Hello Jessy - I see that your second effort[1], where you eliminated all references to physical appearance of either gender was accepted. I think that was appropriate. I think what was a bigger issue in your first effort was that you just switched male to female and vice versa, but left in the part about physical appearance in both cases. Your second effort was exemplary - it reflected completely gender-neutral attributes (cleverness, athletic ability) and is an excellent way to have addressed the gender bias in the information. Just switching the gender without changing the attribute didn't really make the references less biased or more gender-neutral. That you identified positive gender-neutral attributes with a woman in these examples was a major coup on your part, and is possibly one of the best examples of addressing a systemic bias I've seen in a while.
It occurs to me that you figured out all by yourself how to improve the Wiktionary entry while also removing the systemic bias, by sticking to it and thinking more broadly about the issue. I'm not sure that you'll get recognition for this work, mostly because most editors get very little recognition. One thing that I personally have found to be rewarding is to receive a "thanks" message from another editor, which I have received for edits on Meta, English Wikipedia, and Commons. It appears to me that the "Thank" extension isn't active on English Wiktionary. If someone is more technically minded than me, perhaps this can be verified and a phabricator task initiated in order to get it active. Then I would encourage you to use it; many editors on Wiktionary will recognize (and probably appreciate) being thanked since it is active on other projects they probably edit, and will start reciprocating. Risker/Anne [1] https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=so&type=revision&diff=42599094&oldid=42598962 On 26 April 2017 at 13:27, Jessy D. King <jessy.d.k...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > I'm new to this list, this is my first post. > > If Wikipedia is a boy's club, Wiktionary is an uber boy's club. It *so* > desperately needs people interested in addressing systemic bias. > > Every time I try to make completely legitimate fixes to address systemic > bias of the male privilege variety (for example, > https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=so&type= > revision&diff=42598962&oldid=42598906 ) > it is reverted very quickly (in the just-referenced case, within 10 > minutes). Then a fight must ensue in which I'm accused of being things like > "dishonest", "disrespectful" and 'railing'. The person in this case has > demonstrated his double standards in his edit summary and in his comments > to me on his talk page, and that is absolutely (unfortunately) the norm > amongst long-term Wiktionary editors. > > It is incredibly demoralising. My contributions to Wiktionary include > adding etymologies, adding quotations, all with absolutely no gender issues > involved, yet none of that work is ever recognised in any way, and I'm > treated like a resented interloper. The majority of long-term Wiktionary > editors seem to bitterly resent the very suggestion of addressing systemic > bias. It is a really, really nasty little uber boy's club in there. Which I > realise may not encourage anyone to join, I'm just being honest. > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
