Vandalism is an edit made to Wikipedia which may be non-helpful or may not be seen as very productive, it could include writing rude comments about someone in article for example. - Partly correct: This answer isn't quite on the money. I'd have liked to see more information on what vandalism actually is, as this is a bit vague, and doesn't for me quite tie down the difference between vandalism and not vandalism. But it's an OK answer.
2 List 3 situations where an edit which could be considered vandalism, may not actually be vandalism.
Disruptive editing is an example of something which may be considered as vandalism but which isn't vandalism as it doesn't affect the integrity of Wikipedia.
Editing tests by new/experimenting users are also not seen as vandalism unless they persist with the editing tests once welcomed or warned that they should use the Sandbox. - Partly correct: These answers are fine, but there's only two - I did ask for three :) Attention to detail is important.
3 What are obvious indicators of a vandalism edit while watching recent changes?
For example when the pages are tagged with possible libel or vandalism which may be triggered by the edit
Also in the edit summary it may mention that the editor blanked the page
If an IP address edits a page and there are already the above details given then this too may also indicate that there is a case of vandalism because they are staying anonymous. - Partly correct: Mainly due to the comment about the edit maybe being vandalism because they're editing as an anon. Anti-IP bias is a real sticky point for me. It's important to remember that anons actually add the majority of the content on Wikipedia, and not all anons are vandals. Edits should be assessed based on the edits themselves, not whether an anon or a user made them.
4 How do you revert vandalism?
One way in which to revert vandalism is to click undo next to the edit summary of the edit and to provide a reason for the reversion or undoing of the vandalism, it would also be suitable to write a message at the said user's page.
Another way would be to use a gadget such as Twinkle where you would click for the LAST edit and then click 'rollback vandalism' and then give a correct template to warn the said editor
Also if there are rollback privileges held then Huggle and Igloo can also be used but that is a bit complex Y Yeah, that answer covers the gist of it.
5 What warning template would you use if a user removed or blanked all the content from a page?
I would use this template for warning a user who blanked the page at level 1
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Wikipedia. When removing content, please specify a reason in the
welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox
. Thank you. Y Yep, I'd use that one too. Obvious exception is if they were to blank one of their own pages. Additionally, if an article is blanked, ensure the blanking was not done for a reason (example to remove BLP violations on an article).
6 What warning template would you use if a user add the words "i really hate wikipedia!" to an article?
I would use this template for warning a user who vandalised the page at level 1
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of
welcome page
to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Y Yeah, I'd use that too.
7 How do you add an article to your watchlist?
You go to the said article/page and can click the star at the top of the page or press alt+w on your keyboard Y That's true, if you're using Vector (I use the old monobook).
8 If you misuse such tools as
Huggle
, what could happen?
Any powerful tools such as Twinkle or WP:Huggle are difficult to use, if you do not understand how to use them, do not try as your edits that you make with them are your responsibility and if they are misused accidentally or deliberately they can and will result in a block. Alternatively for Huggle, rollback priviliges may be removed or for Twinkle, you may be blacklisted. Y Yep. Good answer.
Answer - A permission is a right or additional ability given to trusted and more experienced users which enable them to make edits beyond the ability of the 'normal' user. They should be used to aid in the improval of the integrity of Wikipedia. YCorrect.
What are unregistered users restricted from doing on Wikipedia?
Answer - Unregistered users are unable to edit protected or semi-protected pages. They are unable to create pages outside of their user talk page. They are prohibited from deletion debates or they may be allowed to comment but cannot vote. Almost wrong, but some elements are OK, so 1/4 marks. They can create any talk page, not just their user talk page, and they can comment on any debate (deletion, RFA etc) but cannot vote.
What is an auto confirmed account?
Answer - An auto-confirmed is one that has made more than 4 edits and has been a member for at least 4 days and made at least 10 edits. This is to protect Wikipedia from security through vandalism. Un-registered users (i.e those whom haven't been 'autoconfirmed') cannot edit protected or semi protected pages which are protected as a security feature to prevent vandalism etc. An example of a semi-protected page is George W. Bush and a fully protected article is the main page. YCorrect.
What is a confirmed account?
Answer - A confirmed account is where an account has been approved by an administrator before being autoconfirmed, it has the same rights as a confirmed account and is in the same category as that. Otherwise it is exactly the same. YCorrect.
What permissions do autoconfirmed accounts have?
Answer - They have no special permissions although they are able to edit semi-protected and fully protected pages. They can also create new pages as well as uploading pictures and moving pages. Partly correct - Autoconfirmed users cannot edit fully protected pages.
Who can grant rollback?
Answer - An administrator can grant rollback to experienced users or trusted users. YCorrect.
What does rollback enable you to do?
Answer - Rollback allows you to revert more than one (multiple) edits at a time which is why it is different to the undo tool. It also enables for vandalism edits to be undone quicker without having to confirm the edits like with UNDO. YCorrect.
What should you not use rollback for?
Answer - You should not use rollback to edit war but in particular to violate the three revert rule. Also if it is not blatant vandalism or for mistakes that you have made yourself. YCorrect.
What does the account creator allow you to do?
Answer - Account creator's can create more than 6 users per day and also create new users for others upon request. If someone files for a new account then the account creator is able to do this. This right is granted to people whom are involved in the new account user area. YCorrect.
If you have the IP block exemption user right, what does it allow you to do?
Answer - Those users who have IP Block Exemption cannot be autoblocked or be affected by IP blocks because they may use a shared IP address so therefore they can 'bypass' it. It is only granted in rare circumstances and after a checkuser. YCorrect.
What does the autopatrolled user right allow you to do?
Answer - The autopatrolled right helps new page patrollers by creating less work and allows users to be marked as automatically patrolled/reviewed. Which means that they can be trusted and that they won't vandalise Wikipedia, also it is only really granted to users who know and understand policy very well. YCorrect.
What are administrators able to do?
Answer - Administrators can carry out a lot of extra tasks to the 'normal' user, they can block and unblock vandals or disruptive users, they can also protect and delete pages as well as all the other users permissions such as rollback, review, autopatrol etc. They may also move pages protected against moves as well as a lot of other things. YCorrect.
How do you request adminship?
Answer - You have to put a request in at WP:Requests for adminship, you also have to have a lot of support from the community. 75% specifically. Firstly you must be nominated or nominate yourself, and then you must accept/decline after which users ask questions and decide whether they support, oppose or are neutral to your case. YCorrect, though the % amount isn't specific.
What are bureaucrats' main duties?
Answer - Bureaucrats' main duties include the ability to change usernames and they can also close requests for adminship as well as granting and revoking an account's bot's status. Y Correct.
What technical abilities do stewards have?
Answer - They have the ability to change user groups and user rights across all the Wikimedia's and have been appointed by the Wikimedia Foundation, they deal with cross-wiki vandalism. Also if a Wiki doesn't have a bureaucrat, then they fill the shoes as the bureaucrat de facto. NWrong - Sorry, but this is too far off the mark here. The answer I was after was more specific to them having the ability to add or remove any user right on wikimedia wikis, and that they can use those tools on wikis such as CU/OS/admin or crat, but this is only done when a local user isn't available to do so.
What does checkuser enable a user to check?
Answer - Checkuser allows a user to check the IP address of an account user and also any sockpuppets involved with it for the prevention of vandalism and to keep the integrity of Wikipedia, they must be identified as +18 by the Wikimedia commons. YCorrect, noting it's not commons, but the foundation that you have to identify to.
What is oversight?
Answer - Oversight is a form of enhanced deletion, the user can suppress edits and delete them from existence. YCorrect.
What type of a user must you be to be granted oversight?
Answer - You must be granted by the arbitration committee and an administrative account holder. YCorrect.
Grade: 15.75/18 = 87.5% Pass
Policies
Policies Assignment
It is essential to sign comments with -~~~~ so that people know and are aware who made the post except in the case of edits to articles where it is not required for people to see that you have changed something on that page because it is in the history anyway and you are not more special than the other people who have contributed to it if everybody did it then Wikipedia would be in tatters, this comes under collaborative editing and is a good behavioural policy to follow and to get to become instilled in you because it is frowned upon if you don't
You should also explain why you made an edit which you did so you should always fill in the edit summary before saving changes to an edit, this is seen as courtesy, it also helps in some cases to rule out vandalism on watch pages etc. Also in your user preferences there is an option to be prompted if you forget to fill in an edit summary if you're one of them forgetful types
WikiMarkup helps articles and comments etc. to look neat and tidy and increases versatility on Wikipedia and it is good behavioural policy to learn it and stick with it when editing Wikipedia on a day to day basis
One of the key policies is to have common sense as you go about editing, most people have got common sense although it is about keeping it as you go about editing mainstream Wikipedia, it is also said that you should not follow every word of every rule and it is best to do something sensible than get wrapped in policy
If you have problems on Wikipedia and you are not getting on well then do not as I did become stupid and edit disruptively and vandalise Wikipedia
One of the five pillars of Wikipedia is civility, it is completely essential to be civil and not SHOUT or scream at anyone while on here. You should treat other editors, users and contributors how you would like to be treated. You should always be polite, calm and respectful to all users even if they are being rude to you and/or you disagree with them. There are always going to be differences in such a big project such as this so you should always avoid personal attacks and be cooperative and collabarative all of the time.
If someone makes an edit that you don't/didn't like then do not revert it as you will get yourself into an edit war. You must not override someone elses edits and revert them, if you have a problem with them, report them to
Three revert rule
which is also not good.
There are all different types of contributors to Wikipedia, some are ignorant and some are just down right nuisances, unless they have produced blatant vandalism, treat them nicely and don't bite them because they are good faith editors who are trying to edit Wikipedia. Always assume good faith.
Always reference and make sure that a source is verifiable. You must not have conducted your own research and then released it and used that as a citation, you must cite verifiable references such as the BBC whom are an extremely verifiable organisation, something such as a book where 2-3 prints were ever made and only you've got a copy may not be as verifiable for example. You must not also put your own point of view to the contribution and always be neutral in your point of view.
Also newer users shouldn't be afraid to make edits, they should make bold edits outside of their comfort zone, if a mistake is made then there mistakes will be reverted but they will at least credited with having made an effort.
These response look very good, demonstrates a sound knowledge of the policies I presented to you. One thing to keep in mind if that someone makes an edit you don't like or don't agree with, you can undo it and discuss the change (see
The clock is ticking....
11:09, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Copyright on a Free Wikipedia Assignment
Copyright on a Free Wikipedia Assignment
Test
Q1) Do you think Wikipedia *is* free?
A- Wikipedia is mostly free, there are two types of license, one being
Creative Commons
, under both texts are 'free' although the use of pictures, videos and images can be a little bit frowned upon and is very much regulated on Wikipedia-En, all media on the Wikimedia Commons is all free and they can all be in the public domain.
Q2) When can you upload a picture to Commons?
A-
Q3) You find music displaying this licence [1] (non-commercial). Wikimedia is non-commerical, can we upload it to Commons?
A-
Q4) A user uploads a poster which is a composite of all the Beatles album covers. Can he do this? It is his own unique composition.
A-
Q5) Can you upload a press image of the Pope?
A-
Q6) Can you upload a press image of a prisoner on death row?
A-
Q7) You find an article that matches a company website About Us page exactly. What do you do? You check the talk page, and there's no evidence that the text has been released under
WP:CC-BY-SA
A-
Q8) Can you see any issues with doing a cut-and-paste move?
A-
Q9) A final practical test... Go. Have a snoop around some wikipedia articles, see if you can find an image which is currently being used under "fair use". Come back and link to it (using [[:File:IMAGENAME]]. You must get the : before the File name, as we cannot display the image here!)
A-
Users interests
Requirements to graduate from adoption
Please note these change per user, depending on interests and prior experience
Done
Yep, I'd use that one too. Obvious exception is if they were to blank one of their own pages. Additionally, if an article is blanked, ensure the blanking was not done for a reason (example to remove BLP violations on an article).
