User:Puddleglum2.0/Total Eclipse 2017 CVUA

Hello @Total Eclipse 2017:, 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 Wikipedia:Vandalism as that's the knowledge which most of the questions I ask you and tasks you do will revolve around.

How to use this page

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.

The CVUA curriculum

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.

Communication

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?)} 21:27, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

The start

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.

@Puddleglum2.0: I have enabled it. Can’t find Twinkle button anywhere though. I’m editing on mobile device... would that have something to do with it?? Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 21:33, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes; twinkle doesn't actually work on mobile. On the bottom of every page you should see a button that says something like "Desktop View ." Trying clicking that and then see if twinkle works. --Puddleglum ^2.0_{(How's my driving?)} 21:53, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Puddleglum2.0: Yep it works now. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 21:54, 1 May 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.

@Puddleglum2.0: I’m not 100% sure on this, but I think that a good faith edit is one that, while it may cause damage, wasnt meant to harm Wikipedia. On the other hand, a vandalism edit deliberately sabotages Wikipedia. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 22:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Spot on! The key difference between good faith and vandalism is the intent. Nice job! BTW, you can answer as many questions as you want without me grading; I'll grade 'em after you've finished. --Puddleglum ^2.0_{(How's my driving?)} 22:13, 1 May 2020 (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. Place diffs below

Good faith:

Special:Diff/954341730 Not helpful, but I don’t think this was meant as vandalism.

very borderline here; it was probably vandalism, but we can't know for sure, so it's always good to WP:AGF when in doubt.

Special:Diff/954342306 I think the guy just wanted to say hi. Almost definitely good faith, IMO.

Special:Diff/954342979 The person just wanted to share his opinion. Not helpful, but I don’t think it’s vandalism.

Vandalism:

Special:Diff/954342183 Pretty sure that someone saying that a person died today from an “Anal implosion” isn’t made in good faith.

Special:Diff/954342926 Judging by the username and the edit, this is definitely not in good faith.

Special:Diff/954343215 This one was pretty borderline. Judgin by the username, though, I don’t think the person doing this is doing it in good faith.

@Puddleglum2.0: here are my 3 examples of each. I kinda went with my instincts on these... Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 23:14, 1 May 2020 (UTC) Thanks

@Total Eclipse 2017: awesome - See below section. --Puddleglum ^2.0_{(How's my driving?)} 23:42, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

A note about Twinkle

Use either the green, blue, or red "rollback" links, since they save a more relevant edit summary

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.

Please answer the following questions

So that they have a chance to realize that what they’re doing isnt acceptable, and that if they continue they might be blocked. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 23:58, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

warnings also serve as a sort of paper trail for admins if the vandal ever gets reported. --Puddleglum ^2.0_{(How's my driving?)} 00:35, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

When a user performs very disruptive vandalism that immediately requires that the user know that they need to stop or they will be blocked.Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 00:01, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Yup - defamatory.content on a WP:BLP, etc. --Puddleglum ^2.0_{(How's my driving?)} 00:35, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, you should. You do it by putting “subst:” directly before the template name. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 23:58, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

re-reads pages given* Report them to the admins at WP:AIAV Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 00:01, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

--Puddleglum ^2.0_{(How's my driving?)} 00:35, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Puddleglum2.0: Questions answered. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 00:02, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Total Eclipse 2017: cool -- next section below. --Puddleglum ^2.0_{(How's my driving?)} 00:38, 2 May 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 being vandalized by more than one non-autoconfirmed user or IP (if it was just one user they would probably just get blocked). Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 17:57, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

the vandalism must also be constant and persistent.

In what circumstances should a page be pending changes protected?

When some of the IP edits to the article are good, but some are vandalism. This is so the good IP edits could be added to the article. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 17:57, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

In what circumstances should a page be fully protected?

A page should be fully protected for a short time when a large amount of edit warring occurs. It should be temporary, though, as vast majority of editors are not admins Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 17:57, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

the vandalism must also come from confirmed users.

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

I think when it’s repeatedly recreated as a page that’s eligible for CSD (I did my research for these)... Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 17:57, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

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

In the case of persistent disruption to the talk page. However, the policy says that the article and talk page should very rarely be semi protected at the same time. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 17:20, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

correct.

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).

@Puddleglum2.0: I answered the questions- wasn’t really sure on the last one though. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 17:58, 2 May 2020 (UTC) @Total Eclipse 2017: great job -- I'll put up the next section after you answer that second-to-last one. If you're having trouble, just ask, we'll talk. --Puddleglum ^2.0_{(How's my driving?)} 00:28, 4 May 2020 (UTC) @Puddleglum2.0: Ready for next section. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 17:20, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

Please read WP:CSD.

In what circumstances should a page be speedy deleted?

@Puddleglum2.0: When it meets one of the speedy deletion criteria. (I read the CSD page 4 times to make sure I’d get these right...) Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 16:52, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

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.

Scenario 1

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.

I would probably tag it with G10, but I think A7 could also apply. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 16:55, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

G10.

Scenario 2

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.

Definitely G11. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 16:55, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Scenario 3

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.

Umm... I think this would be A7. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 16:55, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Scenario 4

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: Ritchie333 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.)

I don’t think this is worth speedying, but its content could maybe get merged with The Nice? Not so sure about this one. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 17:01, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

a redirect would be best.

Scenario 5

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?

G12. However, my understanding of copyright is, even if it doesn’t say “all rights reserved”, it’s still copyrighted unless it explicitly says it isn’t... Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 17:01, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Scenario 6

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

I don’t think I would CSD it, but I would use Google Translator to translate it, then say on its talk page that the translation happened. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 18:55, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

I would probably stick it in a translator then see if it meets any CSD criteria in a different language. (Copyvio, attack, vandalism, etc.) If not, just flag it for translation.

Scenario 7

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

Well, according to the policy, if that user is the only contributor, that can be seen as a G7... Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 17:06, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Scenario 8

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?

If it’s in user space, I wouldn’t touch it. (My userpage is barely more coherent =D) However, if it was an article, I would tag it G2. I would have tagged it G1, but the “pie is great” on the end prevents that, since it’s understandable... Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 17:04, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Correct on the first part, but G1 works here, as pieisgreat has no context.

Here you go Total Eclipse 2017; again, apologies for the wait! --Puddleglum ^2.0_{(How's my driving?)} 00:41, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@Puddleglum2.0: Questions answered. Wasn’t sure on Scenario 6, but I took a stab at it anyway. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 18:55, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@Total Eclipse 2017: graded -- next section coming up. --Puddleglum ^2.0_{(How's my driving?)} 19:04, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Revision Deletion and Oversight

Please read WP:Revdel and WP:Oversight.

Occasionally, vandalism will be so extreme that it needs to be removed from publicly accessible revision histories - the criteria for these are described in the articles above. Revision deletion hides the edit from anyone except admins; oversight provides an even greater level of restriction, with only oversighters able to see the comments. The threshold between the two is quite fine - I've been on the wrong side of it a few times. If you are in doubt as to whether revdel or oversight is required, the best bet is to forward it to the oversight team - whoever reviews it will be able to make the decision and act on it.

If you believe an edit needs to be revision deleted, how would you request that?

I would ask an admin, either by email (which I dont have unfortunately) or on their talk page. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 19:20, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Y
If you believe that it's so serious it needs oversight, how would you request that?

I would email the oversight team. (Talk page definitely shouldn’t be used if the edit requires oversight.) Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 19:20, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@Puddlelgum2.0: I’m ready for next section. Hopefully I never have to implement what I learned in this section... Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) (Origin of the username) 19:20, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@Total Eclipse 2017: your answers are correct - just a couple notes. If you don't have email, try using WP:IRC for revdel and oversight; you'll find the correct channels at that link. preferably, don't leave a revdel request on a admin talk page - they're highly watched so everyone will see the bad edit. Nice job! --Puddleglum ^2.0_{(How's my driving?)} 00:48, 6 May 2020 (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 (note that you can set this to view 500 users rather than the default 50 - I find that easier to scroll through quickly, and the link on my userpage takes you there directly). 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 (words like admin, sysop etc), usernames that impersonate other people (either famous people, or other Wikipedians' usernames), 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 particular 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). If you need more information before deciding what to do, explain what more you need.

Possible impersonation of Bill Gates. Would need to review contributions before taking action. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(talk) (Origin of the username)} 18:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

yup. It might be fine, their name might be Bob Gates or something, but yes, wait to see for promotional edits.

Company name. If they edit, will report to UAA. Their edits will likely be promotional...

I found out that there’s a user called Girth Summit, so would report to UAA for impersonation. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(talk) (Origin of the username)} 18:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

yes - he was actually my CVUA trainer. =)

I think this one would be fine as a username, however, would check their contributions. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(talk) (Origin of the username)} 18:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Misleading username. If user edited, would report to UAA. (A lot of these seem to be “wait until user edits”...) Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(talk) (Origin of the username)} 18:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

yes - unless it's offensive or impersonation, always wait for the user to edit.

Impersonation of... well, me. Would report to UAA. (On completely unrelated note, there was no total eclipse in 2018 that I know of;)Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(talk) (Origin of the username)} 18:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

if there was an eclipse in 2018, it would be fine.

Impersonation of Donald Trump. Would report to UAA if the user edits. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(talk) (Origin of the username)} 18:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

immediately report of its clear impersonation.

Offensive username. Would wait until user edited to report them though.

always report to USA immediately for offensive usernames.

Apparently there’s a user named Oshwah, so Iwould report for impersonation. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(talk) (Origin of the username)} 18:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

I think this one would be fine. Maybe politely ask them to change it though? Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(talk) (Origin of the username)} 18:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Impersonation of... well, you. Would report to UAA. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(talk) (Origin of the username)} 18:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

@Puddleglum2.0: Ready for grading.

@Total Eclipse 2017: nice job. --Puddleglum ^2.0_{(How's my driving?)} 19:18, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Emergencies

I hope this never happens, but as you participate in counter-vandalism on Wikipedia, it is possible that you may come across a threat of physical harm. In the past, we have had vandals submit death threats in Wikipedia articles, as well as possible suicide notes. The problem is, Wikipedia editors don't have the proper training to evaluate whether these threats are credible in most cases.

Fortunately, there's a guideline for cases like this. Please read Wikipedia:Responding to threats of harm carefully and respond to the questions below.

Who should you contact when you encounter a threat of harm on Wikipedia? What details should you include in your message?

I should email emergency@wikimedia.org. I would include a diff of the threat of harm as the details. I would also go on the admins IRC channel (or email them) and ask them to revdel the post. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(talk) (Origin of the username)} 19:28, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Y yup -- actually, oversight would probably be better in this scenario.
What should you do if an edit looks like a threat of harm, but you suspect it may just be an empty threat (i.e. someone joking around)?

That’s not up for me to decide. I would still email emergency@wikimedia.org and let them decide whether it’s credible or not. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(talk) (Origin of the username)} 19:28, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

yes.

@Puddleglum2.0: I hope I never have to utilize what I learned in this section. Have you ever had to? Also, ready to grade. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(talk) (Origin of the username)} 19:28, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

@Total Eclipse 2017: graded, nice job! This stuff rarely happens (it's never happened to me,) but we want to make sure you know what to do even in a very unlikely scenario. Cheers, --Puddleglum ^2.0_{(How's my driving?)} 19:41, 6 May 2020 (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 attention is what they crave, and if we give them recognition, it may cause them to do more vandalism. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(talk) (Origin of the username)} 20:00, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

How can you tell between a good faith user asking why you reverted their edit, and a troll trying to harass you? (Note - this is not a trick question, but it's not a straightforward one. Have a think about it, make your suggestions, and then we'll have a discussion. There isn't necessarily a clear right answer, but I'd be interested to know the factors you'd consider.)

We may have to discuss this some, but here’s what my interpretation of the difference is. I think a good faith editor would act confused, and ask you why you reverted their edit. On the other hand, I think a troll would basically rant at you and do whatever they can to provoke you and make you angry. I may be wrong here, but that’s what I think is the difference. (Hence, why we should probably discuss this in more detail.) Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(talk) (Origin of the username)} 20:04, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

that's a good answer! Remember, if there's even a seedling of doubt between an editor being GF or a vandal, always assume good faith.

@Puddleglum2.0: Ready for next section. We may have to discuss question 2 of the next section... Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(talk) (Origin of the username)} 20:08, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

The next section involves rollback, a tool that is useful in counter-vandalism but not a necessary part. If you'd like to learn about it and aquire it, tell me and I'll put up the section, otherwise its time for the Final Exam! (Its not as scary as it sounds. ) --Puddleglum ^2.0_{(How's my driving?)} 19:44, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

I think I’ll do the rollback section. It sounds interesting... Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(talk) (Origin of the username)} 20:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Rollback

In light of your recent contributions, I expect that if you apply for the rollback permission at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback, an administrator would be happy to enable it on your account, but first we should demonstrate that you understand what the tool is, and the responsibilities that go along with it.

The rollback user right allows trusted and experienced counter vandalism operatives to revert vandalism with the click of one button, not unlike the "rollback" button that you've already been using in Twinkle. This would give you a new rollback button in addition to the three you've been seeing in Twinkle. The new rollback button is slightly faster than the Twinkle rollback button, but more importantly, having the rollback right gives you access to downloadable counter-vandalism software like Huggle and Stiki.

If you're interested, take a look at our rollback guideline at WP:Rollback and feel free to answer the questions below. The rollback right is not an essential part of this course, so if you're not interested, feel free to say so and we'll skip this section.

Describe when the rollback button may be used and when it may not be used.

The rollback button would only be used in cases where its clear vandalism-basically in places where I would use the red [Rollback VANDAL] twinkle button. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(Stay at home and wear a mask to prevent the spread)} 17:31, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Hopefully this will never happen, but it does occasionally. If you accidentally use rollback, what should you do?

Undo the change manually, with the edit summary “accidental use of rollback”. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(Stay at home and wear a mask to prevent the spread)} 17:31, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Should you use rollback if you want to leave an edit summary?

No. I would just use Twinkle for that. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(Stay at home and wear a mask to prevent the spread)} 17:31, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

@Total Eclipse 2017: If you don't mind, include a link to this course and ping me in your rollback request so I can support your application. (I can't enable it as I am not an admin.) Good luck! --Puddleglum ^2.0_{(How's my driving?)} 00:37, 8 May 2020 (UTC) @Puddleglum2.0: Questions answered. Will put in request for rollback. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(Stay at home and wear a mask to prevent the spread)} 17:31, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Nice job Total Eclipse 2017! All of them are correct. Here's the final exam, take as much time as you need and ping when you're done. Good luck! --Puddleglum ^2.0_{(How's my driving?)}

Final Exam

Please read each of the following questions carefully, and ensure that you have responded fully - some of them ask you to expand on what you would do in different situations. When responding to numbered questions please start your response with "#:" (except where shown otherwise - with **). You don't need to worry about signing your answers.

Part 1

For each of these examples, please state whether you would call the edit(s) described as vandalism or good faith edit, a reason for that, and how you would deal with the situation (ensuring you answer the questions where applicable).

A user inserts 'ektgbi0hjndf98' into an article, having never edited before. Would you treat it differently if they had done the same thing once before?
A user adds their signature to an article after once being given a {{Uw-articlesig}} warning. What would you the next time they did it? What about if they kept doing it after that?
A user adds 'John Smith is the best!' into an article. What would you do the first time? What about if they kept doing it after that?
A user adds 'I can edit this' into an article. The first time, and times after that?
A user removes sourced information from an article, with the summary 'this is wrong'. First time, and after that? What would be different if the user has a history of positive contributions compared with a history of disruptive contributions?

Answers

I would call this a good-faith test edit if they had never edited before. However, if they had done it once before and had been warned for it, I would start to believe it’s keyboard-mashing vandalism

I would call this a good-faith edit the first time, but after that, I would consider it vandalism, and use the “disruptive editing” series of templates, but explain that it’s related to signatures in the “optional” field.

The first time, I would probably think it’s a test edit, and call it such in the warning, but after that, I would call it disruptive editing. The theme here seems to be, the first time, the editors don’t know better, but after that, they should know better.

yup - unless it's blatant, always good to AGF.

Definitely would consider good-faith test edit the first time, and maybe the second, but after that, I would consider it intentional disruption and revert it accordingly.I

for sure - test-edit warning would be best.

The first time, I would probably give them a “blanking of content” level 1 warning, and assume it’s in good faith. After that, I would probably assume that the editor has some sort of connection with the article. Also, I would be more forgiving if the user had good contributions, but if they were mostly bad, I would be less lenient.

Part 2

Which templates warning would give an editor in the following scenarios. If you don't believe a template warning is appropriate outline the steps (for example what you would say) you would take instead.

A user blanks Cheesecake.
A user trips edit filter for trying to put curse words on Derek Jeter.
A user trips edit summary filter for repeating characters on Denis Menchov.
A user puts "CHRIS IS GAY!" on Atlanta Airport.
A user section blanks without a reason on David Newhan.
A user adds random characters to Megan Fox.
A user adds 'Tim is really great' to Great Britain.
A user adds 'and he has been arrested' to Tim Henman.
A user blanks Personal computer, for the fifth time, they have had no warnings or messages from other users.
A user blanks Personal computer, for the fifth time, they have had four warnings including a level 4 warning.
A user blanks your userpage and replaced it with 'I hate this user' (you have had a number of problems with this user in the past).
A user adds File:Example.jpg to Taoism.

Answers

{Uw-delete}

{Uw-attempt}

{Uw-efsummary}

Definitely {uw-vandalism}.

{uw-delete}

{uw-test} the first time, and {uw-vandalism} or {uw-disruptive} after that

probably vandalism warning.

{uw-test} the first time, and possibly {uw-disruptive} after that.

Vandalism template would be best, not disruptive.

Probably {uw-biog}...

Hmm. Since they’ve done it 5 times, I would probably do {uw-vandalism4im}...

how 'bout definetly? 😀

I would take them on a nice little trip... straight to Wikipedia:AIAV.

I would probably use {uw-npa}

you could also bring it to ANI.

Simple: {uw-image}

test would also work.

Part 3

What CSD tag you would put on the following articles? (The content below represents the entire content of the article).

Check out my Twitter page (link to Twitter page)!
Josh Marcus is the coolest kid in London.
Joe goes to [[England]] and comes home !
A Smadoodle is an animal that changes colors with its temper.
Stupid Wiki Admins!

Answers

Probably G11.

Hmm. Probably A7...

A7.

actaully, A1 would be best here; as this is an article that has zero context whatsoever. A7 might work, but A1 would be much closer to the mark.

G3, with template {db-hoax}, unless there’s something I don’t know about...

G10. Definitely.

Part 4

Are the following new (logged in) usernames violations of the username policy? Describe why or why not and what you would do about it (if they are a breach).

TheMainStreetBand
Fartypants
Brian's Bot
sdadfsgadgadjhm,hj,jh,jhlhjlkfjkghkfuhlkhj
WikiAdmin
12:12, 23 June 2012
PMiller
OfficialJustinBieber

Answers

Yes, since it implies being an organization. Would report to UAA, though I would note that “Joe of TheMainStreetBand” would be fine...

Offensive name. Straight to UAA.

It's not offensive to a disruptive level - I honestly think that a discussion and pointer to WP:CHU would be best. All this assuming of course that they have not edited before.

Unless it’s an actual bot, it’s not allowed. UAA.editors

Probably fine, though I might ask them to change it, since that name’s virtually unpingable..

if they edit disruptivelt, take 'em to UAA, it's disruptive enough to warrant a trip with bad edits, not without.

Unless they are an admin, unacceptable name. UAA.

Names that look like time stamps are specifically mentioned as unacceptable. UAA.

Probably fine...

unless they start COI editing some person's article with PMiller initials.

Impersonation of Justin Bieber. UAA.

Part 5

Answer the following questions based on your theory knowledge gained during your instruction.

Can you get in an edit war while reverting vandalism (which may or may not be obvious)?
Where and how should vandalism-only accounts be reported?
Where and how should complex abuse be reported?
Where and how should blatant username violations be reported?
Where and how should personal attacks against other editors be reported?
Where and how should an edit war be reported?
Where and how should ambiguous violations of WP:BLP be reported?

Answers

If it is obvious, the edit-warring policy makes an exception for that. However, if it isn’t, I probably could get in an edit war, and would have to be careful...

<red>can you tell me which policy might get you in trouble?</red>

@Puddleglum2.0: the three-revert rule. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(Stay at home and wear a mask to prevent the spread)} 22:09, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:AIAV.

Either Wikipedia:AN or Wikipedia:ANI. However, I will note that I visited ANI once, and vowed never to come back unless absolutely necessary...

<red>just curious, what happened in that report?</red>

@Puddleglum2.0: I didn’t make a report, I just clicked the link... and found editors basically ripping each other’s heads off. I vowed never to come back unless absolutely necessary...Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(Stay at home and wear a mask to prevent the spread)} 22:11, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:UAA.

Probably also Wikipedia:ANI.

Wikipedia:AN/EW.

Well, I did some searching and found Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard, so probably there.

@Puddleglum2.0: Questions answered. Just wondering, what happens if I failed? Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(Stay at home and wear a mask to prevent the spread)} 20:57, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Total Eclipse: awesome, I'll take a look soon! Took a cursory glance, and you definitely passed, but if you didn't I would ask you to read up on policies I think you need work on and then post an alternate exam with a focus on areas you're having trouble with. Stay well. -- puddleglum^2.0 21:06, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Total Eclipse 2017: sorry, I blanked on the name for some reason. -- puddleglum^2.0 21:07, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Puddleglum2.0: Thats good. I was a little worried... also, like your new sig! Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(Stay at home and wear a mask to prevent the spread)} 21:09, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Completion

@Total Eclipse 2017: Congratulations from both myself and all of the instructors at the Counter Vandalism Unit Academy, on your successful completion of my CVUA instruction and graduation from the Counter Vandalism Unit Academy. You completed your final exam with a score of 95%. Well done! -- puddleglum^2.0 19:02, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

As a graduate you are entitled to display the following userbox (make sure you replace your enrollee userbox) as well as the graduation message posted on your talk page (this can be treated the same as a barnstar).
{{User CVUA|graduate}}:

This user is a Counter-Vandalism Unit Academy graduate.