On 6/22/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote:
The missing piece of data is: what proportion of
anonymous editors are
good contributors? If it's very small, then it's a non-issue.
I have a theory that for any change made by an anon editor:
- if it's a deletion, it's probably vandalism
- if it's the addition of more than a sentence, it will probably be
unsourced and get reverted
- if it's only a net change of plus or minus 5 characters, it's
probably a useful copy-edit
Anon make a lot of typo corrections, but are rarely bold enough to fix
major problems in articles.
Steve