. It means that you put a bit of work into your decision, read their questions, read the other comments, look into their past contributions (properly, I hope you'll be looking at least 1000 contributions back). Once you have, you should state whether you support, oppose or neutral, along with a reason based on what you've discovered. I would expect you to provide a diff in your reasoning.