User talk:Puddleglum2.0/New3400 CVUA

Hello, 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

There are several sections of the training course. In some of them, will be asking you to do perform practical exercises; in others, I will ask you to read certain policies and guidelines, and then ask you some questions about their content. To be clear, it is not a problem if you give the wrong answer to any of the questions - making mistakes and discussing them is a crucial part of the learning process. For that reason, it is important that you do not attempt to find previous users' training pages in order to identify the 'right' answers to give: all your answers should be your own, so that we can identify and address any misconceptions that you might have. There is no time pressure to complete the course: we will go at whatever pace works for you, and you can take a pause or ask questions at any point along the way.
 * The CVUA curriculum

Counter-vandalism work can result in very large watchlists, which can make it more difficult to monitor pages using that alone. For this reason, I will ping you whenever I update this page with some feedback or a new task; I would also ask you to ping me when you have completed a task, so that I get a notification telling me that it's ready for review. See WP:PING for details on how to do this if you aren't sure. -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 19:19, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Communication

Twinkle
Twinkle is a very useful tool when performing maintenance functions around Wikipedia. Please have a read through WP:TWINKLE.
 * Enable Twinkle (if haven't already) and leave a note here to let me know that you have enabled it.

Ok I got it. New3400 (talk) 19:22, 24 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Awesome ! Let's get started. -- Puddleglum  2.0 (How's my driving?) 19:28, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

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. While it is often necessary to revert such edits, we treat them differently from vandalism, so it is important to recognise the difference between a vandalism edit and a good faith edit. Please read WP:AGF and WP:NOT VANDALISM before completing the tasks in this section.


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

Well, a good faith edit contains zero offensive content, unlike a vandal edit, and they often add something that helps the article.New3400 (talk) 19:32, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Almost, but not quite. Really the key behind good faith edits and vandalism is the intention ; whether or not the perpetrating editor intends the edit o build the encyclopedia or to simply harm it. for example, if someone entered a random jumble of letters (gshsnodjcbfdjdk) into an article, they might be testing their editing ability; Not necessarily vandalism, but also not helpful. On the other hand, if someone inserted "He is racist" into an article like Donald Trump that would be vandalism, as it is intended only to insult and harm. Generally vandalism will be personal attacks or blatant misinformation, while a good faith edit usually won't be helpful, but also not intended to harm. Does that make sense? -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 20:20, 24 April 2020 (UTC) t


 * 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. Place diffs below

Ok well so far, I found 1. it was in the Steven A. Smith article saying that he was an Dallas cowboys fan, which I think is vandalism. I can't link the edit, due to being on an weird mobile browser. but it was around March 15 2020, that was the edit that I reverted earlier this month. New3400 (talk) 19:43, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I can't judge it without a diff, and can't quite find that revision. I'm sure it happened, but can't answer without a clear diff. How long do you think you'll be on mobile? diffs will be important throughout the course. You can read more at WP:DIFF to get better understanding if needed. -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 20:20, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Ah, bad news, I don't have an computer. I could try and find an computer after this coronavirus ends. Is there a way I can continue without a diff? New3400 (talk) 20:45, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * We can try a way I thought up... It's far from optimal, but if you post the article where you reverted edits, I can go into the revision history and find it. to do so the reversions will have to be recent, so you'll want to go over and patrol Special:RecentChanges, with the filter "Likely Vandalism". Hope this helps? -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 00:59, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Ok, I will do that. See you in a few days mate. New3400 (talk) 01:02, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Huaning Road station what happened was that the editor tryed to make an category that didn't exist. The next edit was an revert. I believe this is an good faith edit. So far I found 2. New3400 (talk) 01:21, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Black Hours, Morgan MS 493, blatant vandalism that caused protection of the article. New3400 (talk) 01:29, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Nerijus Valskis this edit would be a good faith edit, except he did it two times, so I think it is vandalism. New3400 (talk) 17:16, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Gary Coleman this is my final vandalism edit that i found. Intentional blanking of his death, and was reported. New3400 (talk) 17:24, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Steven A. Smith - ✅ I'll trust you on that.

Huaning Road station - ❌ this was probably a mistake, the same editor self-reverted soon after.

Black Hours, Morgan MS 493 ✅ yup.

Nerijus Valskis ✅ once an editor starts to do the same unhelpful edit multiple times after they are warned, it becomes vandalism.

Gary Coleman ✅

Good answers on the most part -- Please read the comments I left. before we continue, can you find one more good faith edit? It's an important distinction, so I want to make sure you have a good understanding before we continue. Thanks, -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 18:41, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Dwight York ip added American criminal, when he or she could use the crime he did. New3400 (talk) 18:47, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

looks good! I'll get the next section set up. -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 18:49, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

A note about Twinkle
Hopefully you'll have noticed that Twinkle allows you three options for performing a rollback - green, blue, and red links (see the screenshot). All three will revert all of the most recent consecutive edits made by a single user to a page.

Try to use these buttons where possible. The green and the blue ones allow you to add an edit summary - it's described as 'optional', but you should not treat it as such - always leave a brief edit summary, even if it's just 'Rv test edit', or 'Rv unexplained removal of content', or whatever. Use the green one when you think it's a good faith mistake, and the blue one when you're not sure. Only use the red one when you are certain that it is unambiguous vandalism - it saves time, because it leaves a generic edit summary, and all of them will take you directly to the talk page of the person you have reverted, to allow you to use the 'Warn' option to give them a warning. (Also note that you can use the brown "restore this version" button when you need to revert edits by multiple users.)

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 make sure that they know what edit was made that did not help the article and that the edit was reverted. New3400 (talk) 18:58, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Please answer the following questions:
 * Why do we warn users?
 * ✅ Also to create something of a paper-trail for administrators investigating an AIV report.

When vandalism is happening multiple, with an single (or multiple) users. New3400 (talk) 18:58, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
 * When would a 4im warning be appropriate?


 * ✅ yes -- also if a vandalism edit is massively egregious -- a personal attack on a BLP article, something like that.

Yes, as different users do different things. New3400 (talk) 19:06, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Should you substitute a template when you place it on a user talk page, and how do you do it? (Hint - read the link before answering!)


 * yes, but for different reasons: on every talk page you post a template on. Twinkle will do this automatically. Maybe skim through WP:SUBST again? It's not an important part of counter vandalism, so I wouldn't spend to much time on it, but its good to have at least a general knowledge.

Report to WP:AIV,. Also, what's the warning for awarding too many barnstars? New3400 (talk) 19:06, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
 * What should you do if a user who has received a level 4 or 4im warning vandalises again?


 * ✅ yup! Awarding lots of barnstars isn't a warnable offense by itself,.There has to be other behaviour, which, if present, may lead to an ANI report.


 * Find and revert some vandalism. Warn each user appropriately, using the correct kind of warning and level. For each revert/warning please fill in a line on the table below.

See above -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 18:54, 25 April 2020 (UTC) -- see above: great job, please read the comments and finish up the last task. Thanks, -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 22:42, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

you don't have to do this one at a time -- I'll just check all the ones you enter. -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 14:30, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi. You can answer more questions without me grading them; just fyi. -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 17:41, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

OK, graded your questions, please see my feedback and the next section below. Cheers, -- puddleglum  2.0  00:53, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

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. 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?

When a page is vandalized often by a ip.
 * ✅ the key here is consistent vandalism from a dynamic IP (meaning that the vandalism cannot be stopped by simply blocking one IP.)


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

When there is vandalism. By ips over a few days.
 * Can you be a bit more specific than that? Vandalism from who? How much? Over what period of time? If you are having any trouble, we can discuss this.


 * In what circumstances should a page be fully protected?

A: when there is a lot of vandalism. From accounts B: when there is a edit war.
 * A lot of vandalism from what type of editor? Why not justsemi-protect it if there's a lot of vandalism or edit wars? You're missing one key point here.
 * closer, but I would say that full protection is only warranted when there is vandalism and edit warring from extended confirmed users who can edit semi protected pages. Full protection is rare becuase of this.


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

When trolls make a bad article numerous times.
 * ✅ after the articles are deleted.

When there is a major argument or trolls appear. Also if there is vandalism by many ips and accounts.
 * In what circumstances should a talk page be semi-protected?
 * Not really - I've had many "major arguments" on my talk page and it's never been fully protected- There must be consistent and bad harrasment, trolling and/or vandalism on the talk page.


 * Correctly request the protection of one page (pending, semi or full); post the diff of your request at WP:RPP below. (Note - it might take you a while to come across a circumstance where this is required - we can continue with the next section of the course before you do this, but when the need arises please post here and ping me).

Uh, can we skip this for now?
 * Yes - take your time, but remember to answer this eventually. New3400 (talk) 19:39, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * see the above - a couple things need to be clarified, if you're having trouble, feel free to reach out and we can discuss. All the best, -- puddleglum  2.0  19:53, 9 June 2020 (UTC)


 * graded, see notes and next question. -- puddleglum  2.0  00:20, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion
Please read WP:CSD.

When it's A: blatant vandalism, B: spam, and C: copyrighted, New3400 (talk) 17:46, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * In what circumstances should a page be speedy deleted?
 * there are a lot more criteria; see WP:CSD for more.
 * see below. -- puddleglum  2.0  00:26, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion
Please read WP:CSD.


 * In what circumstances should a page be speedy deleted?

Speedy deletion examples
In past iterations of this course, students have been asked to go out and actually tag pages for deletion, but with the introduction of WP:ACPERM, the amount of straight vandalism that gets created directly in mainspace has reduced dramatically. As such, I'm going to ask you to say how you would act in a set of hypothetical scenarios. What would you do if you saw the page listed in each scenario? Note that not all scenarios may warrant speedy deletion.

A user with the username "BobSucks" creates an article called "John Smith" that contains solely the following text: John Smith is the worst elementary school teacher on the planet.
 * Scenario 1

It looks like a G10. New3400 (talk) 02:30, 19 June 2020 (UTC) A user with the username "GoodTimesLLC" creates a user page with the following text: Good Times LLC is an organization dedicated to helping your children get the highest quality education at an affordable price. Visit our website at goodtimes.info and contact us at 123-456-7890.
 * Scenario 2

A user creates an article titled "Edward Gordon" with the following text: Edward Gordon (born July 1998) is an aspiring American actor and songwriter. So far, he has starred in many school plays and has published two albums on SoundCloud. He has over 5,000 subscribers on YouTube.
 * Scenario 3

A user creates an article titled "Bazz Ward" with the following content: Bazz Ward was a Hall of Fame roadie and I wish he was as well known as Lemmy. Cheers Bazz. (Attribution: came up with this scenario as a question to an old RfA candidate. I've borrowed his example here. Hint: Try Google searching a few key terms from this short article.)
 * Scenario 4

A user creates an article that was clearly copied and pasted directly from another website, which states "All Rights Reserved" at the bottom of it. Would your answer be the same if it didn't state "All Rights Reserved" at the bottom?
 * Scenario 5

A user creates an article, but you can't understand any of it because it's in a foreign language.
 * Scenario 6

A user creates an article, but shortly after creating it, the same user blanks the article by removing all of its content.
 * Scenario 7

A new user creates a user page with nothing but the following content: Jlakjrelekajroi3j192809jowejfldjoifu328ur3pieisgreat How would this scenario be different if the page was created in a different namespace?
 * Scenario 8