Wowpedia:Violations/Outro

About reverting vandalism
If you wish to revert vandalism, open the last correct version (by clicking on the date), hit edit on that page and save it with an appropriate note!

However, it is worth noting that admins can quickly revert changes with one click, but only if it is the last edit. If you have better things to do than undo all their edits, you can just add the vandal's name here and we will block them. Once added to the list a 'contribs' link appear, giving quick access to a list of all their contributions. In that case we can open each revert link and revert all their edits in one fell swoop.

Therefore there's no desperate need to try to undo their works unless:
 * The page is high profile
 * It looks like no admins are around
 * You have a reason to contribute to an article that has been vandalized

There's no need spend all your time undoing vandalism - just make sure they're on the above list!

Thank you for all your assistance, everyone.

How to add a new month
Very simple, add the following (replace  and   with appropriate month and year):
 * &lt;new suspect/vandal...&gt;
 * &lt;new suspect/vandal...&gt;
 * &lt;new suspect/vandal...&gt;

How to add a new suspect (Admins only)
Also easy to do. Just add the suspect template in the appropriate month/year at the top:
 *  ==== &lt;month&gt; &lt;year&gt; ====
 *  {| 
 * &lt;other suspects/vandals...&gt;
 *  |} 
 *  |} 

Note that underscores are helpful. If a user has a space in his name, it may cause problems with the template, but this problem should have been eliminated.

How to add a new vandal
Also easy to do. Just add the vandal template in the appropriate month/year at the top:
 *  ==== &lt;month&gt; &lt;year&gt; ====
 *  {| 
 * &lt;other suspects/vandals...&gt;
 *  |} 
 *  |} </tt>

Note that underscores are helpful. If a user has a space in his name, it may cause problems with the template, but this problem should have been eliminated.

Administrator-only actions
When a user is marked as a vandal, an admin will investigate the claim (usually by reviewing the accused vandal's contributions) and follow the policy. This may include reverting acts of vandalism and informing the user on their talk page that they have been accused of vandalism, if their contributions don't seem to be overt vandalism.

In addition, admins can do a few things the average user cannot to deal with vandalism:
 * Use the &#91;rollback&#93; link to quickly revert vandalism (if it was the last edit on an article).
 * Use the Special:Blockip page to ban/block the user from editing for a period of time (based on policy).
 * Use the tab in situations where a regular user might not be able to, to maintain the history of a vandalized article.
 * Use the tab to give a reprieve to a frequently vandalized article, assuming it doesn't undergo frequent necessary updates.

If a vandal has caused massive disruption, use the "if bot" link when reverting vandalism &mdash; it will cause the vandalism (and the rollback) to become tagged as a "bot edit" and hidden from the RC list by default.

Blocking a vandal
After an admin has investigated they can ban/block the user according to policy by using the block template:

An admin may add some extra information when the block happens or at a later time such as ban/block time length, date/time of unblock or date/time when an unblock occured.


 * Adding block duration time/date
 * &#123;&#123;block|&lt;blocked vandal user name&gt;|time=&lt;block time or unblock date/time&gt;&#125;&#125;</tt>


 * Adding unblock time/date when or if block expires
 * &#123;&#123;block|&lt;blocked vandal user name&gt;|unblocked=&lt;date/time when unblock occurred&gt;&#125;&#125;</tt>

Making a suspect
If the user subsequently contacts an admin with a reasonable explanation for the act (falsely accused, mistaken edit, misunderstood policy, etc.) and the admin is convinced the user has reformed or sufficiently explained their actions, the admin can use the suspect template to put then on a sort of probation (and clear the ban/block, if warranted):

Identifying fake spam cleaners
Thanks to CJ for noticing these "sneaky bots".

Here are easy steps to identify fake spam cleaners:
 * 1) Go to the history page of the article that was supposedly cleaned.
 * 2) Click the left radio button next to the entry you think was the last non-spam edit (spammers usually have red user links, since they're not real users).
 * 3) Click the right radio button next to the entry of the "fake spam cleaner" edit.
 * 4) Click the "Compare selected versions" button.

If you see lots of spam remaining, this user is probably a "fake spam cleaner".

Put them on the vandals list!