User talk:Zippybonzo/Training/CVUA/Students/TechnoSquirrel69

Hello, welcome to your Counter Vandalism Unit Academy page! Please make sure you have this page added to your watchlist. 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. ((ping|TechnoSquirrel69}} Once you graduate I will copy this page into your userspace so you have a record of your training and a reference for the future.
 * How to use this page


 * I was wondering why I hadn't gotten an update about this yet! I found out recently that pings don't work if the message isn't signed, which is probably what happened here. Thanks for starting this page; I'll make my way through these sections over today and tomorrow, keeping you updated. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 08:36, 7 August 2023 (UTC)


 * oh yeah. that'll probably be why then. Zippybonzo &#124; Talk (he&#124;him) 08:55, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the responses below, Zippybonzo! Ready to move on to the next sections whenever you are. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:38, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

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


 * ✔️. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 08:37, 7 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Good to know. Zippybonzo &#124; Talk (he&#124;him) 08:55, 7 August 2023 (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. 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.


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


 * I'd say the most important difference between the two is the presence or absence of malicious intent behind the editing, and there are a few different ways of telling them apart. There are some telltale signs of malicious editing — the addition of overtly negative or insulting points of view (usually unsourced), deceptive edit summaries, adding patent nonsense, and so on — all of which usually warrant a simple revert and talk page warning. It gets a little bit more complicated with other kinds of edits — subtle vandalism that requires subject-area expertise or access to paywalled sources, addition of contentious content that may or may not align with WP:WEIGHT, and so on. Assuming that the editor is acting with the interest of bettering Wikipedia is important, even if they have violated an important policy or guideline with their editing, until they have clearly shown malicious intent. If I truly can't tell the difference, I could always ask them! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 09:43, 7 August 2023 (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

—TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 10:02, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Special:Diff/1169033461: Here's one I reverted earlier today; the editor was new and adding only tangentially related content using a blog source. I sent them a welcome message and directed them to WP:SELFPUB on their talk page.
 * 2) Special:Diff/1168647992: An unregistered editor adding slightly confusing language to a sentence in an attempt to clarify a person's age. Reverted and explained with an edit summary.
 * 3) Special:Diff/1167362206: A relatively inexperienced editor making sweeping fixes to sentences that were already gramatically correct.  Reverted, warned with an explanation, and directed to WP:GOCE.


 * Vandalism

—TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 10:27, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Special:Diff/1168359367: An unregistered editor adding an unsourced statement that a certain group of people were making false accusations. Reverted and warned.
 * 2) Special:Diff/1166584759: Multiple IPs adding nonsense to a talk page. Reverted without warning as it had been a while since then.
 * 3) Special:Diff/1167585141 A new editor adding inappropriate external links. I reverted the edit (again), assumed good faith and tried to explain the issue, but it turned out the account was a sock.

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.


 * Please answer the following questions:
 * Why do we warn users?

Warnings usually come after one of the user's edits has been been reverted, providing them with an explanation of what was wrong with the edit. Warnings are necessary to make sure editors understand when they've violated one of the policies or guidelines, and give context to other editors if the user is violating repeatedly. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 13:09, 7 August 2023 (UTC)


 * When would a 4im warning be appropriate?

This is the final warning issued to a user before they're reported. It should usually be used only when the previous three warning levels have been issued, but can be issued immediately in severe cases. It assumes that the user is acting with malicious intent. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 13:09, 7 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Should you substitute a template when you place it on a user talk page, and how do you do it?

Yes, warning templates should always be substituted. Templates are substituted with the syntax. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 13:09, 7 August 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ Zippybonzo &#124;  talk to me   &#124;   what have I done   (he&#124;she&#124;they) 19:58, 8 September 2023 (UTC)


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

It's time for administrator intervention; I'd report them at the appropriate venue depending on the case, possibly at WP:AIV or WP:ANI. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 13:09, 7 August 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ Zippybonzo &#124;  talk to me   &#124;   what have I done   (he&#124;she&#124;they) 19:58, 8 September 2023 (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.

Of course, I'm likely using the drop-down menu on Twinkle for this, but here are some relevant templates.



—TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 13:09, 7 August 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ Zippybonzo &#124;  talk to me   &#124;   what have I done   (he&#124;she&#124;they) 19:58, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

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

I'm essentially done with this section. I'm continuing to do some recent changes patrolling to catch vandalism, but at this point I'm just waiting to chance upon a test edit, or an editor with a fourth warning to take to AIV, so I can satisfy the minimum requirements mentioned. I'm comfortable with moving to the next section if you are, and I can update this table when I revert one of those kinds of edits. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 05:13, 15 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Ok, adding the next sections now. :) Zippybonzo &#124; Talk (he&#124;him) 11:41, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ seems all good. Zippybonzo &#124;  talk to me   &#124;   what have I done   (he&#124;she&#124;they) 19:57, 8 September 2023 (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:").


 * Noted. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:16, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

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.

If you would like to use, or learn to use any of the following tools, please leave a comment below;

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.

SWViewer
SWViewer is a tool that allows you to monitor possibly unconstructive changes from multiple Wikimedia wikis, to use it you require the rollback user right.

RedWarn
RedWarn is an incredibly useful anti-vandalism tool, which can be used to accept pending changes, and revert unconstructive edits. RedWarn contains many automation features, such as opening the warn menu and automatically selecting a reason and warning level after reverting.


 * I've been using Twinkle for a while and have heard that RedWarn/Ultraviolet has a feature set that's similar. Would you recommend one or the other, and if so, why? —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:24, 7 August 2023 (UTC)


 * @TechnoSquirrel69 RedWarn is a more finished version of Ultraviolet and I recommend RedWarn for its automation and speed. Zippybonzo &#124; Talk (he&#124;him) 16:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

AntiVandal
AntiVandal is an powerful tool, similar to Huggle, that allows you to revert and warn users with 1 button. Use of this tool requires the rollback user right, or inclusion on its whitelist.


 * I've heard good things about this tool and would be down to learn it. Should I go ahead and request for rollback? —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:24, 7 August 2023 (UTC)


 * @TechnoSquirrel69 when I feel you are ready I will get you added to the whitelist to see how your usage of an automated tool affects your anti vandalism. Zippybonzo &#124; Talk (he&#124;him) 16:04, 7 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Sounds good! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:31, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

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, it requires the rollback user right.

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?

Some users get their kicks out of causing as much inconvenience and frustration as possible; lashing out and responding to their messages or ranting to other users about their disruption is exactly what they want. Vandalism and Wikipedia can be disincentivized by sending vandals the message that their edits with not cause the level of disruption that they're hoping for — they will simply be reverted, and everyone moves on. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:17, 15 August 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ Zippybonzo &#124;  talk to me   &#124;   what have I done   (he&#124;she&#124;they) 19:55, 8 September 2023 (UTC)


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

I actually have some examples on my talk page right now! Obviously, if the user's message is nothing but insults or attempts to waste my time, they can simply be ignored. Extreme cases can be reported to the admins, or very rarely, directly to the WMF. Otherwise, WP:AGF takes precedence. Red flags for bad-faith messages are probably misplaced anger, a belief that I have a bone to pick with them specifically, a need to right great wrongs, etc. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:17, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 * All done here! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:13, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ Zippybonzo &#124;  talk to me   &#124;   what have I done   (he&#124;she&#124;they) 19:55, 8 September 2023 (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. 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?

Semi-protection is appropriate when the page in question is receiving a significant amount of vandalism from multiple unregistered or new users. Blocks would be preferred if they would fix the issue. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ Zippybonzo &#124;  talk to me   &#124;   what have I done   (he&#124;she&#124;they) 19:55, 8 September 2023 (UTC)


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

Pending changes protection is useful when an article is experiencing a transient spike in vandalism, possibly due to external attention. If the page is experiencing long-term vandalism the edit volume is otherwise relatively low, indefinite protection may be appropriate. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ Zippybonzo &#124;  talk to me   &#124;   what have I done   (he&#124;she&#124;they) 19:54, 8 September 2023 (UTC)


 * In what circumstances should a page be fully protected?

I've seen short-term full protection be applied to an article to stop an edit war, where semi- and extended-protection wouldn't have worked. Some templates and generic file names can be indefinitely protected to prevent possible wide-spread vandalism. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ Zippybonzo &#124;  talk to me   &#124;   what have I done   (he&#124;she&#124;they) 19:54, 8 September 2023 (UTC)


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

In cases where a page has been disruptively recreated multiple times, and when user blocks would not fix the issue. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ Zippybonzo &#124;  talk to me   &#124;   what have I done   (he&#124;she&#124;they) 19:54, 8 September 2023 (UTC)


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

This should be avoided if possible, but can be applied when the talk page is receiving severe vandalism from unregistered and new editors. I can't think of a situation where indefinite protection would be appropriate. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ Zippybonzo &#124;  talk to me   &#124;   what have I done   (he&#124;she&#124;they) 19:54, 8 September 2023 (UTC)


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

Special:Diff/1172793357: Requested semi-protection due to an uptick in vandalism. Article was protected for a month. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 13:47, 29 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Hey ! I'm going to the mountains this week and will probably be in Internet dead zones for a good chunk of that time. I be able to respond to pings occasionally, but I could very possibly be completely offline until August 29. I'll continue with this training once I'm back. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @TechnoSquirrel69 No problem :) enjoy the mountains! Zippybonzo &#124; Talk (he&#124;him) 06:51, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks Zippybonzo! I'm now back from my wikibreak and back to work — I've finished these sections and I'm ready to move forward when you are. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:05, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm also back from my wikibreak so I'll get new sections added soon (tm) Zippybonzo &#124; Talk (he&#124;him) 17:40, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:43, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Hey Zippybonzo, I've been busy the last couple of days wrapping up my first GAN, but I'm good to move on to the next sections over here now! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:30, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Zippybonzo? —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 05:23, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ Zippybonzo &#124;  talk to me   &#124;   what have I done   (he&#124;she&#124;they) 19:54, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion
Please read WP:CSD.


 * In what circumstances should a page be speedy deleted, very briefly no need to go through the criteria?

The CSD are used for situations where it is clearly obvious that a page is problematic, and a full discussion can be skipped due to a near guarantee that consensus would point towards deletion. There are also some cases where content most be quickly removed from visibility, and a discussion is skipped as it may be too slow. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:17, 29 August 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ Zippybonzo &#124;  talk to me   &#124;   what have I done   (he&#124;she&#124;they) 19:53, 8 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Correctly tag two pages for speedy deletion (with different reasons - they can be for any of the criteria) and post the diff and the criteria you requested it be deleted under below.

So I don't have diffs for pages that have been deleted, but here's my CSD log. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:17, 29 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Yeah that will be fine. Zippybonzo &#124; Talk (he&#124;him) 16:17, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ Zippybonzo &#124;  talk to me   &#124;   what have I done   (he&#124;she&#124;they) 19:53, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Usernames
Wikipedia has a policy which details the types of usernames which users are permitted to have. Some users (including me) patrol the User creation log to check for new users with inappropriate usernames. There are four kinds of usernames that are specifically disallowed: Please read WP:USERNAME, and pay particluar attention to dealing with inappropriate usernames.
 * Misleading usernames imply relevant, misleading things about the contributor. The types of names which can be misleading are too numerous to list, but definitely include usernames that imply you are in a position of authority over Wikipedia, usernames that impersonate other people, or usernames which can be confusing within the Wikipedia signature format, such as usernames which resemble IP addresses or timestamps.
 * Promotional usernames are used to promote an existing company, organization, group (including non-profit organizations), website, or product on Wikipedia.
 * Offensive usernames are those that offend other contributors, making harmonious editing difficult or impossible.
 * Disruptive usernames include outright trolling or personal attacks, include profanities or otherwise show a clear intent to disrupt Wikipedia.
 * Describe the what you would about the following usernames of logged in users (including which of the above it breaches and why).


 * DJohnson

This is such a generic name that it could easily be confused for being someone else's. I'd leave a notice on their talk page recommending a change. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:02, 29 August 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ Zippybonzo &#124;  talk to me   &#124;   what have I done   (he&#124;she&#124;they) 19:53, 8 September 2023 (UTC)


 * LMedicalCentre

Clearly a promotional username for this center. I'd leave a talk page notice. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:02, 29 August 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ Zippybonzo &#124;  talk to me   &#124;   what have I done   (he&#124;she&#124;they) 19:52, 8 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Fuqudik

This one is sexually explicit and could be perceived as offensive. Straight to WP:UAA. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:02, 29 August 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ Zippybonzo &#124;  talk to me   &#124;   what have I done   (he&#124;she&#124;they) 19:52, 8 September 2023 (UTC)


 * ColesStaff

Implies that the account is shared between multiple users. I'd leave a notice about the username and the policy prohibiting shared accounts. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:02, 29 August 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ Zippybonzo &#124;  talk to me   &#124;   what have I done   (he&#124;she&#124;they) 19:52, 8 September 2023 (UTC)



Could be confusing due to Wikipedia's signature system. I'd leave a notice. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:02, 29 August 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ Zippybonzo &#124;  talk to me   &#124;   what have I done   (he&#124;she&#124;they) 19:51, 8 September 2023 (UTC)


 * 172.295.64.27

Can obviously be confused with the IPv4 address of an unregistered editor. I'd probably leave a notice, but I might take it to UAA if I have reason to believe the account was created in bad faith. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:02, 29 August 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ Zippybonzo &#124;  talk to me   &#124;   what have I done   (he&#124;she&#124;they) 19:51, 8 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Bieberisgay

Could be considered slander of a notable living person, and also likely homophobic. Straight to UAA. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:02, 29 August 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ Zippybonzo &#124;  talk to me   &#124;   what have I done   (he&#124;she&#124;they) 19:51, 8 September 2023 (UTC)