User:Jackson Peebles/Adoption/Avinendra Exam 2

1.) Q- In your own words, explain what it means to assume good faith.

A- To assume good faith ([[AGF]]) is the assumption that users are actually trying to improve Wikipedia sincerely and with honest intention or belief. It encourage healthy and friendly behavior among contributors and editors. Treat others with respect and solve dispute while keeping your head cool. Everyone makes mistakes, instead of causing more conflict and lead discussion in negative way,give others the opportunity to explain their point of view. Always try to the best of your ability to explain and resolve the issues. Rules, standards and tradition are applied in such a way as they help and encourage contributors. Treat others with responsible and polite way which show your willingness to compromise and improvement of the article.

• 5/5 Very good definition.

2.) Q- Explain how you would deal with this scenario using specifics: You are working in New Page Patrol and come across a new page that, though it's content is fine, has a few minor formatting issues. The page is three minutes old. You fix the format issues on the page. A few minutes later, you get a nasty note on your talk page which states that you caused the new editor, who created the page, an edit conflict by performing your few minor corrections. He was unaware of how to correct an edit conflict, and therefore lost everything he was trying to do. He even goes so far as to start an AN/I discussion about how you're incompetent and should butt out of his editing. What specific steps would you take? Disclaimer: This is based on a true story. Note: A similar question will be asked once we get to the dispute resolution question, but simply based on assuming good faith, I want to here how you'd approach this scenario.

A- I will apologize to the editor on his talk page and offer my assistance with the changes he was trying to make. I will also give suggestions on how to deal with edit conflicts. As for Administrator [[Noticeboard/Incidents]]([[AN/I]]) I will put the note that I have apologized explaining the whole situation in brief and edit links.

• 5/5 That's pretty much the ideal way to respond to this situation. ANI will blow over, as it is groundless. Apologizing is the nice thing to do here and doesn't heighten tensions.

3.) Have a look at the conversation below:

What's the best car in the world? -- Rod Probably something German or Japanese. -- Freddie Like what -- Rod's Mate I dunno, something like Volkswagon? -- Freddie Volkswagon Passat --Passat Lover <-Postion:A What do you want it for? -- Jane Volkswagon Passat --Passat Lover <-Position:B

Well, the Passat lover clearly loves his Passat, but who is he replying to? In

3a.) Position A?

A- Rod's Mate

• 5/5 Yes

3b.) Position B?

A- Rod

• 5/5 Yes

3c.) An editor who has a low edit count seems awfully competent with templates. Should he be reported as a possible WP:SOCK?

A- Not necessarily, He might be an advanced computer user. If his behavior resembles or giving clear impression with any troubling user, we can keep track of his activity but will not report unless he is causing any harm.

• Best answer I've had on this! You're completely right, we should assume good faith, here, even though it arouses suspicion!

Once you have finished, please notify me on my talk page, then proceed to Lesson 3: Vandalism.

Y 25/25 Fantastic work - 100% on the first lesson! Please continue on!