3 ms·
I assume they're dividing his "almost 3 million edits" by the "more than 5.7 million articles" on en.wp. It's obviously extremely wrong, but their incentives a
by lkbm 8y ago
I assume they're dividing his "almost 3 million edits" by the "more than 5.7 million articles" on en.wp.
It's obviously extremely wrong, but their incentives aren't for being sticklers on accuracy. It's on being sensational.
- ptest1 8y agoYeah, that makes sense. But it’s still wrong!
- lkbm 8y agoActually, to follow up on that, there've been a few articles about him, and on Quora[0], the author of a WaPo article[1] says "Of the site's nearly 5.7 million pages, Pruitt has edited a staggering one third." If this guy is correct, the edits are sufficiently spread across different articles for him to have touched 1/3 of them. Still obviously not the same as writing, but it puts the headline in a slightly less absurd light. [0] https://www.quora.com/Who-is-Ser-Amantio-di-Nicolao-of-Wikipedia https://www.quora.com/Who-is-Ser-Amantio-di-Nicolao-of-Wikip... [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/meet-the-most-prolific-contributor-to-the-english-version-of-wikipedia/2018/10/02/a6497a74-9411-11e8-a679-b09212fb69c2_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/meet-the-m...