Board Thread:Consensus Track/@comment-1216896-20180223202243/@comment-9782468-20180228194813

Seelentau wrote: You willingly misinterpreted what I said. I never said "I think @Kunoichi's 30,000 edits to the wiki over the various articles hasn't been a substantial contribution". I said that the number of your edits does not represent your contribution. It represents the number of your edits, nothing else. If user A has 50 edits full of spam and user B has 10 edits full of improvements on articles, then user B has contributed more to the wiki. I asked if that's what you were saying, because it's the only way I could see it having relevance towards the point I made.

It wasn't willing misinterpretation. I asked if that's what you meant, because I wasn't sure.

Now, it's a fair point you made about the number of edits not necessarily indicating the amount of contribution.

But in this case, from my point of view, I've seen @Kunoichi101 editing many, many articles across the wiki and generally cleaning and proofreading the wiki as a whole.

Vs. @DXAshram, who's edits are mainly in the forums. This in and of itself isn't at all an issue; I just said it irked me that they would essentially say to "go do it themselves" when the OP has been working on articles, consistently.

It's true that the number of edits doesn't necessarily scale to contribution. But a quick look at both contributions pages shows that in this case, @Kunoichi101's edits have for the most part been towards cleaning up articles.

So that's why I asked for clarification on your input of "A high edit count doesn't mean that the user has contributed a lot. ;)." Because if I was wrong and @Kunoichi101's edits weren't substantial contributions, then it would be a relevant correction that affects the overall point of my original message. And then I would respond accordingly.

But if you were just correcting for the sake of saying that the edit counts weren't always indicative, then whichever. The original point still stands that one user has contributed a lot in terms of articles, and I don't think it's right to just tell them to "do it themselves."