The hazing of trying to be an administrator is also addressed in this series. More troubling is what the Roth article links to, namely: Atlantic, July 2012--" How Wikipedia Is Running Out of Admins" http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/07/3-charts-that-show-how-wikipedia-is-running-out-of-admins/259829/
On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 8:28 AM, David Gerard <[email protected]> wrote: > On 8 September 2012 13:22, Carcharoth <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I noticed that the article makes the (very common) error/assumption > > that administrators exercise some sort of editorial control, when (in > > principle), it is editors that exercise editorial control (when the > > editorial process works, that is). Do those dealing with Wikipedia > > publicity ever try and correct this misunderstanding, or is it > > near-impossible to get the distinction across to journalists? > > > It's near-impossible. The BBC didn't contact anyone for comment, > either; the article is strictly ex-culo. > > > - d. > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
