Top Contributors Awards! Power Apps, Visual Studio and community wiki ninjas

Hello Wiki Ninjas.

It's great to watch the community in action and the high level of contribution.

Back for analysis of contributions to TechNet Wiki over the last week .

First let’s meet up, the weekly leader board snapshot.




This is the total number of contributions over the week.

8,471 users have contributed 24,429 pages, 191,371 revisions, and 111,739 comments.

For more information about the Wiki visit:


Most Revisions Award
Who has made the most individual revisions


The contributors are incredible and exceeded 29 revisions.


#1 Prashanth Jayaram with 154 revisions.


#2 Peter Geelen with 45 revisions.


#3 Edward van Biljon with 29 revisions.


Most Articles Updated Award
Who has updated the most articles


Special attention to more 20 articles updates. Great collaboration.


#1 Prashanth Jayaram with 109 articles.


#2 Edward van Biljon with 29 articles.


#3 Peter Geelen with 22 articles.


Just behind the winners but also worth a mention are:


#4 Waqas Sarwar(MCSE 2013) with 7 articles.


#5 Carsten Siemens with 6 articles.


#6 Sjoukje Zaal with 5 articles.


#7 Richard Mueller with 5 articles.


#8 Emiliano Musso with 3 articles.


#9 Renato Groffe with 3 articles.


#10 Stefan Johner with 2 articles.


Most Revised Article Award
Article with the most revisions in a week


This week's most fiddled with article is Microsoft PowerApps: Getting Started, by Alagunila Meganathan.

It was revised 7 times last week.

This week's revisers were Peter Geelen, Waqas Sarwar(MCSE 2013), Burak Ugur & Alagunila Meganathan

Interesting technical article on Apps


Most Popular Article Award
Collaboration is the name of the game!


The article to be updated by the most people this week is Make a NumberBox in Visual Studio 2015(With TextBox), by Aryan Mesgari

Very cool Wiki about coding in Visual Studio. It is good to see develop in our community.

This week's revisers were Peter Geelen, Rachit Sikroria, Mandar Dharmadhikari & Aryan Mesgari



We appreciate the contributors for another great week of collaboration.

Next week we will return with more information in the community.


Best regards.

Wiki Ninja Hezequias Vasconcelos @++.




Comments (7)

  1. Great Congrats to all. I think we need to add more rules for updates in article.I guess many peoples just editing article with out meaning .Who ever editing an article they must give strong comments as what they edit and why they edit in detail.

    1. Thank you for commenting.
      This is a challenge in the community, because the issues also require common sense from the contributors.

  2. pituach says:

    Thanks for sharing the statistics Hezequias 🙂
    * SYEDSHANU idea seems great, but might be a bit hard to implement since we do not have direct option to to the database or the code 🙂

  3. Congratulations all!! Thanks for your time in sharing the stats, Henzequias!!

    I agree with Syed but in reality, there are very few editors active in the WIKI portal. There have been a lot of spam
    articles created frequently in last Kepler days.

    I have to mention this Peter Geelan, Richard Mueller, Waqas Sarwar and myself were monitoring
    and editing those spam articles.

    I understand that if someone edits the article, it’s our tendency to react either in a positive or negative way.
    But many are lagging in saying at least thanks if that edited article really comes out well in TechNet WIKI portal and meets the standards.

    Peter Geelan had mentioned that my edited article inducing few invalid HTML tags in the code hence ought to remove those tags from
    most of the articles. That’s the reason my stats(edited article) is high this time. Thanks for Peter Geelen efforts in keeping and
    maintaining the site clean.

    1. Cleaning up the HTML in an article adds value. It makes it much easier to fix problems, like extra space getting duplicated, broken table of contents, colors disappearing, broken “Return to Top” links, etc. Unfortunately these fixes require edits in the HTML, so keeping it clean helps. And such edits and fixes often are not visible, even in the History tab. Even standardizing tags adds value, since it greatly helps people find articles using tag searches. For example, if someone misspells a tag, it is less likely to be found. Correcting the tag adds value. But such edits result in very few points, which is proper. I agree that adding a comment to explain helps a lot, but this cannot be done for tag edits.

  4. I totally agree to Shanu’s comment. There needs to be a system where only trusted members can update and *improve* the content. It will ensure great experience for readers while maintaining the standards for TechNet. 🙂

Skip to main content