I just scanned an article: "Wikipedia is basically just another giant bureaucracy", http://www.sciencealert.com/wikipedia-is-basically-just-another-old-fashioned-bureaucracy-study-finds
and it is astonishing how bad it is. I don't really quibble with the headline - it is a bureaucracy, but some of the content of the article is head-scratching. For example, how many editors do you know who have achieved the rank of super-contributor? Can one take an article seriously that blunders this badly? Phil _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
