User:Vertium/sandbox

This is the user sandbox of Vertium. A user sandbox is a subpage of the user's user page. It serves as a testing spot and page development space for the user and is not an encyclopedia article. Create or edit your own sandbox here.

Other sandboxes: Main sandbox | Template sandbox

Finished writing a draft article? Are you ready to request review of it by an experienced editor for possible inclusion in Wikipedia? Submit your draft for review!


User	Talk	To Do	Statistics	Subpages	Awards

Did you know?

Links I'll Use Later edit

Examples of Admins being a bit of a Dick edit

[1]

Good faith and vandalism edit

When patrolling for vandalism, you may often come across edits which are unhelpful, but not vandalism - these are good faith edits. It is important to recognize the difference between a vandalism edit and a good faith edit, especially because Twinkle gives you the option of labeling edits you revert as such. Please read WP:AGF and WP:NOT VANDALISM before completing the following tasks.

Q1. Please describe below the difference between a good faith edit and a vandalism edit, and how you would tell them apart.

The difference between these two edits is the motive of the user. A good faith edit is when a user sets out to improve the project, either because they see wrong information or want to add information. A vandal edit is when someone sets out to deliberately disrupt the project and comes in various forms. A distinction between good faith edits and vandalism is important because by referring to good faith edits as vandalism, we may alienate (especially new) editors.

To tell them apart, I would look at the revision differences of a page. Whilst reverting a person who had made errors in good faith, this would be generally easy. This is because good faith editors would make no attempt to change, mask or disguise their edits, as they are unaware that what they have done/are doing is wrong. A vandal may make attempts to disguise his/her actions, they may make complicated maneuvers, e.g. page-moving, lying in the edit summary, falsifying a minor edit. It may be necessary to assess the page revision history in more depth if a vandal has taken such evasive measures.

Excellent! Intent or motive are key things to consider, and when the vandal is particularly tricky, it can take a bit of time and effort to determine which you're looking at. One other tool is the user contributions list, which will show all the edits that an editor has performed. While not a perfect tool (since an IP editor may represent many different people), you can often gain good insight from their contribution history to help you understand where they're coming from. Also, please remember to sign your entries here, so I know it's you who did them. ~~~~

Q2. Please find and revert three examples of good faith but unhelpful edits, and three examples of vandalism. Please warn the editors with the correct template and give the diffs of your reverts below.

Do You Agree? edit

The following diffs illustrate various reverts that have been done by other editors or rollbackers. Please indicate whether you agree with the revert and it's categorization as either a good-faith revert or vandalism. Also, please explain your rationale for your decision.

Reversion of Good Faith edits: