Compare the reaction that Keilana's Op-ed got with the reaction that the Signpost article "Wikipedia's cute ass" got: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2012-12-17/Featured_content
Notice any differences? On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 6:38 PM, Pete Forsyth <petefors...@gmail.com> wrote: > Risker, I want to be clear: > > It's not that I don't see a problem. I'm actually pretty sympathetic to > your view; but I think your point has been made very strongly already, and > the important audience is the Signpost editorial staff. I am confident they > have heard the message, and I don't see how further discussion moves us in > a better direction. The past can't be changed. I suppose the Signpost could > retract the op-ed, but I rather doubt you're seeking something so > extreme...or am I wrong? > > -Pete > [[User:Peteforsyth]] > > On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 2:39 PM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I feel very sad that you fellows don't see the problem in using this kind >> of language to describe women. "Badass" isn't a compliment. After the first >> two descriptions, I was fully expecting to see "brilliant motherf***er" to >> describe the third one. I'm surprised it wasn't used, in fact. >> >> The subjects of our articles deserve to be treated much better than >> this. >> >> Further, I'm incredibly disappointed that this got published in The >> Signpost. On Emily's own page...well, okay. But instead of drawing >> attention to the women who are the subjects of the articles, almost all of >> the discussion is about the language used to describe them....and pointing >> out that several of them already had articles about them that were >> improved, rather than that they'd not been written about at all. >> >> All in all, it impressed me as an island of lovely flowers in a garden >> with a winter's worth of St. Bernard droppings. >> >> Risker >> >> On 21 February 2016 at 17:13, Pete Forsyth <petefors...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> +1 Ryan. >>> >>> This was one article, and no Wikipedians, readers, or article subjects >>> were injured as a result of its publication. I don't really have a strong >>> opinion one way or the other about whether using language in this way is >>> OK. But the main lesson to me is how much the English Wikipedia community >>> has come to value the Signpost as an institution. It's hard to imagine such >>> any Signpost column inspiring so much passion, say, five years ago. Above >>> all, I think this constitutes a strong endorsement of the general value of >>> the Signpost. >>> >>> -Pete >>> >>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Ryan Kaldari <rkald...@wikimedia.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> The depressing thing to me is that the English Wikipedia community >>>> takes all of 10 minutes to work itself into a frenzy about the use of >>>> profanity in a positive, non-personal way, but if an editor on Wikipedia >>>> calls a female editor a cunt, no one dares to bat an eye. >>>> >>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Is it a double standard? If that page hadn't been written by Keilana, >>>>> would it have been published as is? >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps you're right, it *is* a double standard. Just not quite the >>>>> one some think it would be. >>>>> >>>>> Risker/Anne >>>>> >>>>> On 21 February 2016 at 08:31, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Op-ed about systemic bias and articles created. Interesting double >>>>>> standard about profanity in the comment section. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2016-02-17/Op-ed >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Gendergap mailing list >>>>>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, >>>>>> please visit: >>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Gendergap mailing list >>>>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, >>>>> please visit: >>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Gendergap mailing list >>>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, >>>> please visit: >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gendergap mailing list >>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please >>> visit: >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gendergap mailing list >> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please >> visit: >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Gendergap mailing list > Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org > To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please > visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
