User talk:JennKR/Archive 2



Welcome to the CVUA!
Hello Jennie--x! I'm Vertium (Steve) and I've been asked to mentor you as part of the Academy. It's great to have you on board! First, as I'm sure you are aware (since I noticed you said you formerly were involved in working against it) vandalism is an everyday occurrence in Wikipedia, and we need to know how we deal with it correctly. We use The Four Steps of counter vandalism and those are:
 * Identify it;
 * Remove/revert it;
 * Warn the user; and if they persist,
 * Report to WP:AIV.

I would suggest going through the links and, if you haven't recently read it, have a good look at WP:VAND. I noticed you use Twinkle and are open to looking at STiki as well. I use both (as well as manual revert while I'm just perusing articles), so I'd suggest we have a go with Twinkle first and then, once you get rollback rights, we can spend some time on STiki.

Here's the process we'll go through...


 * 1. You should start reviewing of articles (I'll typically review Recent Changes) and look at the Diffs on the various files.  Of course, when someone makes multiple changes (either because they have made genuine multiple edits or trying to do sneaky vandalism), you may have to look at multiple Diffs on the article.


 * 2. When you discover something that needs to be reverted, Twinkle provides you three choices on the Diff page:
 * Rollback [AGF] (green) - for reverting good faith edits that just aren't constructive or are poorly sourced or violate some policy (e.g. WP:BLP - always providing an edit summary for why a good faith edit was reverted. If there's consistent reversion of content, please start a discussion on the article's talk page.
 * Rollback (blue) - for reverting edits where you'd like to provide an edit summary for the rollback
 * Rollback [VANDAL] (red) - for reverting content that constitutes vandalism


 * 3. After the revert, go to the user's talk page and leave the appropriate warning.  For explanations of warning sequence and examples, see here.


 * 4. I'll check in and review your reverts or other edits (usually once or twice a day) and provide you feedback.  If you have any questions, always feel free to leave me a message on my talk page and I'll get back to you ASAP.

I hope this has helped, if it's confusing in any part, please let me know and I'm happy to explain further. Also see WP:BITE and WP:AGF for more information. You probably have it, but if you don't have Twinkle, you can install it by going on your Preferences then Gadgets and click Twinkle (make sure you save!).

Again welcome, and I look forward to hearing from you. Vertium  When all is said and done  13:52, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Your CVUA assignment page.
Hello again... I've created your CVUA assignment page here. We'll use that as the central place for questions or tasks related to your participation in the academy. Talk to you soon. Vertium  When all is said and done  14:30, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

A review of your contributions
Hi, I've just had a look at some of the edits you did yesterday and you're off to a great start. My only comment would be that you marked this diff with a good faith reversion, and I'd have probably considered it vandalism and given it a level-1 warning. The user currently has no warnings and a level-1 warning is careful to present the reversion as potential "test editing", so as not to bite the newbie. Your thoughts on that?

I've spot checked the other reversions and think you're doing quite well. Any particular questions for me?

Lastly, I've put another note onto your CVUA page when you have a moment. Vertium  When all is said and done  12:06, 16 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I think I'd probably agree! My immediate thoughts after writing "WP:Nonsense" is that it may have come across harshly, but I thought it was probably where it would fall under. I think vandalism seems more appropriate now after re-reading WP:VAN, as it falls under "test editing" or "silly vandalism" criteria.


 * I'll have a look at my CVUA page now, thank-you for your help so far! --Jennie | ☎ 15:13, 16 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Looking good. Now that you have Rollback perms, you might want to download STiki, which will make the whole process go faster.  Let me know if that's how you'd like to proceed.   Vertium  When all is said and done  17:34, 16 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Yep, just downloading STiki now. --Jennie | ☎ 17:41, 16 July 2012 (UTC)


 * It's pretty straightforward. I use it as is with one exception.  I update the message sent to vandalism reverts to read "...test edit editing or potential vandalism..." to soften it up a bit in the edit summary.  You'll find that when there are multiple edits (where only the most recent is shown), you should still go back to the diffs and have a look to make sure there's not some sneaky vandalism going on.  STiki makes it easier to go much faster, but it also increases the risk (at least for me) that I get going too fast and have to revert some of my own reverts.  Just a caution there.   Let me know how it's going (here or on your CVUA page).  I'll check some more of your edits on Tuesday and provide feedback.  It's clear you've had some experience at this... you're doing great!   Vertium  When all is said and done  01:19, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Correction in the above statement Unlike Huggle which shows the most recent diff and you have to check the earlier versions as well to make sure if its vandalism. The latest version of STiki makes it easier for the vandal fighters by combining "all the recent edits" by the last editor in a single diff, so that the Vandal fighter is aware of the version to which the article will be reverted if he presses the revert button. This is also the reason why you see a blank White screen on the STiki diff screen, it occurs when an editor makes a test edit and then self reverts himself, so that there is nothing more to do in that particular case for the vandal fighter. (I was just passing by when I thought of correcting you.)-- D Big X ray   11:17, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Your rollback request
Hi Jennie--x, I have granted rollback rights to your account in accordance with your request. Please be aware that rollback should be used to revert vandalism/spam/blatantly unconstructive edits, and that using it to revert any other type of edit (such as by revert-warring or reverting edits you disagree with) can lead to it being removed from your account...sometimes without any warning depending on the admin who becomes aware of any misuse. If you think an edit should require a reason for reverting, use a manual edit summary instead of using the rollback tool. For practice, you may wish to see New admin school/Rollback. Good luck. Acalamari 16:20, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Review of your contributions/edits II
Hi,

I just had another look at the diffs for the reversions you've made and I agree with those that I saw. Nicely done. I hope you're having an easier go of it with STiki. It's so much faster and easier than with a manual review of the Recent Changes.

I've put out one more task for you on your CVUA page. Once that's complete and a couple days more of edit reviews and you'll be all set. Keep up the great work! Vertium  When all is said and done  20:04, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Just to let you know that I've responded to your assessment of the reverts on your CVUA page. Great responses! Thank you for taking the time to be so thorough. Vertium  When all is said and done  13:50, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations

 * I've looked at your contributions and you're doing great. Please feel free to keep in touch if there's anything I can do to help.  All the best!   Vertium  When all is said and done  13:16, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

re: Nicki Minaj
I can't review the article as I have edited the article in the past, but for thanks for the Graduation review I can help fix some of the issues with the article to increase its chances of passing its GA. Just after a quick look through it, I noticed bare URL notification towards the bottom of the page, and some of the references not done properly. If you want, I could help prepare it for the review instead. Bruce Campbell (talk) 01:54, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of apocalyptic and post-apocalyptic fiction
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of apocalyptic and post-apocalyptic fiction. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 11:15, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Nickiminajhackneyweekend.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Nickiminajhackneyweekend.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:14, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you!
Oh wow, thank you, my first barnstar! :D Siawase (talk) 12:44, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Phallus
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Phallus. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 12:16, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:YoungMoneyBedrock.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:YoungMoneyBedrock.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:19, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Just Checking In
Hi, haven't talked for a while, so just thought I'd check in and see how things are going on the vandalism fighting front. If ever I can help, just let me know.

Hope all is well! Vertium  When all is said and done  10:16, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Nicki Minaj
Just a heads up that the reviewer who passed this article is being discussed at WT:GAN. There is a possibility that this review might be discounted undone. This s no reflection on the nomination. AIR corn (talk) 03:51, 17 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Jennie--X, I've raised a question there in respect of your latest posting. Pyrotec (talk) 18:39, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Hello there, Jennie. I noticed that we missed one of Pyrotec's requests on Nicki Minaj. I made the necessary change and let him know that we were ready to continue with the review. If you want, I can help make any necessary changes. Otherwise, I'll back-off until the review is complete. Happy editing. :) --Thevampireashlee (talk) 01:19, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
 * You've now got GA. Congratulations on your hard work. Pyrotec (talk) 08:30, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Lilith Sternin
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Lilith Sternin. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 13:15, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 22
Hi. When you recently edited Lil' Kim, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Foxy Brown (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:18, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

GA reviews
I like your enthusiasm in doing reviews and we do need reviewers but not like this. Sorry to say but your review of Black Swan (film) was not good. You just passed it without raising issues and there are few issues in the article which were needed to be addressed. I've done 31 reviews and know that many articles look good but a closure look tells that they are not that good. Black swan need minor work but it is GA now and so no trouble. Since you've started review of 2012_Summer_Olympics_opening_ceremony, this needs a lot of changes thus if you require any help feel free to ask me :) Thanks for reviewing articles!  TheSpecialUser TSU 11:03, 24 August 2012 (UTC)