Talk:Staff: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
Now we have 10 staff and 2 contractors, could we take Pete the WikiPlatypus off the list of staff? I noticed that the WMF do something similar on their site and they were being ridiculed for their lack of professionalism. I could imagine this appropriate and hilarious for a Student's Union but not a national charity. Thanks --[[User:Fæ|Fæ]] ([[User talk:Fæ|talk]]) 15:20, 8 January 2014 (UTC) | Now we have 10 staff and 2 contractors, could we take Pete the WikiPlatypus off the list of staff? I noticed that the WMF do something similar on their site and they were being ridiculed for their lack of professionalism. I could imagine this appropriate and hilarious for a Student's Union but not a national charity. Thanks --[[User:Fæ|Fæ]] ([[User talk:Fæ|talk]]) 15:20, 8 January 2014 (UTC) | ||
Even though I am technically outranked by a fluffy toy, and appreciate the prospect of dead man's shoes, I would still keep Pete on. It's not the only organisation, business etc that I've seen with pets and/or cuddly toys listed as staff. | :Even though I am technically outranked by a fluffy toy, and appreciate the prospect of dead man's shoes, I would still keep Pete on. It's not the only organisation, business etc that I've seen with pets and/or cuddly toys listed as staff. | ||
Just limit his job responsibilities to ceremonial ones. Best --[[User:Stuart Prior (WMUK)|Stuart Prior (WMUK)]] ([[User talk:Stuart Prior (WMUK)|talk]]) 14:40, 9 January 2014 (UTC) | Just limit his job responsibilities to ceremonial ones. Best --[[User:Stuart Prior (WMUK)|Stuart Prior (WMUK)]] ([[User talk:Stuart Prior (WMUK)|talk]]) 14:40, 9 January 2014 (UTC) | ||
::Perhaps you can supply an example of a respected national UK charity that has fictional employees listed on its website? WMUK aspires to become a respected national charity rather than seen as a project spun out from a hip San Francisco software engineering start up; it needs to behave like it for that to become a reality. Thanks --[[User:Fæ|Fæ]] ([[User talk:Fæ|talk]]) 14:54, 9 January 2014 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 15:54, 9 January 2014
Can we get some better photographs of the staff? Both Jon and Daria are photographed against bright windows, resulting in their faces being in shadow. --Tango (talk) 19:32, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Typo
"Robin is Wikimedia UK Mangaer in Wales." --Stwalkerster (talk) 17:45, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Counting jokes as staff
Now we have 10 staff and 2 contractors, could we take Pete the WikiPlatypus off the list of staff? I noticed that the WMF do something similar on their site and they were being ridiculed for their lack of professionalism. I could imagine this appropriate and hilarious for a Student's Union but not a national charity. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 15:20, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
- Even though I am technically outranked by a fluffy toy, and appreciate the prospect of dead man's shoes, I would still keep Pete on. It's not the only organisation, business etc that I've seen with pets and/or cuddly toys listed as staff.
Just limit his job responsibilities to ceremonial ones. Best --Stuart Prior (WMUK) (talk) 14:40, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
- Perhaps you can supply an example of a respected national UK charity that has fictional employees listed on its website? WMUK aspires to become a respected national charity rather than seen as a project spun out from a hip San Francisco software engineering start up; it needs to behave like it for that to become a reality. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 14:54, 9 January 2014 (UTC)