Vikipedi:Hizmetlilik başvurularında kaçınılması gereken gerekçeler: Revizyonlar arasındaki fark

İçerik silindi İçerik eklendi
134. satır:
 
==''Editcountitis'' - değişiklik sayısı hastalıkları... ==
[[ImageResim:Heaps of beans.jpg|thumb|right|250px|ItYeteri iskadar unhelpfulolduğunu tobildikten keep countingsonra [[beansfasulye]]leri once you know that you havesaymanın plentybir tofaydası eatyoktur.]] One of the more problematic "arguments to avoid" is the improper use of the number of edits (usually determined by looking at the results from an edit counter). Certainly an editor with only 100 edits is too inexperienced to be an administrator. But the converse argument—that a ''lot'' of edits is needed to really know Wikipedia (and that this is critical for adminship)—has two different problems:
 
* First, a very high number of edits isn't a guarantee of trustworthiness. There are editors with tens of thousands of edits who have been blocked dozens of times, as evidenced by their block logs. There are also editors with many thousands of edits who have racked these numbers up by using semi-automated tools such as [[Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser|AWB]] to revert vandalism and issue warnings, something that (while valuable) requires neither editing skills nor much interaction with users (Wikipedia vandals typically are of the hit-and-run type). Similarly, it's possible to do huge numbers of edits in a matter of days (if one puts in the time) to post "welcome" messages to the thousands of people who register every day, with very little further interaction. In short, the quality of edits needs to be taken into account - a participant who does not consider an editor's contributions in detail should not simply support a candidate based on a high edit count.