The following discussion is preserved as an archive of anadministrator election candidacy thatdid not succeed.Please do not modify it.

Final(56/144/341)(S/A/O); Seeofficial results(non-admin closure) –DreamRimmer■12:31, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Vestrian24Bio (talk ·contribs) – After some observations, I found out that during daytime in our side of the earth (eastern) many pages are backloged needing administrator attention, while most of them are sorted through the nighttime. I figured this is due to the lack of active administrators in the eastern hemisphere. While, I won't be able to make big impact alone, I'll do my part with the hope for more adimins from eastern side in the future.

I was blocked for edit warring once, but I've learnt from my mistakes. I ran into a similar situation recently and I handled it by 1) initiating discussion; 2) requesting page protection; 3) reporting to AN3[1].Vestrian24Bio11:55, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

Please disclose whether you have everedited Wikipedia for pay: I joined Wikipedia initially to edit for a local organization ("ND Enterprisers", which I used to own), and after a few edits, I was blocked. I was unblocked after agreeing not edit about it anymore. Since, I have never edited Wikipedia for pay and I don't think I will anytime soon as I've learnt alot about Wikipedia since, and I think paid editing makes it less authentic (my personal opinion, although I will respect the editors who do).

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

1. Why are you interested in becoming an administrator?

A: As I said in my above statement, I want to make a change in the lack of active adimins on this side of the earth. An important example I must say, in recent times whenever I make a page protection request, RPPI page is backloged withapprox. 30+ requests. While, I myself can't make a huge impact, at least, I could do my part in making sure there are admins to step-in when they are needed the most, with hope for more editors to come forward from this hemisphere.

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A: I've been working on a few cricket topics to get them toWP:GT /WP:FT. Mainly,2024 Men's T20 World Cup topic which has got 4 GAs and 2 FLs thus far and just 6 more articles to go, but an ongoing PM discussion as well. I'm also working on theMen's T20 World Cup topic as well. In the meantime2025 Indian Premier League topic is also underway. I have also made 4 ITN noms, 1 DYK and a pending DYK nom. I do reviews as well - 32 GANs, 17 FLCs, and 2 FACs. I have contributed to 17 editions of theWikipedia Signpost as well. I have listed more of by best contributions in my userpage.

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 always do my best to keep my calm. If users are not into constructively discussing, and going on circles, I just ignore them. If they start personal attacks towards any editor or something (such as edit warring etc.); I report them toWP:ANI (orWP:AN3 etc.).

You may ask optional questions below. There is alimit oftwo questions per editor. Multi-part questions are disallowed, but you are allowed to ask follow-up questions related to previous questions. Make sure to use level 4 section headers, not bold face. (4 equal signs)

4. Are there any areas of adminship you do not plan to participate in, due to unfamiliarity or lack of technical knowledge? If you later decided you wanted to help in these areas, what would be your plan to become an effective admin in those areas?

A: I plan to start working on RPPI, RMT, NPP, and some sectors of CSD and XFDs as well as closing RMs, PMs etc. Same plan for every other part of adminship areas: when I start working on them, I'll observe current requests and archives to see how other experienced admins handle similar situations, and learn from them. If I have any questions or doubts, I'll ask out experienced admins for advice.

5. In your viewpoint, Is it necessary to add edit summary for every edits that you or we made?

A: I would say that when making continuous edits to the same page, just the section header would be enough. Eg, if I putworking on the page to get it to GA in an edit summary, that's what the next edits to the page is going to be, so just/* [section name] */ would be enough. I also think that during copy-edits, minor edits, and reverting obvious vandals wouldn't need a detailed edit summary. Otherwise, an explanation should always be given. PS: the edit summary gadget for whatever reasons seems to mark edits with only the section header as empty edit summaries.

6. Can you elaborate more on whypaid editing makes [Wikipedia] less authentic?

A: Based on my encounters with paid editors thus far, when someone edits for pay their priority is to add the content they want regardless of whether it's supported by RS or if it's NPOV, which are two important things in editing and part ofWP:5P2 ofWikipedia:Five pillars. Which is why I think without those two it would be less authentic compared to other good faith editors.

7. Thank you for putting yourself forward as an administrator candidate. In what situations, if any, do you believe an administrator should invokeignore all rules when justifying the use of advanced permissions?

A: IAR is usually if a rule stands in the way of improving the encyclopedia, for regular editors. But, I don't think there's any reason for an admin to IAR, no matter how dire the situation might be.

8. Since the last admin election, the community has authorized and established arecall process. How has the addition of the recall petition affected your choices when choosing to run for the mop?

A: I don't think it had any impact on my choice. It's like redoing RfA for traditional admins, while for elected admins going through an RfA either way.

9. How would you address a good faith editor who made a honest mistake?

A: If they've realised their mistake and corrected their wrong-doings they should be forgiven as long as they don't make the same mistake again.

10. What are your thoughts on the progression of the ongoing discussion atTalk:2024 Men's T20 World Cup#Merge proposal, in which we have both opined? Can you provide a few sentences on what you see as the pros and cons of the opposing viewpoints? Thanks,

A: As for what I said there last, I don't think "bloat" might be the correct way to describe the situation, but I'm not sure how to describe it; so, I'm working on a draft for how the post-merge page would look. Which, I believe it affects the quality of the page as it's already a GA. Maybe I could be wrong.

11. What is your perspective on Artificial Intelligence (AI) as it relates to Wikipedia?

A: While there are bots and stuff that use AI-related tools to identify problematic edits which I'm okay with, I'm against the usage of LLMs for editing or discussions. LLMs 1) use existing sources to generate content which if copied to Wikipedia would be copyvios; 2) or generates results based on what's on Wikipedia, so there's no way fact-check it (other than manually looking for it) as there are many IPs adding false content from time to time, pages could contain wrong information during the time of search; 3) or creates non-existent stuffs using imaginary tools. On the other hand, LLMs doesn't seem to understandWikipedia:Policies and guidelines based on the LLM-generated edit requests I came across and there are editors posting LLM-generated content without even understanding it completely, which doesn't help in a constructive discussion.

• Links for Vestrian24Bio:Vestrian24Bio (talk ·contribs ·deleted ·count ·AfD ·logs ·block log ·lu ·rfar ·spi)
• Edit summary usage for Vestrian24Bio can be foundhere.

Please keep discussion constructive andcivil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly reviewhis contributions before commenting.

Please donot cast votes or issue any declarations of support/opposition here. This section is for neutral discussion. Voting will take place usingSecurePoll from 23 July.

• WP:AFD notes:n=136, lots of recent participation, usually votes "delete". Almost all of their participation is about cricket. Some !votes suggest a lack of care, eg[2], others a lack of patience, eg[3]. Some turn on disagreements about deletion policy, eg[4]. They do not tend to explain their positions in depth. No fully red flags but no green ones either. --asilvering (talk)02:16, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

• It would be nice to see specific examples of conflicts and what they consider their best contribution. One/two sentence answers are, in my eyes, never the best way to speak about your experiences. Also, apparently the very first edit was a paid edit. While that isn't per se a problem now (especially since it was disclosed), that both Liz[5] and ToBeFree[6] had to mention it in order for them to truly disclose it, could be of some concern.Conyo14 (talk)03:48, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
  • If they have learned from this experience, I don't see it as a negative. --Reconrabbit15:02, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
• It's pretty striking to see someone who's been declined in the last three months for rollback[7], new page patroller[8][9], and page mover[10] come to the conclusion that running for adminship is the next step. When you add to that the recent block and the lack of immediate forthrightness about paid editing, I think this candidate still has quite a ways to go in terms of experience, maturity, good judgment, etc.Extraordinary Writ (talk)04:15, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
• Agree with Extraordinary Writ that consistently ignoring the criteria for receiving other permissions does not bode well for meeting theexpectations of adminship and the thread cited by AirshipJungleman29 shows poor communication. I am particularly concerned that in responding to Fade258's unease that this candidate only uses edit summaries 66.2% of the time, their idea of a good edit summary is "working on the page to get it to GA". "Summaries help other editors by (a) providing a reason for the edit, (b) saving the time to open up the edit to find out what it's all about, and (c) providing information about the edit on diff pages and lists of changes" (Help:Edit summary). It is alreadyassumed in good faith that the edit was made for article improvement, so the edit summary must contain a substantive summary and rationale for the edit. Failure to understand this point is a dealbreaker for me.ViridianPenguin🐧 (💬)06:09, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
• Vestrian24Bio was blocked for 72 hours on 21 March 2025 for edit warring about infoboxes, a contentious topic. Their unblock request shows a lack of understanding of what edit warring is and that there is no entitlement to 3 reverts. --Guerillero^{Parlez Moi}08:53, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

  Just going to point out for everyone, the recent warning[11] they received for edit warring appears slightly misconstrued. VestrianBio and one other editor were reverting a disruptive socker and it flagged the 3RR warning (even though they only reverted twice). More can look into it, just thought it would be notable before discussion closes.Conyo14 (talk)23:24, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

• With regard to the stated desire for adminship basically boiling down to "nobody seems to want to work the 'night shift'": I'm not sure if we really have any useful data on the distribution of administrators among time-zones (I suspect not, since we don't require disclosure of that kind of info and people even in the same timezone can have wildly different schedules). But as Vestrian24Bio's user page indicates they're from Sri Lanka (along with a lot more personal information that I'd certainly be comfortable with publishing), it might be helpful context to point out thatUTC+05:30 is the second-most populous timezone afterUTC+08:00; followed by UTC+1, +2, and +3. The most populous Western Hemisphere timezone is -5, which comes in 9th place.[12]. It may also be helpful to compare that with the distribution of English speakers worldwide (as this is en.wp) as indicated by the maps onList of countries by English-speaking population.⇒SWATJester^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!}18:34, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

  Speculating using the global distribution of English speakers would overlook that despite India having the second-most English speakers, far fewer of them have Internet access than Americans, among other issues. Also curious, I usedR to produce this heatmap of rights, protect, block, and delete actions made during the past week starting on 13JUL2025 at 00:00 UTC:File:English Wikipedia Admin Actions Heatmap.png. Rather than a time-zone trend, there are simply bursts where individual admins clear a backlog.ViridianPenguin🐧 (💬)08:31, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

  This aligns with theWP:administrators' noticeboard thread that Sohom linked to in the CoconutOctopus section wherePppery lamented being the sole closer atWP:CFD in recent weeks.ViridianPenguin🐧 (💬)08:46, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

  Anecdotally, I've noticed that theWP:RM/TR backlog tends to peak in the European morning, which is the same time period the candidate notes generally has high backlogs. My theory is that this time period has a relatively higher proportion of "regular editors" without necessary userrights and a relatively lower proportion of admins and editors with advanced rights, which results in larger backlogs. This likely holds true not just for South Asia, but also Africa and large parts of Europe, where we have many editors editing the English Wikipedia but not as many admins (save for the UK).Toadspike[Talk]14:31, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

  Agreed that RMTR is often busier in the mornings and clearer once the US wakes up. Ideally there'd be more non-US page movers for this reason, but you get what what you're given I guess. I'd also argue that the backlog isn't as much of an issue as say RFPP or AIV, which is nearly always more urgent, and processes well overall.CNC (talk)10:09, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

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 eitherthis nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.