User talk:ZaphodsCatwalk/Adoption

Adoption

Hi there, I'm Lixxx235. I have been a registered user since 2010 and I am currently a rollbacker and reviewer. Are you still interested in the adoption program? If so, I'd be honored to adopt you. If you would like me to adopt you, please leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks, Lixxx235^{Got a complaint?} 20:27, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To keep the discussion centralized, let's keep it here. The biggest question: do you want a formal, "school style" adoption, or do you want a more relaxed one? Out of my current adoptees, two have opted for the "school style" adoption, one for the "relaxed" option, and one hasn't chosen yet. For an idea of what the "school style" adoption is like, see User Talk:Larksky12358/Adoption or User Talk:Tomato 33/Adoption. Thanks, Lixxx235^{Got a complaint?} 20:38, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you can put {{adoptee|Lixxx235}} on your user page to get:

, just in case you wanted it, and you should also probably remove the looking for adoption category. Thanks, Lixxx235^{Got a complaint?} 20:47, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey ZaphodsCatwalk, just checking in. Would you like a formal "course style" adoption, or a more relaxed one? Thanks, Lixxx235^{Got a complaint?} 14:17, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Part 1

0% completed (estimate)

Assignment 1- pre-assignment

Make sure you are familiar with WP:EYNTK, and WP:V, WP:NOTABLE, and WP:NOR.
Read up on WP:TWINKLE and play around with it.
Read up on WP:NPP and play around with Special:NewPages and Special:NewPagesFeed.

Assignment 1

Explain, in your own words, WP:V, WP:NOTABLE, and WP:NOR, and highlight the differences between them(10 pts):

Core content policies in my own words

Verifiability: Write so that reader can easily drill down to reliable sources. Use WikiProject Resource Exchange for citations of difficult-to-access sources.

Notability: A topic may merit its own standalone encyclopedic article if significant coverage exists by reliable secondary sources.

No Original Research: Add only material attributable to reliable sources; secondary sources generally preferred. No creative synthesis of published material. Original images are encouraged. Accurate translations, transcriptions, and routine calculations are acceptable.

Compare/Contrast

Notability

- standard for proposed topic

- measured in part by number of reliable sources

Verifiability

- standard for sourcing of article's contents

- measure of quality of sources used

No Original Research

- standard for type and quality of sources

- measure of already-accepted mainstream material

ZaphodsCatwalk (talk) 01:06, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Assignment 2- pre-assignment

Read up on WP:CSD and WP:PROD.
Enable logging of CSD and PROD by Twinkle.

Assignment 2

Explain, in your own words, WP:CSD and WP:PROD(10pts):

Using Twinkle, not Article Curation, tag 3 articles for speedy deletion that later gets deleted, and 1 article for PROD that later gets deleted. Provide logs below. 5 pts each.

Part 1 assessment

Write an article that passes the relevant Wikipedia policies. This article should go though AfC and be assessed "C" class and not be declined or speedily deleted for 40 points. For 10 points extra credit, get the article assessed "B" class, and if you're really ambitious, if you get the article to Good Article status, that's 40 additional extra credit points.