Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit/Academy

Able to correctly define and describe:

• How to identify vandalism
• The importance of assuming good faith
• How to properly handle trolls, as well as frustrated, irate, or even enraged users
• The importance of remaining civil with other editors at all times
• The ability to describe Wikipedia's edit warring and 3RR policies, and what edits are exempt from this
• The difference between what is and is not vandalism
• The purpose and correct use of warning templates
• The appropriate time to file a report to AIV, and when it is too soon to do so

• Cannot describe all concepts at an in-depth level that demonstrates knowledge and proficiency with them
• Does not understand the key purpose of reverting vandalism
• Unable to differentiate the difference between vandalism and good faith edits
• Does not understand why civility must be demonstrated at all times.
• Cannot properly define Wikipedia's edit warring and 3RR policies, and the exemptions
• Incorrectly describes when they should report a user to AIV, or demonstrates that they might do so too soon in situations

• Can concisely describe each of these concepts in-depth and at a level where they show full understanding and proficient knowledge.
• Correctly and concisely describes the importance of the assumption of good faith and consistently remaining civil - even in heated situations
• Can describe the proper use of warning templates and how to correctly make an AIV submission, as well as when to do so.

• The ability to locate relevant logs and edit histories of pages regarding past situations
• The ability to follow contributions, edit histories, and relevant logs and links in order to gather information and a timeline about a past event
• The ability to correctly and properly review and compare past edits, reversions, diffs, logs, and subsequent actions
• The ability to identify whether such edits were correctly identified as vandalism or good faith edits, or misidentified as something else

• Cannot locate a page's logs, edit history, an editor's contributions, public logs, or activity
• Cannot demonstrate how to review and compare diffs, page histories, logs, and put together a series of events
• Cannot correctly follow contributions and links in order to gather all relevant information at a consistent level
• Does not correctly or fully piece together an event's timeline, or misidentifies or incorrectly draws conclusions from the information gathered

• Can identify information, as well as navigate to page histories, logs, contributions, and public data
• Shows proficiency with taking an edit, log, or contribution, and piece together all details and relevant information to form a timeline of events
• Correctly describes an event from start to finish and using accurate and relevant information and evidence that they retrieved from logs, contributions, and histories
• Correctly identifies whether the edit was vandalism or bad-faith, or if it was not - and if the situation was appropriately handled and followed relevant policies and guidelines

• The importance of effective communication with other editors regarding reversions, and how to do so
• The importance of backing up statements and supporting them with relevant diffs and references to relevant policy
• The importance of taking responsibility for one's actions and mistakes
• How to respond in a positive manner and offer users help when necessary - even in heated and angry situations

• Communicates inconsistently with editors via talk page comments or in response to editors who question or challenge their reversions
• Fails to reference relevant diffs or Wikipedia policy pages in responses that refer to past edits or that state a policy
• Does not demonstrate civility in all situations; gives defensive, dismissive, or accusatory replies instead of offering to help
• Refuses to apologize or correct any mistakes that were made
• Jumps to conclusions in responses to criticism; is not open to feedback or opportunities to improve communication
• Does not use effective or helpful methods to diffuse heated situations or solutions to conflict

• Communicates in a polite and professional manner with other editors at all times
• Avoids biting other editors and harsh comments or unnecessary criticism
• References and provides links to diffs and appropriate policies in responses where they are mentioned or referred to
• Apologizes when mistakes are brought to their attention, and correctly rectifies the mistake when possible
• Does not make accusatory statements, and gains relevant information to make responses instead of making assumptions

Effectively applies the concepts and tools of vandalism fighting in a productive and proficient manner.

• Cannot consistently revert vandalized pages correctly.
• Is inconsistent in use of warning on user talk pages or uses incorrect warning templates
• Has reverted fewer than 50 instances of vandalism in the two weeks prior to graduation – or – has reverted more than 50 instances of vandalism with a high degree of incorrect reversions.

• Demonstrates proficiency in performing reversions, either manually or with a tool (Twinkle, etc.).
• Consistently leaves the correct messages on vandal's talk page explaining the reversion, and is able to further explain to the vandal their reasoning behind the reversion if prompted.
• Has accurately reverted at least 50 instances of vandalism in the two weeks prior to graduation.