User talk:Michael Anon/Archives/2012/July

Opinion polling for the United Kingdom general election, 2005

Hi Michael. In the above article, you put the leading party and how much they were leading by -diff[1].

How did you do that? Did you type it all in manually or did you find a way to do it automatically? Ilikeredirects (talk) 15:46, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello Ilikeredirects,

There's unfortunately no great secret to how I added the information to the table - the data was manually entered. However, it fortunately wasn't particularly difficult: the difference between the parties was provided in the original table (I just had to remember to remove every negative sign) and the remarks noting Labour's lead were simply copied for every row.

Regardless, I am very grateful for the barnstar.

Michael Anon (talk) 16:30, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For improving my lazy article, Opinion polling for the United Kingdom general election, 2005 Ilikeredirects (talk) 15:48, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	I hereby award this barnstar to you, good sir. Thank you for dealing with repeated vandalism from Wgmlwgml98's account. Cheers, mate! Ðrdak (T) 20:20, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much Ðrdak. Michael Anon (talk) 20:38, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Invitation to the Counter-Vandalism Unit Academy

Hello, Michael Anon/Archives/2012/July! The instructors at the Counter-Vandalism Unit Academy have seen your hard work reverting vandalism, and we would like to thank you. But do you want to go to the next level? Would you like to know how reverts, warnings, reports, blocks, and bans all come together to keep this Encyclopedia free from disruption? Then consider enrolling today! Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 11:09, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I would be happy to take you on myself if you want. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 11:09, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you - I accept the invitation. Michael Anon (talk) 12:10, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Would you mind going to the enrol page (the link is in the invite) and adding your name (just so that there is a record). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:19, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Once you put your name there I'll give it a tick and you can get started on your first task. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:33, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I've added myself to the enrolment page. Michael Anon (talk) 12:58, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I'll leave it for a few hours (to make sure no one else really wants to take you. Then we can go for it. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 13:37, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

WP:CVUA

Hello Michael (Mike???)! I'm Chip123456 and I'm happy to say I will be your academy instructor and it's great to have you on board! First of all as I'm sure you are aware vandalism is an everyday occurrence in Wikipedia, and we need to know how we deal with it correctly. We use The Four Steps of counter vandalism and that us to Identify it, remove it, warn the user and if need be, if they persist report to WP:AIV. I would suggest going through the links and also read WP:VAND. My first question is, have you got any questions? I'll be happy to answer! Once again, it's great to have you on board! Later on, I will go through your contributions so we have something to discuss about! Below is how to warn a user!

Warning users, this maybe complicated to understand at the beginning as there are different types and levels of warning. To issue warnings and file reports, I use Twinkle. It's easy to use and you can preview the warnings before issuing them to the disruptive editor. I'm just going to go over the warning and reporting process with you! Below is an example if an editor who is vandalising on Wikipedia:

1. User has wrote 'Chris is gay LOL! :)' on Heathrow Airports article. This is their first edit on Wikipedia. Issue them a general note for vandalism (which van be found on twinkle by clicking the TW tab near the top right of the page and click on 'vandalism'). If you don't have twinkle, give them the first level warning under vandalism on WP:WARN.

2. The user has reverted your revert and has replaced the vandalism. Do the same process as above but give them a level 2 warning ( labelled as a caution on twinkle)

3. The user is now seen as purposely vandalising Wikipedia as they have gone onto HRH Princess Michael of Kents article and have placed 'Dfdfhhgrhdhdthdthdthdthdthgdhdthdhthhtdtfhdhdhdthdtfghfhtdh'. Like before give them a warning but now under level 3 (labelled as warning on Twinkle). This message informs the user that they maybe blocked if they continue.

4. The user has continued to vandalise in another article. Issue them their final warning (level 4 labelled final warning using Twinkle). If, you are dealing with a registered account (not an IP) it is probably clear that this is a vandalism only account and you can report at WP:AIV using twinkle. You click on the TW tab and click 'ARV'. Click on the 'select report type' and click vandalism. Then it asks you to tick a box, asking you why you have reported them. Click on 'Evidently a vandalism only account'. Note - you have an option to add a message. Then click 'submit query'.

5. If you have given the registered user another chance or the IP has continued to vandalise after the final warning, then report at WP:AIV using twinkle and click on 'vandalism after final warning' with optional message and submit query.

If there is a user who already has a warning for vandalising Wikipedia (on the same day you revert the vandalism) there is no need to start from a general note. If they were given a caution, give them a warning, if they were given a final warning on the same day, report them.

I hope this has helped, if it's confusing in any part, please ask me to explain further. Also see WP:BITE and WP:AGF. Note - don't have twinkle? Install it by going on your preferences then gadgets and click twinkle, make sure you save!

I will look over your contributions after you draw a line under your previous ones. Of course, I will look at those, but I want to judge you from what I can see. I would suggest going through the recent changes and reverting vandalism when you are sure you've seen it! Once again, Welcome!--Chip123456 ^Talk_Contribs 18:36, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello Chip123456. Thanks for the introduction and all the information (although I have already used a number of the warning templates and reported a couple of vandals to WP:AIV anyway). I'm actually going to be unavailable for a few days, but will return early next week and would suggest that you start monitoring my edits then (I'll add a note to this thread when I start editing again). Michael Anon (talk) 19:27, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Hey, no problem. I'm usually inactive on Friday evenings and Saturday, so that works out fine! Give me a nudge when you are ready and we'll begin then. Sound good?--Chip123456 ^Talk_Contribs 19:46, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Absolutely. Michael Anon (talk) 19:53, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Good, I'll look forward to it!--Chip123456 ^Talk_Contribs 19:57, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

When you find time, please see User:Chip123456/CVUA--Chip123456 ^Talk_Contribs 20:21, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm back and will start working through the page you've made. Do you want me to directly edit it to mark my progress or should I copy the page into my userspace? Michael Anon (talk) 19:54, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply :). No, its fine there :)--Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 17:05, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

WP:STIKI

Hey Mike! I'm wondering if you would like to use the Stiki tool for your vandalism work. Although its usually only allowed for rollbackers, instructors at the CVUA can personally request their students to use it, without rollback! Let me know what you think and I can file a reuqest. Best--Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 12:43, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm not interested at the moment thanks, but I'll let you know if I change my mind. Michael Anon (talk) 13:52, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Ok, thats fine. Do you know what the tool does? Would you like a simple explanation?--Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 14:00, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I've read a little about the tool and think I understand what it does: it directs users to potential vandalism based on computer analysis of edits and editor feedback collected by the tool and allows users to categorise the change as "Vandalism", "Good-faith Revert" or "Innocent", taking action (such as reverting and warning) on the basis of this categorisation. It also allows them to "Pass" if they lack the experience required to adequately categorise the edit. Michael Anon (talk) 14:15, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Well there you go! I'm going to create a test for you, so I can graduate you from the academy. Nothing serious, but I need to make sure you know everything before i CAN pass you.--Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 14:38, 29 July 2012 (UTC)