Wikipedia:Editor review/Vibhijain

Vibhijain
I will like to have an editor review so I can get a good knowledge of what are the things which I can improve upon. Another reason for this is that I do look to go for an RfA, although that will be after a year or maybe more than that, but still a editor review will benifit a lot. I went for a unsuccessful RfA recently, and I look to go for it again in 6 months, so a editor review will help me a lot. Thanks for taking your time. :) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛  Talk Email 14:43, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * My primary contributions include fighting vandalism. At the moment I have been more active editing articles and creating new ones.
 * 1) Have you been in editing disputes or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
 * As on enwiki, No. I might have been in some edit disputes, but they were solved pretty quickly.
 * As on enwiki, No. I might have been in some edit disputes, but they were solved pretty quickly.

 Reviews  Review by Srikar Kashyap
 * I have never seen such an ambitious Wikipedian.For 14, you do wonders.Most youngsters of your age do good-faith edits,have them reverted and quit wiki complaining.But you are doing wonders at this young age.Your wide range of contributions shame users like me who are older than you but have less contributions.You have been doing a great job reverting vandalism.I would call you a Wiki All rounder with different kinds of user rights in different wikis'.All the best and I would love to see you as an Administrator soon!  Srikar Kashyap << Talk >> 15:43, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your trust. I will try my best to live up to it. :) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛  Talk Email 15:47, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Review by Geo Swan
 * A marvelous editor. Looking through contribs I find a very good record. Also we needed some article creators. Thank you s much for ur help! Dipankan  ( Have a chat? ) 16:09, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * You're a nice editor really.I am wondering to see such young editor from India.More and more Indians are expanding on Wikipedia now-a-days.Maybe it's effect of Wiki conference that was organized last year.Anyways, Wish you best. Max Viwe &#124;  Viwe The Max  20:41, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I have some advice for you.
 * First, in this comment you wrote:


 * In my opinion administrators have an obligation to set a high standard of civility and collegiality. If I understand the thread in question User:Nangparbat is a confirmed sockpuppet; you and what appears to be a clique have been frustrated by Nangparbat; and -- this is the most problematic part -- you all joined in mocking Nangparbat.


 * Realistically, many/most/all of the very most prolific wikipedia volunteers are, at least, eccentric. Some portion of the the wikipedia's most prolific volunteers and former volunteers, show signs of, or have openly acknowledged, mental health issues.  In my opinion this is particularly true of those who can't or won't abide by our policies, guidelines and conventions and win blocks and bans.  I don't know User:Nangparbat.  I am not going to look into their background.  I am going to ask you to consider that if there is a mean-spirited statement you wouldn't say about someone you knew was mentally ill, you not say it about wikipedia volunteer -- or about anyone you meet in real life.  I suggest you always take the high road without regard to whether you think your target enjoys perfect mental health.


 * Try to take the high road. If you have wikipals who start to gang up on someone, (1) don't join in; (2) don't sit silent; (3) do remind your wikipals of the policies they are lapsing from.  If they then turn on you then I would strongly recommend you reconsider how closely you should associate with them.


 * User talk pages, like that where you joked about fetucide, are still public spaces. You may have no idea how emotionally charged the issue of fetucide and abortion is in some regions and cultures.  A 14 year-old will have some people grant them some leeway over this kind of joke -- so long as they are still a kid.  But one day soon you will be 19 or 24 or 34, and applying for a job or a promotion, and one of the interviewers will have checked your contribution history and found this joke.  When you are actually an adult the excuse you made the comment when you were 14 won't win you that leeway when you are clearly an adult.  Geo Swan (talk) 17:40, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments, they are highly valuable to me. Maybe I became highly frank. I will take care of that next time onwards. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛  Talk Email 06:02, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Review by Yunshui

We first encountered ona another about seven or eight months back, when I removed a speedy deletion tag you had placed. In both your response to the tag removal and your conduct at the subsequent AfD, I was struck by your courtesy and willingness to consider opposing viewpoints. When I've seen you around subsequently, I've continued to be impressed by your politeness and positive attitude. Wikipedia is built around community co-operation; it's abundantly clear that you understand this and endeavour to discuss and resolve disputes rather than escalate them. (That said, it might be worth reviewing your recent disputes with User:TopGun; burying the hatchet there would be a good idea.) Geo Swan makes a good point, above - whilst your conduct is usually exemplary, you often appear in conjunction with the same group of editors in minor disputes, and it's not always easy for an outside party to segregate your comments from the general group response. I suspect it's also difficult for you to avoid getting sucked in to the general pile-on when such incidents start rolling; just keep reminding yourself that this is an encyclopedia, not a chatroom. That said, generally, your interaction with other editors is, as I've said, to be commended.

Your content work is generally good. In writing this review, I took some time to look over your edits to 100 euro note and Rambhadracharya (both of which you helped on their way to GA); in both cases, I saw a pattern of solid, source-based editing. However, I concur with the copyright issues brought up at your recent RfA; you skirt the line on close paraphrasing a little too closely in a few instances. Of your created articles, I thought Jagadguru Rambhadracharya Handicapped University was a particular highlight; a little tweaking would probably bring that to GA status as well.

I don't use STiki or WP:Huggle, so I'm not entirely au fait with their workings, but you seem to be doing effective anti-vandal work with them. A random sampling of about thirty of your recent reverts gave me no cause for concern; all were clear instances of vandalism and should indeed have been reverted on sight.

You might need to be a bit more careful with CSDs - of the articles you've tagged so far in 2012, only 66% have actually been speedily deleted. It's worth remembering that there is no leeway with these criteria; if you're at all unsure about a CSD tag, don't add it - use a PROD tag instead, which you seem to have more success with (82% of your PRODded articles in 2012 were subsequently deleted). Your !voting in AfDs is also generally correct, with a 71% match between your !votes and the eventual result. It would be good to see a little more explanation of the rationale behind your decisions in these cases; whilst you never leave one-word Keep or Delete !vote, you don't always offer a policy-based reason for your choice. Personally I've generally agreed with your calls at AfD, but it would be nice to know that we agree for the same reason!

Overall, you're a real asset to the project - polite, co-operative, constructive and extremely enthusiastic. I'm looking forward to supporting your future RfA. Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 08:42, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Reviews by  →TSU tp*

I'd love to review your work as you have been a great friend of mine and a better editor. I should have done this myself and should not have waited for you to request about this on Facebook, but anyhow here is the review now. Like I review the contributions of other editors, I will leave few positive points and few negative points. :)


 * +points


 * Civility - I was actually shocked to see that you are so young as your activity on wiki has been so mature and civil. There will be hardly any editor of your age who shows this good understanding of policies of wiki. Even in the times of conflicts, you keep your cool and comment in a pretty civil manner which most of the editors don't do and get rude or even personal. I have never seen you loosing your temper and making a bad comment, You are always polite to others regardless of the situation. This is the best quality about you.
 * Technical work - Making a BOT is a hard thing for a boy at your age and you did it! Also, I have seen you fixing complex templates and other things with perfection. 199 edits at Portals is indeed superb
 * WikiProject Indian Premier League - Well well, this is very familiar. Making that Portal, other template related contributions, improving the project, etc. Great work in short!
 * Content creation - This a topic in which not many are good at. You are doing nice at it with 37% edits. Especially, your work related to Rambhadracharya topics are remarkable. You are also working for FLs (2 successful so far and 2 under progress) which is nice. 17 DYKs is a superb number!
 * Vandal fighting - You have a good amount of reverts and accurate ones. Not much to say but in short, we need fighters like you

here comes the devil


 * -points


 * CSD - Your log doesn't give a good impression as your success rate is pretty low compared to community standards. This can cause trouble in your future RfA and also tagging wrong pages may result in BITE
 * Copy right issues - Now this is a serious concern then CSDs and other. Your RfA failed due to this reason and lack of experience. Eventually you removed the copyright thing but still copying isn't a good idea and is discouraged. Please avoid it next time as taking more time and fixing the sentences isn't a bad option.
 * Experience - I have to admit that your RfA was a hasty one. 6-8 months of activeness doesn't give a proper overview of your understanding despite of your amazing contributions in other wikis. Age factor also kicks in if you go for adminship as generally teenagers are considered to be impulsive and stupid at times. There are admins who are teens but all of them would be near 16-19 which is a time period where some trace of responsibility is found and thus they are trustworthy
 * Conflicts - You were accused by TopGun of hounding him as you followed his work. Though it wouldn't have been your intention, such activity can badger anyone. Like real life, issues of Ind-pak has always got heated up and so should take care before making any comments or edits.
 * AfD - Success rate of your votes matching the final outcome is average. Your arguments are policy based and in a civil and meaningful manner. I found that you nominated few pages which don't actually should have been nominated as they were notable but anyways it was in good faith as your deletion rationals were also quit proper. Just take little more care before nominating and voting (even commenting, especially at Indo-pak things)

In short, you are an asset to the community, very valuable and have rare personality (in a good way). You are doing great and will be an admin one day. In fact, a better admin then others. I'll nominate you without asking you after 1 year or some if you continue the tempo in a positive way :) Hope that you'll find this helpful. Please take the comments above positively and no doubt you'll progress a lot! Happy editing!  →TSU tp* 16:19, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review TSU! :) By the way, I have only 1 FL at this time, and 2 under nomination. ;) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛  Talk Email 17:22, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Review by Dennis Brown

Been a crazy week, so I waited until I could sit down and devote my time only to this. Like I said at your RfA, you are definitely a good contributor. I notice you are getting more involved in AFD per my suggestion, and it is a bit of a bumpy road, but you know what, jumping into a new area always is. About 1/3 of articles that go to AFD are kept, so I would say to be careful to not just focus on delete voting, but also on finding articles that need to be kept, fix them, then vote to keep. Number of AfD's where vote didn't match result (red cells): 22 (22.4%) is a bit high, but like I said, it is part of the learning curve. I normally like to see that around 10 percent. I don't trust people with 0 percent, no one has a real opinion that is 100% with consensus, so don't sweat that.

At CSD, it looks like you are slowing down a bit and being more cautious, which is good. Let me recommend one thing that I did pre-RFA and still now: In your CSD log, when you are left with a blue link, add a reason. I bold it on my page. Sometimes it is a redirect, or was recreated in the right way, or there is another valid reason why you were right to CSD it, but it looks wrong as a blue link. This will help you at your next RfA, as some people just count the red and blue links otherwise. Doing the same with your PROD log is also a good idea.

As for civility, you are usually quite civil but sometimes a little blunt, but I don't think that is a bad thing. Politely being direct is often an asset as admin. As a matter of fact, the longer I am an admin, the more I think that we often worry about civility a little too much. Oh, we should always be civil, but we should be tolerant of others who are less so, and simply ignore minor rudeness from others. Keep this in mind, for as an admin, you will have a lot of mud thrown at you and you will have to overlook most of it. We are all different, allow for it, and do NOT fall victim to becoming the "civility police". This isn't a problem of yours, just guidance.

As for being 14, I wouldn't have thought it, but I don't think about that when talking to someone, I try to judge the merits of their words and yours are always heartfelt and useful. Some do think about age, as you've seen, but it shouldn't hold you back too much at RfA. In general, you are moving in the right direction, making perfectly normal and minor mistakes along the way and learning from them. Your age won't affect my vote at RfA, as you speak multiple languages and are likely already a better editor and smarter than me and have shown your motivations are to make Wikipedia a better place. Some things do come with age, but you more than make up for it with other skills. I think diversity in adminship is a good thing, both nationality and age.

If I can be so bold and break out of "admin/editor" mode, and into my real self, a 47 year old uncle with lots of nieces and nephews your age, let me offer you some advice. Go outside more. I know you want to get the admin bit, but I still think you need to wait until at least the spring, for your own self. Don't let Wikipedia consume too much of you. In order to be a good Wikipedian, you need to be a well rounded human first and too much time here isn't conducive to this. You are 14, and while that won't affect my vote at RfA, it doesn't change the fact that you will benefit from many different experiences in life, so be careful to not become too consumed with Wikipedia. Go outside and play or watch a cricket match once in a while (Ok, I'm an American, and cricket confuses the devil out of me.) You will eventually be an admin here, there is no doubt in my mind about that. Just make sure you enjoy the journey as well, my friend. In the end, that will make you a better admin once you get the bit.

Dennis Brown - 2&cent;    &copy;  11:56, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * First of all, thanks a lot for this review. I will surely take care of your notes, specially the ones in the last para. Again thanks. :) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛  Talk Email 12:05, 7 July 2012 (UTC)