Hi all,
I do not think it is particularly useful to look at these issues of
customers and employees with all the vexatious legal hoo-haa that that
involves.
Wikipedia works as a community gathered around a social goal.
A "reader" is an editor who has not made their first edit, a window
shopper, a "Man Friday" who has yet to leave a foot print in the sand.
A "subject" is a living person. We need suitable processes for ensuring
that all biographies of living people are handled appropriately.
Companies are legal fictions, and although we do not cover them quite as
well as filmic and televisual fictions, this may be because wikipedians
find them less interesting. If people find them such dull topics that
no-one cares to prioritise updating their information, it is no good PR
companies moaning. They should wake up to the fact that one of the reasons
no-one does their role gratis is that it is completely thankless.
Perhaps they should also remind themselves that Wikipedia became the sixth
most popular website on the planet without their help. Then they should
cut themselves some slack and edit some pages connected to one of their
hobbies. Then they might learn to be less obsessive . . . or perhaps more
obsessive, but about something more interesting.
all the best
User:Leutha
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 14:10:22 +0000
From: Thomas Morton <morton.thomas(a)googlemail.com>
To: UK Wikimedia mailing list <wikimediauk-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] PR industry blames 'cumbersome' Wikipedia
(Andreas Kolbe)
Message-ID:
<CAKO2H7_9RiYSR9KtfiJQoZdf46WvcotYHO7DGXmZrafq2ZGgJA(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
We have two customers, and one "employee" role, I think. And it should go
something like (in order of importance):
Reader (Customer)
Subject (Customer)
Editor (Employee)
Or in other words; because the PR company represents the subject of the
article, and we rank so highly on Google etc., they should reasonably
expect to receive a good service from us.
Tom