Editing Encyclopedia:Vandalism (section)

==Warnings==
{{WarningsSmall|align=center}} 
{{Policy shortcut|WP:WARNVAND}}
The purpose of warning a user who has vandalized is to inform the user that the user's conduct is abusive and prohibited, and seek the user's compliance. Not all that appears to be vandalism is in bad faith, and a warning can politely advise and correct users unaware of the nature of their actions. A warning may even dissuade a user acting in bad faith from continuing, particularly as the warnings escalate and the user is informed of the consequences of continuing.

Warning a user for vandalism is generally a prerequisite to administrator intervention. Because of this, users should be warned for each and every instance of vandalism.

===How to warn vandalizing users===
A list of user warning templates, with descriptions and instructions for their use, is at [[Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace]]. In addition to a series of user warning templates for vandalism, there are series for specific types of vandalism. Use the most specific user warning template for the conduct. The existence of these templates is intended as a convenience, and {{strong|their use is not required}}. A specifically tailored note, written personally and directly addressing the problematic behavior is equally as acceptable as a form of warning, and in many cases, will often result in better engagement with the user in question.

[[WP:Assume good faith|Assume good faith]] (such as that the user is simply unaware of the policies and guidelines) unless it is clear that the user is deliberately harming Wikipedia from the outset, for instance in cases of abusive, vulgar, or juvenile vandalism.

If you do choose to use warning templates, please choose templates that are appropriate to the type and level of problem in question. If edits are questionable, but not clearly vandalism, consider using lower-level templates (level 1 or 2) and wait for a few further contributions to see if the other editor responds or changes their behavior. If the behavior continues, or if it is clear the edits are in bad faith from the outset, the use of a higher-level template (level 3 or 4) may be appropriate. If, after receiving multiple warnings, the behavior persists past the point where good faith can be extended, or it becomes clear that the user has {{em|had}} the opportunity to notice they have been warned, and they {{em|still}} persist with the problematic behavior, consider reporting them to [[WP:AIV|the Vandalism noticeboard]].

===Administrator response to vandalism===

Response from administrators at the vandalism noticeboard varies depending on the type of vandalism and the specifics of the report. Keep in mind:
* Admins are unlikely to block a user who has not been warned at all, or who has been warned, but has stopped editing since being warned. It must be clear that the user has been told to stop vandalizing, and still persists despite such warnings, except for egregious cases.
* Reports of vandalism from registered accounts are handled differently than that from IP users, and reports from newly registered accounts are handled differently from accounts of experienced Wikipedia users.
** IP addresses may or may not be kept by the same person for long periods of time; a dynamic address which appears to have stopped vandalizing will probably not be blocked, while one that {{em|is}} actively vandalizing will likely receive a short (1–2 day) block. If there is evidence that an IP address is being used by the same person over a long period of time to repeatedly vandalize Wikipedia, or if it is clear the IP address is being used by multiple people to vandalize Wikipedia (such as a school-based IP, which can sometimes attract lots of juvenile vandalism over long periods of time from many different people) then an administrator may block the IP for a longer time period (several months to a year). IP addresses are almost never blocked indefinitely.
** Brand-new accounts who repeatedly vandalize despite multiple warnings are usually blocked indefinitely, especially when there is no history of quality editing on the account.
** Reports which involve experienced Wikipedia users rarely result in blocks for vandalism, as these reports are usually mislabeling other problematic behavior (such as misrepresenting sources, or removing text, or edit warring) as vandalism. The vandalism noticeboard is not designed to litigate disputes or to investigate complex behavior problems. Instead, other noticeboards such as [[WP:ANEW|the edit warring noticeboard]] or [[WP:ANI|the incidents noticeboard]] are more appropriate to deal with those issues.
* Check back in to the vandalism noticeboard to see how your report has been dealt with. If an administrator declines to block someone you report, they will always leave a note explaining why they did not respond as you requested. Often, this does not mean the person you reported is behaving properly, or should not be dealt with, but merely that the {{em|mechanisms}} of the vandalism noticeboard are not well suited for handling many types of reports. Consider taking the issue up at a more appropriate noticeboard, which has been tailored to the specific type of problem you are seeing. Other times, a report is declined for being stale (blocks to abandoned accounts, or to IP addresses which have been dormant for some time are rarely done), or to the admin being unable to easily identify the edits as vandalism.
* If the vandalism in question is "subtle vandalism", is being committed by a person who was [[WP:SOCK|blocked under a prior account or IP address]], or requires in-depth and direct knowledge of a prior problem, consider taking the report to [[WP:ANI|the incidents noticeboard]] instead. There are hundreds of Wikipedia administrators, and many of them are unfamiliar with the intricacies of past cases. Unless it is the sort of vandalism that needs no explanation at all, it should be taken elsewhere and not [[WP:AIV]].

===Reminding responding users to correctly warn===
Because warnings for vandalism are generally a prerequisite to administrator intervention, it is important that users responding to vandalism warn vandalizing users. To inform responding users of this responsibility, use the user warning template {{tl|uw-warn}}.

Likewise, incorrect use of user warning templates, even if well-intended, should be identified to the mistaken user. The {{tl|uw-tempabuse}} series of user warning templates may be used, but a detailed talk page message is better.