User talk:Washburnmav/adoption

• Edit this subpage • advise xenocidic of updates to this subpage
• Talk pages: Washburnmav • xenocidic

Adoption subpage

As you can see ^^^^ I've copied almost all of our adoption history here. Also, feel free to continue to ask me questions directly on my talk page, especially for anything where you might want opinions from those talk page stalker types that hang out there. If you ask me a question here, just sign your name in the first section of my talk page so I know to come and answer it. If I don't answer you within a day and you've seen that I've been editing, sign again because I might have missed your signature notification. –xeno (talk) 00:25, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Excellent 'pimping'. Much appreciated. Got through my first article cleanup only to have the comp crash and lose everything. Ugh. Washburnmav (talk) 01:00, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

oh man. that sucks big time... =( remember, there's no need to do everything in a single edit (unless you want to join the ranks of the wikidragons or something). by the way, i tweaked the assignment to be 5 instead of 15. obviously do more if you want, but 15 seemed like an awful lot especially if they were major cleanups. –xeno (talk) 01:16, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Ya, thats a little more reasonable, especially if you desire well-rounded adoptees =]. Washburnmav (talk) 01:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

First cleanup attempt

My first crack at a good cleanup has just been finished, I worked on Abington Senior High School. I chose it because I've worked on high school articles in the past and are relatively familiar with them. Ready for feedback...don't bite too hard ;] Washburnmav (talk) 01:33, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

The grammar changes look good. The fact things don't need to have your username in them. The only thing I'd mentioned is you maybe went a little far with the wikilinks. I wouldn't bother linking things like "irony", "respondent", "mosaic" or "prayer". Linking the "separation of church and state" was completely appropriate, though. So in other words, dictionary words often shouldn't be linked, but concepts that might need further explanation should. Hope that helps. –xeno (talk) 01:41, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok I read somewhere that it is courteous to leave your username in the fact templates, is that not the case? Ya, I may have been a little overzealous with the wikilinks, it's just so sad to see such a lack of blue in a paragraph.... Washburnmav (talk) 01:44, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Hrm, actually, it appears you're right! See {{fact}} for usage notes. Never seen that =) I still wouldn't bother though, unless there was a compelling reason...like you really needed to explain why you needed that passage verified or something. Most of the time I just put it as "{{fact}}" (just so) and let a bot come along and date it later. Not a best practice, but, meh ;> –xeno (talk) 01:50, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Round two

I just cleaned up the international section of Adult Swim. I will never take good semicolon usage for granted again... Washburnmav (talk) 18:24, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Looks like good changes to me! –xeno (talk) 22:08, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Numero tres

Cleaned up Dental cement. Washburnmav (talk) 15:56, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Looks like a solid cleanup effort to me. Finally, those "improvements to dental articles" you promised ;> (winces in pain) I think my wisdom teeth are coming in. Didn't know this shit could happen so late - I'm in my late twenties! –xeno (talk) 15:59, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Haha, i'm hitting my twenties in a year or 2 and I don't have mine out yet. You should get in to your dentist to ask about getting them pulled though. As soon as those puppies break the gums they can start pushing all your other teeth out of alignment. And that sucks to fix... Washburnmav (talk) 16:02, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I'm going in today to see about it, I've been having spurts of agonizing pain all weekend. One minor thing is that refs should come after the punctuation and with no space in between the punctuation and the ref. Fixed. –xeno (talk) 16:04, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I knew that I just forgot to go back and look over that part of the article. It's hard to tell in the wikicode, it gets so cluttered with the ref stuff in there. Washburnmav (talk)

• Np. By the way, if this page ever gets too long for your taste, feel free to archive some of it to the User:washburnmav/adoption. –xeno (talk) 16:16, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

One more to go...

Gibson Les Paul Studio

Thanks for the tip, I'll do that. Washburnmav (talk) 21:23, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll have to take a closer look at that one a bit later, but on a quick glance it looked pretty good. It's tough when people just drive-by tag with "cleanup" and then never say on the talk page what they want cleaned up. One thing about wikilinking years... i think the practice is changing somewhat, I'll try to find a link so that we can take a look at what "current practice" is on that. –xeno (talk) 22:04, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Here's the link on dates: Wikipedia:CONTEXT#Dates I haven't read it thoroughly (at home and dealing with a couple different things) but take a look. –xeno (talk) 22:07, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok I went through the changes and they look fine to me. Only thing I should mention is that if a word is linked already in the article, it shouldn't be linked again without a good reason. For example I think I saw you add a link to humbucker when it was already linked in the previous sentence or so. –xeno (talk) 19:39, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Right that was fixed already, I caught myself. I get carried away with wikifying sometimes. Washburnmav (talk) 19:42, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Ah ok I must not have noticed it in the subsequent edits. Great work then. –xeno (talk) 19:45, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Nummer Vier

Lonnie Mack per request from guitar wikiproject. Washburnmav (talk) 17:52, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Looks like a solid cleanup to me! Nice work Y Assignment completed =) –xeno (talk) 18:34, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

• Re [1], FWIW, I don't see any problem whatsoever with assessing articles that you've worked on yourself - as long as you are doing so within the framework of the assessment criteria and being as objective as possible. –xeno (talk) 18:47, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Csd/Xfd

I went ahead and tagged my first 5 pages for deletion. I'm still a little unsure of myself in this field of wikipedia, so would you mind looking over those 5 before I go ahead and finish the assignment (15)? Thanks. Washburnmav (talk) 14:59, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

• Hrm, the GM Card didn't qualify, it was fairly neutral and didn't simply blatantly promote the card.
• List of songs by American artists which reached number-one on the Eurochart Hot 100 would probably be better served by a category, if "#1 on the Eurochart Hot 100" is particularly notable.
• ChampagneChroniKnightCap looks like a solid nom to me, but probably could've been prodded first.
• The Best Of Melanie C unsourced crystal balling, probably a good nom.
• Thomas Otter - I think professors automatically qualify for notability per WP:PROF. You may want to review and possibly withdraw and cleanup the article instead.

I must admit deletion is not one of my strong points. Try WP:NPP to find some stuff that is easier to shoot from the hip like patent nonsense, vandalism, A7's & G10's. participating in deletion discussions for a while would probably give you a better understanding of what articles qualify for AFD. –xeno (talk) 15:13, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

OK thanks, maybe I'll postpone that assignment until I can really dive into the rules of NPP. Washburnmav (talk) 15:47, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Permissions

1. What is a permission?

A permission is an ability that allows a user to perform some action that is not available to the most basic users. These include things simply from editing semi-protected pages, all the way to the ability to hide certain edits (only for stewards).

Correct - well, hiding edits almost completely is done by oversighters, stewards could theoretically grant themselves the oversight ability to do so. Admins can also hide edits, but other admins can see them.

2. What pages are un-registered users able to edit?

Un-registered users are able to edit any page on wikipedia that is not semi or fully protected. Other than that, they are very limited and have little other permissions.

Correct

3. What is an auto confirmed account?

An auto confirmed account is an account that has been verified as a legitimate user. This is done after the user account exists for 4 days and has a certain number of edits (#?).

Correct (10 edits) to be technical, I wouldn't say they've been verified as "legitimate" per se, but they're granted more access

4. What permissions do registered accounts have?

Once a registered account has been auto confirmed, it has all the rights of an unregistered user, plus the right to edit semi-protected pages, move pages, create pages, and upload images and other content.

partially Correct new users are able to create pages right away.

5. Who can grant rollback?

Stewards, Bureaucrats, and Admins all have the right to grant rollback to auto confirmed users.

Correct , but stewards rarely (if ever) grant rollback on the english Wiki. the less populous wikis, though, definitely.

6. What does rollback enable you to do?

Rollback enables a user to revert a page the last edit by a user other than the one targeted for rollback.

Correct

7. What should you not use rollback for?

Rollback should not be used for anything except blatant vandalism.

Correct - but rollback may also be used to rollback your own edits or edits of banned users that might not be blatant vandalism

8. What are administrators able to do?

Admins have access to a lot of tools users don't. These include the ability to grant rollback, delete, view and restore deleted pages, edit the wiki interface, block users, protect pages, and access a special "unwatched" page. O and the ability to delete the main page :P

Correct they also pwn

9. How do you request adminship?

Requests for adminship are done at WP:RFA, where users are nominated, and then a discussion ensues. Generally, a 75% consensus is needed for a user to pass an RFA, but this percent can differ.

Correct

10. What are bureaucrats main duties?

A bureaucrat's main duties are promoting a user's status, altering bots access levels, and renaming accounts.

Correct

11. What technical abilities do stewards have?

Stewards have the abilities to promote or demote any user level on all wiki projects. The title of 'steward' only refers to them having the ability to edit permissions.

Correct except maybe "founder". you probably need a dev for that =)

12. What does checkuser enable a user to check?

The checkuser tool enables a user to check the IP address a user is editing from and when it was accessed. It is normally used only in controversial WP:SSP debates.

Correct they can also check some other stuff like the browser and version , XFF headers, and such

13. What is oversight?

Oversight is a tool that allows the user to remove an edit from public view in the edit history. This is generally only used in legal situations.

Correct , or situations where sensitive personal information like phone numbers have been posted

14. What type of a user must you be to be granted oversight?

Oversight is only granted to a user with a specific need for it, and even then normally only to those in the arbitration committee.

Correct

 Great work! –xeno (talk) 21:44, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Those are kinda fun, I learned quite a bit, despite thinking I had a good grasp of wikipedia permissions before reading it. Cheers to being well informed :) Washburnmav (talk) 22:03, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism 101

1. What is vandalism?

In a nutshell, vandalism is an edit to wikipedia that does not help in anyway, and is generally just unconstructive

Correct

2. List 3 situations where a edit which could be considered vandalism, may not actually be vandalism.

1) If a user is moving content to another place and forgets to include an edit summary saying the move is in progress, it could be construed as 'removal of content' vandalism. 2) Edits to articles that deal with vulgar or sexual content are often immediately dismissed as vandalism due to their nature, despite being constructive. 3) Users removing warning templates from their own talk pages is commonly mistaken as vandalism (guilty!), whereas in truth it is allowed.

Correct

3. What are obvious indicators of a vandalism edit while watching recent changes?

An edit summary indicating the user 'replaced content with:...' or 'blanked the page'. Another strong indicator is a bold kb change, either in green or red, indicating a large edit to a page.

Correct - redlinked user&talk pages is also a good indicator - and if it's constructive - a user that needs to be welcomed =)

4. How do you revert vandalism?

Vandalism can be done many ways, including manually (through recent changes & undo), with twinkle, with huggle, or other means. It should all be done with WP:AGF in mind, however, and been done in a WP:CIVIL manner.

Correct

5. What warning template would you use if a user removed or blanked all the content from a page?

I would use the {{subst:uw-delete1}} template in this instance.

Correct - increasing the warning level as required

6. What warning template would you use if a user add the words "i really hate wikipedia!" to an article?

In this instance I would use the {{subst:uw-vandalism1}} template.

Correct - but NPOV would work as well if you were feeling cheeky ;>

7. How do you add an article to your watchlist?

To add an article to your watchlist, you simply click the 'watch' tab at the top of the article page in question.

Correct - or set your prefs to automatically watch articles you edit

8. If you misuse tools such as Twinkle, what could happen?

When using a tool such as Twinkle, you are completely responsible for anything that the tool does. Therefore you are subject to the same consequences whether you are using a tool or not, the use of the tool itself is not an excuse for misuse. If a user is shown to be misusing Twinkle, he/she is subject to a block.

Correct

YNice work again! 100%

If I may suggest an additional question, or even one to replace #6. I think that question is too run of the mill vandalism. When I see others reverting vandalism my biggest pet peeve is the lack of discretion and detail. Instead of listing an obvious 'test edit' with a test edit warning, they just press the big red VANDALISM button. I think a question re a test edit such as image:example.jpg or 'TESTSTST' would be more pertinent. This are both edits I've encountered.

Yes - please be bold and make the changes yourself =) Feel free to add questions as well. I didn't write these assignments. –xeno (talk) 17:03, 21 August 2008 (UTC)