Exact, just like Wikipedia :D _____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal <http://wikimedia.pt> (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. <http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos>* On 1 February 2012 18:35, emijrp <emi...@gmail.com> wrote: > No. You just want to write a book with no rigor. > > > 2012/2/1 Béria Lima <beria.l...@wikimedia.pt> > >> We are not trying to fix gender gap here (here means: WWCamp ) Emijrp. >> _____ >> *Béria Lima* >> Wikimedia Portugal <http://wikimedia.pt> >> (351) 963 953 042 >> >> *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter >> livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a >> construir esse sonho. <http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos>* >> >> >> On 1 February 2012 18:03, emijrp <emi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> 2012/2/1 Béria Lima <beria.l...@wikimedia.pt> >>> >>>> I can't answer for her, but I believe she was only gathering data. >>>> Since she isn't Brazilian or Indian or Dutch, maybe might be difficult for >>>> her to know what is excatly relevant or not. >>>> >>>> >>> The problem here is that you musn't try to fix a bias or imbalance (in >>> this case: gender gap) when you don't understand the problem features and >>> the details of every human group. >>> >>> >>>> I put in my list correct Brazil's and Portugal's entry, but I still >>>> didn't find time to do so, but please - If anyone has the time, do it for >>>> your country (and for mine if you have spare time) :-) >>>> _____ >>>> *Béria Lima* >>>> Wikimedia Portugal <http://wikimedia.pt> >>>> (351) 963 953 042 >>>> >>>> *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter >>>> livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a >>>> construir esse sonho. <http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos>* >>>> >>>> >>>> On 1 February 2012 13:51, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I suspect people have been hesitant to remove the information because >>>>> it's not clear why it was added in the first place; on the whole, >>>>> Wikimedians are content collectors rather than content removers, unless >>>>> they are very comfortable that the information being removed is of no >>>>> significant value or is actively harmful. >>>>> >>>>> Having a quick glance, I see comments like "no women were elected to >>>>> Arbcom" for projects that don't have Arbcoms, and references to no women >>>>> on >>>>> projects that don't exist for that language group. >>>>> >>>>> As the majority of the data was completed by Laura (thanks for all >>>>> your research!), perhaps she could help the list to understand what the >>>>> intention was in including some of this information. >>>>> >>>>> Risker/Anne >>>>> >>>>> Risker/Anne >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 1 February 2012 10:41, Béria Lima <beria.l...@wikimedia.pt> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Again, I would like to point that meta is a wiki and all of us have >>>>>> usernames there. So I would suggest all of you to *be bold *and >>>>>> correct what is not correct in your opinion. >>>>>> _____ >>>>>> *Béria Lima* >>>>>> Wikimedia Portugal <http://wikimedia.pt> >>>>>> (351) 963 953 042 >>>>>> >>>>>> *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de >>>>>> ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos >>>>>> a construir esse sonho. <http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos>* >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 1 February 2012 13:18, Sarah Stierch <sarah.stie...@gmail.com>wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Laura - Thanks for asking for more contributions. I was wondering >>>>>>> what was going on, since the project has seemed a bit quiet lately! >>>>>>> Glad to >>>>>>> know it's catching steam again. I made some edits a few months ago to >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> US section. (See comments below) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 2/1/12 5:18 AM, Lodewijk wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Perhaps it would be helpful if you could add some explanation why >>>>>>> you are collecting this information, what you want to make clear. >>>>>>> Because >>>>>>> as I explained before to you privately (and I see nothing has changed) >>>>>>> at >>>>>>> least for the Netherlands the stats that have been put up are almost >>>>>>> hilarious. Lots of percentages, but every Dutch person will be able to >>>>>>> tell >>>>>>> you that many of them are of no meaning (Ripuarian is not a language >>>>>>> spoken >>>>>>> at any significant level in the Netherlands, Zealandic is considered >>>>>>> mainly >>>>>>> a dialect and has 1 admin, of course there are no Dutch women in the >>>>>>> enwiki >>>>>>> arbcom, because to my best knowledge there are no Dutch people in there >>>>>>> at >>>>>>> all at this moment, and I would wonder why there are no Dutch female >>>>>>> admins >>>>>>> on the Portuguese Wikinews...) I am not sure if it is just me, but >>>>>>> reading >>>>>>> this page ( >>>>>>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiWomenCamp/FAQ/Perspectives/Netherlands >>>>>>> ) >>>>>>> I would almost think that this is a parody of something - I can't tell >>>>>>> if >>>>>>> it is the same in other countries. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I've also been highly confused by these statistics. It confused me >>>>>>> so much that I acted boldy and removed them from the United States >>>>>>> section. >>>>>>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiWomenCamp/FAQ/Perspectives#United_States >>>>>>> When I started to see information on how there were no Portuguese women >>>>>>> involved in Algerian Wikipedia I was like "why would there be? and is >>>>>>> this >>>>>>> information here?" >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I rewrote the majority of the section to just discuss women's roles >>>>>>> in the United States - at WMF, as fellows, as researchers, as >>>>>>> Wikimedians >>>>>>> and active editors, etc. I created a list of people who are active US >>>>>>> Wikimedians who are known to be women (didn't want to make assumptions >>>>>>> about anyone) and some of the cool things they've been doing. Of course, >>>>>>> these are limited to people I know, so I hope others are added (as >>>>>>> someone >>>>>>> did me). I also removed the "US related on Wikipedia" in regards to the >>>>>>> subject matter (which was added back). I wasn't really sure why netball >>>>>>> would be featured because it's not popular in America at all, so to me >>>>>>> it >>>>>>> doesn't really tell us anything, but it's not popular. Same with roller >>>>>>> derby. (But other women's sports aren't discussed?) So I guess if >>>>>>> someone >>>>>>> has interest in discussing American women's sports, this area has room >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> expansion, or IMHO removal. And the list of popular biographies makes >>>>>>> sense >>>>>>> - Amy Winehouse died when this data was retrieved and I'm sure her >>>>>>> popularity has been replaced. And it's no surprise that "someone from >>>>>>> Barbados" is in the top 10 - it's Rhianna, and same for Nicki Minaj >>>>>>> (two of >>>>>>> the most famous pop stars in the world, at least in the US.) I just >>>>>>> don't' >>>>>>> think this shows much about women who contribute to Wikipedia except >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> people of all genders like reading articles about pop stars and media >>>>>>> frenzies. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm more curious about how women are active and what women are >>>>>>> doing. Who are planning events, have those been successes? Are people >>>>>>> being >>>>>>> hired by Wiki companies? (Not just Wikimedia.) What is participation >>>>>>> like >>>>>>> regarding women and other Wiki websites? (This conference is about that >>>>>>> right, not just Wikimedia?). Sadly I can't gather data on those, nor do >>>>>>> I >>>>>>> know how, but it would be cool to know what the most popular Wiki's are >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> women and so forth. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am sure your intentions are good though, so perhaps it would be >>>>>>> helpful to state somewhere what kind of information you're looking for >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> is *really* informative, and get rid of the non-relevant parts? I would >>>>>>> say >>>>>>> that the semi-automated adding of information isn't exactly helpful in >>>>>>> at >>>>>>> least the Dutch case - again, I can't vouch for other countries. Some >>>>>>> information *is* interesting (interest ratios on Facebook or other >>>>>>> external >>>>>>> websites) and it would be a waste if that gets discarded because of the >>>>>>> irrelevance of the rest of the page. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> +1. I think this has really cool potential to focus on "original >>>>>>> research" - just knowing who is doing what and sharing that >>>>>>> information. I >>>>>>> took the time on the US section to not only celebrate who is doing what, >>>>>>> but, opportunities that women have been given in the movement in the >>>>>>> US. I >>>>>>> wanted people to see what women were doing in the United States, not >>>>>>> what >>>>>>> they *aren't* doing. We already know the statistics are depressing >>>>>>> about women's participating - so what are women doing to change that or >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> be a part of that? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks Lodewijk and Srikanth for sharing your thoughts! I was >>>>>>> beginning to think I was the only person who had these thoughts! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And thanks Laura for spearheading a unique and interesting >>>>>>> opportunity to learn more about women around the world in the >>>>>>> community. I >>>>>>> hope people be bold and participate! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sarah >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> *Sarah Stierch* >>>>>>> *Wikimedia Foundation Community Fellow* >>>>>>> >>Support the sharing of free knowledge around the world: donate >>>>>>> today <https://donate.wikimedia.org/><< >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Gendergap mailing list >>>>>>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Gendergap mailing list >>>>>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Gendergap mailing list >>>>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Gendergap mailing list >>>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gendergap mailing list >>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gendergap mailing list >> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Gendergap mailing list > Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap > >
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
