User talk:GregJackP/Admin criteria

According to Merriam-Webster online:

"The plural criteria has been used as a singular for over half a century  . Many of our examples, like the two foregoing, are taken from speech. But singular criteria is not uncommon in edited prose, and its use both in speech and writing seems to be increasing. Only time will tell whether it will reach the unquestioned acceptability of agenda."

See Criterion, n.d.

I'm aware of the difference. GregJackP  Boomer!   00:51, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Well...
I disagree – most admins don't spend a lot of their time creating content. A janitor in a school doesn't need teaching qualifications, neither does a kitchen technician require a Bachelor’s Degree in Culinary Arts. While it is good for an admin to have some experience in writing content, I don't think it is necessary to insist a candidate assist in making multiple good or featured articles to get your vote. Without people spending their time on background tasks, the project would go nowhere. Olidog (talk) 21:54, 6 May 2017 (UTC)


 * OK. If you disagree, don't use it to evaluate potential admins. In the meantime, please don't tell me how to evaluate them. If they can't create content, they shouldn't be admins. Period. GregJackP   Boomer!   04:23, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

"We don't ask non-pilots to supervise the Air Force, for non-police to supervise the cops, for non-businessmen to supervise businesses"
Of course we do. In the United States, for instance, the civilian President and Congress command and regulate the Air Force, mayors and city councils supervise and appoint police chiefs, and independent regulatory commissions and officials supervise businesses. There's that whole civilian control of the military thing. I don't entirely disagree with your broader point, and I would hope you don't think the job of admins is to act as "supervisors and managers" of content creators, either. But there might be better examples than the particular ones you chose for this essay. Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) 21:11, 4 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Actually, we don't. The CSAF has never been a non-rated officer. The CSA has always been a combat arms officer. The people who supervise the day to day operations of whatever function are typically from that function. Admins are comparable to those leaders, not the CEO or Chairman of the Board, or President. Second, Congress has no command authority over the military, they control the purse, but that's it. GregJackP   Boomer!   01:02, 5 August 2019 (UTC)