Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Vibhijain

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

Vibhijain[edit]

Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page) Final (16/27/4); ended 07:32, 21 May 2012 (UTC) - Withdrawn by candidate. Jafeluv (talk) 07:32, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination[edit]

Vibhijain (talk · contribs) – Hello everyone,I'm delighted to nominate Vibhijain, an experienced and enthusiastic editor with over 10,000 edits.He has good understanding of the policies.Has a wide range of contributions with an FL,3 GAs' and 15 DYKs'.Has great anti-vandal works with over 2000 reverts using Huggle.User is friendly and helping.Has a clean block record.I'm sure the user would use the new tools wisely.StrikeEagle ✈ 09:25, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:I accept this nomination. First of all, thanks for having the trust in me that I can be a good admin. I hope that this RfA, despite of its result, will prove to be beneficial for me and I will be able to further improve my edits. At last, I will respect the decision of the community. :) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 09:31, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate[edit]

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
A: I will like to close AfDs if I become an admin. I have been active in doing non-admin closures, however admin tools will enable me to close discussions as delete. I would also like to review RfRs, mainly "rollback", "file mover" and "autopatrolled". I will be also willing to work with DYK and sometimes ITN. I would also like to work with WP:RFP and particularly WP:AIV. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 09:57, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: My main contributions have been reverting Vandalism. I have been highly interested in editing articles. I have contributed to 1 FL, 3 GAs and 15 DYK articles. Most of my work has been to Rambhadracharya, which is a GA, however most of the credits for it should go to User:Khamgatam. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 09:57, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
A: I hardly get in any conflicts. If I see that a conflict may occur, I try to ignore it and be friendly. I try to stay away from extremely hot discussions. As an admin, one comes in many of such situations. If I become an admin and come in such a situation, I will like to be civil and friendly, and I will not let the conflict become bigger. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 09:57, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Additional question from Dipankan001
4. You mentioned you are going to work in permission-giving tracks. Under what circumstances shall you grant a editor IP Block Exempt? Also, describe what is the tool meant for.
A:
It can be given to any user who is in good standing and being disturbed by blocks meant to prevent vandalism. In case the user's IP address has been blocked, without their fault, this right can be given to them so they do not face any interruption during editing. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 09:55, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Additional Question by Strike Eagle
5. How do you determine consensus? Would you like to close a discussion that gets too hot?
A:
Consensus can be at times a difficult thing to understand. First of all we have to understand that Wikipedia is not a democracy, and it is not the number of votes that matters, it are the opinion given by the editor. First of all I would read the whole discussion and check whether the opinions given by the users meet with the article concerned and the Wikipedia policies. Then I will see that what is coming as the outcome of the discussion, and in order I will determine that to which side is the consensus reaching. Some discussions which go on the talk pages of articles and users, can be closed if they get extremely hot and doesn't really makes sense, and closing them is in the favor of the community. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 10:10, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Additional question from Pol430
6. I see you hold sysop flags on a number of other projects. Why are you a 'former' sysop on Sanskrit Wikipedia? Please explain the circumstances surrounding the removal of the flag.
A:
It was not a removal. If you would have observed it carefully, Sanskrit Wikipedia had a pretty less number of editors at that time (although it has increased, and I am happy about that), and it didn't also had any active bureaucrat. That is why stewards granted me the sysop tools for a temporary period of time. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 11:06, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation. All I was able to observe was that you were once a sysop and now you are not, that is why I asked for clarification. I cannot read Sanskrit and neither can Google translate. Pol430 talk to me 11:13, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No problems. :) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 11:19, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Additional question from Leaky
7. Are you familiar with this guideline WP:REDACT and do you know why I am asking?
A:
I have been pretty familiar with this, however, I know that you are asking this due to User talk:Chip123456#Not done template. I admit that it was a mistake of mine, and since this incident, I have repeatedly read this policy so I can make sure that such things doesn't happen again. I got to know a lot of things from this, including that I should take up discussions on an other page if the current one may not be suitable for it. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 15:51, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My question has nothing to do with that. It relates to the fact that in my oppose below (#3) I drew attention to the fact that your written English was, in my opinion, deficient. Within a short period of time you corrected a couple of the grammatical errors, but by no means all. I wanted to know why you had done that without considering WP:REDACT. Leaky Caldron 15:57, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I will like to clarify three things. First of all those corrections couldn't had been done in accordance to WP:REDACT since I wanted to add some more characters to my answer. Second thing, you will observe that I frequently miss e, d, s and w while editing because of some technical difficulty in my keyboard. Third is that those corrections were not in accordance to your comments, but I just wanted to spell my answers correctly so that one doesn't thinks that I am using chat language. I agree that my English is not as good as others here, generally because it is not my native language. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 16:10, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The fact is that you re-factored to correct your errors having just been subject to scrutiny on that very point. If you did that as an Admin. which noticeboard do you think you would end up at? You must be transparent and not open to any suspicion that you are acting in a non-straightforward fashion. You cannot use youthful naivety as an excuse if you end up as an Admin. It's a tough place as you will quickly find out. As for your keyboard problems, that is what proof reading is for. Leaky Caldron 16:20, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just make it sure, it was not because I was a "subject to scrutiny" on that. In-fact I noticed it only when you told me about that. My mistake was that I didn't proof-read my answer before saving it. There was no objective to fix you comments, honestly. :) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 16:26, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So you hadn't read Oppose #3 but you rectified some of the errors anyway, OK. Well you missed some. :) Leaky Caldron 16:35, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Additional question from Monty845
8. Discuss how you would close an AfD discussion in which the nominating statement and first delete !vote accurately invoke WP:GNG, and the next four !votes acknowledge that the article may fail WP:GNG but argue it should be kept anyway, as it is a topic that is likely of interest to readers of Wikipedia, that keeping it improves the encyclopedia, and that there would be no harm in making an exception for the particular article. Assuming there are no other !votes, what would you do? Would it change your answer if the article was a WP:BLP?
A:
I will delete the article because if an article fails WP:GNG, it can't be kept. This is due to several reasons. If it fails the GNG, it means that there is no reliable third-party sources covering the topic, hence the article can't be neutral. Plus another reason is that "the article is interesting" is a comment which has to be avoided in AfD discussions. I will like to cite a paragraph of WP:INTERESTING here, which will clarify more my answer more clearly : "Wikipedia editors are a pretty diverse group of individuals and our readers and potential readers include everyone on the planet. Any subject or topic may be of interest to someone, somewhere. And on the converse, there are any number of subjects or topics which an individual editor may not care about. However, personal interest or apathy is not a valid reason to keep or delete an article." If the article is a WP:BLP, it really can't be kept in case it is not notable, and since there are no reliable sources, it has to be deleted. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 16:37, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Assuming the article is not a BLP, would it be possible to invoke WP:IAR in an AfD discussion? Monty845 16:42, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My answer will be no, because of the fact that if the article really is interesting to reader, there must be some other secondary sources covering it. Even Uncyclopedia articles are interesting, but they can't be kept on Wikipedia. :) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 16:48, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Additional question from Dennis Brown
9. What was your biggest mistake at Wikipedia? What did you do, if anything, to rectify it? In hindsight, would you have handled the aftermath differently now, and if so, how and why? Feel free to provide diffs if appropriate.
A:
My biggest mistake has been with commons:File:Ramjas School, Pusa Road.png. I made it pretty long before but still when I remember about it, i start laughing on myself. This picture was a screenshot of a copyrighted video, and I uploaded it on Commons after editing it a little. At that time, i had the age-old believe that if we edit an image, it becomes our work and we get its copyrights. Surely I was wrong. Although it was marked for deletion after some time. However that picture helped me a lot and its deletion indicated me where do I stand in the knowledge of copyright, and the big mistake I did with not reading the copyright policies, and from that day, I have been particularly concerned with legal issues. If any such thing happens now by mistake, although it will not, I will nominate the file for deletion and personally tell an admin to delete that file, if it may possess some serious legal threats. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 17:16, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Additional question from Bbb23
10. Given your nationality, as an admin, would you devote more time to Indian articles than others? Please explain your response.
A:
It depends, since it is my nation, I would know more about India relates topics. It also helps me in the sense that being an Indian helps me to find sources about Indian topics more easily. Although I love to work with articles related to other countries, I prefer to find out some sources before I actually start working on it. However I don't believe that I will work exclusively on Indian articles if I become an admin, however I may participate in AfD discussions related to them if some sources are needed for the article. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 04:03, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
When has Bbb23 asked such a question of Americans or of Englishmen etc.? What possible point could this question have? (A country with a billion inhabitants and the first earth books on logic and grammar needs more attention, not less.)  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 19:10, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Additional question from Carrite
11. Have you ever edited English Wikipedia under another screen name? Is so, what was that name or names?
A:
As of English Wikipedia, No. I have got two other accounts, one for bot edits, and one is a test account (used to do some tests), but I have never used any of them here. I did once or twice edited with an IP address, but that was way back in 2008, and I really don't remember anything about it, and since then my IP has changed 2 times. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 04:23, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Carrite (talk) 04:44, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Additional question from Bbb23
12. In the beginning of your editing at Wikipedia (March 2011), you created two articles, Ramjas School, Pusa Road and List of disputed territories of India. Both articles were poorly drafted. The school article was messy on a small scale. The list article was messy on a large scale. I just went in myself and did some clean-up of the school article. You haven't edited it since March 15, 2011, shortly after you created it. You have't touched the list article since August 2011. In October 2011 another editor removed all the citations to Wikipedia. At the moment, it sits as a very long and unsourced article. I'm sympathetic to a new editor making mistakes, and I understand we don't own articles we create or edit, but that's different from cleaning up after oneself. Why have you not fixed the problems in both articles?
A:
I got inactive on English Wikipedia after March 2011 and got active on other projects, and due to do I was more like a newcomer to English Wikipedia when I came back here. Most probably if I would had been that much experienced at that time, I would have not created these article, because I don't think there are much sources related to them. The only article I sought to edit after my comeback was Zain Khan, because this one was a BLP. I did though of editing other articles which I created, but I failed in doing so because of the absence of sources. Also I deliberately decided not to edit the Ramjas School article because the school authority warned me not to write anything about the school on internet (that is a big story and I can't tell it here, Sorry!), although I am no longer a part of that School, i don't want to take any risk in my real life. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 17:49, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That explains why you didn't touch the school article, but not why you didn't fix the list article, which, as I earlier said, you edited in August 2011 (when you were back at Wikipedia in full swing). If you felt that you couldn't find sources to support the material in the list article, why didn't you, at a minimum, remove the unsourced material?--Bbb23 (talk) 19:24, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

General comments[edit]

Withdrawn First of all, thanks to everyone who participated in this RfA, it has been a great learning experience. I have got a number of things to improve upon after this, and I hope that I will be able to do that in a span of about 6 months. Again thanks to everyone who gave their opinion on this RfA. :) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 06:50, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review his contributions before commenting.

Discussion[edit]

Support[edit]
  1. Support - A friendly and hardworking editor. Has did great job for GAs and FL and also DYKs. Their rollbacks are pretty good and the user is non-controversial who doesn't get into much conflicts. Lack of experience can be a reason to oppose (only 7 months activity on wiki is very low) but still I'll support as I cannot refrain that he is a superb editor with good understanding of policies and we need editor like him. →TheSpecialUserTalkContributions* 10:14, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for your trust. Just for clarification, earlier I have been pretty active on other wikis before getting active here. The fact that despite being my home wiki, my edits at English Wikipedia constitute of 45% of my global contributions, clarifies that. :) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 10:20, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support; meets my strict requirements. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 10:18, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support What's more, this user has been civil, outstanding work at articles, and great work in File: namespace which very few people do. He is 3 in 1 type of editor who has all. We should really lower our standards a bi and support this extraordinary editor. Dipankan (Have a chat?) 10:21, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Which standards you mean we should lower? StrikeEagle ✈ 10:22, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Some people has some strict guidelines. That's what I said. That had been a issue in my RFA. Dipankan (Have a chat?) 10:24, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    There is a disscussion going on Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship about it. And it is better if we move this talk to somewhere else. →TheSpecialUserTalkContributions* 10:25, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Only activity time (7 months) might be a concern in this regard.He surely passes all the other thresholds. StrikeEagle ✈ 10:27, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support Although the opposers throw up legitimate concerns, I do not think those concerns show that you will abuse the tools. Your sysop flags on other projects encourage me that you have the technical ability to use the admin bits. After a careful examination of your contributions, you seem to be sufficiently cool headed to be trusted with the tools and your WP:PAG knowledge seems reasonable. You have reasonable experience in counter-vandalism and other admin areas and you have good article contributions. Your age does not concern me; I think your maturity shines through in your editing. I can find no evidence of 'dickishness'. My only remaining concern is that you have only been active for a fairly short time period, but that is not a reason for me to oppose. I wish you every success with this RfA. Pol430 talk to me 11:56, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Support - Unlike many, I actually like your answer to Q3. It shows that you are highly unlikely to incite drama and inflame conflicts. I see no issue with an admin who wants nothing to do with AN3, ANI, ARB, RFCs, and other controversial tasks and instead wants to deal with RFPP/AIV. The wanting to close AFDs is a mild concern given his avoidance of conflict, but most AFDs aren't explosive politics-filled messes. Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:49, 19 May 2012 (UTC) Unfortunately, per copyright issues. Reaper Eternal (talk) 13:06, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Support. 209.117.69.2 (talk) 13:18, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Support. UsedBeen20 (talk) 13:19, 19 May 2012 (UTC) User's first day, 17th edit. —Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 14:52, 19 May 2012 (UTC) User has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet. Indenting !vote. —Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 09:07, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Strong Support One of the best young editors on the project. Great content contributor in addition to having good experience in admin-related areas. →Bmusician 13:29, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Strong Support as the nominator. StrikeEagle ✈ 14:08, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support Opposes unconvincing. Seems a very clueful editor, as evidenced by his userrights and proper use thereof on other Wikipedias.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:48, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support- Hasn't made a hash of other projects, here to help, and I find WP:Needs More Drama an insufficient reason to withhold support. Dru of Id (talk) 19:12, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support. Good editor here, and sysop on other wikis. V. good. Rcsprinter (orate) 21:32, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support Garamond Lethe(talk) 23:06, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support SpacemanSpiff oppose is concerning, but I don't think he will abuse the tools, we want candidates who is willing to go though less drama Secret account 23:23, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support. I think his answer to #3 was not phrased very well; "ignore" was the wrong word to use. What he really means, in my opinion, is that if he gets into a conflict, he will try to let it cool down by not fueling the flames. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:17, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support - An Excellent editor who has handled themselves very well, throughout their duration here. Three different user rights; an ideal namespace; over a year's experience; thousands of edits - why no one else nominated this user, for the mop, earlier, is totally beyond me. What's a big concern for me, is that editor's are making candidate's age an issue - Age is just a number; and for the record, not everyone is an immature teenager, Vibhi and your's truly being included in that. Good Luck! -- MST☆R (Chat Me!) 05:30, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    No, age is not just a number. Most kids — and a person who's 14 is most definitely still a kid — are usually immature. It's not their fault, of course, but they usually lack the life experience needed to deal with complex and heated conflicts — and, on Wikipedia, to appropriately deal with the responsibilities of having a WP:MOP. There may be kids who are particularly mature and behave responsibly, like adults, but they are exceptions. And, as is the case with all exceptions, there has to be evidence showing that they indeed are mature and in Vibhijain's case, there is no evidence he is particularly mature (nor is there evidence he is particularly immature, that's true). Salvio Let's talk about it! 12:18, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Salvio, with all due respect, I, myself, started at Wikipedia when I was 14. My motivation has, and still is, me seperating myself from the teenage stereotypical comment, "if your a teen, you're immature". I believe, by going through Vibhijain's contributions, he is easily, one of those "exceptions"; and I have no reason, whatsover, to believe he would abuse those tools. And for the record, I just like others, have come across many editor's here, who are surprisingly enough, not teenagers, but, stereotypically saying, "do act like them." -- MST☆R (Chat Me!) 13:15, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, the teenager defending the teenager. :-) I agree with Salvio. It's certainly true that some teens (and don't forget teens covers a wide number of years from 13-19, and 14 is at the lower end of that range) are more mature than others, but I think it's reasonably safe to generalize that most 14-year-olds have considerably less life experience than adults. I also think it's telling that Vibhijain has stayed away from some of the more contentious areas of Wikipedia. Perhaps, as an editor, that's wise of him to do so, but as an admin, he needs to be able to deal with drama (like this one), and without prejudging him, the fact that he hasn't means we are unable to assess how well he would be able to do that. Then again, maybe everything I've just said is total hogwash because I'm SO much older and clearly biased in favor of senile admins.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:41, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not defending Vibhijan, just because he's a teenager - as I said, in my opinion, age is just a number. He could be 57, and still would get the exact same support I have given him. IF he was a disruptive editor, who has been blocked a couple times etc. then I would not support him at all, by all means. He has been here for well over a year, has established himself as a focussed editor within the community, regardless of how old he is, he deserves the respect, that any editor here deserves. Anyway, I have commitments to attend to at the moment, so I'll be willing and interested to continue this age discussion, with the both of you, on an appropriate venue, perhaps tommorow. Thank you, -- MST☆R (Chat Me!) 14:01, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support - I think you will be a great admin. -- Pasindu ( Talk / @ ) 07:34, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support - Despite what the opposing users write, I don't think you'll be hampered by your age. I support your candidacy, C(u)w(t)C(c) 16:42, 20 May 2012 (UTC).[reply]
  16. The opposing comments do not convince me that Vibhijain is unsuited for adminship. Therefore, I am supporting with the caveat that he makes an extra effort to paraphrase information from outside sources using his own words, rather than tweaking the already existing text. Master&Expert (Talk) 03:42, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose[edit]
  1. Oppose. Although Vibhijain has closed uncontroversial AfD nominations, he does not seem to contribute in AfDs with reasoned "Keep" or "Delete" arguments. Without such participation, I cannot trust Vibhijain to apply the deletion criteria appropriately. Axl ¤ [Talk] 10:27, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Not ready for adminship yet — claims to want to work with ITN but, speaking as an ITN regular, I've almost never seen this user there. We don't need admins just busting in pretending to know everything without having actually spent time at areas they want to work in. —Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 10:48, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks your views and suggestions. By the way, I have got 3 ITN articles and I do casually participate there. Also I have told that I would like to close ITN discussion sometimes. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 11:03, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    "(Having) 3 ITN articles" means nothing. You have not often participated in the discussions there at ITN and I for one would not trust you to work at ITN until you did get more involved with the process. It is not as simple as "having articles" passed at ITN. An admin wanting to work at ITN doesn't need to have any "ITN articles" — they need to take part in the debates. —Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 11:06, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Additionally — you want to work with WP:RFPP and WP:AIV, yet you only have 17 edits to the former and 59 to the latter, both well under 10% of all your Wikipedia-space edits. And, at the risk of bringing up the age-old ageism argument (no pun intended), at 14, considering you say in Q3 that you haven't been in any conflicts, I don't want to know how you'd handle it with the admin tools. At that age teenagers can be very volatile. Sorry, there's no way I'd consider supporting. Try again in three years, more likely, at least from my point of view. —Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 11:11, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry but I have failed in understanding your first comment, how really somebody's age effects his conversation with others. Sorry to say, but this is more like a stereotype opinion for me. :( ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 11:17, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose. Effective, unambiguous communication is the most vital competence for an Admin. Based on several of the answers on this page the candidate's standard of written English is not up to the mark or they have failed to proof read their contribution. Leaky Caldron 11:27, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  4. I fear I have to oppose your candidacy at this time due to your reply to question #3; a candidate who basically ignores conflicts will not be a very good admin, in my opinion, because, even if they'd wish to keep as far away from them as they could, admins often have to step in disputes — very heated ones, sometimes — to at least try to get them settled; to be able to do so in a way that improves the project — and one that's also mindful of Wikipedia content policies —, you must have had first-hand experience of content disputes. Salvio Let's talk about it! 11:34, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    He has to have had some experience with content disputes and other concerns given the content he has created. Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:51, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Oppose While we wouldn't want anyone to go and look for conflict or disputes, and that we certainly want civil and friendly admins, I fear someone who actively avoid heated discussions might disappear from a discussion of his action if a discussion becomes heated. KTC (talk) 13:53, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think there is any wikipedia policy that says every Administrator should participate in heated arguments.If there is a desparate need for his participation(intervention),he will surely.I think he said that he would try to be friendly and take care of the matter.Thanks! StrikeEagle ✈ 13:59, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry for again jumping in, but let me make it sure that I will be surely available to clarify any doubt if someone raises any objection over any of my action. And in case, I am not able to give a clarification over it, I will be more than happy to recall my Adminship (if this RfA passes). ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 14:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Oppose. Except in special cases I oppose in principle children as administrators due to their normal lack of maturity when dealing with conflict. I can be persuaded by evidence but in this case there's no track record of dealing with conflict I can examine. In addition language skills aren't good enough. Some of the responses here and on the talk pages I've examined suggest to me that he will struggle when involved in controversial decision making by being unable to handle very complex language. Finally the almost complete lack of edit summaries, which made it difficult for me to locate the material I would need to make a decision in this case, leads me to oppose for now. QU TalkQu 14:18, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Vibhi was involved in WikiProject IPL in which he was to assess new articles.Hence, I think there was a lack of edit summaries. I find it disheartening as young users are rejected user rights just because they are too young.For his age, Vibhav has shown great maturity and performs well and better than some other editors who have double or triple the age. StrikeEagle ✈ 14:25, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Hope my reply addresses your concerns.. Thanks! StrikeEagle ✈ 14:28, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    As a word of advice: don't badger the opposes. It'll only affect the nomination negatively. If there's anything pressing, the candidate will be more than able to respond himself. —Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 14:54, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    My apologies... StrikeEagle ✈ 14:55, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Oppose, with moral support. In my experience with Vibhijain, he's generally clueful and good at what he does, but I really can't support based on age and judgement. User:QuiteUnusual says it far better than I can. No, posting your age is not prohibited, but when you do you better be able to take any opposes based on that. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 16:50, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Oppose, I'm concerned by some plagiarism/copyvio/close paraphrase issues. I'm using one of the GA's -- 100 euro note as an example. In this edit, the candidate added the following:
    "The hologram image change between the value and a window or doorway can be seen if the note is tilted, and rainbow-coloured concentric circles of micro-letters moving from the centre to the edges of the patch are seen in the background."
    Source:"Tilt the banknote – the hologram image will change between the value and a window or doorway. In the background, you can see rainbow-coloured concentric circles of tiny letters moving from the centre to the edges of the patch."
    "Special printing processes gives the note a unique feel'."
    source: "special printing processes give banknotes their unique feel"
    and so on with a significant majority of the content from the edit coming directly from the source and in the article currently. Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident. I brought this earlier at Talk:National_symbols_of_India#Copyvio based on the FLC nomination. Likewise, about ten days ago, there was an attribution problem with Bangladesh at the 2011 Commonwealth Youth Games which became a GA within three hours and ten minutes of moving to article space from user space. Subsequently another editor had to go to that article (after the quick GA) to add the attribution trail to the source article. Given this history, I'd suggest to User:Vibhijain to go back and check prior contributions for these kinds of problems and fix them first, especially as two of the examples I've given above are listed as his GAs. —SpacemanSpiff 17:26, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Oppose SpacemanSpiff's comments make me think that it's probably better that the candidate get more experience before becoming an admin. Skillfully paraphrasing a source is not always easy, and a lot of editors have included text too close to the source in their articles. It takes time to learn how to do it well, and doesn't mean that the candidate is a bad editor. It is definitely better that he write some articles free from close paraphrasing before getting the mop though, since concerns have been raised on a couple occasions. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:44, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Oppose. Vibijain's strengths almost certainly lie best in our en.Wiki articles on topics from the Indian sub-continent, and helping non-native English speaking editors from that region, and I believe that he should concentrate his skill set in that area where his local knowledge and communication skills with his fellow native editors would be a great asset to en.Wikipedia. There is a huge amount of work to be done within the scope of the India Education Program, especially as an ambassador for example, without the need for the use of admin tools - and it is almost certain that the local chapter in Delhi would welcome him on board. Vibhijain began an editor review only 10 days ago. I think he should have allowed time for more comments to arrive before running for office. Has voted on 153 AfD but 71.9% where the vote matched the result is, IMO, too low. Candidates also need to demonstrate their handling of conflict, because any admin who uses the tools will encounter delicate situations, and I would like to have more reassurance that the candidate would react appropriately in stressful situations. Ca 10,000 edits and 9 months are not alone sufficient grounds for adminship and Vibijain still does not meet all my criteria. I cannot therefore support at this time, but he has already known for a long time that that I am more than willing to help him develop his skills, and I'm sure this English will improve with time, especially when he has completed his education - I have lived and taught in Delhi and I know that very high standards of language can be achieved. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:00, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Your comments were part of why I asked him the question I did, but he hasn't answered it (perhaps he didn't notice it). This comment is not intended to agree or disagree with your !vote, but I do agree with your comments about how he could be helpful in improving Indian articles. Many non-Indian editors have complained about the quality of the Indian articles, and it would great to have someone knowledgeable help out.--Bbb23 (talk) 03:06, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I have answered your question. :) Sorry for the delay but I can't answer the questions while sleeping. ;) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 04:06, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    You'll have to learn how. It's one of the reqirements to become an admin. Thanks for your answer.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:52, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Oppose per Q8. The GNG is not absolute. No one had discussed a merge, which is frequently a goog outcome for subject that people support keeping but technically fails the GNG. If he really feels the right outcome is a straight delete, he should !vote accordingly. Faulty arguments need to be rebutted in the discussion, not by supervote. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:12, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Oppose – User doesn't have knowledge of copyright policies of Wikipedia. Most recently he copied content from one article to another, without giving any attribution to original contributor(s). And, this article is one of his GAs. An admin without the understanding of such basic things would be the last thing I'd like to see on en Wikipedia. — Bill william comptonTalk 04:02, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Oppose My concerns addressed in my earlier neutral argument remain. The editor has made 19 edits since. 13 of those didn't have an automatic edit summary. Of those 13, Vibhijain used an edit summary in one. I was leaning towards oppose as I raised my concern with edit summary usage, the failure to improve confirms my worries. Ryan Vesey Review me! 04:49, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Opposer I find myself having to oppose in this one. The nominee does not use edit summaries near as much as I'd like to see (which alone wouldn't lead me to oppose), but the copyright issues lead me to opposed. Also, communication skills also leave me uneasy.--SKATER Is Back 07:46, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Oppose per Bill william compton. Besides I prefer people who's joined the project for a longer time, and I have concern of his age.--Jsjsjs1111 (talk) 13:04, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Oppose per the copyright issues. Reaper Eternal (talk) 13:07, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Oppose per Axl, SmokeyJoe, and copyright issues --Guerillero | My Talk 17:43, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Oppose. I have concerns about AfD accuracy and experience, and the copyright issues don't help.--Slon02 (talk) 17:45, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Oppose: (1) The candidate is 14 and so not an adult. (2) Close paraphrasing (e.g. "unique feel") concerns noted by an editor who seems to think that this is an encyclopedia---poor doomed soul....  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 19:04, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Oppose - Per SpacemanSpiff's point on poor paraphrasing, and Strange Passerby points on lack of involvment at areas of interest, also, disregard for edit summaries is a sticking point. Try again in 6-12 months, after putting in some effort at WP:RFPP and WP:AIV, and show us you can resolve conflicts, perhaps you will get a better result next time here. — GabeMc (talk) 21:39, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Oppose: Spiff's copyvio examples, the short active tenure, the lack of edit summaries, the avoidance of conflict are all signs that you're not ready for adminship yet. Focus on your content for a bit (your user talk to article space ratio is a bit on the high side) and work on content that is outside your comfort zone (your main article work appears to be in relatively uncontroversial areas) and you'll pick up the requisite admin 'skills' fairly quickly. --regentspark (comment) 23:18, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Oppose. I've seen plenty around on noticeboards and elsewhere, and they've never done anything in particular that gives me cause for concern, but their answers to a number of the questions (especially Q5) hasn't quite sold me on their ability to work at AfD, which given that this is the first thing they list as wanting to do with the mop is slightly concerning. In addition, Q4 doesn't seem to adequately describe what is needed for handling RFPERMs: namely that admins need to make a judgment call about trustworthiness. In the case of IP block exemptions, exceptional care needs to be taken over granting them, and if appropriate to check with a CheckUser. I do think this user's heart is in the right place—they just need to keep their head up, improve and try again in six months. —Tom Morris (talk) 00:00, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Oppose, copyright issues are always a deal-breaker for me. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 00:01, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Oppose per my RFA criteria. Dori ☾Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 01:15, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Oppose Vibhijain is to be commended on his admirable enthusiasm and I hope he will long continue to enhance the encyclopedia with his knowledge and contributions. However, his experience and tenure are slight and it shows; the incidents and examples (as described by inter alia Bill and Spiff, for eg.) that demonstrate policy knowledge and application, judgment, communication and decision-making abilities are concerning and do not show a satisfactory standard. Schoolchildren are IMHO generally unsuitable candidates for adminship. Plutonium27 (talk) 04:52, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Oppose Can't support someone for adminship if they don't understand copyright issues. Canuck89 (what's up?) 04:54, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Oppose, per SpacemanSpiff. Also concerns about judgment (including m:Requests for comment/Vibhijain and Mayur). Jafeluv (talk) 07:15, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral[edit]

Moving to oppose Neutral My primary concerns lie with this editor's communication skills. Edit summary usage is only 53% and a check of the contributions reveals that a majority of the edit summaries are automatic when using stiki or creating a new page so the number should be much lower. The answer to question 4 leaves me with concerns with communication as well. I don't feel that "Under what circumstances shall you grant a editor IP Block Exempt?" was responded to. Instead, the editor only gave a generic statement of what it is for. Language skills show a difficulty in communicating; however, I would have ignored them had the other problems not existed. Ryan Vesey Review me! 14:51, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Strange Passerby that young users may have difficulty dealing with conflict. I don't believe in judging an RfA based on the candidates age; however, it is a reasonable thing to do when there are no examples of the editor dealing with conflict. The response by Vaibhav to Strange Passeby increases my concerns with his age and communication skills. Ryan Vesey Review me! 14:58, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, you've put it far better than I did; 14 year olds can indeed be very mature, but lacking any evidence either way it's incredibly difficult to make a call as to how the candidate will react when put into a conflict situation while he has the tools. I didn't mean to oppose solely on his age, but more on what that meant for him as an admin. Thanks for putting it so succinctly. —Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 16:22, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Age isn't that big of a deal and needlessly erring on the side of caution might be a practice of 'Better safe than sorry', but it should be noted that I dislike comments about an editors age, sex, race or personal feature held against them. An editors personal details should be largely ignored because the only thing we should concerns themselves with is their work thus far. People who are here at RFA are typically extraordinary users because for all the work we do, its not rewarded with monetary value, most people forget that Wikipedia work is a labor of love or for the greater good. That kind of discrimination serves no purpose in the meritocracy that is Wikipedia. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 16:50, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't disagree; I for one would be willing to support a young candidate if they had proven themselves to be able to deal with conflict situations calmly, on merit. This just simply isn't one of those cases, however, as there is no prior evidence to judge the candidate on. In such a case, as Ryan points out, I believe it is not unfair to raise the candidate's age as a potential issue once he has received the tools. —Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 18:29, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would never consider withholding support from an editor based on his age and I hope it doesn't seem like I am holding a personal feature against this editor. As far as I am concerned the age of this user didn't have an affect at all in my decision to put myself in in the neutral column. I only mentioned the issue due to the response the nominee gave to Strange Passerby. Ryan Vesey Review me! 01:01, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Neutral I can't oppose, because I don't think you would do harm to the project if given the tools. Your contributions to mainspace are generally very good and noteworthy. You are thoughtful, mature, and I believe you put the interests of Wikipedia above your own. What I don't see, however, is working in contentious areas. An admin must be able to deal with others who are out of control, without losing his cool and simply blocking everyone. He has to be able to provide balance and neutrality in discussions at AFD, or just when questioned about his actions. Even if you only work at AFD, you have to be able to draw the line between "spirited debate" "moderate incivility" and "personal attack", and know when to warn someone in the discussion, on their talk page, or take action. This takes practice. I think you should work a little at WP:DRN or WP:3RR and learn the basics, slowly at first. This will help you hone your communications skills when dealing with others in less than ideal situations. You don't have to be an expert in this area, but you need enough experience so that when a situation gets out of hand, you can be comfortable and confident in taking control and seeking resolution. You are an excellent candidate who is clearly an asset to the project, and I hope I am able to reconsider your candidacy in a year. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 17:59, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Neutral - Time in the harness strikes me as insufficient, with most activity clustered into about a 4 month period. I'm also not seeing a lot of administrator-like tasks in the edit history. My advice would be that you keep creating content, that's what Wikipedia needs, and leave the janitorial tasks to the janitors. Carrite (talk) 04:50, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Neutral (leaning towards Oppose) - he does make rather good contributions to articles, but most do not have edit summaries and because of that and the fact I didn't have time to sort everything out I could only analyse the previous day's edits, which were mostly adding WikiProject boxes to talk pages. I don't think age is a problem (being only ~4 months older than him) but seeing his answer to question 3 and hearing he might have included copyvios, I'm staying neutral for now. AndieM (Am I behaving?) 14:31, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I always behave - sometimes well, but sometimes badly... Peridon (talk) 19:43, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Neutral I ignore age (except when the law says that it must be taken into account), but I do take into account experience. I am bothered that we get promising candidates who get put off by the response to them at AfD - when ideally they should have been deflected until ready. I don't recall seeing this candidate in my areas of operation (scissors! scalpel! axe!), but that's not a kiss of death. My advice is to follow Carrite's wise words - keep on creating content - and I would couple to it 'get into the admin areas'. Study RfAs. Learn when it pays to be polite and when it pays to be rude (but do it cautiously at first...). Stalk respectable and/or reputable editors (that lets me out...). Discuss things with on the one hand the more experienced and on the other hand the younger editors. At present, I can't see much need for you to have a mop. I can see someone with potential that I don't want to lose. Someone who, I hope, will learn from this hell hole and will come back prepared like Odysseus was when he faced the Sirens. And most of all, don't get despondent when this goes down the pan. Peridon (talk) 19:43, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Vibhijain&oldid=1147995263"