Archives

Archive 1

We are getting alot of users with 5+ years of experience and with 40,000+ edits, I think we need a new level of some sort. Any ideas? MBisanz ^talk 20:11, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I count only 21 editors who have attained the highest rank, so I don't see any need for any higher rank yet. --Eustress (talk) 22:00, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I just had a look, & assuming Eustress's numbers are correct, only three editors who qualify for that rank have bothered to display it; far more editors with less than 200 edits have this "award" to their user page. I would be upset at these newbie's presumptions, if this "award" meant anything. Like a gift certificate at Amazon, or proof of insanity. -- llywrch (talk) 06:14, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Last year we had a discussion here on changing the term novice to something that was more interesting and exciting for newer users. One I idea was to call them Barnstormers instead of Novices. I'd like to re-open this dialog, and recommend the change. Any thoughts? Kingturtle (talk) 20:22, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What's wrong with "novice"? It's a common, easily understood word used to mean the same thing in many contexts. – ukexpat (talk) 20:43, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What's wrong is that a Novice also carries some pejorative meanings with it too. Novice carries with it some implications of powerless, in need of guidance - whereas something like Barnstormers has a sense of action and energy. Kingturtle (talk) 21:01, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have been a "novice" at many things in my life -- oarsman and bridge-player to name but two -- and I have never felt "powerlessness". I have however felt "in need of guidance", and what's wrong with that? Most new editors do need guidance. "Barnstormers" also implies a sense of reckless abandon and derring-do that we probably don't want. How about "rookie"? – ukexpat (talk) 21:18, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is my 250:th edit, I been in since october 2008, I wonder if you get them for yourself or, you have to request them? Gsmgm (talk) 21:40, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You qualify for Novice editor status. Just copy and paste the code for the award on your user page. --Eustress (talk) 21:48, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As it states on the page, these are to be self-awarded, so yah.. you can give them to yourself. Montgomery' 39 (talk) 15:16, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The list of criteria for the various levels starts as follows:

Novice (or Burba) - 1 month, 200 edits

Apprentice (or Novato) - 3 months, 1000 edits

Journeyman (or Grognard) - 6 months, 2000 edits

(etc.)

But what is the connection between a) the editing level, b) the amount of time listed, and c) the number of edits listed? This is in serious need of clarification.Daqu (talk) 04:46, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It says nothing about your editing ability, just how long you've been around, no big deal really.--Ipatrol (talk) 01:09, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let me try to be clearer: Does "1 month, 200 edits" mean both at least 1 month and at least 200 edits? Or at least 1 month or at least 200 edits? Or something else? Etc.

I'm not asking how big of a deal it is. And if it were only a matter of "how long you've been around", then it would not mention anything about the number of edits.Daqu (talk) 07:59, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

can we have an award between "Novice" and "Apprentice" ? i have 700+ edits and 10 months service Machete97 (talk) 12:29, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. What can be put there though? --♪♫The New Mikemoral^talk_contribs 00:23, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know - maybe another made up word. Should be at 500/550/750 edits ? Machete97 (talk) 10:21, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

750 sound about right. Amateur maybe and Dilettante? --♪♫The New Mikemoral^talk_contribs 01:20, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If we need another award (and I really think we don't), don't call it the Dilettante. It doesn't fit with the others at all. Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:29, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. But what could the award be? --The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 23:00, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What if, for example, you have been editing for two years, but your edit count is 2000? Do you qualify for Journeyman, or for Veteran? The page doesn't really explain what to do in this circumstance.

—BMRR (talk) 19:59, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think both requirements need to be met before you can put the award on your userpage. So in your scenario, the person qualifies for Journeyman only because s/he does not have the 6000 edit count for the Experienced & Established Editor award even if they have met the time requirement. Extremepro (talk) 22:00, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since these "awards" aren't official Wikipedia policy, it's up to you. I don't have 4 years (2 years, 7 months) but well over 24,000 edits (31,984 including deleted ones - 30,342 without deleted ones) so I have the Senior Editor on my page. - ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 15:52, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe that interpretation is supportable from the text or the discussions in the history of the talk page. Rmhermen (talk) 22:24, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Supportable by whom or what? It's not an official Wikipedia "award" or policy. With over 30,000 edit's, 50+ created articles, I'd don't think being here 4 years versus 2 years and 7 months any much different. I go by the edit count. 30,000+ edits with majority in article space doesn't say "Novice". - ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 22:39, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is your opinion as you have already stated. You are certainly free to call yourself, say, a duck - but it doesn't mean the other ducks won't laugh at you. See the discussions in the talk archives to see the thought that went into these awards. Rmhermen (talk) 00:47, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How do you count your edit's? I tried "Jane's Tool" but it said my edit count was nil...-- Myosotis Scorpioides 20:34, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As it says on the main page: You can get your edit count here (In case you have forgotten, this will also show you the date of your first edit (logged in with a real user account), or alternatively you can click my preferences and your edit count will appear there. (Although that number is slightly larger because it includes deleted contributions). - ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 22:39, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks! Just curious really.-- Myosotis Scorpioides 23:06, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! :] - ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 00:28, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First of all this is silly. Second of all if you really want to have levels that mean something on this forum, oops encyclopedia, then the admins should determine them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.82.52.106 (talk) 14:13, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was just wondering if there is a list to see who are the highest editors on Wikipedia? perhaps an automatic chart with highest editors.. it would be nice to see where you stand!!! just for the ego trip you understand.. Jez t e C 23:14, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

wp:EDITS covers the 4,000 most active editors ϢereSpielChequers 21:17, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]