User talk:Cassiopeia/CVUA/ToeFungii

Hi ToeFungii, Greetings, Please use this page for questions and for assignments question pls raise them in assignment sections. Thank you. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:05, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CASSIOPEIA, I've posted on STiki for special perm Here if you wouldn't mind vouching for me. ToeFungii (talk) 22:48, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Got a reply that STiki is now longer active. Wow, that's sad. ToeFungii (talk) 23:04, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do have a question on template use and which level. If a particular template is used at say level one, can that be used as the basis to use another template at level two? I actually had thought of this but then forgot it and ran across the situation. In short, there was a user that was making changes without making any edit summary comments and another user put subst:uw-editsummary on their talk page. Since that's a single-level template I'm assuming it's considered level one. The user continued to make changes on multiple pages without edit summaries so I put a subst:uw-disruptive2 and added a comment about including edit summaries. The user has about 20-30 edits all without summaries, so I didn't think editing tests was appropriate, but based on their edits even though I couldn't figure out exactly why they were changing what they were because there was no edit summary, I did believe they were trying to make improvements so didn't think a vandalism template was warranted. I'd give you the diffs, but suffice it to say trying to figure out what they did is pretty confusing, at least to me, and not sure it would help answer the basic question. But in case you want to look at the user, they are Salzubeidi (talk · contribs) and it's the two Avril Lavigne articles they edited in the past couple days. ToeFungii (talk) 23:34, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ToeFungii Good day. Sorry that I didnt know STiki is temporary down as I dont use STiki often but other tools - see here. I hope the problem would be sloved soon. To say that it would be a lot difficult for you for not having STiki as such I do advise you to be patient to find vandalism edits (note: many vandalism edits happen on Friday night and Weekend). You have asked a few questions here actually. See below

(1) Edit summary - edit summary (es) is a single level template and it is not a vandalism warning as it is not a vandalism or disruptive act if an editor doest not provide edit summary, however, it is highly encourage since editors are collaborate together to improve Wikipedia and without edit summary, we at times would not know the nature/reason of the edits especially those page/content we are not familiar with. In addition, if an editor remove sourced content and does not provide es the we could warn them for removed/delete content which it is considered a vandalism especially they continue to do so.

(2) Unsourced content - editor is allowed to removed unsourced content especially WP:BLP pages and it is not an vandalism act. However, it could be disruptive or considered deletion (a vandalism act) if they remove a huge chunk content that is mixed with sourced and unsourced content. If the editor continues to remove them after the warning and states in es "it is not true" then we check the content as per sources provide and see if the editor telling the true. If the editor states "no longer valid or that of similar" then we still revert it as no source is provide (unsourced template).

(3) Test edit - most CUVA student find this is difficult to understand but it is very simple: Test edit is an edit make by "new editor" (their first or second edit) where by the "try to see if they can make an edit" in Wikipedia. Examples of test edits are (1) removing or adding a/ a few alphabets. (2) adding "safjlsfjsl" random alphabets or (3) removing an alphabet then adding them back in their 2nd edit (4) add "Hi" in their first edit. However, if they continues to add the same way after receiving test edit warning then that would be consider vandalism/disruptive act. In test edit we always check if the edits are the first/second edit from the editor by checking their history log - see here which indicated in this case it was not the editor firs/second edit.

(4) Always check editor contribution log/ talk page and talk page history log/and involved page history log to gauge the "intent" (back to Assignment 1) of the editor and their editing behavior.

(5) Level of warning - In English Wikipedia (each Wikipedia sister sites has their own policies and guidelines and operate independently), the way we place the level of the warning is a flexible system. We usually place level one (AGF) then level 2 and lead up to a block. However, if the nature of the edit is particularly offensive or severe we would place lvl 2 or lvl 3. If the many pages were vandalism in a short span of them by the editor we would place level 4. In short it is a judgement call and we need to act accordingly. However, when in double (not sure it is vandalism) then leave it and let other more experienced or who have more knowledge of the page to act on it.

(6) WP:3RR - 3RR will be in one of the assignments; however, I would like you to have some knowledge first so you wont violate the guidelines (important). If an editor revert more than 3 times within the time frame of 24 in the same article then the editor violates 3RR guidelines which the editor will be blocked from editing unless the edits that are reverted are considered "blatantly vandalism in nature". Uncensored and disruptive are not a vandalism act and if in double do not revert it and leave it to other editor for action. You dont want to be blocked in short for there are many district ion for a blocked editor, right will not be given even after the are free from block and or enroll in a program (we usually need editor with constructive edits for the last 6 months in considered certain request and behavior checking).

Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:58, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

want to make sure of something on warning a user

Cassiopeia, I don't run into it hardly at all, but recently had one so want to double check. I've looked through all the guidance and training, but don't see the answer. If someone is talking on an article, which warning template is used? I think it should be disruptive as it's not an editing test, but what prompted me also to ask is that I someone put vandalism1 on a user's page for a similar thing. Thanks. ToeFungii (talk) 01:13, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ToeFungii, manually subst it. You can find {{subst:talkinarticle}} under single warning level at Wikipedia:Template index/User talk namespace. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:41, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]