Re: [Gendergap] Joseph Reagle on Wikipedia's category taxonomy
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 5:43 AM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case danc...@frontiernet.net wrote: This system keeps the categories more straightforward, and pretty well avoids the sort of subtle bias Wikipedia has been caught with here. Defining the precise intersection of interest is up to the user. But the corresponding weakness is that it depends on the editors hitting all the right categories to work properly (as well as the tool itself, which as heavy toolserver users know is not always the case). Someone may categorize in two of three but not the third (guess which one might get forgotten?) Compare it to the weaknesses of the current category system. 98% of editors don't know what they are doing. Categories and subcategories are applied inconsistently all the time. Nobody has an overview of the entire tree structure, or even a major branch of it. Something that is a subcategory of American novelists today may stop being one tomorrow, just by dint of a single edit, and no one would be the wiser (unless they keep hundreds of categories on their watchlist). The category tree (or weave, as categories can have several parents) changes daily, with categories created, renamed, recategorised, and deleted. There are incessant arguments about how to name, categorise and diffuse categories, and about perceived iniquities. Wiki-gnomes spend days working and undoing each other's work. It's insane. Using a defined set of basic tags in combination with something like CatScan – ported across to the Foundation server if you like, and given a friendly front-end with shortcuts to the most common searches – would do away with that. ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Joseph Reagle on Wikipedia's category taxonomy
On the issue of using tags instead of categories (which is mentioned in Joseph Reagle's article), I've been involved in some discussions on this issue. The two major hurdles for this are how do you make tagging work across languages (for projects like Commons and Meta), and figuring out whether tags should augment or replace the categorization system. The first problem may be solved by Wikidata; the 2nd problem is probably solved by using both for a while and then eventually abandoning categories. There's a possibility that the multimedia development team that is being spun up over the next few months may try to tackle this, but there's nothing concrete on the agenda yet. Ryan Kaldari On 4/29/13 11:15 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 5:43 AM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case danc...@frontiernet.net mailto:danc...@frontiernet.net wrote: This system keeps the categories more straightforward, and pretty well avoids the sort of subtle bias Wikipedia has been caught with here. Defining the precise intersection of interest is up to the user. But the corresponding weakness is that it depends on the editors hitting all the right categories to work properly (as well as the tool itself, which as heavy toolserver users know is not always the case). Someone may categorize in two of three but not the third (guess which one might get forgotten?) Compare it to the weaknesses of the current category system. 98% of editors don't know what they are doing. Categories and subcategories are applied inconsistently all the time. Nobody has an overview of the entire tree structure, or even a major branch of it. Something that is a subcategory of American novelists today may stop being one tomorrow, just by dint of a single edit, and no one would be the wiser (unless they keep hundreds of categories on their watchlist). The category tree (or weave, as categories can have several parents) changes daily, with categories created, renamed, recategorised, and deleted. There are incessant arguments about how to name, categorise and diffuse categories, and about perceived iniquities. Wiki-gnomes spend days working and undoing each other's work. It's insane. Using a defined set of basic tags in combination with something like CatScan – ported across to the Foundation server if you like, and given a friendly front-end with shortcuts to the most common searches – would do away with that. ___ 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
Re: [Gendergap] Joseph Reagle on Wikipedia's category taxonomy
On 04/30/2013 12:03 AM, Risker wrote: Michael, you miss my point entirely. This is exactly the kind of nastiness - trashing someone who takes umbrage at the way Wikipedia does something that directly relates to her own real life - that brings the project into disrepute, and that women in particular find hostile. Agreed. ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
[Gendergap] Chemical Heritage Foundation's new Wikipedian in Residence
It's official! The Chemical Heritage Foundation in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, has a Wikipedian in Residence...and it's a woman! They told me it's official, and encouraged me to share the news (it's not online yet). This marks, as far as I know, the third woman Wikipedian in Residence in the US! I'm so pleased. She's active in some great women's history projects too: https://twitter.com/MMOckerbloom http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mary_Mark_Ockerbloom I'm so pleased with this decision! I know she has interested in doing women's history stuff in relation to chemistry - so yay, more work for WikiProject Women scientists :) I'm hoping I can get her to join this list! -Sarah -- -- *Sarah Stierch* *Museumist, open culture advocate, and Wikimedian* *www.sarahstierch.com* ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Chemical Heritage Foundation's new Wikipedian in Residence
Very awesome news!! Sydney On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.comwrote: It's official! The Chemical Heritage Foundation in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, has a Wikipedian in Residence...and it's a woman! They told me it's official, and encouraged me to share the news (it's not online yet). This marks, as far as I know, the third woman Wikipedian in Residence in the US! I'm so pleased. She's active in some great women's history projects too: https://twitter.com/MMOckerbloom http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mary_Mark_Ockerbloom I'm so pleased with this decision! I know she has interested in doing women's history stuff in relation to chemistry - so yay, more work for WikiProject Women scientists :) I'm hoping I can get her to join this list! -Sarah -- -- *Sarah Stierch* *Museumist, open culture advocate, and Wikimedian* *www.sarahstierch.com* ___ 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] Fwd: [GLAM-US] Reminder: Smithsonian Institution - paid Wikipedian in Residence applications are due today
Please see below. -- Forwarded message -- From: Snyder, Sara snyd...@si.edu Date: Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 8:57 AM Subject: [GLAM-US] Reminder: Smithsonian Institution - paid Wikipedian in Residence applications are due today To: glam...@lists.wikimedia.org glam...@lists.wikimedia.org Just a reminder that *today is the deadline* for applying to the Smithsonian Institution to be our Wikipedian in Residence. Get your applications in before midnight! Feel free to contact me if you have questions. ** ** http://www.smithsonianofi.com/blog/2013/04/18/smithsonian-wikipedian-in-residence-internship/ ** ** The Smithsonian Institution is seeking applicants for a Wikipedian in Residence for Summer 2013. This is an intern position. Founded in 1846, the Smithsonian is the world’s largest museum and research complex, consisting of 19 museums and galleries, the National Zoological Park, and nine research facilities (learn more http://www.si.edu/About). The Wikipedian in Residence will help coordinate efforts across the Smithsonian, strengthening the ongoing Smithsonian Institution WikiProject ( WP:GLAM/SI https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM/SI), and acting as a liaison to the Wikimedia community. *Schedule:* 32-40 hours per week, minimum 10 weeks *Stipend:* $5000 *Location:* Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC. *Eligibility and Skills:* - You must be enrolled in a full- or half-time college or university academic program for Fall 2013. (If not, please explain in cover letter how your learning goals and interests match the learning objectives offered by this opportunity.) - You must be an experienced contributor to Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Commons and currently be in good standing within the community - Good communications skills and desire to strengthen them through oral and written presentation - Experience working in teams and interest in honing your ability to collaborate effectively *This internship will provide an introduction to – * - the broad range of disciplines across science, history, art, and culture that the Smithsonian addresses through its collections and research - the many different people, organizational units, and systems that support the Smithsonian digital enterprise and how they work together *Projects may include the following:* - *Sharing knowledge* – By instructing Smithsonian staff and answering questions about best practices and policies on Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons, you will further master Wikipedia skills - *Events* – Gaining event planning experience by planning special outreach events such as a backstage pass edit-a-thon, photo scavenger hunt, or editing challenge - *Organizing categories* – Working with Smithsonian staff to analyze, optimize, and document Smithsonian-related categorieshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categoriesas applied to articles and assets on Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons - *Commons contribution* – Learning digital content management by helping identify and transfer appropriate digital content from the Smithsonian collections to Wikimedia Commons - *Technical tools *– Planning and creating tools and templates that will make it easier for Wikipedia editors to identify, use, and cite Smithsonian resources on Wikipedia *How to Apply* Your application must include: 1) Cover letter – Please explain why you would like to be the Wikipedian in Residence at the Smithsonian. Include your Wikipedia username and an overview of your experience as a Wikipedia editor. Be sure to discuss WikiProjects that you have been involved with and describe the technical and other skills you would bring. 2) Resume 3) College transcripts (unofficial) reflecting all post-high school education *Please submit all elements of the application as a single pdf by April 30, 2013, to: **w...@si.edu* w...@si.edu*.* Questions? Please send to w...@si.edu. ** ** ** ** Sara Snyder Webmaster, Archives of American Art Smithsonian Institution (202) 633-7987 | www.aaa.si.edu ** ** ___ GLAM-US mailing list glam...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam-us -- -- *Sarah Stierch* *Museumist, open culture advocate, and Wikimedian* *www.sarahstierch.com* ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Joseph Reagle on Wikipedia's category taxonomy
Indeed Mike, how dare you accuse the august NYT of being influenced by so-called class privilege. That's ridiculous. The New York Times is not biased and publishes op-eds solely based on their individual merits. The opinions contained within have nothing to do with the privileges their authors may have or not have. Pff. Pretty soon you'll be suggesting that the fact that 83% of their columnists are men and that 92% are white has something to do with gender and race privilege. And after that, what. Are you going to suggest that gender and race affect viewpoint as well? Are you going to suggest that there's some sort of class gap on Wikipedia too? Utter tosh. I hope you don't intend on editing any Wikipedia articles based on these ridiculous assertions. Nepenthe On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 4:12 AM, Joseph Reagle joseph.2...@reagle.orgwrote: On 04/30/2013 12:03 AM, Risker wrote: Michael, you miss my point entirely. This is exactly the kind of nastiness - trashing someone who takes umbrage at the way Wikipedia does something that directly relates to her own real life - that brings the project into disrepute, and that women in particular find hostile. Agreed. __**_ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/gendergaphttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Joseph Reagle on Wikipedia's category taxonomy
Compare it to the weaknesses of the current category system. 98% of editors don't know what they are doing. Categories and subcategories are applied inconsistently all the time. Nobody has an overview of the entire tree structure, or even a major branch of it. And would this be any less truer of tags? Something that is a subcategory of American novelists today may stop being one tomorrow, just by dint of a single edit, and no one would be the wiser (unless they keep hundreds of categories on their watchlist). The category tree (or weave, as categories can have several parents) changes daily, with categories created, renamed, recategorised, and deleted. There are incessant arguments about how to name, categorise and diffuse categories, and about perceived iniquities.[citation needed] In all the years I’ve been on Wikipedia I think I’ve only once been involved in any dispute over a category’s existence where I didn’t agree (and still don’t) with the outcome: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_August_9#Category:Vogue_editors (I suppose it’s only coincidental here that the category in question was mostly populated by articles about women). Indeed, I find it interesting that WP:LEW includes only one example from the category namespace, with everything else very well represented. Using a defined set of basic tags in combination with something like CatScan – ported across to the Foundation server if you like, and given a friendly front-end with shortcuts to the most common searches – would do away with that. Without really solving the underlying problem, IMO, and making it harder to fix when it recurs. ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
