There are currently two statements marked as requiring citations. Both were added my me and based on personal assessment. I would gladly provide proof-links, but I'm at loss of what links could do that...
I don't know if any plug-in can really count the number of authors of major edits per article. I judged about community stress by response of a person who spoke on behalf of the community in rule's discussion. Ongoing exploits of adding cleverly biased information... Well, the biased parts were removed, and one person of those who was affected thanked us. I'm not sure this is a valid proof.
If there is a strict requirements for decisive proof for this kind of statements, I'm ok with removing them. EvilCat 07:42, 15 May 2012 (EDT)