User:Thanoscar21/CVUA/Empire AS

Hello Empire AS, 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. You already know how this page works, so let's get started where you left off — CSD! I'm going to grade the answers left here.

Protection and speedy deletion

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.

Apply G10 or A11 as subject was discovered by creator.

Y

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.

It seems like an advertisement so G11 would be applied.

Y

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.

I'll wait for some time. If it isn't updated then I would apply A7. But it provides some verifiable information such as birthdate, albums and subscribers.

Y

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.)

Google search provides 2 articles The Nice and Hanx, but the former also includes Lemmy, so A9 maybe workable.

This one's a tough one — if he actually was in the Hall of Fame, then that would indicate notability. A redirect to The Nice 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?

Apply G12, if it doesn't have the statement at bottom, then it will be in public domain.

Y — the first part is correct, but if it's from a website that has "all Right Reserved" on it, then it is not public domain.

Scenario 6

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

Apply A2

Y — add a translation tag as well.

Scenario 7

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

Apply G7

Y — A3 also works

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 the page was created in mainspace then apply G1. If the page was created in user namespace like sandbox then it shouldn't be nominated as the user is testing.

Y

Empire AS, mostly good, just that public domain — that's pretty serious, it'll probably get revdelled, more about which is below. Another thing, you might want to enable a CSD log in your Twinkle preferences; doing so helps you keep track of your taggings. I only turned mine on a few days ago. Thanoscar21^talk_{contributions} 23:18, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanoscar21, I've enabled PROD, CSD & XfD logs. In the past, whenever I opened this page, I failed to load the preferences. Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 08:57, 2 January 2021 (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?

To request a revision deletion, I'd reach an active administrator in the Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to handle RevisionDelete requests. If privacy is necessary, I'd email them rather than leaving a message on their talk page.

Y

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

The best method is to request the oversight team by emailing them. However, there are also other methods like difficult IRC method.

Y — IRC's not too tough, I'll tell you about that below.

Thanoscar21, Thank you for starting. I guess my answers would be right. However, I want a RevDel on my talk page archive but I also don't want my email address to be disclosed. What can I do now? I also don't know how to use the IRC method. Hope the ping worked. Waiting for the next section. Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 11:06, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Empire AS, it'll only get revdelled if it meets one of these criteria. As long as the revdel request doesn't contain any personal doesn't contain any sensitive info (addresses, phone numbers), you can just leave a message at WP:ANI. If it's sensitive, you can email the admin; Wikipedia will not disclose your email. All that the admin will see is "Email from Empire AS". Your email will be safe. If you want to use IRC, you can click here. "Nick" means "nickname", so you can enter Empire AS there. Click on one of the names on the right side, click on "send a message", and then send the diff there. Does that make sense? You can ask me to clarify if it's confusing. Next section below. Thanoscar21^talk_{contributions} 18:20, 2 January 2021 (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.

BGates

I think this is a misleading username as it refers to Bill Gates. Moreover it also violates BPL policy per WP:BLPABUSE. Report to WP:UAA

Y — it could also be "Bob" Gates, or something like that, so maybe leave a talk page note.

LMedicalCentre

A promotional name. Report to UAA.

Y

G1rth Summ1t

Ah Girth Summit, I know him. Misleading and disruptive username. Talk to change otherwise report to UAA.

Y

JoeAtBurgerKing

Acceptable per WP:ISU.

Y

JoeTheSysop

Misleading username. Report to UAA.

Y

Emp1re A$

Misleading and disruptive username. Talk to change the name otherwise report to UAA.

Y

D0naldTrump

Much like BGates. Violates BLP policy as well as misleading. Report to UAA.

Y

Yallaredumb

Google search shows a YouTuber and Tiktoker with this name. Seems alright.

N, it's offensive to people, so that'd be to WP:UAA.

Oshwaah

No problem. Seems alright.

N, there's an admin named Oshwah, so disruptive. WP:UAA.

😜

Non-script username. Only talk to change username.

Y

Than0scartwentyone

Appears to be your. Misleading and disruptive username. Would talk to them to change otherwise report.

Y

Thanoscar21, I'd first talk with the user to change the name. In case of disagreement, I'd invite other users to give their opinion. For immediate action and response, I'd report the user at WP:UAA. I'm a bit unclear about disruptive usernames. Can you give me any example? Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 19:41, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Empire AS, a disruptive username is a name that's not helpful. That's like, "JeffBezos", "I'mTheBest", "Wikipedia is useless", basically, a username that's a lie or offensive. It just doesn't help the encyclopedia. You did great, next section below. Thanoscar21^talk_{contributions} 19:55, 2 January 2021 (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 send an email to emergency@wikimedia.org or Special:EmailUser/Emergency including page name and diffs of threat. I should also contact with administrators through email or IRC.

Y

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)?

I would treat it calmly and peacefully. As I'm sure that user is just joking and can't harm me. Moreover, I think that it would be better to block such users by reporting them to an administrator.

N, no matter what, we always treat such things seriously, so no matter how silly you think it is, it should be reported.

Thanoscar21, looks all fine. Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 08:17, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Empire AS, see my note above. Don't worry — this has only happened to me once, so it's not something common. Next section below. Thanoscar21^talk_{contributions} 16:44, 3 January 2021 (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?

We deny recognition to vandals and trolls to reduce the basic and common motivators of vandalism. By denying recognition, a user may stop their disruptive behaviour as it discourages them. Moreover if I confirms recognition then they would be encouraged to increase vandalism.

Y

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.)

I think that a good faith user would ask kindly in a friendly good tone and way (like Hi, please explain why you've reverted my edit? or Why did you revert my helpful edit? or in any other good way). Whereas a troll's tone realizes about them. They would often use bad words and threatening words in most cases (like How dare you reverted my edit? or This is a warning to you not to revert my edit otherwise you'd pay).

Y - mostly, sometimes there are editors that get angry, but for the most part you're right.

Thanoscar21, second question was a bit difficult but I explained what I think. Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 19:14, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

@Empire AS: all good, next section below. Thanoscar21^talk_{contributions} 19:19, 3 January 2021 (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.

Rollback button should be used only to revert vandalism, contributions of a banned or blocked user or malfunctioning bot or own edits in own userspace. It should not be used to reverted good faith edits or other non-vandalism edits on Wikipedia.

Y

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

In such cases, it is better to rollback that edit again with an edit summary like Accidental use or Caused by mistake. We may also use a rollback confirmation script to avoid such mistakes.

Y

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

Well if I want to leave an edit summary then I'd have to do it manually by adding &summary= in the URL. Also the rollback summary script can help us to leave an edit summary as given here.

Y, you'd have to use Twinkle or RedWarn for that. You could use a script, but it's just easier to use TW/RW.

Thanoscar21, I expect that the answers would be right. Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 19:40, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

@Empire AS: good, just see my note above. If you want the Rollback right, you can ask for it here and I'll drop a note supporting you. Final exam below. You don't need to do it all at once, you can do one section today, and another tomorrow, if you want. Thanoscar21^talk_{contributions} 19:59, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanoscar21, thank you. But I don't want rollback rights now because I may be inactive for 3 to 4 months. However, after my return, I'd make a request there + a ping to you too. I'd finish this work tomorrow as I've not enough time now. Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 20:04, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

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).

1. 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?

   Either good faith edit or vandalism, the user may be testing that whether they can edit or not or may be trying to harm the article. After reverting their edit, I'd warn them. I'd warn them with second level template if they have repeated the test edit and I wouldn't assume good faith.

   Y, it should be good faith, but everything else is right.

1. 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?

   Disruptive but not vandalism, as they have been warned. Next time, I'd warn them to stop this otherwise they would be reported. If the kept doing it again and again even after this, I'd report them to WP:ANI.

   Y - WP:AIV would be better for this

1. 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?

   Good faith edit, although disruptive, they would be warned first by {{uw-disruptive1}}. In case of repeating this, they would be warned by ascending templates and at last would be reported to WP:ANI.

   Y, assuming WP:AIV.

1. A user adds 'I can edit this' into an article. The first time, and times after that?

   Not vandalism but disruptive, the user is testing to edit. First warn them with {{uw-test1}}. If they continue even after a 4 level warning, they would be reported to ANI.

   Y, again, WP:AIV

1. 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?

   Good faith edit, as they are removing information which they consider false, not sourced, if their intent was to remove this information with not this reason, it would be vandalism. I'd warn them with {{uw-delete1}} and if they don't stop this, they would be warned with another template. Morever, I would also explain them the policy of Verifiablity, not truth (WP:VNT) to stop removing sourced information if they had positive contributions too.

   Y

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.

1. A user blanks Cheesecake.

   Warn them using {{uw-blank1}}.

   Y

1. A user trips edit filter for trying to put curse words on Derek Jeter.

   Warn with {{uw-attempt1}}.

   Y

1. A user trips edit summary filter for repeating characters on Denis Menchov.

   Warn by {{uw-efsummary}}

   Y

1. A user puts "CHRIS IS WEIRD!" on Atlanta Airport.

   Use {{uw-nor1}}.

   N, I'd do disruptive editing and then vandalism, OR refers to research regarding the subject of the article.

1. A user section blanks without a reason on David Newhan.

   Warn by {{uw-delete1}}.

   Y

1. A user adds random characters to Megan Fox.

   Use {{uw-test1}} or {{uw-biog1}}.

   Y

1. A user adds 'Tim is really great' to Great Britain.

   Warn with {{uw-nor1}}.

   N, see the "CHRIS IS WEIRD" note

1. A user adds 'and he has been arrested' to Tim Henman.

   Use {{uw-biog1}} and {{uw-defamatory1}}

   Y

1. A user blanks Personal computer, for the fifth time, they have had no warnings or messages from other users.

   Warn with {{uw-delete4im}} because they are not warned.

   Y

1. A user blanks Personal computer, for the fifth time, they have had four warnings including a level 4 warning.

   Report to ANI. Nor further warning.

   Y, the warning part is right, but you should take it to WP:AIV.

1. 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).

   Use {{uw-agf1}} and {{uw-harass1}}.

   N, if you had problems with this user in the past, you should just take it to WP:ANI or maybe leave a 4im warning.

1. A user adds File:Example.jpg to Taoism.

   Warn with {{uw-image1}}.

   Y

Part 3

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

1. Check out my Twitter page (link to Twitter page)!

   Apply A3 as it contains an external link only. (Does G11 apply here?)

   Y, G11.

1. Josh Marcus is the coolest kid in London.

   Tag with A1 (as it has nearly no context) or A11 (as it was discovered by the author).

   N, I'd say A7.

1. Joe goes to [[England]] and comes home !

   A1 due to having no context. (A11 doesn't apply as the subject is not observed by author only)

   Y

1. A Smadoodle is an animal that changes colors with its temper.

   Tag with A7 ({{db-animal}}) or may be A11 also.

   Y

1. wiki is annoying and useless dont use it

   Use G3, obvious misinformation. (A11 may also be applied as the subject was discovered by author without indicating its importance)

   Y

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).

1. TheMainStreetBand

   Seems to be promotional username. It also implies to be shared use. Report at UAA if they disagree to change.

   Y

1. SUBSCRIBETOKURZGESAGT

   Promotional username which says to subscribe a YouTube channel. Talk page note before reporting at UAA.

   Y

1. Brian's Bot

   Misleading username, as it includes the word Bot. Talk to change it if they don't agree then report at WP:UAA.

   Y

1. sdadfsgadgadjhm,hj,jh,jhlhjlkfjkghkfuhlkhj

   Confusing username, first talk page message to change it otherwise report.

   Y

1. WikiAdmin

   Misleading username. Talk page note for change otherwise report.

   Y

1. 12:12, 23 June 2012

   Misleading username as it includes time stamp. Talk page request to change otherwise report at UAA.

   Y

1. PMiller

   May be misleading and BLP violating if it refers to P. Miller. Similar to BGates. Leave a talk page note to change it.

   Y

1. OfficialImranKhan

   Misleading as well as BLP violating username. IRC or email stewards to suppress this and block as well.

   Y: You're right about the block, but you don't need to IRC or email a steward, just a note at WP:UAA would be fine.

Part 5

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

1. Can you get in an edit war while reverting vandalism (which may or may not be obvious)?

   Yes I can. There are high chances that I might get into an edit war while reverting vandalism. Vandals may revert my edit again and again to make me break 3RR but I've to follow 3RR + report that vandals.

   Y - yep, be careful!

1. Where and how should vandalism-only accounts be reported?

   At WP:AIV. We may use Twinkle to report vandalism-only accounts at AIV. To do it manually without twinkle we may use any one of the following codes.

   • To report a logged-in user or user account, use the following template:
     * {{vandal|Username}} Reason stated here. ~~~~
   • To report an anonymous user or IP address, use the following template:
     * {{IPvandal|user IP}} Reason stated here. ~~~~.

   Y

1. Where and how should complex abuse be reported?

   At WP:ANI.

   Y

1. Where and how should blatant username violations be reported?

   At WP:UAA. Twinkle may be used for this purpose but to do it manually, we should use this code. *{{user-uaa|1=Username}} – Reason stated here. ~~~~.

   Y

1. Where and how should personal attacks against other editors be reported?

   At WP:ANI.

   Y

1. Where and how should an edit war be reported?

   At WP:AN3. Twinkle's ARV tool can help us to report users at AN3.

   Y

1. Where and how should ambiguous violations of WP:BLP be reported?

   At WP:BLP/N. Add the name of article in the Create report box, add links to article by {{la|Article name}}, provide diffs and information you think to be corrected.

   Y

Thanoscar21, I've finished my work. Have a look! Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 15:54, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Empire AS, almost done, here a quick question to make sure you understand the difference between ANI and AIV. Thanoscar21^talk_{contributions} 17:13, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

What do you use WP:ANI for and what do you use WP:AIV for?

AIV is for reporting users that are currently engaged in persistent and clear vandalism or spamming. It mainly deals with obviously malicious edits that require no discussion. Moreover, if the vandal has received enough warnings, then they should be reported at AIV. Whereas ANI is to discuss urgent and immediate events and incidents chronic and complex behavioural problems. It mainly deals with personal attacks, complex abuse and disruptive users.

Y

Thanoscar21, answered. Looks fine. Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 18:20, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Completion

Empire AS, 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 '96%. Well done! Thanoscar21^talk_{contributions} 18:27, 4 January 2021 (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.

Question

Thanoscar21 Wow, I completed and succeeded. Thank you. But I want to ask you that can or should I add my name on trainers list of CVUA? Moreover, I see that you don't give NPPS training, are you going to start this or you wouldn't have time to become a trainer there on NPPS? Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 18:34, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Empire AS, I'd wait a few months before becoming a trainer, because having experience is valuable. I graduated the CVUA back in June, and only put my name up a couple of weeks ago. About the NPPSCHOOL, no I don't plan on going into that area right now, because I haven't even attended the NPPSCHOOL. So, yeah, maybe come back around March or April, and you should have sufficient experience to become a trainer! It was fun training you the past week. Happy editing, Thanoscar21^talk_{contributions} 18:37, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

@Thanoscar21:, thank you. I'd act upon your advice.  Thanks. Empire AS ^Talk! 18:40, 4 January 2021 (UTC)