User:Theopolisme/CVUA/LlamaAl

Pre-Course

What are you interested in learning/working on? —Theopolisme (talk) 22:52, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm interested in working on warning levels, how to deal with vandals, when to request page protection, inappropiate usernames... --LlamaAl (talk) 22:56, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Sounds good. I've actually been working on a username-related lesson recently...good a place to start as any! See below. I've watchlisted this page and will also be monitoring your contributions if you have any questions. —Theopolisme (talk) 23:03, 22 February 2013 (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:

• 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.

Please read WP:USERNAME, and pay particluar attention to dealing with inappropriate usernames.

Describe the what you would about the following usernames of logged in users (including which of the above it breaches and why).

DJohnson

Many editors use names starting with DJ, so I would look their contributions to determine if it is a promotional username.

LMedicalCentre

Promotional, it's the name of a company.

Fuqudik

Disruptive.

ColesStaff

Promotional, it's the name of a website or organization.

~~~~

Misleading as it is what we use to sign posts.

172.295.64.27

Misleading, other users can confuse it with an IP address.

Bieberisgay

Disruptive, personal attack.

I've answered between lines. LlamaAl (talk) 23:17, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the speediness. Here's another one of a slightly different sort... —Theopolisme (talk) 23:38, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

AnnaAtWalgreens

This could be a promotional username for a person who works at Walgreens. But is could also be a legitimate use of a sockpuppet account. For example: User:Elen on the Roads. --LlamaAl (talk) 00:26, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Several months ago I was 'tricked' by this one as well; take a look at WP:ISU (third bullet point) for the answer. ;) —Theopolisme (talk) 01:08, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Mi first option was closer than the second . --LlamaAl (talk) 01:11, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Heh. I seem to recall you saying you were interested in patrolling new pages. Is that still the case? Additionally, I've added quite a number of mini-lessons below, to be completed at your convenience: take your pick...whatever interests you! —Theopolisme (talk) 01:18, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

I have completed all the mini-lessons. I'm also interested in NPP. What's next? --LlamaAl (talk) 22:16, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

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?

To notify them that they have violated one or more rules, and to give they an opportunity to reform. --LlamaAl (talk) 02:02, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

When would a 4im warning be appropriate?

When a specific user or IP address repeatedly makes disruptive edits or vandalism without having been warned before. --LlamaAl (talk) 02:02, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

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

We should always substitute user warning templates. We place subst: before the template to substitute it. --LlamaAl (talk) 02:02, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

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

I should report they at WP:AIV. --LlamaAl (talk) 02:02, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Please give examples (using {{Tlsubst|''name of template''}}) 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.

{{subst:uw-vandalism1}}

{{subst:uw-disruptive2}}

{{subst:uw-delete3}}

LlamaAl (talk) 02:02, 23 February 2013 (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: {{subst:uw-test1}}, {{subst:uw-test2}} and {{subst:uw-test3}}.

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.

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

#	Diff of your revert	Your comment (optional). If you report to AIV please include the diff	Marker's comment (optional)
1	[1]	comment	What about that edit was a "test"? It looked more like an unsourced addition of content to me.
2	[2]	comment	Good.
3	[3]	comment	Good.
4	[4]	comment	Good.
5	[5]	comment	Good.
6	[6]	comment	Good.
7	[7]	comment	Good.
8	[8]	comment	Good.
9	[9]	comment	Good.
10	[10]	comment	Good.
11	[11]	comment	Good.
12	[12]	comment	Good.
13	[13]	AIV report	Good; good report.
14	[14]	comment	Good.

• Will finish this later. --LlamaAl (talk) 22:15, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
• Comments in table. —Theopolisme (talk) 05:06, 24 February 2013 (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:").

Tools

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.

Lupin's Anti-Vandal Tool

Lupin's Anti-Vandal Tool monitors the RSS feed and flags edits with common vandalism terms. It's a very simple tool, but which is useful for not having to go check each and every diff on Recent Changes.

 Already used --LlamaAl (talk) 21:55, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

STiki

STiki consists of (1) a component that listens to the RecentChanges feed and scores edits on their possibility of being uncontructive; and (2) An application which scans through the most recent revisions on pages and scores the possibility of them being uncontructive.

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.

 Already used in two Wikipedia's. --LlamaAl (talk) 17:44, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

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?

Because if we recognize their <<work>> they feel rewarded and encouraged to continue trolling or vandalizing. It's better to ignore them as there are more possibilities for them to stop doing harm to the encyclopedia. --LlamaAl (talk) 22:08, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

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

A good faith user would ask me why I reverted their edits in good terms whereas a troll would harass me before, during and after I give an explanation. --LlamaAl (talk) 22:08, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

NPP

Great work with all of the above -- sorry for my slight delay in checking this. On to NPP: as I assume you've read over WP:NPP and WP:CSD (if not, chop chop ), I suggest that you simply do a bit of patrolling -- visit Special:NewPagesFeed and just mess around a bit with settings and such -- I typically patrol for vandalistic/inappropriate pages using the "new user/unreviewed" settings. Don't forget, though, to look at the "good stuff" too! You can give barnstars and much more through the curation toolbar, which I highly recommend doing for especially great new articles. Here are some assignments; do whatever floats your boat! —Theopolisme (talk) 22:32, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Tag five pages for speedy deletion -- but remember, quality not quantity!

1. Real Library
2. List of tourist attraction.....
3. Ian tweedy

Tag an article with BLP-PROD; read WP:BEFORE first, though.

Copyedit a new article.

Tag a page as a stub and appropriately categorize it ("short, uncategorized" filters in the New Pages Feed help).

Write some feedback for a new author.

• Nice. Will be working on it later. Here are my CSD and PROD logs:
• User:LlamaAl/CSD log
• User:LlamaAl/PROD log.
•  Working
• --LlamaAl (talk) 02:21, 5 March 2013 (UTC)