User talk:MariusStrom: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
Adoption task #2 |
|||
Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
::Sometimes an article would do well with violating all of the standard rules. I can't come up with a good example of where this is applied, but I'm sure it happens. --[[User:MariusStrom|<b><span style="color:#92CDDC">marius</span><span style="color:#31849B">strom</span></b>]] 23:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC) |
::Sometimes an article would do well with violating all of the standard rules. I can't come up with a good example of where this is applied, but I'm sure it happens. --[[User:MariusStrom|<b><span style="color:#92CDDC">marius</span><span style="color:#31849B">strom</span></b>]] 23:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC) |
||
:::Oh, it happens all the time! The point is that the rules can be ignored if they block building a encyclopedia, if it's verified and not an original research, though. --[[H|<font color="blue" face="vivaldi" size="3">H</font>]][[User:Hirohisat|<font color="blue" face="Times new roman" size="3">irohisat</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:Hirohisat|<font color="orange" face="Times new roman">Talk</font>]]</sup> 00:03, 9 August 2007 (UTC) |
:::Oh, it happens all the time! The point is that the rules can be ignored if they block building a encyclopedia, if it's verified and not an original research, though. --[[H|<font color="blue" face="vivaldi" size="3">H</font>]][[User:Hirohisat|<font color="blue" face="Times new roman" size="3">irohisat</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:Hirohisat|<font color="orange" face="Times new roman">Talk</font>]]</sup> 00:03, 9 August 2007 (UTC) |
||
== Adoption task #2 == |
|||
Okay, since you finished your 1st assignment pretty sucessfully, here's the second assignment...We will be doing vandal fighting! |
|||
:: I want you to go to the following page [[User:MariusStrom/monobook.js]]. Add the script below. |
|||
:// <nowiki>[[User:Lupin/popups.js]]</nowiki> |
|||
:importScript('User:Lupin/popups.js'); |
|||
:::Save the page and then delete your cache. Now when you highlight an internal link it will popup. This makes vandal fighting easier. Then I want you to read [[WP:WARN]], [[WP:REVERT]], [[WP:VAND]] & [[WP:CANVAS]]. |
|||
::::Afterwards, follow these directions. |
|||
::::# Click the "[[Special:Recentchanges|Recent changes]]." |
|||
::::# This will provide you with a list of recent edits to wikipedia. To update the list click the "go" button at the top of the page. |
|||
::::# I want you to hold your mouse over the "(diff)" button next to an edit. This will show you what changed. Applying what you learned at [[WP:VAND]], I want you to identify vandalism. |
|||
::::# If you identify vandalism click the "(hist)" button beside the change that is vandalism. |
|||
::::# You will be brought to a list of the edits to the article that was vandalised. |
|||
::::# Now I want you to move over the date of the last edit that was not vandalism. A little popup of the previous version of the article will appear. |
|||
::::# While still on the popup click the "rv" button. That will revert the vandalism to the last legit version. |
|||
::::# Now go back to the history of the page, by clicking the history button at the top of the page. |
|||
::::# Then click the user talk of the vandal, as shown on [[WP:WARN]]. |
Revision as of 04:11, 9 August 2007
Barnstar
Thank you for the barnstar! Andre (talk) 22:14, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Adoption
Hello Marius, you seemed to be interested in being adopted. If you're still interested, feel free to drop a note in my talk page. Have a nice day! --Hirohisat Talk 21:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
- Glad to hear. Anyhow, let's get started! First please read the 5 Pillars of Wikipedia if you haven't done so yet. --Hirohisat Talk 00:25, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, now I want you to leave comments about each pillar.
- 1.Wikipedia is a encyclopedia
- To me, this basically means that Wikipedia should be fact based and accurate. --mariusstrom 23:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- For further reading, check WP:NOT out. --Hirohisat Talk 00:03, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
- To me, this basically means that Wikipedia should be fact based and accurate. --mariusstrom 23:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- 2.Neutral Point of view
- Closely aligned ith #1 in my opinion - if you keep articles bound to citable or well known facts, then it will, by definition, not carry a bias. --mariusstrom 23:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, verifability over truth. --Hirohisat Talk 00:03, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
- Closely aligned ith #1 in my opinion - if you keep articles bound to citable or well known facts, then it will, by definition, not carry a bias. --mariusstrom 23:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- 3.Wikipedia is a free content
- Basically that Wikipedia is free (as in beer and speech). --mariusstrom 23:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- Can you elaborate further on this? --Hirohisat Talk 00:03, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
- Sure. Basically, there's no charge to accessing wikipedia, so it's free (as in your friend buys you a free beer). The second part is that it's free (as in free speech) - You can post what you want (although you should be within the bounds of the 5 pillars and the code of conduct), and people can later edit your posts. The free (as in beer) thing has a lot of implications with regard to copyright and such, and making sure that the materials posted can be put into the public domain free-of-charge and within legal capability. --mariusstrom 01:43, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
- That's about it. You're right on track. --Hirohisat Talk 04:01, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
- Sure. Basically, there's no charge to accessing wikipedia, so it's free (as in your friend buys you a free beer). The second part is that it's free (as in free speech) - You can post what you want (although you should be within the bounds of the 5 pillars and the code of conduct), and people can later edit your posts. The free (as in beer) thing has a lot of implications with regard to copyright and such, and making sure that the materials posted can be put into the public domain free-of-charge and within legal capability. --mariusstrom 01:43, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
- Can you elaborate further on this? --Hirohisat Talk 00:03, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
- Basically that Wikipedia is free (as in beer and speech). --mariusstrom 23:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- 4.Wikipedia has a code of conduct
- When anyone can edit anything, people are likely to get mad. The code of conduct is in place to keep Wikipedia a civil place. Thanks to the anti-vandalism folks, it largely stays that way. :) --mariusstrom 23:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, you got the point. Civility is a major factor of the wiki community. --Hirohisat Talk 00:03, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
- When anyone can edit anything, people are likely to get mad. The code of conduct is in place to keep Wikipedia a civil place. Thanks to the anti-vandalism folks, it largely stays that way. :) --mariusstrom 23:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- 5.Wikipedia does not have firm rules
- Sometimes an article would do well with violating all of the standard rules. I can't come up with a good example of where this is applied, but I'm sure it happens. --mariusstrom 23:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, it happens all the time! The point is that the rules can be ignored if they block building a encyclopedia, if it's verified and not an original research, though. --Hirohisat Talk 00:03, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
- Sometimes an article would do well with violating all of the standard rules. I can't come up with a good example of where this is applied, but I'm sure it happens. --mariusstrom 23:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Adoption task #2
Okay, since you finished your 1st assignment pretty sucessfully, here's the second assignment...We will be doing vandal fighting!
- I want you to go to the following page User:MariusStrom/monobook.js. Add the script below.
- // [[User:Lupin/popups.js]]
- importScript('User:Lupin/popups.js');
- Afterwards, follow these directions.
- Click the "Recent changes."
- This will provide you with a list of recent edits to wikipedia. To update the list click the "go" button at the top of the page.
- I want you to hold your mouse over the "(diff)" button next to an edit. This will show you what changed. Applying what you learned at WP:VAND, I want you to identify vandalism.
- If you identify vandalism click the "(hist)" button beside the change that is vandalism.
- You will be brought to a list of the edits to the article that was vandalised.
- Now I want you to move over the date of the last edit that was not vandalism. A little popup of the previous version of the article will appear.
- While still on the popup click the "rv" button. That will revert the vandalism to the last legit version.
- Now go back to the history of the page, by clicking the history button at the top of the page.
- Then click the user talk of the vandal, as shown on WP:WARN.