archuser-orbitalapp
Application-shaped ambition
archuser-orbitalapp sounds like it is preparing for liftoff, while the portfolio metadata leaves the launch sequence delightfully mysterious.
Roasts
samplerepo-pr-practice
Pull-request dojo
samplerepo-pr-practice turns version control into a training arena: less finished product, more Git wearing a karate headband.
contacts
Contact formation
contacts is a wonderfully direct name for a Java project—like labeling a drawer “drawers” and trusting the contents to explain themselves.
lender
Borrowed ambition
lender pairs a practical-sounding premise with a fork-based origin, giving the portfolio the energy of a startup incubating inside a study group.
Category breakdown
Impact
25% weight
There are several original-looking repositories alongside practice-oriented and forked repositories, but the metadata does not establish substantial usefulness, originality, or adoption.
Consistency
15% weight
The supplied dates show a cluster of activity in February through April 2024, with one later update in March 2025 and no broader contribution totals provided.
Quality
25% weight
Java and JavaScript projects suggest real implementation work, while the available metadata does not provide evidence about tests, documentation, CI, licenses, or internal engineering quality.
Depth
20% weight
Multiple repositories indicate exploration and some ownership, but many are forks and the metadata does not show sustained scope, releases, or maintenance depth.
Breadth
10% weight
The portfolio spans Java, JavaScript, and repositories with unknown language classification, plus application and practice-oriented projects.
Community
5% weight
Community evidence is limited to nine followers and zero stars across the listed repositories; under the rubric this is treated as neutral rather than negative.
Stats
52-week commit heatmap
21 active daysLanguage distribution
3 langs
- Unknown50%
- Java42%
- JavaScript8%
Based on the bounded repository sample saved with this analysis.
Numbers
Owned repos
Non-fork sample
4
Commits
Last 12 months
34
Followers
Accepted fact
9
Joined GitHub
Profile date
Aug 2022
Top repos
Scores marked Profile rating use bounded public repository metadata. Full repo analysis appears only when a separate accepted repository analysis exists.
kishen271828 /
archuser-orbitalapp
48/100
An independently listed JavaScript application-oriented repository, one of the clearer signals of standalone project work in the portfolio.
OwnedActiveProfile ratingJavaScript
★ 0 · 2y agoOpen on GitHub ↗
kishen271828 /
pe
42/100
An independently listed repository with no language classification; the metadata supports ownership but not its scope or implementation maturity.
OwnedActiveProfile ratingUnknown
★ 0 · 2y agoOpen on GitHub ↗
kishen271828 /
ped
42/100
An independently listed repository with no language classification; available evidence indicates a project exists but does not establish depth.
OwnedActiveProfile ratingUnknown
★ 0 · 2y agoOpen on GitHub ↗
kishen271828 /
alpha
42/100
An independently listed repository with no language classification and a concise, generic name; its purpose and maturity remain unclear from metadata.
OwnedActiveProfile ratingUnknown
★ 0 · 2y agoOpen on GitHub ↗
kishen271828 /
tp
28/100
A Java fork, likely reflecting practice or extension work, but ownership and project scope are not established by the supplied metadata.
ForkActiveProfile ratingJava
★ 0 · 2y agoOpen on GitHub ↗
kishen271828 /
ip
28/100
A Java fork with a short name; it contributes another practice artifact but reveals little about scope or maintenance.
ForkActiveProfile ratingJava
★ 0 · 2y agoOpen on GitHub ↗
kishen271828 /
contacts
28/100
A Java fork named contacts, suggesting an application-shaped exercise, though the available evidence cannot establish implementation depth.
ForkActiveProfile ratingJava
★ 0 · 3y agoOpen on GitHub ↗
kishen271828 /
lender
28/100
A Java fork named lender, suggesting a domain-focused exercise, but the metadata does not demonstrate independent ownership or maturity.
ForkActiveProfile ratingJava
★ 0 · 3y agoOpen on GitHub ↗
kishen271828 /
samplerepo-pr-practice
27/100
A Java fork explicitly framed as pull-request practice, useful as a learning artifact but not strong evidence of a standalone portfolio project.
ForkActiveProfile ratingJava
★ 0 · 2y agoOpen on GitHub ↗
kishen271828 /
first-contributions
25/100
A fork of first-contributions, indicating participation in a contribution exercise rather than clearly owned project development.
ForkActiveProfile ratingUnknown
★ 0 · 1y agoOpen on GitHub ↗
kishen271828 /
samplerepo-things
25/100
A fork with an informal project name and unknown language classification; it signals experimentation but offers little evidence of independent scope.
ForkActiveProfile ratingUnknown
★ 0 · 2y agoOpen on GitHub ↗
kishen271828 /
circus
25/100
A fork with unknown language classification and an unusual name; the metadata supports experimentation, not substantial owned work.
ForkActiveProfile ratingUnknown
★ 0 · 2y agoOpen on GitHub ↗
Timeline
- Joined GitHub
- Created kishen271828/archuser-orbitalapp
- Created kishen271828/ip
- Created kishen271828/lender
- Created kishen271828/contacts
- Created kishen271828/circus
- Created kishen271828/samplerepo-things
- Created kishen271828/samplerepo-pr-practice - A sample repo for practicing how to create Pull Requests
- Created kishen271828/tp
- Created kishen271828/alpha
- Created kishen271828/ped
- Created kishen271828/pe
- Created kishen271828/first-contributions - 🚀✨ Help beginners to contribute to open source projects
- Most recent push to kishen271828/first-contributions
Compare
KISHEN271828 · 6DMEDIAN CODER
Rubric
How this score was produced
Overall = Σ(category × weight) + deterministic top-end curve
| Category | Weight | Score | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Impact | 25% | 33 | 8.25 |
| Quality | 25% | 35 | 8.75 |
| Depth | 20% | 31 | 6.20 |
| Consistency | 15% | 34 | 5.10 |
| Breadth | 10% | 45 | 4.50 |
| Community | 5% | 50 | 2.50 |
Impact · 33/100
What it measures. Project usefulness, ambition, originality, and coherence. Popularity is not impact.
Evidence for kishen271828. There are several original-looking repositories alongside practice-oriented and forked repositories, but the metadata does not establish substantial usefulness, originality, or adoption.
Quality · 35/100
What it measures. Engineering and project-maturity signals supported by the available public metadata.
Evidence for kishen271828. Java and JavaScript projects suggest real implementation work, while the available metadata does not provide evidence about tests, documentation, CI, licenses, or internal engineering quality.
Depth · 31/100
What it measures. Sustained ownership, meaningful scope, and continued maintenance rather than one-shots.
Evidence for kishen271828. Multiple repositories indicate exploration and some ownership, but many are forks and the metadata does not show sustained scope, releases, or maintenance depth.
Consistency · 34/100
What it measures. Recency and contribution patterns across the supplied activity window.
Evidence for kishen271828. The supplied dates show a cluster of activity in February through April 2024, with one later update in March 2025 and no broader contribution totals provided.
Breadth · 45/100
What it measures. Language entropy and project-type diversity across owned repos.
Evidence for kishen271828. The portfolio spans Java, JavaScript, and repositories with unknown language classification, plus application and practice-oriented projects.
Community · 50/100
What it measures. A weak positive tie-breaker for supplied community signals, never a popularity penalty.
Evidence for kishen271828. Community evidence is limited to nine followers and zero stars across the listed repositories; under the rubric this is treated as neutral rather than negative.
- Raw total
- 35.30
- Top-end curve
- +0.00
- Final overall
- 35.3
Tier thresholds
S 90-100 Mass-producing humansA 80-89 Ship machineB 70-79 Solid engineerC 60-69 Getting thereD 40-59 README enthusiastF 0-39 GitHub tourist
I. How this saved profile rating was produced
- 01
Validate. The server validates the login, signed browser session, attempts, cooldown, daily ceiling, and the single provider permit.
- 02
Collect. The VPS collector reads bounded public profile metadata and up to 12 recent repository metadata rows in volatile memory.
- 03
Rate. One pinned provider returned a closed profile-rating object with no tools, browsing, shell, or repository-content access.
- 04
Verify. Server checks bound the subject, rejected unsafe or echoed text, validated the schema, and recomputed rubric-v3 final arithmetic.
- 05
Save. Only a valid completion and allowlisted post-completion facts commit atomically; the public projection is then rebuilt.
This saved profile analysis is metadata-only and did not read repository trees, README files, or source code. Availability of new analysis is separate from this historical result.
Rated 2026-08-10 · rating-rubric/3
II. Data sources & caveats
- Scores summarize one accepted, subject-bound analysis; they are not a security audit or endorsement.
- Rank, percentile, and median use 1095 currently accepted public profiles and can change as the leaderboard changes.
- Repository and language details reflect the bounded analyzed sample, not necessarily every repository.
- Missing data is shown as unavailable or not evaluated instead of being inferred as zero.
- Analysis completed Aug 10, 2026, 12:15 AM UTC and is marked aging.