Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits (5th nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: keep. Bad-faith nomination by sock. (non-admin closure) LEPRICAVARK (talk) 19:34, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits[edit]

Encourages editors to increase the quantity of their edits by sacrificing quality. This Editcountitis obsession by users has caused a lot of problems over the years. In fact there is an ongoing discussion at WP:ANI right now about an editor's bad quality mass edits [1].
We have randomised the first 100 entries in Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by article count because the race to get to the top ended up causing a lot of problems. This page is causing the same problems. Unlike article count, randomising this page doesn't make sense, so it is better to delete it altogether. Someone who is genuinely here to build an encyclopaedia wouldn't be concerned with things like edit count and we shouldn't be having pages that give legitimacy to such notions. Trampseats (talk) 16:40, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can not really agree, I am here to built an encyclopedia as it must be obviious from my contributions, but I am concerned not just with my edit count (which is shown by various scripts) but alo with how my edit count compares to other editors. Ymblanter (talk) 16:49, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Widely accepted statistical page nominated by a user that just created an account today. Probably a WP:SNOW case. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:51, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. No valid deletion rationale has been presented by nom. Deleting this would deny a resource to those who are interested in documenting Wikipedia's vital statistics. It's about the right time of year for SNOW too.--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 17:04, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the nomination itself is badly malformed, as it reads (2 nomination) when it should read (fifth nomination), although I do note the third nomination seems to be missing from the chart.--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 17:06, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep "Encourages editors to increase the quantity of their edits by sacrificing quality." Do you have any proof of this or is it pure conjecture? Also, what is different from all the other nominations? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:40, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I'm here to built an encyclopedia and intested in this list, so the claim that anyone wouldn't be concerned with things like edit count is obviously wrong. Actually, how can a user like Trampseats with not a single contribution in article namespace argue in this case? --Cyfal (talk) 18:33, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.