On Thu, 4 May 2006 20:36:57 +0200, you wrote:
I agree that edit counts are *relatively* meaningless,
but people use
them anyway. The reason I support formalising them as a requirement,
is to prevent people citing lack of edit counts for increasingly high
limits. Once we fix that 1000 edits is enough to be an admin, "not
enough edits" will cease to be a reasonable reason to oppose a person
with 2000, for instance.
Indeed. And it will deter those who self-nominate after their third
edit. Just as with notability criteria we can, by consensus,
de-emphasise those things which some have thought significant but
others have sown are not. A low edit count number will make it plain
that edit counts are indeed meaningless.
Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG