Re: [Gendergap] more women's voices

[Neotarf]

It looks like some sort of controversy section was started,  "Opposition in
the United States", but it contains nothing more than a link to the
"Vaccine controversies" article where, somewhere above the Spanish-American
War, there are two rather dated links related to APV virus [1] [2] Just
looking at what's available in a quick online search, it looks early
opposition centered around the compulsory nature of vaccinations for school
children before there had been extensive testing of the vaccine, while
later opposition to mandatory vaccination was diminished once a certain
level of voluntary vaccination was reached in a particular community. This
reminds me of the microwave/plastic/cancer thing a few years back, where
every published source said there was no link, but medical professionals
were warning people privately.  Wikipedia can only go by what is published,
so maybe this is just an example of the limitations of what Wikipedia can
be expected to do.


[1]
https://www.npr.org/2011/09/19/140543977/hpv-vaccine-the-science-behind-the-controversy
(2011)
[2] http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1586/erv.10.36?journalCode=ierv20
(2010)


On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 5:30 PM, Jane Darnell <jane...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Most health articles on Wikipedia are about men's health. I think you will
> find lots of stuff still covered by good 'ol 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica,
> except for the work done by the Medical Project, which needs more
> volunteers and is of course ongoing. In cases where articles get lots of
> traffic, they tend to be pretty good, but quite a long read. A friend was
> worried about having her daughter vaccinated for HPV, something that is
> done at school in my area for girls aged 13. My friend's doctor, a woman,
> said off the record that she would not allow her daughter to get the
> vaccine. Reading the Wikipedia article, I am not sure what to decide, and
> it certainly doesn't seem at first glance to be at all a controversial
> topic. I am not sure this article gives my friend all the information she
> needs to make a decision.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HPV_vaccines
>
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 10:25 PM, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure that disaster response and public health are mutually
>> exclusive, or how far non-specialists can get with this.  In any case, the
>> disaster response consists of getting Wikipedia-based knowledge into areas
>> without internet, either as an offline resource via Wiki Project Med/App,
>> or a local internet connection, so, in any case, they can only provide as
>> much information as is already in Wikipedia.
>>
>> Doing a spot check on children's health, individual articles that have
>> been adopted by WikiProject Medicine, like chickenpox and rubella, seem to
>> be well developed, but the navigation is hard to follow.  There is a
>> category for "pediatrics" also for "children's health", but where is the
>> navbox to tie everything together? What if you want to know something about
>> standard vaccines, for example, or psycho-social issues, or the reemergence
>> of polio in war zones.  What if you want to work on or evaluate a series of
>> articles around a central theme, or you want information to care for your
>> own children?
>>
>> Compare the extensive connection of articles at "Women's health" with
>> navigation templates at both the right sidebar and footer areas.  Compare
>> also the pitiful coverage of "Men's heath", which a google search resolves
>> to an article about a Rodale publication of that name.  A note at the top
>> of that article says "For health issues that apply specifically to men, see
>> men's health", which links to a pitiful start-class article with a somewhat
>> promotional tone, rated "low-importance" by Wikproject Medicine, that has
>> sported an incomplete tag since 2015.  The "men's health" article only has
>> a navigation template for "reproductive health".  There is a Rodale
>> magazine called Women's Health, but Wikipedia does not consider the
>> magazine to be the "primary topic" (WP:PRIMARYTOPIC) according to
>> Wikipedia's naming conventions.  It has the secondary topic title format
>> of  "Women's Health (magazine)" and an additional note at the top: "It is
>> not to be confused with the academic journals, Women's Health Issues
>> (journal), or Journal of Women's Health."
>>
>> And where is "domestic violence" or "sexual assault" in the men's health
>> roster?  Are these women's topics only? For that matter, where is
>> "prostate-specific antigen blood test"

Re: [Gendergap] more women's voices

[Neotarf]

I'm not sure that disaster response and public health are mutually
exclusive, or how far non-specialists can get with this.  In any case, the
disaster response consists of getting Wikipedia-based knowledge into areas
without internet, either as an offline resource via Wiki Project Med/App,
or a local internet connection, so, in any case, they can only provide as
much information as is already in Wikipedia.

Doing a spot check on children's health, individual articles that have been
adopted by WikiProject Medicine, like chickenpox and rubella, seem to be
well developed, but the navigation is hard to follow.  There is a category
for "pediatrics" also for "children's health", but where is the navbox to
tie everything together? What if you want to know something about standard
vaccines, for example, or psycho-social issues, or the reemergence of polio
in war zones.  What if you want to work on or evaluate a series of articles
around a central theme, or you want information to care for your own
children?

Compare the extensive connection of articles at "Women's health" with
navigation templates at both the right sidebar and footer areas.  Compare
also the pitiful coverage of "Men's heath", which a google search resolves
to an article about a Rodale publication of that name.  A note at the top
of that article says "For health issues that apply specifically to men, see
men's health", which links to a pitiful start-class article with a somewhat
promotional tone, rated "low-importance" by Wikproject Medicine, that has
sported an incomplete tag since 2015.  The "men's health" article only has
a navigation template for "reproductive health".  There is a Rodale
magazine called Women's Health, but Wikipedia does not consider the
magazine to be the "primary topic" (WP:PRIMARYTOPIC) according to
Wikipedia's naming conventions.  It has the secondary topic title format
of  "Women's Health (magazine)" and an additional note at the top: "It is
not to be confused with the academic journals, Women's Health Issues
(journal), or Journal of Women's Health."

And where is "domestic violence" or "sexual assault" in the men's health
roster?  Are these women's topics only? For that matter, where is
"prostate-specific antigen blood test". You can find more information about
these topics on reddit than on Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Pediatrics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Children%27s_health
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_health
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_Health
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_health
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_Health_(magazine)




On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 10:58 PM, J Hayes <slowki...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yeah, if you wanted a case study of what implicit bias looks like, just
> look at health care.
> It is good working on disaster response, but the vital chronic public
> health topics are relatively neglected.
> This infant sleep article got elevated by our oclc friends. Much criticism
> of the start by the librarians.
>
>
> On Nov 1, 2017 8:41 PM, "Neotarf" <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Health professionals thinking about what belongs in an educational video
>> might want to walk down the hall to the outpatient department and see what
>> kind of films are being shown to family members while they wait.  Who
>> knows, there might even be something out of copyright that can be made
>> available to the public. If obstetrics is being described in terms of
>> storks (what, no cabbage patch?) then pediatrics on Wikipedia is even more
>> dismal. I wondered about this article on infant sleep training and why it
>> is assigned to women's health project.  Does Wikipedia recognize no
>> difference between gynecology and pediatrics?
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Infant_sleep_training And then I
>> realized there is no project for pediatrics. With the medicine project
>> developing the offline Kiwix application that can be used by practitioners
>> who treat refugees and populations in the developing world, this seems like
>> a knowledge gap that has huge implications for maternal and infant health
>> worldwide.
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 10:34 PM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Noting that the discussion has now closed with the video being removed.
>>>
>>> Risker/Anne
>>>
>>> On 29 October 2017 at 14:50, Ryan Kaldari <rkald...@wikimedia.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> It would be nice to have some women weighing on this debate:
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Abortion#RfC_regarding_video
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __

[Gendergap] Fwd: "Selective incivility"

[Neotarf]

More research on 'selective incivility':

This refers to an academic discussion of whether discrimination is no
longer overt but has become covert, in the form of incivilty that selectively
targets gender and other marginalized groups without making open reference
to those groups.

Gender, Sexual Orientation, and Workplace Incivility: Who Is Most Targeted
and Who Is Most Harmed? https://www.researchgate.net/p
ublication/301762104_Gender_Sexual_Orientation_and_Workplace
_Incivility_Who_Is_Most_Targeted_and_Who_Is_Most_Harmed

Research on bystander intervention.  Includes various ways to classify
bystander
responses: 1) assertive to stop the incivility, 2) supporting to the
perpetrator by minimizing, ignoring, or downplaying the transgression 3)
passive by social support to the target.

Witnessing wrongdoing: The effects of observer power on incivility
intervention in the workplace
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318911812_Witnessing_wrongdoing_The_effects_of_observer_power_on_incivility_intervention_in_the_workplace


-- Forwarded message --
From: Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 9:16 AM
Subject: "Selective incivility"
To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the
participation of women within Wikimedia projects." <
gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>


This is a body of research going back to at least 2008, usually referred to
in the literature as "Cortina’s theory of selective incivility". It
categorizes types of selective incivility, and has data showing that
selective incivility causes marginalized groups to leave organizations.

"That is, 'generally' uncivil words and deeds make no overt reference to
gender or race (or any other social dimension). Nevertheless, incivility
may sometimes represent a covert manifestation of gender and racial bias
when women and people of color are selectively targeted."

The most frequently cited study is Selective Incivility as Modern
Discrimination in Organizations (2013):  http://journals.sagepub.com/do
i/abs/10.1177/0149206311418835
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] more women's voices

[Neotarf]

Health professionals thinking about what belongs in an educational video
might want to walk down the hall to the outpatient department and see what
kind of films are being shown to family members while they wait.  Who
knows, there might even be something out of copyright that can be made
available to the public. If obstetrics is being described in terms of
storks (what, no cabbage patch?) then pediatrics on Wikipedia is even more
dismal. I wondered about this article on infant sleep training and why it
is assigned to women's health project.  Does Wikipedia recognize no
difference between gynecology and pediatrics?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Infant_sleep_training And then I
realized there is no project for pediatrics. With the medicine project
developing the offline Kiwix application that can be used by practitioners
who treat refugees and populations in the developing world, this seems like
a knowledge gap that has huge implications for maternal and infant health
worldwide.

On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 10:34 PM, Risker  wrote:

> Noting that the discussion has now closed with the video being removed.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On 29 October 2017 at 14:50, Ryan Kaldari  wrote:
>
>> It would be nice to have some women weighing on this debate:
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Abortion#RfC_regarding_video
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [Gendergap] FYI - GGTF case appeal

[Neotarf]

There is some association with a private GLAM mailing list.  I could not
find out more, and I cannot give more details without risk of exposing
someone's identity. No idea if it is a NDA, NCA or NPA or something else,
even a misunderstanding, you know how people can be, but why would
something be secret if it does not exist? If you know people in these
institutions maybe you can count for yourself how many of them are
anonymous and how many list their employers on their talk page, and if
there is some uniformity, how that might have come to be.  I am unable to
go further with this issue, but as they say, first do no harm, my loyalty
will be to protecting the careers and reputations of real people, I do
believe this should be the best interest of the WMF as well. It is sad that
when there can be no public discussions of these issues without reprisals,
only the private channels remain.

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Robert Fernandez <wikigamal...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> No, that's exactly the opposite of what was said.  I did not say I signed
> a non-disparagement agreement.  I said I signed the standard WMF
> confidentiality agreement.
>
> You can read it here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> i/Confidentiality_agreement_for_nonpublic_information/  Everyone signs it
> for even mundane things.  I first signed it when I processed free database
> accounts for The Wikipedia Library and had access to names and email
> addresses of editors.
>
> You can see there's nothing in it about non-disparagement.  I feel quite
> free to disparage any person or institution that I choose.
>
> Given that you are unable to distinguish between a routine confidentiality
> agreement and a non-disparagement agreement, or between normal criticism
> and the suppression of discussion, I'm pretty confident that these alleged
> NPAs have never existed.
>
> The idea that Risker "wants to suppress all discussion" of these alleged
> NPAs is nonsense.  She merely pointed out, quite correctly, that spreading
> baseless allegations is quite damaging to the very causes you profess to
> care about.Please consider that before you continue to double down on a
> baseless allegation.  There are plenty of legitimate criticisms to level at
> the Foundation and this community for ineptness and inaction in these areas
> without making things up.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 2:11 PM, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> So we have two former arbitrators on this list, one of whom has offered
>> to assist in evaluating this thing privately, and who has himself signed
>> such a non-disparagement agreement, and another who wants to suppress all
>> discussion of it.  We don't know if she has signed such an agreement.
>>
>> Publications like the New York Times and Washington Post do print and
>> evaluate information without naming sources, and it is true they are
>> sometimes called "fake news" on Twitter, but does not make the information
>> "factless", or prevent Wikipedia from consider them to be RS.
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> So, in other words, you have no evidence at all, except for some gossip,
>>> that *anyone* is being required to sign NDAs in order to edit Wikipedia.
>>> You have some information that suggests other organizations, completely
>>> separate from Wikipedia,
>>>
>>> It's bad enough that women do, indeed, face greater sexual harassment
>>> both societally and on Wikimedia projects, something that is quantified in
>>> various ways even if there is some question about the accuracy of that
>>> quantification.  Sesnsationalistic statements such as yours, without any
>>> evidence at all, have a very significant negative impact on the ability to
>>> fight such harassment, especially when they seem so absurd.  Simply put,
>>> it's factless allegation, or what certain sectors of the American public
>>> have come to term "fake news".  Please retract your statement.
>>>
>>> Risker/Anne
>>>
>>> On 7 August 2017 at 08:21, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have no way of investigating something I was not supposed to find out
>>>> about in the first place. Given Wikipedia's culture of retaliation against
>>>> anyone who speaks out, I am unlikely to find out more, but it did seem
>>>> credible. These agreements are becoming more common, for instance here a
>>>> female employee wanted to get out of her non-disparagement agreement but
>>>> Angel List said no. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0
>>>>

Re: [Gendergap] FYI - GGTF case appeal

[Neotarf]

So we have two former arbitrators on this list, one of whom has offered to
assist in evaluating this thing privately, and who has himself signed such
a non-disparagement agreement, and another who wants to suppress all
discussion of it.  We don't know if she has signed such an agreement.

Publications like the New York Times and Washington Post do print and
evaluate information without naming sources, and it is true they are
sometimes called "fake news" on Twitter, but does not make the information
"factless", or prevent Wikipedia from consider them to be RS.

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote:

> So, in other words, you have no evidence at all, except for some gossip,
> that *anyone* is being required to sign NDAs in order to edit Wikipedia.
> You have some information that suggests other organizations, completely
> separate from Wikipedia,
>
> It's bad enough that women do, indeed, face greater sexual harassment both
> societally and on Wikimedia projects, something that is quantified in
> various ways even if there is some question about the accuracy of that
> quantification.  Sesnsationalistic statements such as yours, without any
> evidence at all, have a very significant negative impact on the ability to
> fight such harassment, especially when they seem so absurd.  Simply put,
> it's factless allegation, or what certain sectors of the American public
> have come to term "fake news".  Please retract your statement.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On 7 August 2017 at 08:21, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I have no way of investigating something I was not supposed to find out
>> about in the first place. Given Wikipedia's culture of retaliation against
>> anyone who speaks out, I am unlikely to find out more, but it did seem
>> credible. These agreements are becoming more common, for instance here a
>> female employee wanted to get out of her non-disparagement agreement but
>> Angel List said no. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0
>> 7/21/technology/silicon-valley-sexual-harassment-non-dispara
>> gement-agreements.html Also the internal Google gender manifesto that
>> was just leaked "Until about a week ago, you would have heard very little
>> from me publicly about this, because (as a fairly senior Googler) my job
>> would have been to deal with it internally, and confidentiality rules would
>> have prevented me from saying much in public.But as it happens, (although
>> this wasn’t the way I was planning on announcing it) I actually recently
>> left Google..." https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-
>> manifesto-1e3773ed1788
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:16 AM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6 August 2017 at 23:08, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> ..
>>>>
>>>> Women who do not want to interact on these terms, with individuals who
>>>> are quite probably minors, are being silenced.  I have heard that
>>>> professional women are being recruited for Wikipedia, women whose employers
>>>> would ordinarily be expected to protect them from a 'hostile work place',
>>>> but they are being required to post their real identities on their talk
>>>> pages, along with the names of their employers. and a COI form statement.
>>>> They are also required to sign a non-disclosure agreement that prevents
>>>> them from revealing any harassment they experience in Wikipedia, or from
>>>> even revealing they have been required to sign an NDA.  These women will
>>>> join Wikipedia, and listen to the pitch and eat the bagels, and Wikipedia
>>>> gets to count them as female editors, but very few of them go on to make
>>>> that second edit, because it's their professional reputation on the line.
>>>>
>>>> If Wikipedia wants women editors they are going to have to come to
>>>> terms with this.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> This is a very inflammatory thing to say, Neotarf, and I need to insist
>>> that you show some proof of this.  Links to discussions or requirements,
>>> please. This is far too sensationalistic to allow it to sit here without
>>> serious evidence.
>>>
>>> Risker/Anne
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
>>> visit:
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mai

Re: [Gendergap] FYI - GGTF case appeal

[Neotarf]

I have no way of investigating something I was not supposed to find out
about in the first place. Given Wikipedia's culture of retaliation against
anyone who speaks out, I am unlikely to find out more, but it did seem
credible. These agreements are becoming more common, for instance here a
female employee wanted to get out of her non-disparagement agreement but
Angel List said no.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/21/technology/silicon-valley-sexual-harassment-non-disparagement-agreements.html
Also the internal Google gender manifesto that was just leaked "Until about
a week ago, you would have heard very little from me publicly about this,
because (as a fairly senior Googler) my job would have been to deal with it
internally, and confidentiality rules would have prevented me from saying
much in public.But as it happens, (although this wasn’t the way I was
planning on announcing it) I actually recently left Google..."
https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-manifesto-1e3773ed1788


On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:16 AM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 6 August 2017 at 23:08, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> ..
>>
>> Women who do not want to interact on these terms, with individuals who
>> are quite probably minors, are being silenced.  I have heard that
>> professional women are being recruited for Wikipedia, women whose employers
>> would ordinarily be expected to protect them from a 'hostile work place',
>> but they are being required to post their real identities on their talk
>> pages, along with the names of their employers. and a COI form statement.
>> They are also required to sign a non-disclosure agreement that prevents
>> them from revealing any harassment they experience in Wikipedia, or from
>> even revealing they have been required to sign an NDA.  These women will
>> join Wikipedia, and listen to the pitch and eat the bagels, and Wikipedia
>> gets to count them as female editors, but very few of them go on to make
>> that second edit, because it's their professional reputation on the line.
>>
>> If Wikipedia wants women editors they are going to have to come to terms
>> with this.
>>
>>
>>
> This is a very inflammatory thing to say, Neotarf, and I need to insist
> that you show some proof of this.  Links to discussions or requirements,
> please. This is far too sensationalistic to allow it to sit here without
> serious evidence.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] FYI - GGTF case appeal

[Neotarf]

I doubt very much whether anyone who has been paying attention to this
thread still thinks it's about me.  The problems with arbcom have been very
public since at least the 2015 Wikiconference USA. [1] But JJ Marr does
have a point.  The Arbcom does label this a "finding of fact", although the
WMF is probably more likely to regard it as a 'poorly written personal
opinion' of the arbitrators who signed their names to it, at least from a
legal standpoint. But the arbitration committee does not have any standard
for "fact", as WP does with BLP. The arbitration committee, with a few
exceptions, is mostly very young and inexperienced with life and work, and
has no training at all with arbitration or dispute resolution.  The only
tool they are given as part of their remit to resolve disputes is to
publicly humiliate and embarrass volunteers who have given their time to
the project.

The result is that anyone who has ever objected to harassment on Wikipedia
has been driven off, either by arbitration or by doxing.

One of the problems is this non-consensual sodomy thing that's making the
rounds.  This kind of talk is very normalized in some areas of Wikipedia,
for instance in the back rooms of the Signpost when I was there it was a
standing joke. It's one thing though if consenting adult men are using
Wikipedia to hook up with each other, but the problem is that older men are
telling younger men that this is the way to impress women, and the younger
men believe them, they just don't know.

Women who do not want to interact on these terms, with individuals who are
quite probably minors, are being silenced.  I have heard that professional
women are being recruited for Wikipedia, women whose employers would
ordinarily be expected to protect them from a 'hostile work place', but
they are being required to post their real identities on their talk pages,
along with the names of their employers. and a COI form statement.  They
are also required to sign a non-disclosure agreement that prevents them
from revealing any harassment they experience in Wikipedia, or from even
revealing they have been required to sign an NDA.  These women will join
Wikipedia, and listen to the pitch and eat the bagels, and Wikipedia gets
to count them as female editors, but very few of them go on to make that
second edit, because it's their professional reputation on the line.

If Wikipedia wants women editors they are going to have to come to terms
with this.

[1]
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Danielle_Citron_speaks_at_WikiConference_USA_2015

On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 11:02 PM, Johanna-Hypatia Cybeleia <
johanna.hypa...@gmail.com> wrote:

> JJ Marr, I hate to be the one who walks into a conversation late and asks
> "What are you talking about?" —especially since you're going to stop
> talking about it now, but... I searched all through the archives of this
> list in my mail, but so far am none the wiser...
>
> On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 10:10 PM, JJ Marr  wrote:
>
>>
>> Maybe it would be better for the mailing list if we stopped talking about
>> this? Just a suggestion.
>>
>
>
> --
> __
> I have been woman
> for a long time
> beware my smile
>
> --Audre Lorde
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] FYI - GGTF case appeal

[Neotarf]

Just to follow up, the WMF has now responded.  I appreciate them taking
time to review these concerns.

>>>your best course of action is to discuss the PII situation with WMF
Legal.

Been and done, also involvement from C-levels, although that was some time
ago

>>>a few other remedies which could come into play, but they would almost
certainly take longer and be more politically problematic than a minimal
intervention

If this is necessary, we should not shrink from it.  If this can happen to
me, it can happen to anyone -- your students, your employees, or someone
like Bassel Khartabil. The arbitrators should not be using dox as a tool to
silence voices for diversity or as an arbitration outcome.

The foundation lost social capital during the media viewer/visual
editor/flow controversies, because the community went to a great deal of
effort to document the problems with those products, and was not listened
to.  But that was a long time ago, and the community has now lost the high
ground, largely because of the gender issue. 640 people voted in the 2014
arbcom election, but after this GGTF case, 2674 people voted in the 2015
election. Is there any doubt that the arbcom is out of touch with the
community, and that the community process is failing?  The arbitration
committee was not established by the community, it was established by Jimmy
Wales. Is there any doubt the foundation has the capability and the
resources to step in and protect the long term interests of the movement if
the arbcom and the community process can not?

On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 8:03 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Unfortunately I don't think there is much more I can do here. Based on
> what you wrote, I think that your best course of action is to discuss the
> PII situation with WMF Legal. There are a few other remedies which could
> come into play, but they would almost certainly take longer and be more
> politically problematic than a minimal intervention in which WMF Legal
> clarifies to the Ombuds and Arbcom what is required under WMF's
> interpretation of its privacy policy.
>
> Pine
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 3:49 PM, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The privacy policy as written certainly leads users to expect their PII
>> is safe. There is nothing I can find in the written policy that would back
>> the idea that the ombuds should refuse to remove PII if they think it might
>> have been posted in good faith. If it could be used to identify someone, it
>> should just be removed. That's just basic safety.  Maybe they are not
>> allowed to go against arbitrators  I also don't understand why arbitrators
>> would insist on posting PII over and over. We have seen too much what that
>> can lead to. In all fairness, the gamergate sub-reddit was very
>> professional and removed the dox within an hour of my request.
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 5:56 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hmm. I'd like to take a closer look at this, but unfortunately I'm
>>> already backlogged with other projects. I wish I knew what to suggest here.
>>> If you have already been to the Ombudsman Commission and you disagree with
>>> their interpretation of WMF policies, then you might try to contact WMF
>>> Legal, although I don't know to what extent they will want to involve
>>> themselves.
>>>
>>> For what it's worth, if I had my way the OC would (1) have significantly
>>> more independence from the WMF Board and staff and (2) be issuing monthly
>>> or quarterly reports about its activities, but realistically the current
>>> setup is likely to continue for the foreseeable future.
>>>
>>> Pine
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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

Re: [Gendergap] article for first women's political party in Pakistan is about to be deleted

[Neotarf]

Thank you Camelia.

The Womanity Foundation article is looking great, I enjoyed reading it.
Too bad the Yann Borgstedt article didn't make it, maybe there are more
sources in French language and it would do better on French Wikipedia.
There seems to be a lot in Spanish as well.

What does anyone think of this artist?   The article has just been relisted
at AfD, it looks like she has had some international exhibitions and won
some awards.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lina_Condes

http://avantgallery.com/lina-condes/
Awarded the “2016 Best of International Emerging Artist” in Dubai
http://nomosoho.com/press-releases/nomo-soho-debuts-emerging-artist-lina-condes-bagel-emoji-2-bachelor-miami-sculptures/
exhibition

Sculpture on cover of Art Monaco by Lina Condes
http://artmonacomagazine.com/lina-condes/

Art Miami'16 miami exhibition (Ukrainian language) http:/
tabloid.pravda.com.ua/news/58512a4420568/
https://ukrop.depo.ua/ukr/molodoy_ukrop/hudozhnitsya-lina-condes-predstavila-ukrayinu-v-mayami-15122016094800

http://artemonaco.com/web/en/exhibitor_details/36 bio with details of
exhibition prizes

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 2:27 AM, camelia boban <camelia.bo...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Thank you Neotarf, hope with these sources the article will be safe for
> deletion.
>
> Best,
> Camelia from WikiDonne
>
>
>
> --
> *Camelia Boban*
> *Wikimedia *Foundation *Affiliations Committee*
>
> Freelance developer  |  WikiDonne founder
> T. +39 0669362474 <+39%2006%206936%202474> | M. +39 3383385545
> <+39%20338%20338%205545>
> camelia.bo...@gmail.com
> *Wikipedia <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Camelia.boban> | *Twitter
> <https://twitter.com/cameliaboban> *|* *Google Plu
> <https://plus.google.com/+CameliaBoban/>s
> <https://plus.google.com/+CameliaBoban/>*
> *WikiDonne <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progetto:WikiDonne>* *| **LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/camelia-boban-31319122>  **|* *Aissa
> Technologies* <http://aissatechnologies.eu/>
>
>
>
>
> 2017-06-27 5:43 GMT+02:00 Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com>:
>
>> Here is the archived article: "Women’s political party launched Pakistan
>> Women Muslim League (PWML)" January 6, 2014 http://archive.is/V3Vpk
>>
>> Party registered with PEC Pakistan Election Commission:
>> https://books.google.com/books?id=RROXCwAAQBAJ=PA280=
>> Pakistan+Women+Muslim+League,+Rubina+Shaheen=en=X=
>> 0ahUKEwicvJSP19zUAhWFOz4KHQK6BMAQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage=Pakist
>> an%20Women%20Muslim%20League%2C%20Rubina%20Shaheen=false
>>
>> Cabinet list and photo of oath-taking ceremony
>> http://pwml.pk/index.php/cabinets/188-oath-taking-cermony
>>
>> Official website (English and Urdu): http://pwml.pk/
>>
>> See also Maimoonah Khan https://www.facebook.com/pwml.islamabad/ and
>> Urdu https://www.facebook.com/pwmlp, FB profile:
>> https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100012757092035=ts There
>> seem to be new internal elections underway by email starting 3 days ago.
>>
>> Twitter https://twitter.com/chrpersonpwml?lang=en
>>
>> YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCLP3T3yn95nLlP1DLY4LBQ
>> Another Youtube Rubina Shaheen speaking in Peshawar
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X1eatiEeeo
>>
>> Rubina Shaheen introduces herself as primary school teacher
>> https://www.worldpulse.com/en/community/users/rubina-shaheen#stories
>>
>> Linked in: https://pk.linkedin.com/in/rubina-shaheen-22a252100
>>
>> There is also a Rubina Shaheen Wattoo, daughter of Manzoor Wattoo,
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manzoor_Wattoo who seems to have won some
>> elections, http://www.pap.gov.pk/index.php/members/profile/en/19/647 and
>> may be notable, but by the photographs this does not appear to be the same
>> person. Disambig page?
>>
>> There was a Rubina/Robina Shaheen who ran in the 2013 election for PK-5
>> Peshawar KPK Assembly seat, but the party affiliation (PML-Q) (probably The
>> Pakistan Muslim League or Quaid e Azam Group, Urdu: پاکستان مسلم لیگ ق‎)
>> does not look right (s/b PWML), so probably not the same one.
>> https://www.thenews.com.pk/archive/amp/432028-all-women-cand
>> idates-from-kp-lost-election-by-huge-marginshttp://www.
>> electionpakistani.com/ge2013/pk/PK-5.htm
>>
>> There was a fair amount of coverage of PWML in Urdu sources here, from
>> their official website, unfortunately these are photos of newspaper
>> clippings and not digitized. http://pwml.pk/index.php/home-
>> en/10-icetheme/features/245-news-media
>>
>> This may be the only women's party in the world, as Pakistan has seats
>> reserved for women (although it is

Re: [Gendergap] FYI - GGTF case appeal

[Neotarf]

The privacy policy as written certainly leads users to expect their PII is
safe. There is nothing I can find in the written policy that would back the
idea that the ombuds should refuse to remove PII if they think it might
have been posted in good faith. If it could be used to identify someone, it
should just be removed. That's just basic safety.  Maybe they are not
allowed to go against arbitrators  I also don't understand why arbitrators
would insist on posting PII over and over. We have seen too much what that
can lead to. In all fairness, the gamergate sub-reddit was very
professional and removed the dox within an hour of my request.

On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 5:56 PM, Pine W  wrote:

> Hmm. I'd like to take a closer look at this, but unfortunately I'm already
> backlogged with other projects. I wish I knew what to suggest here. If you
> have already been to the Ombudsman Commission and you disagree with their
> interpretation of WMF policies, then you might try to contact WMF Legal,
> although I don't know to what extent they will want to involve themselves.
>
> For what it's worth, if I had my way the OC would (1) have significantly
> more independence from the WMF Board and staff and (2) be issuing monthly
> or quarterly reports about its activities, but realistically the current
> setup is likely to continue for the foreseeable future.
>
> Pine
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] FYI - GGTF case appeal

[Neotarf]

Pine, yes without a doubt a violation of WP:Privacy policy, WP:OUTING, and
WP:WHEEL for starters, since dox was removed by one admin and reinstated by
another, at the direction of yet another arbitrator whose edit history will
show nothing.  At this point I don't remember any more all the people I
took it to, they determined that the privacy policy had been violated but
declined to take any action. The point I think is not about any particular
individuals, because there were just so many; but that PII does not belong
in the hands of untrained volunteers, but rather with professionals who
have signed a meaningful NDA.

On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:

> If Arbcom members actually posted information which could be considered
> "outing" in violation of WMF policies, please take that information to the
> Ombudsmen Commission. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman_commission
>
>
> Pine
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The arbitration committee has never responded to any of my emails,
>> although some individual arbitrators were willing to communicate with me
>> while I was writing the arbitration report for the Signpost.  Would you
>> like screenshots of the bounce notifications?  In addition, four
>> arbitrators posted personally identifying information about me and did not
>> respond to my requests to remove it.
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 2:05 AM, JJ Marr <jjm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "I emailed the WMF in relation to my enwiki arbcom case"
>>>
>>> You're getting ignored because the WMF doesn't want to get involved in
>>> community processes. Sorry to be blunt, but you should try emailing ArbCom
>>> before making this type of posting.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committe
>>> e/Procedures#Standard_provision:_appeals_and_modifications
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 09 Jul 2017 1:47 AM, "Neotarf" <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello, this is to let everyone know that I have submitted an appeal to
>>> the GGTF case.
>>>
>>> It has been very difficult to try to respond to the accusations in this
>>> arbitration case, because I don't understand them. Everyone who has looked
>>> at the diffs has found nothing.  Kevin Gorman called them "flimsy".  Even
>>> Wikipediocracy, which has no particular love for me, could find nothing.
>>> After having had time to go through some of the histories, I found that
>>> half of the diffs were from someone who wrote a program specifically to
>>> collect diffs of my edits in order to sift through them and who was able to
>>> use the program to discover IP addresses as well.  The other half of the
>>> diffs were added to the case by one of the arbitrators after the evidence
>>> phase of the case had closed and included edits made by Jimmy Wales and one
>>> of the admins--not even my edits.  I don't want to say a lot about this on
>>> a public mailing list, but at this point it is pretty obvious that this is
>>> a false conviction.
>>>
>>> I understand I was eligible to appeal this after one year, however I
>>> have waited more than two years. My initial inquiry to the WMF was on
>>> 11/17/16.  I was assigned a member of the WMF staff and told I could expect
>>> to hear something in mid-January.  Since then, I have made three followup
>>> queries, asking for an update to the expected timeline, but have been
>>> unable to get any response at all.  At this point, there is no reason to
>>> believe the non-response is not deliberate.
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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

Re: [Gendergap] FYI - GGTF case appeal

[Neotarf]

The arbitration committee has never responded to any of my emails, although
some individual arbitrators were willing to communicate with me while I was
writing the arbitration report for the Signpost.  Would you like
screenshots of the bounce notifications?  In addition, four arbitrators
posted personally identifying information about me and did not respond to
my requests to remove it.

On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 2:05 AM, JJ Marr <jjm...@gmail.com> wrote:

> "I emailed the WMF in relation to my enwiki arbcom case"
>
> You're getting ignored because the WMF doesn't want to get involved in
> community processes. Sorry to be blunt, but you should try emailing ArbCom
> before making this type of posting.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_
> Committee/Procedures#Standard_provision:_appeals_and_modifications
>
>
>
>
> On 09 Jul 2017 1:47 AM, "Neotarf" <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello, this is to let everyone know that I have submitted an appeal to the
> GGTF case.
>
> It has been very difficult to try to respond to the accusations in this
> arbitration case, because I don't understand them. Everyone who has looked
> at the diffs has found nothing.  Kevin Gorman called them "flimsy".  Even
> Wikipediocracy, which has no particular love for me, could find nothing.
> After having had time to go through some of the histories, I found that
> half of the diffs were from someone who wrote a program specifically to
> collect diffs of my edits in order to sift through them and who was able to
> use the program to discover IP addresses as well.  The other half of the
> diffs were added to the case by one of the arbitrators after the evidence
> phase of the case had closed and included edits made by Jimmy Wales and one
> of the admins--not even my edits.  I don't want to say a lot about this on
> a public mailing list, but at this point it is pretty obvious that this is
> a false conviction.
>
> I understand I was eligible to appeal this after one year, however I have
> waited more than two years. My initial inquiry to the WMF was on 11/17/16.
> I was assigned a member of the WMF staff and told I could expect to hear
> something in mid-January.  Since then, I have made three followup queries,
> asking for an update to the expected timeline, but have been unable to get
> any response at all.  At this point, there is no reason to believe the
> non-response is not deliberate.
>
> ___
> 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] FYI - GGTF case appeal

[Neotarf]

Hello, this is to let everyone know that I have submitted an appeal to the
GGTF case.

It has been very difficult to try to respond to the accusations in this
arbitration case, because I don't understand them. Everyone who has looked
at the diffs has found nothing.  Kevin Gorman called them "flimsy".  Even
Wikipediocracy, which has no particular love for me, could find nothing.
After having had time to go through some of the histories, I found that
half of the diffs were from someone who wrote a program specifically to
collect diffs of my edits in order to sift through them and who was able to
use the program to discover IP addresses as well.  The other half of the
diffs were added to the case by one of the arbitrators after the evidence
phase of the case had closed and included edits made by Jimmy Wales and one
of the admins--not even my edits.  I don't want to say a lot about this on
a public mailing list, but at this point it is pretty obvious that this is
a false conviction.

I understand I was eligible to appeal this after one year, however I have
waited more than two years. My initial inquiry to the WMF was on 11/17/16.
I was assigned a member of the WMF staff and told I could expect to hear
something in mid-January.  Since then, I have made three followup queries,
asking for an update to the expected timeline, but have been unable to get
any response at all.  At this point, there is no reason to believe the
non-response is not deliberate.
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] article for first women's political party in Pakistan is about to be deleted

[Neotarf]

Now this is strange.  The person who created The Womanity Foundation back
in October also created the article Yann Borgstedt
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yann_Borgstedt> which is apparently the guy
who started the organization. The article passed a review by Articles for
Creation back in 2011, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Yann_Borgstedt
but has just been nominated for deletion.

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 6:54 PM, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Looking at the discussion, it seems they are using the wrong notability
> guideline, the first one, WP:COMPANY, which would be used for restaurants
> or garage bands, instead of WP:NONPROFIT
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28organizations_and_companies%29#Non-commercial_organizations>,
> further down the page. The page is rather confusing in the way it is
> organized, but I don't see any other category that could be used for
> political parties or organizations in the public interest.
>
> According to WP:NONPROFIT:
>
> *Non-commercial organizations*
>
> Organizations are usually notable if they meet *both* of the following
> standards:
>
>- The scope of their activities is national or international in scale
>- The organization has received significant coverage in multiple
>reliable sources that are independent of the organization.
>
> So I have compiled a list of the Farsi-language sources at
> https://neotarf.wordpress.com/2017/06/29/sources-for-
> pakistan-women-muslim-league/
>
> A total of 12 newspapers have published articles about Pakistan Women
> Muslim League, including an interview with the founder. There are 11
> articles from Peshawar (local) sources, 2 from unidentified sources, and 3
> articles from sources from the capital in Islamabad, showing national
> scope, as does the fact that the party is registered nationally.
>
> If there is not a consensus for an article, perhaps the information could
> be added to another article, I see there is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> List_of_political_parties_in_Pakistan#Minor_or_regional_parties although
> I suppose you would have to nominate all the other small parties for
> deletion as well, or incorporate them into the list.
>
> I really have to wonder if this is a good use of our time.  While I
> appreciate Ryan's efforts in bringing this issue here, it took me literally
> hours to identify these articles to establish notability, on a topic that
> should already be obviously notable.  Shouldn't anyone be able to go to
> Wikipedia to find information about another country's political system.
>
> On a similar note, I see The Womanity Foundation
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Womanity_Foundation> nominated for
> deletion and the person who started the article referred to as "an SPA".
> Welcome to Wikipedia. A quick google shows a huge number of reliable
> sources. https://www.google.com/search?q=The+Womanity+Foundation=
> utf-8=utf-8#q=The+Womanity+Foundation=nws Aren't they supposed to
> check that before they nominate it for deletion?  Can the new community
> culture group help with that?
>
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 11:43 PM, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Here is the archived article: "Women’s political party launched Pakistan
>> Women Muslim League (PWML)" January 6, 2014 http://archive.is/V3Vpk
>>
>> Party registered with PEC Pakistan Election Commission:
>> https://books.google.com/books?id=RROXCwAAQBAJ=PA280=
>> Pakistan+Women+Muslim+League,+Rubina+Shaheen=en=X=
>> 0ahUKEwicvJSP19zUAhWFOz4KHQK6BMAQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage=Pakist
>> an%20Women%20Muslim%20League%2C%20Rubina%20Shaheen=false
>>
>> Cabinet list and photo of oath-taking ceremony
>> http://pwml.pk/index.php/cabinets/188-oath-taking-cermony
>>
>> Official website (English and Urdu): http://pwml.pk/
>>
>> See also Maimoonah Khan https://www.facebook.com/pwml.islamabad/ and
>> Urdu https://www.facebook.com/pwmlp, FB profile:
>> https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100012757092035=ts There
>> seem to be new internal elections underway by email starting 3 days ago.
>>
>> Twitter https://twitter.com/chrpersonpwml?lang=en
>>
>> YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCLP3T3yn95nLlP1DLY4LBQ
>> Another Youtube Rubina Shaheen speaking in Peshawar
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X1eatiEeeo
>>
>> Rubina Shaheen introduces herself as primary school teacher
>> https://www.worldpulse.com/en/community/users/rubina-shaheen#stories
>>
>> Linked in: https://pk.linkedin.com/in/rubina-shaheen-22a252100
>>
>> There is also a Rubina Shaheen Wattoo, daughter of Manzoor Wattoo,
>> https://en.wikipedia.o

Re: [Gendergap] article for first women's political party in Pakistan is about to be deleted

[Neotarf]

Looking at the discussion, it seems they are using the wrong notability
guideline, the first one, WP:COMPANY, which would be used for restaurants
or garage bands, instead of WP:NONPROFIT
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28organizations_and_companies%29#Non-commercial_organizations>,
further down the page. The page is rather confusing in the way it is
organized, but I don't see any other category that could be used for
political parties or organizations in the public interest.

According to WP:NONPROFIT:

*Non-commercial organizations*

Organizations are usually notable if they meet *both* of the following
standards:

   - The scope of their activities is national or international in scale
   - The organization has received significant coverage in multiple
   reliable sources that are independent of the organization.

So I have compiled a list of the Farsi-language sources at
https://neotarf.wordpress.com/2017/06/29/sources-for-pakistan-women-muslim-league/

A total of 12 newspapers have published articles about Pakistan Women
Muslim League, including an interview with the founder. There are 11
articles from Peshawar (local) sources, 2 from unidentified sources, and 3
articles from sources from the capital in Islamabad, showing national
scope, as does the fact that the party is registered nationally.

If there is not a consensus for an article, perhaps the information could
be added to another article, I see there is
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_Pakistan#Minor_or_regional_parties
although I suppose you would have to nominate all the other small parties
for deletion as well, or incorporate them into the list.

I really have to wonder if this is a good use of our time.  While I
appreciate Ryan's efforts in bringing this issue here, it took me literally
hours to identify these articles to establish notability, on a topic that
should already be obviously notable.  Shouldn't anyone be able to go to
Wikipedia to find information about another country's political system.

On a similar note, I see The Womanity Foundation
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Womanity_Foundation> nominated for
deletion and the person who started the article referred to as "an SPA".
Welcome to Wikipedia. A quick google shows a huge number of reliable
sources.
https://www.google.com/search?q=The+Womanity+Foundation=utf-8=utf-8#q=The+Womanity+Foundation=nws
Aren't they supposed to check that before they nominate it for deletion?
Can the new community culture group help with that?

On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 11:43 PM, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Here is the archived article: "Women’s political party launched Pakistan
> Women Muslim League (PWML)" January 6, 2014 http://archive.is/V3Vpk
>
> Party registered with PEC Pakistan Election Commission:
> https://books.google.com/books?id=RROXCwAAQBAJ=PA280=Pakistan+Women+
> Muslim+League,+Rubina+Shaheen=en=X=
> 0ahUKEwicvJSP19zUAhWFOz4KHQK6BMAQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage=
> Pakistan%20Women%20Muslim%20League%2C%20Rubina%20Shaheen=false
>
> Cabinet list and photo of oath-taking ceremony http://pwml.pk/index.php/
> cabinets/188-oath-taking-cermony
>
> Official website (English and Urdu): http://pwml.pk/
>
> See also Maimoonah Khan https://www.facebook.com/pwml.islamabad/ and Urdu
> https://www.facebook.com/pwmlp, FB profile: https://www.facebook.com/
> profile.php?id=100012757092035=ts There seem to be new internal
> elections underway by email starting 3 days ago.
>
> Twitter https://twitter.com/chrpersonpwml?lang=en
>
> YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCLP3T3yn95nLlP1DLY4LBQ
> Another Youtube Rubina Shaheen speaking in Peshawar
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X1eatiEeeo
>
> Rubina Shaheen introduces herself as primary school teacher
> https://www.worldpulse.com/en/community/users/rubina-shaheen#stories
>
> Linked in: https://pk.linkedin.com/in/rubina-shaheen-22a252100
>
> There is also a Rubina Shaheen Wattoo, daughter of Manzoor Wattoo,
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manzoor_Wattoo who seems to have won some
> elections, http://www.pap.gov.pk/index.php/members/profile/en/19/647 and
> may be notable, but by the photographs this does not appear to be the same
> person. Disambig page?
>
> There was a Rubina/Robina Shaheen who ran in the 2013 election for PK-5
> Peshawar KPK Assembly seat, but the party affiliation (PML-Q) (probably The
> Pakistan Muslim League or Quaid e Azam Group, Urdu: پاکستان مسلم لیگ ق‎)
> does not look right (s/b PWML), so probably not the same one.
> https://www.thenews.com.pk/archive/amp/432028-all-women-
> candidates-from-kp-lost-election-by-huge-marginshttp:/
> /www.electionpakistani.com/ge2013/pk/PK-5.htm
>
> There was a fair amount of coverage of PWML in Urdu sources here, from
> their official website, unfortunately these ar

Re: [Gendergap] article for first women's political party in Pakistan is about to be deleted

[Neotarf]

Here is the archived article: "Women’s political party launched Pakistan
Women Muslim League (PWML)" January 6, 2014 http://archive.is/V3Vpk

Party registered with PEC Pakistan Election Commission:
https://books.google.com/books?id=RROXCwAAQBAJ=PA280=Pakistan+Women+Muslim+League,+Rubina+Shaheen=en=X=0ahUKEwicvJSP19zUAhWFOz4KHQK6BMAQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage=Pakistan%20Women%20Muslim%20League%2C%20Rubina%20Shaheen=false

Cabinet list and photo of oath-taking ceremony
http://pwml.pk/index.php/cabinets/188-oath-taking-cermony

Official website (English and Urdu): http://pwml.pk/

See also Maimoonah Khan https://www.facebook.com/pwml.islamabad/ and Urdu
https://www.facebook.com/pwmlp, FB profile:
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100012757092035=ts There seem
to be new internal elections underway by email starting 3 days ago.

Twitter https://twitter.com/chrpersonpwml?lang=en

YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCLP3T3yn95nLlP1DLY4LBQ
Another Youtube Rubina Shaheen speaking in Peshawar
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X1eatiEeeo

Rubina Shaheen introduces herself as primary school teacher
https://www.worldpulse.com/en/community/users/rubina-shaheen#stories

Linked in: https://pk.linkedin.com/in/rubina-shaheen-22a252100

There is also a Rubina Shaheen Wattoo, daughter of Manzoor Wattoo,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manzoor_Wattoo who seems to have won some
elections, http://www.pap.gov.pk/index.php/members/profile/en/19/647 and
may be notable, but by the photographs this does not appear to be the same
person. Disambig page?

There was a Rubina/Robina Shaheen who ran in the 2013 election for PK-5
Peshawar KPK Assembly seat, but the party affiliation (PML-Q) (probably The
Pakistan Muslim League or Quaid e Azam Group, Urdu: پاکستان مسلم لیگ ق‎)
does not look right (s/b PWML), so probably not the same one.
https://www.thenews.com.pk/archive/amp/432028-all-women-candidates-from-kp-lost-election-by-huge-marginshttp://www.electionpakistani.com/ge2013/pk/PK-5.htm

There was a fair amount of coverage of PWML in Urdu sources here, from
their official website, unfortunately these are photos of newspaper
clippings and not digitized.
http://pwml.pk/index.php/home-en/10-icetheme/features/245-news-media

This may be the only women's party in the world, as Pakistan has seats
reserved for women (although it is not the only country to do this)
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/may/09/pakistan-female-election-candidates-confidence



On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:00 PM, Ryan Kaldari 
wrote:

> The article for the first women's political party in Pakistan is about to
> be deleted, unless someone can find some sources for it.[1][2]
> Urdu-language speakers would be especially useful for this effort.
>
> 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_Women_Muslim_League
> 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_
> deletion/Pakistan_Women_Muslim_League
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Let's go gender neutral

[Neotarf]

>>> "that's very good i have not had any luck engaging partollers."

Ha, did you try barnstars?
So here is a link to my article tutorial, feel free to introduce it to
patrollers or anyone else.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Neotarf=prev=16635615

@Fae, congratulations on the Commons RfC, at least it's one out of two, and
the enwiki discussion was close. I do not agree with the closure on the
basis that notification of mailing lists is "canvassing".  If you look at
WP:CANVASSING, the guideline discourages email notifications because they
are private.  A mailing list is not "email" just because you can opt to
have posts delivered to your in box.  It is quite public, anyone can read
it.

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 6:41 AM, Fæ  wrote:

> Reminder! If you want to express your opinion in the English Wikipedia
> Request for Comment on whether to adopt gender neutral language in
> Wikipedia policies (but not articles or discussion pages), this is due
> to be *closed this weekend* having reached 30 days for votes and
> discussion.
> Shortcut: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fae/RFC_GNL
> Full link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_
> comment/RfC_to_adopt_a_default_gender_neutral_style_
> for_policy,_guidelines_and_help_pages
>
> The tally is currently 80 support votes versus 61 oppose votes. That's
> 57.6% support. A non-controversial "supermajority", as used in some
> past RfCs, would require over 60% support.
>
> As a taster, here are 3 sample views expressed for support and oppose,
> it's worth browsing through the RfC discussion section to get a feel
> for the arguments raised and balance of evidence:
>
> Support "I have no issues with this being done. Assuming proper
> grammar is maintained, I think that this can probably be done without
> an RfC. Though perhaps the opposition here proves otherwise."
>
> Support "It does not affect others but helps those, who do not use he
> or she as pronouns. Using they is also shorter than writing he or
> she."
>
> Support "I support the use of gender-neutral language in order to make
> everyone feel welcome here at Wikipedia."
>
> Oppose "I do not support altering our text to the proposed doublethink
> new-language at the behest of a small minority of non-conformers who
> perceive micro-aggressions from standard wording."
>
> Oppose "I am a person, not an object. I was born a man, I will die a
> man, and I demand to be referred to in a gender supportive language.
> Don't force you preference for gender neutrality on the rest of us
> through policy initiatives, otherwise it ceases to be neutrality and
> becomes fascist in nature."
>
> Oppose "A bridge too far, heavyhanded and unnecessary. Sure I'd be on
> board with suggesting that generic "he" be replaced with singular
> "they" or "he or she" or whatever. But, no, even "he or she" is
> considered hostile. Sorry, I consider this an egregious case of
> special pleading and first-world-problemism. How about instead lets
> worry about how we are unwelcoming to women. That's a lot bigger
> problem."
>
> To see who said what, go to the RfC. :-)
>
> Thanks,
> Fae
> Wikimedia LGBT+ https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_LGBT+
>
> On 7 April 2017 at 22:51, Fæ  wrote:
> > An English Wikipedia gender neutral policy, similar to the one
> > developed for Commons, is now under "lively" discussion in a Requests
> > for Comment started this afternoon. You can read the proposed policy
> > and join in by adding your viewpoint at:
> > Shortcut: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fae/RFC_GNL
> > Full link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_
> comment/RfC_to_adopt_a_default_gender_neutral_style_
> for_policy,_guidelines_and_help_pages
> >
> > Some of the comments may be upsetting for some readers. I've actually
> > been a bit surprised. If it's too much drama for you, go focus on
> > something more fun.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Fae
> > Wikimedia LGBT+ https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_LGBT+
> >
> > On 5 April 2017 at 11:44, Fæ  wrote:
> >> * https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#
> Defaulting_to_gender_neutral_language_in_the_Commons_namespace
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> One of the outcomes from my weekend at the Wikimedia Conference in
> >> Berlin, was that the various discussions over /feeling/ more welcoming
> >> in our language presumptions for non-male contributors made me think
> >> about taking some practical steps on my home project. Commons is lucky
> >> that having a standard policy language of English makes it easier to
> >> use neutral gender in policy statements. I'm taking that further by
> >> proposing that we stick to a neutral gender for all our policies and
> >> help pages. In practice this means that policies avoid using "he or
> >> she" and stick to "they" or avoid using a pronoun at all. I'm hoping
> >> that the outcome will feel like a much more natural space for people
> >> like me 

Re: [Gendergap] Wiktionary *desperately* needs more gender-aware editors

[Neotarf]

Hello all, I first saw this on the mailing list and not through email, so
the links did not come through and I had to search around the edit
histories for a while. What I saw was a lot of errors--errors in
pronunciation markings, in wiki text markup, and in not knowing where the
first attributed usage comes from ( the OED). If you are writing a
dictionary, this is very basic stuff. And I saw the regulars being very
patient in reverting the incorrect edits and in explaining why they were
incorrect.  When I saw that one of noted linguist Mark Lieberman's
trademarked "breakfast experiments" had been edited as well, I thought I
had seen the fourth out of four errors.  But checking the source, Lieberman
did not use any examples, those were added by someone else, so I don't see
any problem with changing them as long as it is not attributed to Lieberman.

Yes, the examples were biased, and thank you for to Heather for providing
the link that explains it.  I was thinking of "male gaze".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_gaze

That said, what was done with the examples was just to reverse the bias,
which IMO is not good dictionary practice. It would be better to pick
examples that accurately demonstrate the usage of the word, without
introducing additional cultural biases or negative stereotypes.  But I am
not part of that community, and have not taken the time to understand how
they do things, so I doubt they care what I think.

If you look further, some of the exchanges on the talk pages are not very
productive.  Something like this, with a user whose first language is
Portuguese, is likely to go nowhere.
https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ungoliant_MMDCCLXIV=45671284

If someone with J Hayes' history with the movement is recommending that
someone move on to a different project, I don't think this should be
dismissed out of hand. His comments may sometimes come off as pessimistic,
but they are born from long experience.

On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 9:16 PM, Heather Walls  wrote:

> Inline replies to 3 people...
>
> On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 1:57 PM, J Hayes  wrote:
>
>> the smaller wikis have ownership issues , the arguments are so vehement
>> because the stakes are so small.
>>
>> i would advise trying out lots of other wikis like commons or wikisource
>> or wikidata. friendlier at source, and lots more metadata cleanup to do at
>> commons / wikidata.
>>
>
> Hello J. When someone comes to an issue-specific list to discuss that
> issue, why would you recommend that they just edit somewhere else and not
> speak to their question? Isn't it the point of this list to discuss
> gendergap issues?
>
>
>
>> On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 3:13 AM, Peter Southwood <
>> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>>
>>> At the risk of being labelled biased, I do not see that that was a
>>> legitimate fix to address systemic bias. It looked rather pointy to me.
>>> Perhaps you could explain just how it addressed systemic bias in a useful
>>> way.
>>>
>>> Cheers, Peter
>>>
>>
> Peter, what I see in that first edit was the removal of a sentence that
> spoke about the appearance of a woman for no reason at all. There is more
> information here http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Beauty_duty
>
>
>
>>  *From:* Gendergap [mailto:gendergap-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] *On
>>> Behalf Of *Jessy D. King
>>>
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, 26 April 2017 7:27 PM
>>> *To:* Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> *Subject:* [Gendergap] Wiktionary *desperately* needs more gender-aware
>>> editors
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 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=revision
>>> =42598962=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.
>>>
>>
> 

Re: [Gendergap] GenderGap admin update

[Neotarf]

That's not what I suggested and that's not what Fae suggested, but since
this list is being used to hijack identities I would suggest communicating
off list.

On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 5:34 PM, WereSpielChequers <
werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Please don't ping Kevin, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2016-08-04/Obituary
>
> Fae is right to point out that we should replace him at the least.
>
> On 27 April 2017 at 20:15, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I believe the second one has been active recently, maybe someone could
>> ping them.
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 1:26 PM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, it was pointed out that
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap has an out of
>>> date list of admins.
>>>
>>> Can we confirm how many active admins GenderGap has today, and find
>>> out if any more are needed?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Fae
>>> --
>>> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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

Re: [Gendergap] GenderGap admin update

[Neotarf]

I believe the second one has been active recently, maybe someone could ping
them.

On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 1:26 PM, Fæ  wrote:

> Hi, it was pointed out that
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap has an out of
> date list of admins.
>
> Can we confirm how many active admins GenderGap has today, and find
> out if any more are needed?
>
> Thanks,
> Fae
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] "A Call to Men UK " manhood workshops

[Neotarf]

Speaking of dox and in-person events, a few months ago one of the
WP:BADSITES known for dox had a thread about attending a WMF
harassment workshop. So anyone who is not comfortable with a paper
trail, and would prefer face-to-face conversations with allies, could
actually find themselves face to face with their harassers instead.

On 4/12/17, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I had meant to revisit this discussion after my thinking on the
> subject had come together a little better, unfortunately that isn't
> happening, so I will just express my concerns.
>
> Perhaps this is only anecdotal, but it has been my observation that a
> good many admins are students and either stop editing or cut back
> their participation drastically in their junior year. So if they start
> at age 12, which I think has happened a lot, they are basically
> editing for about ten years. I find it hard to believe there are that
> many older admins, the photos from events certainly don't bear this
> out.
>
> The link from enwiki is interesting, I do recognize names of a few
> professionals but even more who fit the 'advanced student' pattern.
> The pattern on Meta seems similar.
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AListUsers==sysop=1=1=2000
>
> So the problem I am trying to solve is basically the "endless
> September" one that Sue pointed out in her 2011 editor retention talk
> to WMUK.  I know this information is dated, but the concept still
> might be a useful starting point. I have not spent a lot of time on
> Meta, but a while back I was quite startled to have an individual on
> Meta demand I engage with him in a discussion about vulgar words for
> reproductive organs
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ajraddatz=15715606=15715064
> , and even more startled to find out this was a functionary. Not only
> that, it is someone who appears to be deeply opposed to the concept of
> safe space
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:IdeaLab/Inspire/Meta=15729581
> and whose name appears on a key committee for Wikimania, which as I
> understand it, will be under a safe space policy. So my original
> question was how can we get newcomers up to speed on the social norms,
> but considering the number of past privacy violations by
> functionaries, both on WP and on WP criticism sites, now the question
> seems to be who has access to PII, especially for in-person events.  I
> know of no policy for this. Perhaps it is time to restrict all access
> to PII to WMF staff and contractors.
>
> On 2/20/17, WereSpielChequers <werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> *Re "** young men from 11-19", which if you think about it, is pretty
>> much
>> the demographic of Wikimedia's admins and functionaries."* That's an old
>> joke, but nowadays a joke that looks a tad out of touch. Yes a
>> significant
>> proportion of  people were that age when they became admins in 2004-2008.
>> But if there is one thing we know about the people who became admins ten
>> years ago, it is that they are ten years older today. I couldn't
>> guarantee
>> that none of our current admins were that young now, but I'd be surprised
>> if more than one or two were. Only twenty of our current admins created
>> their accounts in the last six years
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AListUsers==sysop=1=1=2000>.
>> RFA has been difficult for teenagers to pass for several years now, If
>> any
>> have got through in the last six years they have been unusually mature in
>> behaviour. As for Functionaries, Functionaries other than crats have to
>> prove they are 18 or over when they become Functionaries. So it is
>> theoretically possible that any new functionaries who first became so in
>> the last two years could be 18 or 19, but it isn't exactly likely.
>>
>> The template bombers who tag lots of articles for admins to delete
>> probably
>> do include some people in that age group, but admins? If 1% of the 1200
>> admins on English Wikipedia were still under 21 I would be stunned. Far
>> more admins are over 60 than could possibly be 11-19.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 20 February 2017 at 18:53, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "A Call to Men UK has 55 coaches working in schools, youth justice
>>> departments and youth centres across Worcestershire. The organisation
>>> has
>>> one principal aim, explains development manager Michael Conroy: to spark
>>> a
>>> 'cultural shift in the way boys relate to girls', and through this to
>>> prevent violence against women and girls  'As a culture it’s 

Re: [Gendergap] "A Call to Men UK " manhood workshops

[Neotarf]

I had meant to revisit this discussion after my thinking on the
subject had come together a little better, unfortunately that isn't
happening, so I will just express my concerns.

Perhaps this is only anecdotal, but it has been my observation that a
good many admins are students and either stop editing or cut back
their participation drastically in their junior year. So if they start
at age 12, which I think has happened a lot, they are basically
editing for about ten years. I find it hard to believe there are that
many older admins, the photos from events certainly don't bear this
out.

The link from enwiki is interesting, I do recognize names of a few
professionals but even more who fit the 'advanced student' pattern.
The pattern on Meta seems similar.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AListUsers==sysop=1=1=2000

So the problem I am trying to solve is basically the "endless
September" one that Sue pointed out in her 2011 editor retention talk
to WMUK.  I know this information is dated, but the concept still
might be a useful starting point. I have not spent a lot of time on
Meta, but a while back I was quite startled to have an individual on
Meta demand I engage with him in a discussion about vulgar words for
reproductive organs
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ajraddatz=15715606=15715064
, and even more startled to find out this was a functionary. Not only
that, it is someone who appears to be deeply opposed to the concept of
safe space 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:IdeaLab/Inspire/Meta=15729581
and whose name appears on a key committee for Wikimania, which as I
understand it, will be under a safe space policy. So my original
question was how can we get newcomers up to speed on the social norms,
but considering the number of past privacy violations by
functionaries, both on WP and on WP criticism sites, now the question
seems to be who has access to PII, especially for in-person events.  I
know of no policy for this. Perhaps it is time to restrict all access
to PII to WMF staff and contractors.

On 2/20/17, WereSpielChequers <werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:
> *Re "** young men from 11-19", which if you think about it, is pretty much
> the demographic of Wikimedia's admins and functionaries."* That's an old
> joke, but nowadays a joke that looks a tad out of touch. Yes a significant
> proportion of  people were that age when they became admins in 2004-2008.
> But if there is one thing we know about the people who became admins ten
> years ago, it is that they are ten years older today. I couldn't guarantee
> that none of our current admins were that young now, but I'd be surprised
> if more than one or two were. Only twenty of our current admins created
> their accounts in the last six years
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AListUsers==sysop=1=1=2000>.
> RFA has been difficult for teenagers to pass for several years now, If any
> have got through in the last six years they have been unusually mature in
> behaviour. As for Functionaries, Functionaries other than crats have to
> prove they are 18 or over when they become Functionaries. So it is
> theoretically possible that any new functionaries who first became so in
> the last two years could be 18 or 19, but it isn't exactly likely.
>
> The template bombers who tag lots of articles for admins to delete probably
> do include some people in that age group, but admins? If 1% of the 1200
> admins on English Wikipedia were still under 21 I would be stunned. Far
> more admins are over 60 than could possibly be 11-19.
>
>
>
> On 20 February 2017 at 18:53, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "A Call to Men UK has 55 coaches working in schools, youth justice
>> departments and youth centres across Worcestershire. The organisation has
>> one principal aim, explains development manager Michael Conroy: to spark
>> a
>> 'cultural shift in the way boys relate to girls', and through this to
>> prevent violence against women and girls  'As a culture it’s time
>> that we gave our young men permission to be complex, sensitive and happy
>> human beings who transmit positivity and respect to others'.” [1]
>>
>> They have a program "for young men from 11-19", which if you think about
>> it, is pretty much the demographic of Wikimedia's admins and
>> functionaries.
>> [2]
>>
>> This is all the more interesting right now because of the recent Newmark
>> Foundation grant to combat harassment, which it seems is to be used for
>> developing more forceful blocking tools for admins and functionaries
>> "with
>> the participation and support of the volunteers who will be using the
>> tools".  If anyone has not seen th

Re: [Gendergap] Good sources for criticism of sexism in traditional media

[Neotarf]

@Chris, if you're just interested in that specific event, try a different
search term: this one should bring up BBC News, NYT, WaPo, Gruniad, CNN,
Newsweek, Time, etc.
https://news.google.com/news/story?ncl=djsO7LXTpmw7aiMDN-HWM9RCZlNzM=Never+mind+Brexit,+who+won+legs-it=English=en=X=0ahUKEwi8udiH7fnSAhULxWMKHaqKCTsQqgIINjAE


On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 7:49 AM, Chris Keating 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Just wondered if anyone here knew any good sources about the prevalence /
> impact of sexism in traditional media?
>
> I'm particularly thinking of adding to this article, where all I can find
> on a quick Google is things on HuffPost and Jezebel which aren't
> particularly great to use on-wiki, so I'm wondering if there is more out
> there.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail#Sexism_accusations
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> Chris
>
> ___
> 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] Wikimedia Foundation updates non-discrimination policy

[Neotarf]

This is very encouraging to see. It is so frustrating to try to have a
conversation about harassment with WMF employees and realize that so many
of them have no frame of reference for Title IX, sexual harassment
training, or other HR fixtures for onboarding new employees that have been
standard in other organizations for decades.  In 2007, Wikimedia had fewer
than 10 employees, but now that Wikipedia is a teenager, this is really
needed.  Thank you.

https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/03/14/non-discrimination-policy-updates/
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] US government website for International Women of Courage Award is down

[Neotarf]

I'll make this short for anyone who's observing the "day without a woman"
boycott (or looking for something red to wear) but I have compiled a list
of active archives for International Women of Courage Award at
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Neotarf/Relinking_US_gov  They
are listed by year, after an introductory section about archiving dot gov
sites.

There is usually a new list of awardees that drops on March 8 each year,
but according to the DoS official blog, the names of the 12 awardees will
be announced later in March.  The AWIU organization that partners with
State has already announced the date of their social event as April 6, 2016.

On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 10:01 PM, J Hayes  wrote:

> the poor archiving of state department predates the change over
> i did some link rot repair using archive.is but there may be lost years
> we should think about a program of archiving state urls, since they will
> not do it.
>
> jim
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Ellie Kesselman 
> wrote:
>
>> I searched the U.S. State Department website, and while I got many hits,
>> see here https://findit.state.gov/search?query=International+Women+
>> of+Courage+Award=dos_stategov=
>>
>> the only page that was not 404 error not found was this
>> https://www.state.gov/s/gwi/iwoc/index.htm
>>
>> I don't know what is going on, nor whether it is temporary. I doubt that
>> it is due to the new Trump administration, as there was continuity between
>> the Bush and Obama administrations.
>>
>> FeralOink
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Craigslist founder donates $500K to curb Wikipedia trolls

[Neotarf]

The assumption here is that harassing users are the same as blocked users,
to which I say a great big "citation needed".  As I recall, one of the big
reasons Kevin gave for moving discussion of gender to this mailing list is
that list moderators are able to keep out harassment, which they were
unable to do with the gender gap project on enwiki.  So if admins failed to
deal with harassment in the past, why is the problem of harassment now
being turned over to them. But that is exactly what it looks like the WMF
is doing, i.e. they say "we want to partner with admins", plus apparently
the updates are going to be published on enwiki to something called the
"administrators' newsletter". [1]  Since most people believe the admins to
be primarily male and heterosexual, this leaves the problem of harassment
to be defined by those who are the least likely to have experienced it or
to understand what it is.

The WMF already announced this on the Wikimedia mailing list back in
January, not sure why they decided to bypass this mailing list. [2]

[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_health_initiative
[2]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2017-January/086013.html

On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Fæ  wrote:

> I find it depressing that the only actually *planned* way that this
> money is going be spent is on developing reports and tools to hunt
> down apparent harassers so that they can be blocked. Meh.
>
> For those of us that have experienced obsessive harassment, we know
> that this is not a cure. When the harassment continues off-wiki,
> sometimes for years, the only advice from the WMF or on-wiki groups is
> for the *victim* to vanish, meaning that those that were outed have to
> close down their Facebook, LinkedIn, etc. accounts with all the
> associated damage that comes with being forced to take a paranoid
> path; not even mentioning how the rest of the Wiki-community is
> affected by seeing how trolling does not stop until the target
> vanishes or goes in to hiding for a few years. A better use of this
> money would be to try new methods of engaging with the apparent
> harasser and consider ways of encouraging them to change their
> behaviour.
>
> I doubt that many of the trolls that post misogynistic, racist or
> homophobic rubbish believe in these views, they are seeking attention,
> for personal reasons they may not even understand themselves. An
> approach to harassment that offers experienced counselling and support
> to both victim and attacker has a much better chance of being both an
> effective and long-term solution.
>
> Based on the related email discussion, the WMF seem to think that
> long-term solutions are a community problem, so that's not something
> they have any plans to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on. I'd
> much rather see the smaller part of the money spent on more software
> development, and the majority spent setting up support services that
> handle alleged harassment in a more mature way, even if the people who
> are doing the real support work end up being us volunteers.
>
> Fae
>
> On 27 January 2017 at 20:16, Carol Moore dc 
> wrote:
> > http://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech/craigslist-founder-donates-500k-to-curb-
> wikipedia-trolls-1.3259781
> >
> > Wow! When I think of the 2 plus hrs a week x 385 odd weeks of hours I
> spent
> > dealing with guys who just didn't like the idea that a "female" dared to
> > edit - or worse, change their edit - I still tear my hair out.
> >
> > I just hope it helps!!
> >
> > I'd like to go back in a few years when hopefully have accomplished other
> > goals. Or ENCOURAGE women to edit, as opposed to now having to warn them
> all
> > the time about what they have to do to edit safely!
> >
> > CM
> >
> > ___
> > Gendergap mailing list
> > Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> > To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
> > visit:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
>
>
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote.
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] U.S. government website for International Women of Courage Award is down

[Neotarf]

I have located the apparently official archived copies of this page at
https://2009-2017.state.gov/s/gwi/iwoc/index.htm It appears to be complete.

The most recent snapshot from archive.is unfortunately is from 2011, so a
lot missing there.

There is a more current snapshot at Internet Archive link
https://web.archive.org/web/20160330043716/http://www.state.gov/s/gwi/programs/iwoc/
which I added to one of the articles, but there are more dead links just on
that page.

There is an index of State dept. archive websites here, looks like it goes
by administration: https://www.state.gov/misc/112234.htm The search term I
used was "u.s. department of state archive" so I suppose you could search
for each department separately.  There was a similar discussion about
whitehouse.gov on enwiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)/Archive_54#Whitehouse.gov_changes_have_broken_many_URLs_used_on_Wikipedia


Seems like a bot might be useful here.



On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 2:36 AM, Pete Forsyth <petefors...@gmail.com> wrote:

> It appears that the award has had its own web presence independent of the
> State Department since March 2016: http://web.archive.org/
> web/20160304031707/http://www.awiu.org/international-women-
> of-courage-celebrations/about-iwoc-celebration/
>
> Perhaps in inquiry to the AIWU board of directors or personnel could
> clarify the connection with the State Department, and unearth any
> information that has been lost from the State Department web site?
>
> -Pete
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>
> On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 10:11 PM, Ryan Kaldari <rkald...@wikimedia.org>
> wrote:
>
>> It looks like the main page for the International Women of Courage Award
>> has been moved to https://www.state.gov/s/gwi/iwoc/index.htm.
>> Unfortunately, it seems to no longer have any actual information.
>>
>> I've never heard of a requirement for the U.S. government to archive all
>> of its web pages, nor have I ever seen any official archives of federal
>> government sites other than whitehouse.gov (which is archived by the
>> National Archives as part of the official Presidential Record). This seems
>> like a dubious claim to me, but I would be very happy to be wrong (as such
>> archives would be incredibly useful to Wikipedia).
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 10:07 PM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Please bear in mind that many US government websites are routinely
>>> rebuilt at the time of a transition of the presidency and/or cabinet level
>>> change.  This is not new or unusual, although the last time there was a
>>> transition was 8 years ago and the websites weren't nearly as built-up.
>>> They are, however, required, to archive all pages, so they should be
>>> somewhere - not necessarily easy to find, but somewhere within the US
>>> government sites.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Risker/Anne
>>>
>>> (Who lives in Canada, which does not have the same applicable
>>> legislation as exists in the US to require the federal government to retain
>>> information)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1 February 2017 at 12:31, J Hayes <slowki...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> here is the archive .is page
>>>> https://archive.is/1XJm
>>>> internet archive not working
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The U.S. government website for the International Women of Courage
>>>>> Award is down. There are probably quite a few articles that link to this
>>>>> page, as it helps establish notability for many women in the Global South.
>>>>>
>>>>> The award was started by Condoleezza Rice in 2007 when she served as
>>>>> U.S. Secretary of State under Republican president George W. Bush.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.state.gov/s/gwi/programs/iwoc/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ___
>>>>> 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

Re: [Gendergap] In memory of User:Danveg

[Neotarf]

Done. The right-to-left scripts can be a challenge, especially if your
keyboard is not set up for it. Sometimes it is easier to copy/paste.   It
helps when these wikis have sets of brackets and double brackets at the
bottom of the page so you can highlight something and format it easily.  Of
course that only works if they have MediaWiki markup enabled as the
default, as hewiki seems to, or if you can figure out how to disable the
Visual Editor.

On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 10:18 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen <
list-wikime...@funcrunch.org> wrote:

> On the English Wikipedia there are some trans redlinks on the Women in Red
> list, LBT section: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/LBT_Women
>
> I just bluelinked one of them with a new article on Angelica Ross (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angelica_Ross). I'd add the link to the
> DanVeg page, but I can't read Hebrew and am afraid of screwing up...
>
> - Pax aka Funcrunch
>
>
> On 1/4/17 9:52 PM, Neotarf wrote:
>
> I'm noticing that most, if not all of the articles on that page already
> have English translations.  Is there a list of redlinks somewhere of
> articles that would be of importance to the transgender community that
> people could work on?
>
> Here is one for the list: there is no article in Hebrew as yet for
> transgender rights activist Nisha Ayub, who received the International
> Women of Courage Award in 2016.
>
> Many of the individuals who receive this type of award are in danger or
> have been imprisoned for their activities. Imagine the effect of having a
> Wikipedia page that pictures them standing next to a high-ranking
> government official. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/
> index.php?title=Samar_Badawi=755359299#January_2016_arrest
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 3:15 AM, Michal Lester <mles...@wikimedia.org.il>
> wrote:
>
>> Dear friends,
>>
>> We're sorry to inform you that user:DanVag chose to end her life last
>> week. User:Danveg was an active editor in HEWK and contributed mostly in
>> the subject of gender and transgender issues. She was also an active
>> volunteer in TLV Wikiwomen group. She guided newbies at Wikiwomen meetups
>> with a lot of patience and kindness.
>>
>> As she was part of the transgender community, we urge you to consider
>> editing articles about transgender issues in her memory. Please add  the
>> articles you edited to this page
>> <https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%95%D7%99%D7%A7%D7%99%D7%A4%D7%93%D7%99%D7%94:%D7%9E%D7%A4%D7%92%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%9D/%D7%9E%D7%A4%D7%92%D7%A9%D7%99_%D7%95%D7%99%D7%A7%D7%99_%D7%A0%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%9D/DanVeg_Memorial_Trans_Project>
>> .
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Tsipi Erann, Wikiwomen group
>>
>> Michal Lester, WMIL
>>
>>
>> *Regards,*
>>
>>
>> *Michal Lester, *
>>
>> *Executive Director Wikimedia Israel*
>> *http://www.wikimedia.org.il <http://www.wikimedia.org.il/>  *
>> *972-50-8996046 ; 972-77-751-6032  *
>>
>> --
> Pax Ahimsa Gethen | http://funcrunch.org
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Research Showcase, December 21, 2016

[Neotarf]

When I saw the "Privacy, anonymity, and perceived risk in open
collaboration" paper in the Signpost a while back, I thought it was about
Tor.  But it's actually about threat models, and should be of interest to
anyone who has been following the harassment discussion.  The presentation
is in the second half of the YouTube video, starting about 33:00.(1)  The
full text of the paper is also available, and I thought it worth a close
reading.(2)  If anyone is interested, I have also done a transcript of the
video and some comment about the paper on my blog.(3)

(1) https://youtu.be/nmrlu5qTgyA?t=1978
(2) http://andreaforte.net/ForteCSCW17-Anonymity.pdf
(3) https://neotarf.wordpress.com/category/andrea-forte/

On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Sarah R  wrote:

> Hi Everyone,
>
> The next Research Showcase will be live-streamed this Wednesday,
> December 21, 2016 at 11:30 AM (PST) 18:30 (UTC).
>
> YouTube stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmrlu5qTgyA
>
> As usual, you can join the conversation on IRC at #wikimedia-research.
> And, you can watch our past research showcases here
> 
> .
>
> The December 2016 Research Showcase includes:
>
> English Wikipedia Quality Dynamics and the Case of WikiProject Women
> ScientistsBy *Aaron Halfaker
> *With every productive
> edit, Wikipedia is steadily progressing towards higher and higher quality.
> In order to track quality improvements, Wikipedians have developed an
> article quality assessment rating scale that ranges from "Stub" at the
> bottom to "Featured Articles" at the top. While this quality scale has the
> promise of giving us insights into the dynamics of quality improvements in
> Wikipedia, it is hard to use due to the sporadic nature of manual
> re-assessments. By developing a highly accurate prediction model (based on
> work by Warncke-Wang et al.), we've developed a method to assess an
> articles quality at any point in history. Using this model, we explore
> general trends in quality in Wikipedia and compare these trends to those of
> an interesting cross-section: Articles tagged by WikiProject Women
> Scientists. Results suggest that articles about women scientists were lower
> quality than the rest of the wiki until mid-2013, after which a dramatic
> shift occurred towards higher quality. This shift may correlate with (and
> even be caused by) this WikiProjects initiatives.
>
>
> Privacy, Anonymity, and Perceived Risk in Open Collaboration. A Study of
> Tor Users and WikipediansBy *Andrea Forte*In a recent qualitative study
> to be published at CSCW 2017, collaborators Rachel Greenstadt, Naz
> Andalibi, and I examined privacy practices and concerns among contributors
> to open collaboration projects. We collected interview data from people who
> use the anonymity network Tor who also contribute to online projects and
> from Wikipedia editors who are concerned about their privacy to better
> understand how privacy concerns impact participation in open collaboration
> projects. We found that risks perceived by contributors to open
> collaboration projects include threats of surveillance, violence,
> harassment, opportunity loss, reputation loss, and fear for loved ones. We
> explain participants’ operational and technical strategies for mitigating
> these risks and how these strategies affect their contributions. Finally,
> we discuss chilling effects associated with privacy loss, the need for open
> collaboration projects to go beyond attracting and educating participants
> to consider their privacy, and some of the social and technical approaches
> that could be explored to mitigate risk at a project or community level.
>
> --
> Sarah R. Rodlund
> Senior Project Coordinator-Engineering, Wikimedia Foundation
> srodl...@wikimedia.org
>
> ___
> 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] "Paradigm for Parity" group for gender process

[Neotarf]

"How A Group Of CEOs Plans To Solve Gender Inequality At Their Companies"
https://www.fastcompany.com/3066402/the-future-of-work/how-a-group-of-ceos-plans-to-solve-gender-inequality-at-their-companies
Includes a roadmap https://www.paradigm4parity.com/solution#plan and
toolkit.
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/57e9765e9f7456c76dc1c1c0/t/5845cd816a49637a322cfe9a/1480969602170/Paradigm_For_Parity-toolkit.pdf
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] New publications on harmful online speech

[Neotarf]

There is also a new-ish research institute, "Data & Society", that looks
promising, " focused on the social and cultural issues arising from
data-centric technological development".

"Online Harassment, Digital Abuse, and Cyberstalking in America"
https://datasociety.net/output/online-harassment-digital-abuse-cyberstalking/

“New report shows that 4% of U.S. internet users have been a victim of
'revenge porn'”
https://datasociety.net/blog/2016/12/13/nonconsensual-image-sharing/

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 2:49 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks for the updates. I'm pinging Patrick Earley, who is tracking
> this kind of research for WMF, in case he has yet to see this info.
>
> Pine
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University
> has
> > four new publications online.  https://cyber.harvard.edu/node/99716
> >
> > “Understanding Harmful Speech Online: Research Note” is a summary of
> current
> > research, with several pages of links at the end.  One phrase that stood
> > out: "Munger also recently conducted an experiment among groups of users
> on
> > Twitter considered harassers on the platform and found that counter
> speech
> > using automated bots can impact and reduce instances of racist speech if
> > 'that subjects… were sanctioned by a high-follower white male'.”
> >
> > Two papers are from the Global South. "Grassroots Perspectives on Hate
> > Speech, Race, & Inequality in Brazil & Colombia" has an entire section on
> > "counter-speech", or counter narratives, a term that seems to be gaining
> > some currency.  "Preliminary Findings on Online Hate Speech and the Law
> in
> > India" talks about inciting sectarian violence with fake news.
> >
> > Finally, for an understanding of the definitions of hate speech, forget
> the
> > Wikipedia article, which embarrassingly uses the words "politically
> correct"
> > and "Newspeak" in the introductory paragraphs, sourced to opinion pieces
> by
> > two bloggers who did not even use the words.  The paper “Defining Hate
> > Speech” gives a thought-provoking overview of various approaches to
> > identifying hate speech in a text.  One such framework developed by
> Parekh
> > noted “three essential features” of hate speech: (1) “it is directed
> against
> > a specified or easily identifiable individual or, more commonly, a group
> of
> > individuals based on an arbitrary or normatively irrelevant feature;” (2)
> > the speech “stigmatizes the target group by implicitly or explicitly
> > ascribing to it qualities widely regarded as undesirable;” and (3)
> “because
> > of its negative qualities, the target group is viewed as an undesirable
> > presence and a legitimate object of hostility.”  Also this, food for
> thought
> > about criteria for communication on Wikipedia's talk pages: "...Ward’s
> > definition, noting that a speaker should be seen as employing hate
> speech if
> > 'their attacks are so virulent that an observer would have great
> difficulty
> > separating the message delivered from the attack against the victim'.”
> >
> > ___
> > 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] A List of Female Technology Policy Experts

[Neotarf]

When was the last time you saw a woman on stage talking about something
other than gender?  This list is meant to be "a list of female experts to
talk to when assembling panels, researching, or reporting on issues at
intersections of technology, the law, privacy, civil liberties, and
national security." I googled a few of them, and it looks like at least
some may be "notable", but very few have WP articles.
https://www.lawfareblog.com/list-female-technology-policy-experts

The website has a link to a similar list for women in foreign policy
http://www.fpinterrupted.com/
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Marfan syndrome image

[Neotarf]

Some comment on Lane Rasberry's "model release" question: first it seems
from the supporting essays, the underlying purpose of a "model release" is
legal protection for a photographer selling photographs, which wouldn't
apply to Commons.  The "model" terminology is somehow not quite right for
the open source movement either, it invokes fashion or "adult" industry
terminology.   The definition of a "model" is someone who is paid to
display merchandise. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/model
Finally, if such a thing became available, how would it end up being
used--to require Wikipedians to sign such a release as a precondition of
attending events? We have already seen in the past the unfortunate effects
of such photographs being used against Wikimedians, and disproportionately
against women, by those who politically oppose the Wikimedia movement. I
suspect such a thing would result in less, not more photographs uploaded.

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 9:29 PM, Alison Cassidy  wrote:

> Please also bear in mind the ethical concerns around using images of
> children, especially around medical conditions, and their own informed
> consent. Children cannot consent to this, so obviously their
> parents/guardians can, which makes it legal. However, if they’re
> identifiable, they may well grow up to regret having their image associated
> with a medical condition, and this may have ramifications for them in later
> life. They, as children, had no say in the matter.
>
> Just putting that out there.
>
> — Allie
>
>
> On Aug 9, 2016, at 5:48 PM, Emily Monroe  wrote:
>
> One way to obscure the face is, if you're not trying to illustrate facial
> features of certain genetic conditions, to crop the face out entirely.
>
> Also, I think the concern is more "Are the parents of the kids aware that
> the picture is on Wikipedia and are they okay with it?", and not copyright.
> I know people with genetic syndromes, along with some doctors and a lot of
> parents of kids with genetic syndromes, have issues with some of the
> medical imagery used to portray genetic conditions.
>
> From,
> Emily
>
> On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Nathan  wrote:
>
>> The image was removed by Doc James with the edit summary "Prior person
>> had a lot more than marfans"
>>
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Marfan syndrome image (Neotarf)

[Neotarf]

As far as consent, I have only seen two types of medical consent forms.
One is a consent to treatment when the client first enters the system.  No
provider will treat someone without that.  There are also specialized
consent forms for various procedures, to show that the client has received
information about a particular procedure and understands the risks
beforehand, that is, "informed consent". Medical consent forms will often,
perhaps almost always, have a section about photographs, especially if it's
a teaching hospital.  The implication is always that any photos would be
used for training purposes.  Here is a sample medical consent form that has
exactly that sort of language: "I agree to have photographs taken for
medical study or research", and also a phrase that the patient will not be
identifiable.
http://www.bestmedicalforms.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Diagnostic-1.jpg
In my experience, people do not read such forms, they just sign them.
Perhaps they are in distress, or perhaps they believe they must sign in
order to get treatment. So I don't believe a medical consent form gives the
kind of consent needed to upload a photo from a medical journal for a WP
article.

I agree the photo is disturbing on many levels.  One is that there is no
way of knowing whether the subject is being exploited.  Years ago, western
medical texts used to be full of photos that were obviously from
socio-economically disadvantaged areas. So, "legal in some country in the
Global South" is probably a poor standard to apply to choosing medical
photos. Also, imagine you or someone in your family being newly diagnosed
with this condition and coming across this photo that shows someone with
the condition having a mental deficiency, which is obviously not part of
marfan, and perhaps also being treated in a questionable manner.  Maybe
"portrays the disease accurately" and "portrays a person with the condition
with dignity" would be better standards to follow.

The article is still lacking clear illustrations for the eye and aorta
conditions that go with it.  There are much better ones online, but not
with the right copyright status.  Also scoliosis--the WP article has
several good illustrations for that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scoliosis

This still leaves the original problem unaddressed, which is how to find
copyright-free medical images.  The Marfan Foundation links to a series of
very positive "What does Marfan Syndrome look like" images on Flickr, but
again they are copyrighted.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nationalmarfanfoundation/albums/72157612643340384
Perhaps the ultimate solution will be to partner with some of these
organizations that are concerned with patient advocacy and get them to
upload some of their photos.

On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 3:56 AM, Ellie Kesselman <myindigol...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Regarding the Marfan syndrome image, I looked into it as well as I could.
> It seems to be allowed for re-use per the terms of the Creative Commons
> license in the source article. I changed the description of the image on
> Wikimedia Commons to be "13 year old female" instead of woman, but that
> doesn't help at all. The use of the image in the Wikipedia article bothers
> me a lot, as she is an almost entirely naked 13 year old girl with an IQ of
> 50 according to the research article. I wish that it was not uploaded to
> Commons to begin with. Doc James was the user who uploaded according to the
> log. I can't find any reason to get it removed or deleted though. If anyone
> else can look into it, as Neotarf mentioned, I would be grateful. In my
> previous job, I worked for a state services program that cared for children
> with debilitating congenital medical conditions, and this photograph makes
> me feel very uncomfortable and sad because it seems exploitative to show
> this female child naked from three views on Wikipedia, but I don't know
> what to do about it.
>
> --FeralOink
>
> ___
> 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] Marfan syndrome image

[Neotarf]

Would someone look at the copyright issues surrounding the image in Marfan
syndrome?  This article was mentioned in the Signpost as being worked on in
honor of Kevin Gorman.  The image shows a pubescent child, partially
clothed, apparently during a medical exam. The image was uploaded with a
CC-by-2.5 license.  But if you go to the copyright information in the case
study, it says the article was published under 2.0 license. There is
separate copyright statement for the image: "Written informed consent was
obtained from the patient's parents for the publication of this case report
and accompanying images. A copy of the consent form is available for review
by the Editor-in-Chief of this journal."  It says the child is 13 years old
and has a "global intellectual impairment".

Is the consent needed for a medical study in Brazil the same type of
consent needed to host an image on Commons?   Does the license for the
article also apply to the image of the child?  Can someone sort through
these issues?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marfan_syndrome
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] the passing of Kevin Gorman

[Neotarf]

It breaks my heart that I am not able to post condolences to his talk page.
I wanted to say so much about what he did for people behind the scenes, how
he kept this forum moderated and open for discussion after arbcom closed
down the gender gap project, and how when he talked, the ideas rushed out
of him as if he knew how little time he had, and could overcome mortality
itself in order to accomplish them, but in the end, there are no words,
there are no words.
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] DARVO and harassment tactics

[Neotarf]

 These are mostly TL:DR and not tailored specifically to online
communities, but are mainly valuable for their overviews

DARVO

"DARVO stands for "Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender." The
perpetrator or offender may Deny the behavior, Attack the individual doing
the confronting, and Reverse the roles of Victim and Offender such that the
perpetrator assumes the victim role and turns the true victim -- or the
whistle blower -- into an alleged offender. This occurs, for instance, when
an actually guilty perpetrator assumes the role of "falsely accused" and
attacks the accuser's credibility or even blames the accuser of being the
perpetrator of a false accusation."

http://dynamic.uoregon.edu/jjf/defineDARVO.html

Institutional Betrayal

"The term "Institutional Betrayal" refers to wrongdoings perpetrated by an
institution upon individuals dependent on that institution, including
failure to prevent or respond supportively to wrongdoings by
individual"..."Victims, perpetrators, and witnesses may display betrayal
blindness in order to preserve relationships, institutions, and social
systems upon which they depend."

http://dynamic.uoregon.edu/jjf/institutionalbetrayal/index.html
*Tactics against sexual harassment: the role of backfire*"...if an action
is perceived as unjust and information about it is communicated to
receptive audiences, it has the capacity to cause outrage and consequently
backfire on the perpetrator. Perpetrators regularly use five types of
tactics to inhibit outrage: (1) cover-up of the action; (2) devaluation of
the target; (3) reinterpretation of the events; (4) use of official
channels to give the appearance of justice; and (5) intimidation and
bribery of targets, witnesses and others"

https://www.uow.edu.au/~bmartin/pubs/06jiws.html

"A button to report harassment"

This is ties in to the Citron speech Q on "precision in recall": or "a
rule that was very easy for people who are harassed to report that
harassment, but it also enabled people to use reporting harassment...to
harass other people."...and "we’re making a place where you can safely
report harassment, and somebody will turn around and well, now somebody is
going to in a very hidden place, report that I’m harassing them, and you
know, work against me..."

Now on Wikisource:
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Danielle_Citron_speaks_at_WikiConference_USA_2015#Question_.234:_Conduct_policy_for_technical_spaces_.E2.80.93_.E2.80.9Cprecision_in_recall.E2.80.9D
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Ruth Barrett bio

[Neotarf]

Speaking of drive-by tagging, is there some reason for the existence of
this page about a "game" that encourages tag-spamming of articles about
women? It seems there has been some concern about that user's account being
compromised as well..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias/Gender_gap_task_force/3D2Do

If users are going to assess articles, it seems they should be doing it
according to some standard, for instance see the WikiProject Opera:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Opera/Assessment#Opera_articles_by_quality


On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 11:25 PM, J Hayes  wrote:

> i see brainyj drove by tag-spamed it , 2 years ago...
>
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Ruth Barrett bio

[Neotarf]

Interview published yesterday:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/aloneinherpresence/2016/06/interview-ruth-barrett-on-feminism-erasure-and-the-future/#disqus_thread

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 12:46 AM, Kevin Gorman  wrote:

> You're absolutely correct that the article does not have sufficient cites
> in it to establish notability, but reread that sentence.  "No assertions,
> plausible or otherwise of notability" - that's a big difference than what
> is required to pass an AfD, and the tag didn't belong here.  The article
> contains assertions of notability that are not outlandish, even if they are
> not well cited - and what you wrote actually specifies that even assertions
> of notability that are not plausible or cited are enough to not warrant the
> tag.. You might tag an article about Ron similarly (although the tag
> wouldn't fit there either,) but it's an article that needs expansion, not a
> notability tag that literally does not match the article - and most
> ENWPian's are a lot more likely to tag (or AFD) Ruth than Ron.
>
> 
> Kevin Gorman
>
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 9:35 PM, Michael J. Lowrey 
> wrote:
>
>> I wrote, "The article as written contains no assertions, plausible or
>> otherwise, of notability. It reeks with redlinks and self-published
>> "sources". AS WRITTEN. I would have been equally dismissive of a guy name
>> Ron who claimed to be part of a Odinic priesthood; no more and no less.
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 11:26 PM, Kevin Gorman  wrote:
>>
>>> With Ruth having published articles in peer reviewed journals multiple
>>> times that have been directly responded to by dozens of times, having her
>>> work and ideas forming a significant part of a book by KS Coleman that
>>> directly talks about Ruth's life experences, mentions her full name 20+
>>> times as both a source of information and about life details related to
>>> Ruth, having some details of her life included in both a Thomsan-Gale
>>> encyclopedia regarding LGBT topcs and a separate encyclopedia about Wiccan
>>> and Neopagan traditions, as well as many other articles, including book
>>> reviews, there's no question that she passes both WP:GNG and WP:AUTHOR.
>>> These cites are not in the article but it took me approximately 115 second
>>> (I timed it) to find them without having journal access configured. I
>>> seriously doubt the article would've challenged if it were about a dude.
>>>
>>> If you're going to tag something as non-notable, you should probably
>>> take two minutes before doing so.
>>>
>>> 
>>> Kevin Gorman
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 8:30 PM, Michael J. Lowrey >> > wrote:
>>>
 The book may be notable while the author is not. It sounds like it's a
 rehash of Joanna Russ' classic HOW TO SUPPRESS WOMEN'S WRITING.

 On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 10:05 PM, Carol Moore dc <
 carolmoor...@verizon.net> wrote:

> Dang, I should have found some refs first. See how out of practice I
> am!
> I was sure I'd read it already was discussed by Time or something.
>
> I'm sure that the bio will be quickly deleted, even after the book
> published and reviewed, while thousands of male bios with no refs survive.
> Sigh...
>
> On 6/26/2016 9:45 PM, Michael J. Lowrey wrote:
>
>> The article as written contains no assertions, plausible or otherwise,
>> of notability. It reeks with redlinks and self-published "sources".
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 7:39 PM, Carol Moore dc
>> > wrote:
>>
>> It looks like her bio is being challenged just as the book she
>> edited is starting to get reliable source attention. In case
>> anyone
>> wants to work on it.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruth_Barrett
>>
>> The book is "Female Erasure: What You Need To Know About Gender
>> Politics’, War On Woman, the Female Sex, and Human Rights"
>>
>> ___
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org > Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>
>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
>> please visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey
>>
>> "When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food
>> and clothes."
>>  --  Desiderius Erasmus
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
>> please visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>
>>
> ___
> 

[Gendergap] Panel: "We Belong Here: Pushing Back Against Online Harassment"

[Neotarf]

Haven't had time to listen to the whole thing yet, but this panel looks
promising. Sampling a few sound bites, the speaker at 19:00 is Dr. Michelle
Ferrier: "The terrorism that these groups inflict on you is very deep and
very powerful and very real, and so literally after three years
I...changing my roles, not working nights, trying to find ways to solve
this, and the problem was I came to almost every single professional
organization and asked, "where are your conference sessions talking about
this, where are your programs to be able to protect and support
journalists?  You're talking about diversity in the media?  You're bringing
us in, and we're going out the back door just as quickly as we're coming in
the front, because we're scared to death, and you have done nothing to
protect us."

http://ona15.journalists.org/sessions/antiharassmentkeynote/#.Vz8-874kRCa
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Defining harassment: the first empirical investigation into the nature of creepiness

[Neotarf]

I'm not quite sure how to answer JJ Marr and Nathan, but if you watched the
Berkman panel I posted about earlier [1], the conclusion of the WMF
harassment survey is that the effect of harassment on women in Wikipedia,
is that they leave.

And not to beat around the bush, for those who are not going to read the
piece, the "certain topic" is sex, sex, and sex:

"...behaviors that were seen as being sexual or having a sexual edge to
them were far more likely to be creepy than more innocuous ones. Women,
especially, noted that behaviors like unwanted sexual advances, constantly
turning the conversation towards sex, requests for photos, dates and
invading their personal space were signs that a person was creepy."

So this goes back to defining harassment.  How do you tell the difference
between someone who genuinely does not want to appear creepy, as in the
hotel example, and someone who is deliberately skirting the boundaries, in
order to harass people while flying under the radar.

There is a long history of defining harassment and "hostile work
environment" in employment situations.  For in-person interactions, there
is a whole set of non-verbal signals that tell you when to back slowly
away, the "odd smile" for example.  But obviously in online communications,
you are not going to be able to see how someone smiles.  Harassment on the
internet is something new, the old HR harassment definitions can't just be
copy-pasted.

And how far can you go in telling someone they have to adjust to something
that creeps them out?  On enwiki, we have seen women advised to "keep a low
profile" if they don't want to be photoshopped onto porn.  So the
"encyclopedia that anyone can edit" is now "the encyclopedia that anyone
can edit as long as they don't mind potential employers finding
non-consensual pornographic images of them on the internet".
Paradoxically, the WMF has gone the opposite direction from arbcom,
particularly in their recent safe space event policy, although the means of
enforcement are not very evident.


[1] https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/2016-April/006300.html

On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Isarra Yos <zhoris...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Knowing what these traits are, even if they are uncontrollable, may also
> be useful for educating others about them. If someone is creeped out by
> something and actually knows why it's creeping them out, it may be possible
> for them to realise that, oh, it's just blah, and not actually a threat.
> And if on-wiki we notice someone who might be put off by another user's
> behaviour, reaching out to them and explaining why that behaviour is
> happening (especially if it's fairly normal, which a lot of the things that
> may seem weird to outsiders often are) could do a lot to put them at ease.
>
> Possibly.
>
> -I
>
>
> On 10/05/16 17:02, JJ Marr wrote:
>
> Other highlights:
>
> From the list of "creepy" behavior
>
> >Laughing at inappropriate times
>
> >Talking too much about a topic
>
> >Displaying too much or too little emotion
>
> >Smiling peculiarly
>
> >Having excessively pale skin
>
> >Having bags under their eyes
>
> and then
>
> >Here’s the thing: not being creepy *isn’t that hard*.
>
> >Many of the examples of creepy behavior listed in the Knox University
> study could be avoided throughbasic social calibration
> <http://www.doctornerdlove.com/2012/10/art-social-calibration/all/1/> and
> being aware of the other person’s signals.
>
> Setting aside that a lot of Wikipedians don't have "basic social
> calibration", a lot of these behaviors are uncontrollable in general. If
> you're "suggesting that Wikipedia editors display aberrant behavior which
> prospective female editors find creepy, making it less likely that they
> will contribute?", as another has proposed, a lot (but not all) of these
> "creepy traits" that allegedly make women less likely to contribute are
> uncontrollable by those who have them. I need to stop smiling peculiarly?
> What does that mean? And if we want to attract women to Wikipedia by
> removing creepy people, does that mean I might get banned due to me talking
> "too much" about a certain topic?
> On May 10, 2016 12:25 PM, "Nathan" < <nawr...@gmail.com>nawr...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> It boils down to "people with aberrant behavior or bearing produce
>> anxiety in women." This is drawn from a Facebook survey. It's interesting,
>> even if the "study" doesn't really produce any more knowledge than most
>> other Facebook surveys.
>>
>> The link to the problem of addressing Wikipedia's gendergap seems
>> tenuous; are you suggestin

Re: [Gendergap] Study: men who receive harassment training “significantly less likely” to recognize harassment

[Neotarf]

>On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 11:13 AM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote:... In
many settings, including healthcare, higher education, and certain
industries, ALL staff are provided with anti-harassment training; it's
often treated as an extension of basic health and safety training, and is
frequently mandatory.

I would add government sector to that list, especially since WP is more and
more partnering with government agencies.


Neotarf, I'd actually question whether there's any validity to the
> *perception* that training works; in fact, there are a lot of studies that
> indicate training (particularly ritualized training that is provided
> without a specific context) is not closely associated with behavioural
> change. It's only a step above "create a policy".
>

I have seen it work over and over, routinely.  A new employee comes in, is
given a many-times-xeroxed and barely legible packet to read, and when they
finish they are given a paper to sign that they have read the
anti-harassment training materials and will abide by the policy.  The
packet contains scenarios like complimenting a woman on her dress; it's
okay to say she looks nice in the dress, it's not okay to wax poetic about
what it does for her figure. The training material also spells out what to
do and who do go to in case of harassment, i.e. do they have to say
something to the harasser first that their comments are not welcome,
etc.before they fill out a harassment form, which will undoubtedly have a
form number; also which HR functionary is responsible and what paperwork
they have to maintain in the employee file.  I'm still trying to get my
head around the "only a step above 'create a policy'" thing.  If something
is policy, it is a done deal.


> What works is regular reinforcement when behaviour lapses, and empowerment
> of people to reinforce the desired behaviour.
>

The behaviour never lapses. I suppose nobody wants that in their personnel
file.

I don't understand why the WMF has both an anti-discrimination policy and a
privacy policy that they are apparently not interested in enforcing.  But
maybe my expectation that "if something is policy, it is a done deal" is
based on the kind of accountability that comes with Title 7 and the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 that only applies to employers and employees, in spaces
that employers can control.
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Defining harassment: the first empirical investigation into the nature of creepiness

[Neotarf]

A study published in the journal New Ideas in Psychology, unfortunately
behind a paywall, reviewed by Dr. NerdLove. [1]

Some highlights:

*"*So we’re not allowed to give women compliments?  – *No, telling a woman
how sexy she is isn’t a compliment, especially when you don’t have that
level of intimacy with her."

*"One of the keys to what made someone creepy was the potential for
ambiguity. The study’s authors suggest that because one’s creep-radar is
keyed towards finding potential threats, the ambiguousness of somebody’s
behavior could make people uncomfortable. After all, if you’re continually
wondering if this person actually poses a threat to you, you’re left in a
state of anxious paralysis; you’re continually on edge trying to determine
just what the appropriate reaction to the situation is. Guessing wrong can
have consequences, after all; misjudge a potential threat and now you’ve
made yourself vulnerable to someone who means you harm."

*"One of the most common ways guys are creepy is by ignoring issues of
boundaries and demonstrating that they have more information about somebody
than they should." Example from Instagram: He: "So I take it you're staying
at the Excalibur?" She: "Excuse me, do you not seriously realize how
f*cking creepy it is for a stranger to message a woman out of the blue
insinuating he knows where she is?"

*From the comments: "Someone who comes close to that line and manages not
to cross it obviously knows where it is."

[1] http://www.doctornerdlove.com/2016/05/the-science-of-being-creepy/
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Study: men who receive harassment training “significantly less likely” to recognize harassment

[Neotarf]

Ach, I didn't realize they were citing research from 15 years ago.  Also it
is more about the type of in-person situations that Berkeley and other
campuses have found themselves in the courts over recently, and not the
type of online harassment that WP needs to solve (not to minimize the
importance of the other issue). There was a proposal here, and discussion
on the talk page:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Harassment_consultation_2015/Ideas/Hire_a_harassment_expert
This needs to be considered in conjunction with the dispute resolution
process:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Harassment_consultation_2015/Ideas/Hire_a_harassment_expert=14943096=14933598
The fields of law and sociology are suggested here, but I am told that
harassment is a whole field of its own, that has changed titles over the
years.  I don't see any WP articles about this, even though it's very much
an issue.

If WP intends to continue to partner with GLAMs etc, they need to start
getting up to speed on the anti-discrimination codes these institutions
have to abide by.   What is "title 9", "title 7"? What is "technological
due process"?  What kind of training programs are used most effective? How
are non-profit organizations dealing with this? What about other online
forums? And that is only the U.S. What are the British doing about this?

I would suggest that many organizations that are subject to federal
anti-discrimination requirements are not going to be eager to expose
themselves to lawsuits by collaborating with Wikipedia.  They are going to
either keep WP at arms length by assigning these liaison duties to interns
and volunteers who are not subject to federal law or they will shun
Wikipedia completely.

Yes, articles, please.  This is the future direction of the Project.  We
need to understand this.

On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 9:41 AM, Joseph Reagle <joseph.2...@reagle.org>
wrote:

> On 05/04/2016 09:24 AM, Neotarf wrote:
> > although you would think the Gruniad would not report on something
> > that was obviously flawed.
>
> It's hard to know Gruniad's intention, given the research articles are
> also relatively old (not just published or forthcoming):
>
> 1. Bingham & Scherer (2001)
> 2. Tinkler, Li, & Mollborn (2007)
>
> Also TL (2007) don't cite B (2001)...
>
> > It goes without saying that a meaningful study should have a random
> > selection process, although it happens all the time that researchers
> > can't always get ideal populations so they study the populations
> > they have. Unfortunately the study is behind a paywall, so you can't
> > see how it was designed,
>
> Here's the appropriate bit for B (2001).
>
> ! We randomly assigned departments to the experimental (program
> participation)
> ! and control (program nonparticipation) conditions. Staff and faculty
> ! departments were chosen from separate lists, with staff departments
> organized
> ! by type of labor (administrative vs. nonadministrative) and faculty
> ! departments organized by college; this stratification procedure assured
> that
> ! different categories of staff and faculty departments in each of the
> colleges
> ! would be represented in the two conditions. Random selection of
> departments
> ! rather than individuals resulted in a quasi-experimental design in which
> each
> ! employee and combination of employees did not have an equal chance of
> being
> ! assigned to one of the two conditions of the study. Because our unit of
> ! analysis was the individual employee, we explored possible sources of
> bias due
> ! to differences between employees who were assigned to the experimental
> and
> ! control conditions. Specifically, we compared the questionnaires
> returned by
> ! experimental and control groups on both demographic and experiential
> ! variables. Pearson chi-square analyses (p ≤ .05) were performed to test
> the
> ! associations between participation condition and each variable. The
> ! composition of the two respondent groups was not significantly different
> in
> ! terms of gender, race/ethnicity, position at the university, prior
> experience
> ! as a perpetrator of sexual harassment, experience being accused of sexual
> ! harassment, or experience as a sexual harassment victim. The phi
> coefficients
> ! for this set of variables ranged from .03 to .06. These results suggest
> that
> ! employees in the two groups were comparable in important respects prior
> to the
> ! intervention.
>
> So it doesn't look like it's suffering from selection bias (wherein the
> abusers are sent to the training and have worse attitudes from the start).
>
> > All behind paywalls.
>
> If someone did want to write a WP article, I'm willing to help 

[Gendergap] "Danielle Citron speaks at WikiConference USA 2015" transcript posted

[Neotarf]

The transcript of law professor Danielle Citron's online harassment speech
to Wikiconference USA has been posted to WikiSource:
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Danielle_Citron_speaks_at_WikiConference_USA_2015
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Study: men who receive harassment training “significantly less likely” to recognize harassment

[Neotarf]

It goes without saying that a meaningful study should have a random
selection process, although it happens all the time that researchers can't
always get ideal populations so they study the populations they have.
Unfortunately the study is behind a paywall, so you can't see how it was
designed, although you would think the Gruniad would not report on
something that was obviously flawed.

Here's another study: "This study used a pretest/posttest design and
included a control group to examine the impact of harassment training on
intended responses to harassment. The sample consisted of 282 full-time
professionals. At time 2, trainees expressed lower intentions to confront
the perpetrator than did control-group participants." [1]

This one, "Sexual harassment at work, a decade (plus) of progress" has been
cited widely. [2]

This one examines federal employment practices: " Widespread training
within the agency has an effect over and above that attributable to the
individual's receipt of training itself and training appears to be
particularly successful in clarifying men's views about the “gray” area
generated by unwanted sexual behavior originating with co-workers rather
than supervisors." [3]

All behind paywalls.

And everyone who has ever held a job *knows* that training works.

The point here I think is about jumping on solutions without examining them
first, and the difficulty of trying to crowdsource solutions from WP users.
Who on this mailing list has the time (or the background) to sort though
all this research? This is a whole field of study with years of trial and
error behind it, we need a paid professional to sort though these issues.


[1]
http://pwq.sagepub.com/content/31/1/62.abstract?ijkey=134e5be01979b1d65d136065e4d4445186bb6629=tf_ipsecsha

[2] http://jom.sagepub.com/content/35/3/503.abstract

[3]
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.0038-4941.2003.08404001.x/abstract;jsessionid=00F421CE101197C79EDA53336D15C74F.f03t02?userIsAuthenticated=false=





On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 3:04 PM, WereSpielChequers <
werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Significantly less likely than men who don't attend such training..
>
> So does that mean the targeting is correct and the people sent on such
> training are disproportionately those who most need it?
>
> If you want a test of how effective that training is you could try an AB
> test. Study a large group of attendees, half before and half after such
> training. Or a large group of men a few months before and after such
> training to see if those who attend make more progress than those who
> don't. Comparing those who don't attend with those who do would only make
> sense if the attendees were randomly chosen.
>
> WereSpielChequers
>
>
> On 3 May 2016, at 15:53, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> "A study in the Journal of Applied Behavioral Science
> <http://jab.sagepub.com/content/37/2/125.abstract> found men who
> participated in a university staff sexual harassment programme were
> “significantly less likely” to see coercive behaviour as sexual harassment."
>
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/work/sexual-harassment-training-makes-men-less-likely-to-report-inapp/?utm_source=dlvr.it_mediu
>
> ___
> 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] Study: men who receive harassment training “significantly less likely” to recognize harassment

[Neotarf]

"A study in the Journal of Applied Behavioral Science
 found men who
participated in a university staff sexual harassment programme were
“significantly less likely” to see coercive behaviour as sexual harassment."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/work/sexual-harassment-training-makes-men-less-likely-to-report-inapp/?utm_source=dlvr.it_mediu
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Firefighter woman suicide after online harassment

[Neotarf]

“I was alarmed and wanted to let the public know that there was this blog
out there that was defaming these female firefighters and medics, not only
Nicole but others as well.”
http://www.statter911.com/2016/04/23/sexist-lurid-online-comments-come-light-fairfax-county-firefighters-suicide/

[The website's curator] told Fox that he thought [fire chief] Bowers’s
statement were a “deflection of blame.” He said that he has previously
taken comments down because of complaints or a court order he received last
year for remarks about another female firefighter. [He] said that he wants
his site’s users to see “the nasty truth.”
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/virginia-calls-site-downafter-firefighter-suici-article-1.2619639
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Harassment panel video

[Neotarf]

>From Berkeley School of Information,"Toward a gender-inclusive internet:
countering harassment, revenge porn, threats and online abuse", [1] a panel
that was streamed yesterday is now online.  Panelists were: Patrick Earley,
Sahar Habib Ghazi, Lena Gunn, Leslie Harris, Jacob Hoffman-Andrews, Erica
Johnstone, Jen King, and Tonya Mosley [2]

Websites mentioned by the panel: "Without my consent, tools to fight
internet harassment" [3], "Sidewalk stories", Egyptian group against street
harassment [4], "Hollaback" - street harassment [5], "Heartmob" - internet
harassment [6],

A second streaming video from Berkman Center now posted, mostly copyright,
but some about privacy: Doctoral candidate Jon Penney talks about his
research " ...doctoral research explores regulatory chilling effects online
and is affiliated with the Takedown Project, a research collective studying
“notice and takedown”, and related regulatory systems globally, based at
the University of California (Berkeley) School of Law." [7]  One case study
involves surveillance-related chilling effects and Wikipedia.


[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkOZsNZBWgg
[2]
http://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/newsandevents/events/2016-04-27-gender-inclusive-internet
[3] http://www.withoutmyconsent.org/
[4] https://www.facebook.com/sidewalkstoriesegy
[5] http://www.ihollaback.org/
[6] https://iheartmob.org/pages/about
[7] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u56GxZD9Mzg
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Guardian article on cyber harassment

[Neotarf]

@Chris, yes that Verge link keeps coming across my screen from various
sources, but for some reason I can't seem to get past the first anecdote,
if anyone can give a synopsis for the TL:DR challenged.  There is a great
response to the piece here [1] "Then they throw people at the problem but
never their precious “engineering resources.” When trust and safety, fraud,
compliance, and moderation teams start getting their own engineering
resources, something that often takes years to happen, then you know the
company is finally acknowledging the importance and seriousness of the
work." [2]

Here is also "Understanding the difference between generic harassment and
GenderTrolling" [3]: I could wish for more {{citation needed}}, but the
site in general looks like it might have some good resources.

[1] https://twitter.com/adelin/status/722117945808125952
[2] http://avc.com/2016/04/community-moderation-2/
[3]
http://wmcspeechproject.com/2016/04/15/understanding-the-difference-between-generic-harassment-and-gendertrolling/


On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Chris Koerner  wrote:

> Interesting article. Thank you for sharing. This made me think of the
> recent reporting by The Verge on the issues of moderation in online spaces,
> free speech, and harassment.
>
>
> http://www.theverge.com/2016/4/13/11387934/internet-moderator-history-youtube-facebook-reddit-censorship-free-speech
>
> Yours,
> Chris Koerner
> clkoerner.com
>
> ___
> 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] Guardian article on cyber harassment

[Neotarf]

Guardian article "We will look back at cyber-harassment as a disgrace--if
we act now", by Danielle Citron.

Excerpt:

"Whether it is thanks to commercial interests or social responsibility,
some online platforms have taken a stand against cyber-harassment. Social
media providers, including Facebook, Microsoft, and Twitter, now ban
threats, cyber-harassment, and non-consensual pornography

"Companies should be clear about their policies. They need to explain what
they mean by “cyber-harassment”, “non-consensual pornography”, “threats”
and “bullying”. Users will then have a better understanding of precisely
what is and what is not prohibited. Platforms should explain whether
content will be taken down or what the next step would be."

No mention of Wikipedia.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/15/cyber-harassment-cyberbullying-revenge-porn-education-laws
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Systematic tagging for deletion of articles created at Art And Feminism editathon

[Neotarf]

ng them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From,
>>>>>>> Emily
>>>>>>> On Mar 12, 2016 11:48 AM, "Ryan Kaldari" <rkald...@wikimedia.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I find it disappointing that so many of the Art and Feminism
>>>>>>>> editathons end up focusing almost exclusively on creating new articles 
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>> artists at the hosting institution. Not only does this lead to a high
>>>>>>>> percentage of the articles being deleted, but it's a waste of a huge
>>>>>>>> opportunity to create and expand articles about artists and artworks 
>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>> unquestionable notability and high encyclopedic value.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have no doubt that many of the Art and Feminism articles that are
>>>>>>>> nominated for deletion are nominated due to gender bias (as some of 
>>>>>>>> them
>>>>>>>> seem rather trivial to find sources for and improve), but many of them 
>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>> also legitimately on the notability borderline. At all of the Art and
>>>>>>>> Feminism editathons that I've volunteered at, I've discouraged people 
>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>> creating articles about people they knew personally, and encouraged 
>>>>>>>> them to
>>>>>>>> use the lists at
>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/ArtAndFeminism/Tasks
>>>>>>>> instead. If you are helping to run an Art and Feminism editathon, I 
>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>> also suggest doing this, as it provides more value for Wikipedia and 
>>>>>>>> leads
>>>>>>>> to fewer deletions. I would also like to encourage everyone to edit the
>>>>>>>> lists at
>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/ArtAndFeminism/Tasks
>>>>>>>> and help keep them full of good suggestions. Editathons are a great 
>>>>>>>> tool
>>>>>>>> for addressing the gendergap, and I would hate for them to get a 
>>>>>>>> reputation
>>>>>>>> for just being self-promotional events.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Carol Moore dc <
>>>>>>>> carolmoor...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Someone should write a letter to the editor of the those 5 or 6
>>>>>>>>> publications that came in my google alerts on the topic of the edit a 
>>>>>>>>> thon.
>>>>>>>>> (Search news google to find them.)  And of course deal with the few
>>>>>>>>> legtimate complaints and the trolls with nonsense complaints.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 3/12/2016 10:17 AM, Neotarf wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> All the articles created at Regina ArtAndFeminism event have been
>>>>>>>>>> tagged.   Ten of them have been submitted for deletion.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Regina/ArtAndFeminism_2016/University_of_Regina
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> For example, see comments here:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Risa_Horowitz
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ___
>>>>>>>>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>>>>>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
>>>>>>>>>> please visit:
>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>>>>>>>>
&g

Re: [Gendergap] contents of Gendergap Digest, Vol 62, Issue 10

[Neotarf]

There is a lengthy thread about this on Facebook, starting March 12:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/wikipediaweekly/


On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Jacqueline Mabey <
jacquel...@failedprojects.net> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Just wanted to let you know that we are aware of the anomaly in Regina,
> and are working to figure out want happened. We will include our findings
> in our final report on meta wiki.
>
> Best,
> Siân + Jackie + Michael
> Art+Feminism lead co-organizers
>
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Intnl Womens Days articles about sexism in Wikipedia

[Neotarf]

Wikimedia blog: "The new alchemy: turning online harassment into Wikipedia
articles on women scientists" by Ed Erhart

http://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/03/08/alchemy-turning-harassment-into-women-scientists/

On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Carol Moore dc 
wrote:

>
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-07/women-erased-from-history-on-wikipedia/7225556
>
>
> http://www.dailycamera.com/cu-news/ci_29600263/cu-boulder-students-combat-wikipedia-sexism-edit-thon
> This must have been widely reprinted cause I got several different
> versions of it in my google alert for "wikipedia" and "Sexism".
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] 2 Rachel Feinsteins confused

[Neotarf]

In that case it might be more complicated. The disambiguation guideline for
primary topic is here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Primary_topic

If you go by page views and incoming wikilinks, the comedian would be
primary with respect to usage, at least right now, but the artist/sculptor
might well be primary with respect to long-term significance, notability,
or usage in reliable sources. Someone could always submit it to WP:RM and
see what happens, but their backlog is running into January at this point.
Assuming there is *no* primary topic here (and I don't have time to look at
RS), a disambiguation page might be the least controversial, but at the
very least, the comedian's article should have a link to the artist's
article at the top, which it does not right now.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Feinstein_%28comedian%29

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:23 PM, Robert Fernandez 
wrote:

> I'm not familiar with either one, but from their articles it seems
> like the sculptor is a central figure in the US contemporary art world
> while the comedian is a relatively minor figure in comedy.
>
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] 2 Rachel Feinsteins confused

[Neotarf]

Why is the comedian in the secondary spot? According to the pageview
history, this article, "Rachel Feinstein (comedian)", gets more than 200
pageviews a day, so this should be the primary topic, and does not need
disambiguation, i.e. "Rachel Feinstein".
https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/#start=2016-02-13=2016-03-03=en.wikipedia.org=all-access=user=Rachel_Feinstein_%28comedian%29

The sculptor only gets about 25 pagehits a day, so this is clearly the
secondary topic, and this is the article that should be disambiguated.
https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/#start=2016-02-13=2016-03-03=en.wikipedia.org=all-access=user=Rachel_Feinstein

If you just wanted to be nice to your readers, you could disambiguate both,
and just move "Rachel Feinstein" to "Rachel Feinstein (artist)" and put a
dab template  {{for|the artist |Rachel Feinstein (artist)}} at the top of
"Rachel Feinstein (comedian)".  By rights, if there are only two articles
for the same name, a separate disambiguation page is not needed, but both
articles should have a pointer to the other at the top.

For the naming guideline see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_%28people%29#Disambiguating

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 12:27 AM, Carol Moore dc 
wrote:

> THANKS!!  CM
>
>
> On 3/3/2016 8:56 PM, Robert Fernandez wrote:
>
>> I think I fixed most of the links.
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 8:23 PM, Carol Moore dc 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Oh, duh, FYI, I'm banned from editing or I'd do it myself.
>>> If anyone needs a quicky project to end confusion on wikipedia on which
>>> woman is which.
>>>
>>> Thus the "thanks" :-)  CM
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/3/2016 9:54 AM, Carol Moore dc wrote:
>>>

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Rachel_Feinstein

 Several people have linked comedy-related articles to the
 sculptor/fashionista Rachel Feinstein article. I created it at a
 edit-a-thon a few years back.

 The correct article link is:
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Feinstein_%28comedian%29

 Thanks.

 CM

>>>
>>>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
> ___
> 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] Community council proposal

[Neotarf]

I just went back and looked for this--it was proposed a couple of months
ago, but got dropped in all the excitement of the last few weeks. I don't
think I have to tell anyone on this list how difficult it is for women's
voices to be heard, and how having some kind of representation on an
elected council could make a difference.

Here is the initial post that caught my eye-- there is some discussion
before and after:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-January/081042.html

and here is the discussion--now dropped--on meta:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_Council_Compact

I don't think anyone could make a case that the community was consulted
enough in the major decisions of the last two years, or that the path of
the Wikimedia movement would not have been smoother if it had. There will
soon be more critical decisions to come, as the Foundation searches for new
leadership.  Perhaps it is time to revive this discussion.
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Sumana on codes of conduct

[Neotarf]

This may be the article I remember--the part towards the end caught my
attention:

"The Dangerous Speech Project has gathered typical hallmarks of speech that
seems to catalyze just such mass violence and has developed guidelines for
analyzing the level of danger posed by a particular turn of phrase: how
likely it is to lead to violence in a specific context. This analysis can
be applied to any form of expression—a drawing, photograph, or film—not
just words.

WHICH WORDS SPARK

One can estimate the likelihood that speech will spark violence in any
given situation using just these five criteria: the speaker, the audience,
the speech itself, the social and historical context, and the means of
dissemination.
In each case, one or more of these criteria may be especially important. A
speaker can have great influence over a particular audience, while certain
audiences may be especially vulnerable, because of economic hardship, fear,
or existing grievances. Certain language-related events—defined broadly to
include such acts of expression as burning a book—can be particularly
powerful. "

source: http://www.worldpolicy.org/journal/spring2012/words-weapons

There are more links at the bottom of this Berkman Center page:
https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/events/luncheon/2014/03/benesch
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Signpost op-ed (NSFW)

[Neotarf]

@Risker, if your high school student are that benign, perhaps I will move
to Canada.

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 12:54 PM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Give me a break, Neotarf. I am critiquing the article and the decisions by
> its author and its publisher.  It doesn't surprise me that having someone
> of Keilana's stature drop more f-bombs in a couple of paragraphs than I
> heard on a bus full of high school students this morning will change the
> climate to suggest that it is now perfectly acceptable to curse out people
> everywhere under every circumstance.
>
> For some strange reason, it appears the people on this list are
> celebrating that fact.  And it has nothing to do with gender, really, and
> everything to do with making Wikipedia a pleasant place to work.  Keilana's
> actions have encouraged people to make it less so.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On 22 February 2016 at 12:46, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> @Risker, the double standard is that several individuals dropped f-bombs
>> on the page, but only the woman got tsked.  Talk pages of various users,
>> not to mention the arbitration committee's pages, routinely contain
>> f-bombs, which I have never seen anyone remark on.  JimboTalk has
>> occasionally seen some respectful and considerate pushback, but nothing
>> like the strident comments on the Signpost piece. True, there was a former
>> arbitrator who had an essay about the word deleted, but that was before my
>> time.  In the current climate, an individual can drop the c-bomb on a
>> women's task force page with impunity, while someone who marks such a
>> thread with a NSFW tag can be permabanned for doing so. Wikipedia has
>> become f-Wikipedia; Keilana has claimed her place at the table.
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 11:33 PM, J Hayes <slowki...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> risker:
>>> i'm kinda with you about defining deviancy down
>>>
>>> it's just that things are so bad can't go lower
>>> article subjects are already dismayed by the opaque unfriendly culture
>>> they periodically ask for article deletion
>>> librarians are advised about the "cultural buzzsaw"
>>> having a safe environment on line is a lost cause
>>> but we can have a grim determination with much cursing
>>>
>>> cheers
>>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think I've made myself clear, Pete. I don't think that anything I say
>>>> will make a difference, any more than anything I have ever said has changed
>>>> the sub-optimal behaviour of any editor who thinks it's acceptable
>>>> professional behaviour to cuss all over the place.  I'm just really
>>>> disappointed that people who used to be in the "let's make this a more
>>>> pleasant and positive place to do our work" have gone over to the other
>>>> side.
>>>>
>>>> Risker
>>>>
>>>> On 21 February 2016 at 19:38, 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.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Furth

Re: [Gendergap] Signpost op-ed (NSFW)

[Neotarf]

>>> 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
>>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Sumana on codes of conduct

[Neotarf]

Some notes from Sumana Harihareswara framing codes of conduct, also on the
spectrum of liberty versus hospitality.

There is another piece I saw somewhere associated with the Berkman Center,
that this group might find useful, that gives a framework for evaluating
types of speech. I will try to find it.

https://brainwane.dreamwidth.org/76629.html
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Signpost op-ed (NSFW)

[Neotarf]

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

Re: [Gendergap] Fwd: [Wikimedia-l] Another goodbye

[Neotarf]

This is the third departure of a WMF employee who was involved with the
2015 Inspire Campaign.   The other two were Luis Villa [1] and Anna Koval
[2].  The response to that ideaLab campaign [3] figured significantly in
the program of Wikimania 2015. [4]  The Wikimania 2016 schedule for Esino
Lario, however, seems to have few or no accepted submissions on community
and governance, [5]  and if I understand this correctly, there will be no
Wikimania 2017.  It's hard not to conclude that Wikimedia is transitioning
away from being an open source community movement.

[1]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-February/081706.html
[2]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-February/081725.html
[3]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Community_discussion_on_harassment_reporting
[4]
https://wikimania2015.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:WikiCulture_%26_Community_submissions
[5] https://wikimania2016.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Accepted_submissions





On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Renate Nuppenau <
renate.nuppe...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> Dear Siko,
>
> I wish you all the best! And I will allways remember your support and your
> inspiration during Wikimania 2015 in Mexico.
> My project "Women showing up with hard skills
> "
> turned out to a "small" projekt in Berlin/Germany during a filmfestival
> called *Berlinale 2016*.
>
> We are inviting women from film industry for a wikipedia introduction at
> 15th February 2016:
>
> https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikimedia_Deutschland/WPFF_Berlinale2016
>
> If anyone wants to share it on Facebook:
> https://www.facebook.com/events/110989073916/  :-)
>
> We already expect about 60 participants. 20 Wikipedians and willing to
> wellcome these awespome people - we are alle really looking forward to  and
> we exited about the event!
>
> Thank you for empowerment!!
>
> Yours WS_ReNu from Berlin/Germany
>
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Lists of notable deaths of 2015

[Neotarf]

Exactly. It would inoculate some of these articles against premature
deletion requests. While the red link focus is good, the newbies aren't
necessarily ready to write an article from scratch.  Adding refs is perfect
place to start developing editing skills, especially if the source has
already been vetted.

The "list of deaths by year" series is here, I had not seen that before:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_deaths_by_year The lists have pretty
much what WiR would need for task list--you can see at a glance if it is
blue or red, also a brief description, so someone can pick artists,
scientists, etc, depending on their interests, and a link to the source. I
don't see any category by gender, you might not be able to get a bot to do
that, or even want to. The 2015 NYT list had about 8% red links for women,
I would imagine a similar result for other years.

Does anyone know how to approach a bot developer for advice?

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 9:14 PM, J Hayes <slowki...@gmail.com> wrote:

> nice work
> this is worth making into do list and adding to women in red tasks
>
> it might be worth scraping nytimes and working back, i.e.
> http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/obituaries/notable-deaths-2014.html
>
> this is a nice task for newbies, like the 1lib1ref for everyone, just
> sprinkling nytimes notability dust throughout.
>
> cheers.
>
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 3:51 AM, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Yes, a bot-driven list would be quite helpful, if for no other reason
>> than being standardized and therefore race- and gender-blind as far as
>> selection criteria.  I have just finished compiling a list from the NYT
>> article, and it was very labor intensive just to generate the list, before
>> even starting to look for red links.
>>
>> Note, obituary notices from international newspapers are "articles", not
>> advertisements; for further info see the NYT article on how to tell their
>> classified pages from an article.
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/25/business/media/25asktheeditors.html
>> Also see the WP article on "obituary".
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obituary
>>
>> The *articles* referenced in the above "lists of notable deaths in 2015"
>> are:
>>
>> **Los Angeles Times*, "Notable deaths of 2015"
>> http://www.latimes.com/local/obituaries/la-me-2015-notable-deaths-gallery-photogallery.html
>>
>> **The Washington Post*, "Notable deaths of 2015 and 2016"
>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/notable-deaths-of-2015/2015/01/06/8a2c7536-92b6-11e4-ba53-a477d66580ed_gallery.html
>>
>> *The Wall Street Journal, "2015 Year in Review: Notable Deaths"
>> http://www.wsj.com/articles/2015-year-in-review-notable-deaths-1450647522
>>
>> *The Telegraph, "Culture stars who died in 2015"
>> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/music/news/culture-stars-who-died-in-2015/
>>
>> **BBC*, "Notable UK deaths of 2015"
>> http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-35060400
>> **New York Times,* "Notable Deaths of 2015"
>> http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/obituaries/notable-deaths-2015.html?_r=1
>>
>> Out of the 200-odd notable deaths in the NYT article, the following women
>> are red links:
>> * December*: Mariuccia Mandelli, Peggy Say;  *November*; Janet Wolfe;
>> *October*: Olga Hirshhorn; *August*:Blondell Cummings, *April*: Evelyn
>> Starks Hardy, Anne-Claude Leflaive.
>>
>> In addition, there are problems noted--several of the articles are stubs,
>> one appears to be at the wrong name, one shares an article with her
>> husband, and others have tags for reasons that are not immediately
>> apparent.  One could wish the people who tag these things would actually
>> fix them if they see a problem, or at least leave a note on the talk page.
>> I noted several of the articles did not have photos, but did not make a
>> note of that.  Is there some checklist?  It would seem if they are now
>> deceased it would be possible to find a fair-use image. Complete notes and
>> links, as well as links to existing articles are at:
>> https://neotarf.wordpress.com/2016/01/25/lists-of-notable-deaths-of-2015/
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 2:59 PM, J Hayes <slowki...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> i should not imagine a fear of paid notices, should prevent a systematic
>>> inclusion of NYTimes obits, which are assumed notable.
>>> especially with the reference generator doing all the formatting.
>>>
>>> no one is doing this; the article mentions 25% female among these. i.e.
>>> we don't include reliable sourc

Re: [Gendergap] Lists of notable deaths of 2015

[Neotarf]

Yes, a bot-driven list would be quite helpful, if for no other reason than
being standardized and therefore race- and gender-blind as far as selection
criteria.  I have just finished compiling a list from the NYT article, and
it was very labor intensive just to generate the list, before even starting
to look for red links.

Note, obituary notices from international newspapers are "articles", not
advertisements; for further info see the NYT article on how to tell their
classified pages from an article.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/25/business/media/25asktheeditors.html Also
see the WP article on "obituary". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obituary

The *articles* referenced in the above "lists of notable deaths in 2015"
are:

**Los Angeles Times*, "Notable deaths of 2015"
http://www.latimes.com/local/obituaries/la-me-2015-notable-deaths-gallery-photogallery.html

**The Washington Post*, "Notable deaths of 2015 and 2016"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/notable-deaths-of-2015/2015/01/06/8a2c7536-92b6-11e4-ba53-a477d66580ed_gallery.html

*The Wall Street Journal, "2015 Year in Review: Notable Deaths"
http://www.wsj.com/articles/2015-year-in-review-notable-deaths-1450647522

*The Telegraph, "Culture stars who died in 2015"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/music/news/culture-stars-who-died-in-2015/

**BBC*, "Notable UK deaths of 2015"
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-35060400
**New York Times,* "Notable Deaths of 2015"
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/obituaries/notable-deaths-2015.html?_r=1

Out of the 200-odd notable deaths in the NYT article, the following women
are red links:
* December*: Mariuccia Mandelli, Peggy Say;  *November*; Janet Wolfe;
*October*: Olga Hirshhorn; *August*:Blondell Cummings, *April*: Evelyn
Starks Hardy, Anne-Claude Leflaive.

In addition, there are problems noted--several of the articles are stubs,
one appears to be at the wrong name, one shares an article with her
husband, and others have tags for reasons that are not immediately
apparent.  One could wish the people who tag these things would actually
fix them if they see a problem, or at least leave a note on the talk page.
I noted several of the articles did not have photos, but did not make a
note of that.  Is there some checklist?  It would seem if they are now
deceased it would be possible to find a fair-use image. Complete notes and
links, as well as links to existing articles are at:
https://neotarf.wordpress.com/2016/01/25/lists-of-notable-deaths-of-2015/

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 2:59 PM, J Hayes  wrote:

> i should not imagine a fear of paid notices, should prevent a systematic
> inclusion of NYTimes obits, which are assumed notable.
> especially with the reference generator doing all the formatting.
>
> no one is doing this; the article mentions 25% female among these. i.e. we
> don't include reliable sources even to the extent they present less of a
> gap than we do.
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case <
> danc...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>
>> >At least in the USA, we have to be cautious about "what is an obituary."
>> Newspapers also run "death notices" which (both in print and >online) look
>> much like obituaries, but are actually paid advertisements. I'm not even
>> certain that the terminology ("obituary"=editorial, >"death notice"=paid
>> ad) is consistent across news outlets, I'm just reflecting what I learned
>> from the specific papers I dealt with after >my dad died.
>>
>> Writing as someone who once got paid to write newspaper obits, “paids”
>> are, in print, always in [[agate type]], like sports boxscores; obits look
>> like any other story in the same newspaper.
>>
>> However, textwise, the distinction may be blurring as newspapers cut back
>> on expenses (such as the newbies and interns who cut their journalistic
>> teeth writing obits. Just earlier this week, a young coworker of my wife’s
>> died rather suddenly; when I saw his obit in our local paper I figured they
>> had just printed the text the funeral home sent along since it read like a
>> paid, with all sorts of flowery, non-NPOV language that we never included
>> in obits back in the mid-‘90s regardless of what the funeral home said in
>> the fax, no mention whatsoever of the cause of death, and mentions of a
>> rather wide scope of survivors (the main reason for paids, as families of
>> the decedents usually want to mention relatives outside the scope of the
>> immediate family that newspapers limit their obits to for space if nothing
>> else).
>>
>> Daniel Case
>>
>> ___
>> 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 

[Gendergap] Lists of notable deaths of 2015

[Neotarf]

Links to lists in major news outlets (NYT, BBC, LA TImes, Toronto Star,
etc.) along with commentary on gender bias in obits:
http://forward.com/sisterhood/330631/for-women-gender-bias-continues-even-in-death/

The three women listed in the article do have WP articles.  It would take
some digging--paywalls, registration, etc,--to see if any of the other
women do not yet have articles.
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Women's rights in 2015

[Neotarf]

That's a great idea. These retrospectives are always a lot of fun.  There
used to be a TV series that reviewed the news of the week--That Was The
Week That Was <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS8ac4catVk>--a comedy
though, not serious.  They also serve as a catchup for any events that you
missed while traveling or whatever,  I had thought it was Smallbones who
suggested it, but didn't check. So thank you to Smallbones.

These would be a lot easier to write if people would keep track of possible
events to include throughout the year.  Then at the end of the year, you
would have all the sources and would just have to choose the most
significant events, or whatever criteria you were using.  Some of the links
I gave above are not so much events as trends.   I have also just thought
of Justin Trudeau's "Because it's 2015" statement.  Also some private
companies that stepped into the act and banned online harassment--Reddit
and Facebook took steps against online harassment after the iCloud hack,
Google and Bing took action over the summer, and Twitter, which had defined
itself as as a platform for speech, banned harassment against all
expectation. Then there are annual things like pay equity day
<http://www.pay-equity.org/day.html>, that could become an annual feature.
Sue Gardner's Twitter has some info about women leaving tech in the side
bar, that might be a good starting point for career trends.  There might
also be developments in women's health that people really should know
about--treatments that become outmoded, discoveries, etc. I would prefer to
call it just "Women in 2015", or something along those lines--sort of a
State of the Union report.

This doesn't really fit under the GGTF rubric, does it. Would it be
worthwhile to start a separate project?

On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 9:05 PM, SarahSV <sarahsv.w...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Neotarf,
>
> I saw that Smallbones suggested that article on WT:GGTF
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias/Gender_gap_task_force#Women.27s_rights_in_2015>.
> It would be wonderful to create a series of "women's rights in ...", going
> back decades. Thank you for compiling those sources.
>
> Happy New Year, everyone!
>
> Sarah
>
> On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 6:51 PM, Keilana <keilanaw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for sending these along! Since my pet project is women scientists
>> I want to note some articles that these sources could be used for. And a
>> hearty congratulations to Maia for a lovely article from Scientific
>> American! I'm quite pleasantly surprised that half already had articles -
>> and yes, this is progress. I'm going to write [[Margaret Tisdale]] this
>> weekend, and y'all can hold me to it.
>>
>> * [[Kathryn Barnard]] is a redlink
>> * [[Aída Fernández Ríos]] is a redlink
>> * [[Anita Kurmann]] is a redlink
>> * [[Dottie Thomas]] is a redlink
>> * [[Margaret Tisdale]] is a redlink
>>
>> Happy new year everyone!
>>
>> -Emily
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 6:47 PM, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I notice someone suggested a followup to last year's Women's rights in
>>> 2014 article.  I was hoping someone would write one, mostly because I don't
>>> usually follow these issues, and I found the last one rather informative.
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_rights_in_2014
>>>
>>> The only gender-related events that stood out for me this year were the
>>> Saudi elections, with women both voting and running for office for the
>>> first time, and Gambia doing away with FGM.
>>>
>>> If anyone wants to take a stab at it, or just read up on it, here is
>>> start on sources. There are five women listed in the last link who do not
>>> yet have Wikipedia articles:  Kathryn Barnard, Aída Fernández Ríos, Anita
>>> Kurmann, Dottie Thomas, and Margaret Tisdale.  A couple of them have NYT
>>> obits, so some definite gaps in WP coverage there.
>>>
>>>- Progress of the World’s Women 2015-2016: Transforming Economies,
>>>Realizing Rights -Authors/editor(s): UN Women
>>>
>>> http://www.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/publications/2015/4/progress-of-the-worlds-women-2015
>>>
>>>
>>>- Top 2015 Women's Equality Moments
>>>
>>> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/noreen-farrell/top-womens-equality-moments_b_8890178.html
>>>
>>>
>>>- World Health Organization: Ten top issues for women's health
>>>http://www.who.int/life-course/news/2015-intl-womens-day/en/
>>>
>>>
>>>- Gone in 2015: Commemorating Ten Outst

[Gendergap] Women's rights in 2015

[Neotarf]

I notice someone suggested a followup to last year's Women's rights in 2014
article.  I was hoping someone would write one, mostly because I don't
usually follow these issues, and I found the last one rather informative.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_rights_in_2014

The only gender-related events that stood out for me this year were the
Saudi elections, with women both voting and running for office for the
first time, and Gambia doing away with FGM.

If anyone wants to take a stab at it, or just read up on it, here is start
on sources. There are five women listed in the last link who do not yet
have Wikipedia articles:  Kathryn Barnard, Aída Fernández Ríos, Anita
Kurmann, Dottie Thomas, and Margaret Tisdale.  A couple of them have NYT
obits, so some definite gaps in WP coverage there.

   - Progress of the World’s Women 2015-2016: Transforming Economies,
   Realizing Rights -Authors/editor(s): UN Women
   
http://www.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/publications/2015/4/progress-of-the-worlds-women-2015


   - Top 2015 Women's Equality Moments
   
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/noreen-farrell/top-womens-equality-moments_b_8890178.html


   - World Health Organization: Ten top issues for women's health
   http://www.who.int/life-course/news/2015-intl-womens-day/en/


   - Gone in 2015: Commemorating Ten Outstanding Women in Science
   
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/gone-in-2015-commemorating-ten-outstanding-women-in-science/
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Arbcom election

[Neotarf]

Something should be said here about the importance of "oppose" votes.
Because of the way the votes are counted, oppose votes can have a huge
impact on the outcome.

Andrew Lih (Fuzheado) also has a very interesting voter guide, and explains
"strategic" voting in more detail.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fuzheado/ACE2015

The official election page description is here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2015#Vacant_seats

You can change your vote at any time during the election just by voting
again.

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Ryan Kaldari 
wrote:

> Just a head's up that the ArbCom election has started and you can now
> officially go vote:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:SecurePoll/vote/398
>
> Members of this list may be interested in Smallbones' voter guide for the
> election:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Smallbones/ACE2015
> It focuses mainly on candidate's positions regarding harassment and
> bullying, especially towards women editors, although it also considers
> other qualifications such as experience and consistency.
>
> ___
> 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] Voting information RFC

[Neotarf]

There is a proposal to inform users about their eligibility to vote in the
upcoming Arbitration Committee elections here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Enfranchising_voters_in_arbcom_elections

I seem to remember some hard feelings last year when some users were
notified that they were eligible and were later disqualified.

FYI, the information page for the current election is at WP:ACE
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2015
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Voting information RFC (correcting link)

[Neotarf]

Sorry, something happened to the link in my previous post.  (Crossing
fingers) this should be the link to the RFC on arbcom election information:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Enfranchising_voters_in_arbcom_elections
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Three hours left to register your account for Arbcom elections

[Neotarf]

Thanks for the explanation.  Long-time users sometimes forget us newbies.

Good Idea about adding images. Although I am no big fan of the Visual
Editor, you can get it to do a very effective image search if you just go
to an article and click the "add media" option. I have noticed a number of
articles in this list are lacking images.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Women_of_Courage_Award

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 5:36 PM, WereSpielChequers <
werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Mainspace is where we keep the articles as opposed to policies, drafts,
> user space files and an amazing amount of other stuff.
>
> Another easy and uncontentious way to make a few edits is a little image
> adding exercise
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:WereSpielChequers/image_adding> I
> wrote. Or just look at the articles in this deletion queue
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:BLP_articles_proposed_for_deletion>
> you can remove the deletion tag of anything in that queue if you add a
> reliable source that references something about the subject of the article.
> There are usually a few articles on women in that queue.
>
> On 27 October 2015 at 21:21, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Just noticed this voting requirement:
>> "... An editor is *eligible* to vote who:...(i) has registered an
>> account before 28 October 2015"
>>
>> Reading between the lines, I would guess that means before October 27,
>> 23:59 PM UTC (just type "time UTC" into Google).
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2015#Timeline
>>
>> You have until Saturday (Halloween) night to complete the second
>> requirement: "...at least 150 mainspace edits before 1 November 2015".
>> What is a "mainspace edit"?  I never did understand the "space" thing, but
>> if it helps any, WP:MAINSPACE redirects to "WP:What is an article?"  If
>> anyone is looking for a quick way to get in 150 edits, you might try a
>> little gnoming with the Visual Editor--it has some new functionality with
>> repairing and wikifying links.
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Three hours left to register your account for Arbcom elections

[Neotarf]

Just noticed this voting requirement:
"... An editor is *eligible* to vote who:...(i) has registered an account
before 28 October 2015"

Reading between the lines, I would guess that means before October 27,
23:59 PM UTC (just type "time UTC" into Google).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2015#Timeline

You have until Saturday (Halloween) night to complete the second
requirement: "...at least 150 mainspace edits before 1 November 2015".
What is a "mainspace edit"?  I never did understand the "space" thing, but
if it helps any, WP:MAINSPACE redirects to "WP:What is an article?"  If
anyone is looking for a quick way to get in 150 edits, you might try a
little gnoming with the Visual Editor--it has some new functionality with
repairing and wikifying links.
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Atlantic article..."How Wikipedia is Hostile to Women"

[Neotarf]

The Signpost has an article, "Women and Wikipedia, the world s watching"
and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-10-21/Editorial
and "In the media: Wikipedia's hostility to women"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-10-21/In_the_media


On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 6:29 PM, Kevin Gorman  wrote:

> Hi all -
>
> As a further bit of clarification regarding the current arbcom case
> request (it had not been accepted yet:)
>
> 1)  Eric Corbett made a series of statements that Kirill Lokshin, one
> of our best regarded former arbitrators, regarded as violating his
> topic bans w/r/t discussion of the gendergap.  Kirill, without
> resulting to the AE board (which is an explicitly unnecessary step per
> policy,) blocked Eric Corbett for a period of one month.  The template
> he used explicitly mentioned that anyone undoing the block without
> agreement of the original admin, extensive discussion and consensus or
> by order of the arbitration committee would be summarily desysopped.
>
> 2) Yngvadotttir, an administrator who posted an extremely lengthy
> retirement message around six months ago (but has still been somewhat
> active) chose to unblock Eric unilaterally and without any sort of
> discussion, including with Kirill. Yngvadottir was almost immediately
> desysopped by arbcom under their emergency desysop procedures that are
> called for in any situation where one admin reverses an arb
> enforcement decision of another admin (which were reinforced by
> another recent case that also involved Eric.)  Yngvadottir knew beyond
> any reasonable doubt that her actions would result in her immediate
> desysop.
>
> 3) Black Kite, another administrator who I feel comfortable stating
> has a pro-Eric bias (significantly past the point of WP:INVOLVED,)
> opened an ArbCom case against Kirill for enforcing arbitration
> remedies against Eric.  I'm not entirely clear on what Black Kite's
> argument is.  Eric may have a right of reply in terms of speaking to
> The Atlantic or other media outlets, but past arbcom cases have made
> it absolutely clear that Eric does not have the ability to discuss
> issues of gender anywhere on Wikipedia.  Eric himself is perfectly
> aware of this fact, and has racked up at least seven blocks under the
> arb remedies against him. BK's main points seem to be that he
> disagrees with Kirill's exercise of discretion in blocking Eric (since
> Kirill didn't *have* to block Eric,) but there's no question that
> Kirill was well within policy to do so, and more broadly, that he
> disagrees with the fact that Eric is under Arbcom sanctions in the
> first place (and an arbcom case is not how to appeal Arbcom's past
> remedies against Eric - Eric can do so himself any time he pleases
> through a much less involved process.)
>
> 4) Eric's block has not been reinstated, but there's currently an arb
> motion that would only allow him to edit his own userpages and pages
> related to any ongoing case or case request where he is a named party.
> This is pretty typical handling of disputed blocks that wind up before
> arbcom, although Eric has stated he has no intention of participating
> in any arb request or case about him.  He's also stated that he's
> leaving Wikipedia.  I don't want to go through his history to count
> them up, but this is certainly not the first time Eric has said he is
> leaving Wikipedia only to return.
>
> A couple points specifically about this list:
>
> a)  I'm uncomfortable about the idea of list discussions that people
> are likely to shout CANVASSING at, but I am in full support of keeping
> the list informed of any ongoing developments, since they are directly
> relevant to the list.  I'm not okay with anything that I consider
> likely to be libelous under the laws of the state of California (where
> both WMF and I are located,) or anything that either my own counsel or
> WMF warns me is likely to be libelous.  However, California's
> defamation laws make it extremely hard to argue that a statement is
> defamatory, especially if you're at least a limited purpose public
> figure (which in this context, Eric is,) so I have trouble imagining a
> situation where this would come in to play.  Defamation laws in the UK
> are significantly different, but because of how ridiculous the US
> legislature has considered the in the past, no defamation judgment
> made in a UK court is enforceable in the US, despite our general
> extradition treaty, close relations, etc.  I guess you may need to be
> careful if you are a list member in the U.K. talking about the
> situation, although I can't imagine Eric suing anyone.
>
> b)  Blocks or bans on ENWP do not apply here.  Emily and I fully
> welcome the participation of interested participants who may be
> blocked or banned on ENWP but have relevant contributions here.  We do
> enforce our own code of conduct, and occasionally do moderate or ban
> list members altogether, but not 

[Gendergap] Harassment video from India: "Actually your creep isn't even a legit creep"

[Neotarf]

 In this soft commercial from Bollywood for a match-making app, actresses
Shweta Basu Prasad and Mansi Multani face off in a competition to describe
the creepiest guy currently stalking them on the internet: "Actually your
creep isn't even a legit creep, For my shaadi he is someone my mom would
like to meet."  Bonus linguistic lesson in how to pronounce "ROFL, ROFL,
ROFL, LMAO" in India.  Spoiler: at the end, they discover it is the same
guy harassing them both.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEC0pKHJKNM

Via
http://www.huffingtonpost.in/2015/10/09/all-india-bakchod-qawwali_n_8267772.html
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Video Q discussing Arbcom and gender/orientation harassment cases

[Neotarf]

A transcript of the speech is now available:
https://neotarf.wordpress.com/2015/10/23/danielle-citrons-wikicon-online-harassment-speech/

The other links again:
https://neotarf.wordpress.com/2015/10/19/danielle-citrons-wikicon-online-harassment-speech-qa/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee#Comments_on_ArbCom_and_gender

The speech itself is about 40 minutes, the Q is about 30-35 minutes, so
if you listen to both, it will be a little over an hour. I have also added
links to the texts of any documents mentioned.


On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Kevin Gorman  wrote:

> The entire session was longer than just the Q, and dealt with ways
> to appropriately handle online harassment, coming from someone holding
> a named chair at a major university who is widely recognized as an
> expert on issues of online harrassment (one of *the* experts.)  Since
> arbs get no formal training in how to handle online harrassment beyond
> what ENWP provides and a little bit of guidance from WMF, it's just
> flat out amazing that an arb who wasn't present for the session would
> refuse the minimal time committment.  If they don't have that much
> free time for free expert guidance, they either don't care about
> online harrassment (which is an awful lot of what they deal with) or
> simply don't have time (in which, given the other time committments
> being an arb entails, means they can't possibly have time to be an
> arb.)
>
> I think next election cycle two of my questions to every candidate
> will be "Did you watch Danielle Citron's keynote, and if so, what are
> your thoughts on it?" and "Did you watch Sumana Harihareswara's
> keynote (from wikiconf 2014,) and if so, what are your thoughts on
> it?"  I have a hard time imagining voting for anyone who says they
> didn't have time to watch them, or who can't come up with a reasonable
> set of comments on them.  I doubt I'm alone in that.
>
> 
> Kevin Gorman
>
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Fæ  wrote:
> > FYI, a 45 minutes commitment. Not saying much more, I'm tired of being a
> > punch bag for Arbs and ex-Arbs.
> >
> > Fae
> >
> > On 19 Oct 2015 19:47, "Kevin Gorman"  wrote:
> >>
> >> I've been out of touch with the world for most of the last week, but
> >> I'm extremely disappointed to see the only active arbitrator to
> >> comment on that discussion so far just asked for a tl;dr when given a
> >> two hour long video of free advice from a leading expert in online
> >> harassment issues.  Almost every case arb takes deals with harassment
> >> in one form or another - given the time they spend discussing
> >> trivialities, let alone drafting cases and on private lists, I would
> >> hope that no arbitrator (none of the sitting ones have formal training
> >> in dealing with online harrassment, AFAIK, although I may be missing
> >> someone) would refuse to spend a much smaller amount of time hearing
> >> one of the top experts n the subject talk about it.  If you can't
> >> accept a two hour time committment, you probably shouldn't be an arb.
> >>
> >> 
> >> Kevin Gorman
> >>
> >> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Fæ  wrote:
> >> > Links:
> >> > 1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kS-Y-FuzAH4=85m30s
> >> > 2.
> >> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee#Comments_on_ArbCom_and_gender
> >> >
> >> > Folks may be interested in watching the Q session at the recent
> >> > WikiConference USA where gender and harassment was discussed for about
> >> > 45 minutes.[1] It makes for an interesting summary of how Arbcom is
> >> > perceived with regard to handling harassment cases, and the types of
> >> > harassment of significant concern for our community.
> >> >
> >> > This has been raised on the Arbcom noticeboard[2], it will be
> >> > interesting to see how many current Arbcom members make a public
> >> > comment, or indeed if they are perfectly happy with the way Arbcom
> >> > currently works, or not.
> >> >
> >> > Fae
> >> > --
> >> > fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> >> >
> >> > ___
> >> > 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
>
> 

Re: [Gendergap] Video Q discussing Arbcom and gender/orientation harassment cases

[Neotarf]

My pleasure.  The first time I did one of these, it was with
hearing-impaired in mind.  These are very time-consuming, but every time I
do one, I am reminded again of how lucky I am to be able to hear.  There
does not seem to be one standard location for posting these.  I see Jimmy's
2014 Wikimania speech ended up at Wikisource
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Jimmy_Wales_Speaks_at_Closing_Ceremony_of_Wikimania_2014
but Sumana's keynote from last year is at the WikiiConference USA website
http://wikiconferenceusa.org/wiki/2014/Sumana_Harihareswara_keynote
although there is audio and video on Commons.  No doubt these will also be
processed in due course and magically appear somewhere with all the proper
attributions.

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 6:57 PM, Amanda Menking <amenk...@uw.edu> wrote:

> Thank you for doing this work, Neotarf!
>
> ~Amanda/Mssemantics
>
> On Oct 22, 2015, at 3:50 PM, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> A transcript of the speech is now available:
> https://neotarf.wordpress.com/2015/10/23/danielle-citrons-wikicon-online-harassment-speech/
>
> The other links again:
>
> https://neotarf.wordpress.com/2015/10/19/danielle-citrons-wikicon-online-harassment-speech-qa/
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee#Comments_on_ArbCom_and_gender
>
> The speech itself is about 40 minutes, the Q is about 30-35 minutes, so
> if you listen to both, it will be a little over an hour. I have also added
> links to the texts of any documents mentioned.
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Kevin Gorman <kgor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The entire session was longer than just the Q, and dealt with ways
>> to appropriately handle online harassment, coming from someone holding
>> a named chair at a major university who is widely recognized as an
>> expert on issues of online harrassment (one of *the* experts.)  Since
>> arbs get no formal training in how to handle online harrassment beyond
>> what ENWP provides and a little bit of guidance from WMF, it's just
>> flat out amazing that an arb who wasn't present for the session would
>> refuse the minimal time committment.  If they don't have that much
>> free time for free expert guidance, they either don't care about
>> online harrassment (which is an awful lot of what they deal with) or
>> simply don't have time (in which, given the other time committments
>> being an arb entails, means they can't possibly have time to be an
>> arb.)
>>
>> I think next election cycle two of my questions to every candidate
>> will be "Did you watch Danielle Citron's keynote, and if so, what are
>> your thoughts on it?" and "Did you watch Sumana Harihareswara's
>> keynote (from wikiconf 2014,) and if so, what are your thoughts on
>> it?"  I have a hard time imagining voting for anyone who says they
>> didn't have time to watch them, or who can't come up with a reasonable
>> set of comments on them.  I doubt I'm alone in that.
>>
>> 
>> Kevin Gorman
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > FYI, a 45 minutes commitment. Not saying much more, I'm tired of being a
>> > punch bag for Arbs and ex-Arbs.
>> >
>> > Fae
>> >
>> > On 19 Oct 2015 19:47, "Kevin Gorman" <kgor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I've been out of touch with the world for most of the last week, but
>> >> I'm extremely disappointed to see the only active arbitrator to
>> >> comment on that discussion so far just asked for a tl;dr when given a
>> >> two hour long video of free advice from a leading expert in online
>> >> harassment issues.  Almost every case arb takes deals with harassment
>> >> in one form or another - given the time they spend discussing
>> >> trivialities, let alone drafting cases and on private lists, I would
>> >> hope that no arbitrator (none of the sitting ones have formal training
>> >> in dealing with online harrassment, AFAIK, although I may be missing
>> >> someone) would refuse to spend a much smaller amount of time hearing
>> >> one of the top experts n the subject talk about it.  If you can't
>> >> accept a two hour time committment, you probably shouldn't be an arb.
>> >>
>> >> 
>> >> Kevin Gorman
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > Links:
>> >> > 1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kS-Y-FuzAH4=85m30s
>> >> > 2.
>> >> >
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/w

Re: [Gendergap] Atlantic article..."How Wikipedia is Hostile toWomen"

[Neotarf]

If the editing metrics are still up, could this a reflect a shift in the
type of user to coordinated offsite editing.  Judging by the huge amount of
interest in a certain obscure IdeaLab proposal, we could be looking at a
new editing paradigm.

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 9:21 PM, Kevin Gorman  wrote:

> Daniel: your suggestion doesn't reflect the fact that 2014's election
> had roughly 60% the voters of the year before. We definitely didn't
> have anywhere near that much of a drop in editing metrics.
>
> Best,
> Kevin Gorman
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case
>  wrote:
> >> Not to keep harping on how important it is to vote for arbcom, but I'm
> >> still just flummoxed by the fact that arbcom is elected by about half
> >> a percent of very active editors, and a smaller portion still of
> >> editors who meet the requirements and have edited in say, the last
> >> year.
> >
> >
> > Speaking as someone who does vote in ArbCom elections regularly,
> although I
> > rarely closely follow what that body does ... I think this might reflect
> the
> > oft-unacknowledged fact that a great deal more editors than we realize do
> > the tasks they have set out for themselves, "all alone or in twos", so to
> > speak, managing to complete them and resolve differences of opinion
> amongst
> > themselves without resorting to any sort of formal dispute-resolution
> > process. Of course it's only going to be those who have a reason to care
> who
> > care about ArbCom—and, naturally, that group is going to include a
> greater
> > proportion of those who have agendas they'd like to see ArbCom promote.
> >
> > Daniel Case
> >
> > ___
> > 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

Re: [Gendergap] Video Q discussing Arbcom and gender/orientation harassment cases

[Neotarf]

"...now pitching the idea that ARL libraries take over editing chunks of
Wikipedia..." It does sound like a remake of Bambi Meets Godzilla.

Wonder how that would go over in Canada--looks like they have a number of
ARL libraries http://www.arl.org/membership#.ViU1omtAeKI  Sounds like the
kind of thing LAC might regards as a “high risk” activity.
http://o.canada.com/news/national/federal-librarians-fear-being-muzzled-under-new-code-of-conduct
And there is already an old code of conduct that mentions diversity and
harassment.
http://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/about-us/Pages/code-conduct-value-ethics.aspx#h

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 1:52 PM, J Hayes <slowki...@gmail.com> wrote:

> right,
>  here's the tweet from an audience member at a ARL conference
> https://twitter.com/LibSkrat/status/651786423138430976
>
> it is quoted on one of fuzheado's slides.
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 1:42 PM, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I have posted a transcript of the Q portion:
>> https://neotarf.wordpress.com/2015/10/19/danielle-citrons-wikicon-online-harassment-speech-qa/
>> and added links to the documents referenced.
>>
>> @Fae thanks for the link, I didn't know you could link to a specific
>> point in a video
>> @J Hayes "cultural buzzsaw" tweet?
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 1:08 PM, J Hayes <slowki...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> yes,
>>> nice for arbcom to see how they are perceived
>>>
>>> and Andrew Lih mentioned the "cultural buzzsaw" tweet for importance of
>>> fixing culture as one of the things wikipedia must do.
>>>
>>> this was for an audience of the US powers that be; it will be
>>> interesting to see the impact on future conduct.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Jane Darnell <jane...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yes, that was an interesting Q - I was familiar with most of the
>>>> material discussed in the talk (and a lot of it has been discussed here
>>>> before), but I was surprised by the emotional response afterwards and the
>>>> number of comments/questions.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Links:
>>>>> 1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kS-Y-FuzAH4=85m30s
>>>>> 2.
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee#Comments_on_ArbCom_and_gender
>>>>>
>>>>> Folks may be interested in watching the Q session at the recent
>>>>> WikiConference USA where gender and harassment was discussed for about
>>>>> 45 minutes.[1] It makes for an interesting summary of how Arbcom is
>>>>> perceived with regard to handling harassment cases, and the types of
>>>>> harassment of significant concern for our community.
>>>>>
>>>>> This has been raised on the Arbcom noticeboard[2], it will be
>>>>> interesting to see how many current Arbcom members make a public
>>>>> comment, or indeed if they are perfectly happy with the way Arbcom
>>>>> currently works, or not.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fae
>>>>> --
>>>>> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>>>>>
>>>>> ___
>>>>> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Video Q discussing Arbcom and gender/orientation harassment cases

[Neotarf]

I have posted a transcript of the Q portion:
https://neotarf.wordpress.com/2015/10/19/danielle-citrons-wikicon-online-harassment-speech-qa/
and added links to the documents referenced.

@Fae thanks for the link, I didn't know you could link to a specific point
in a video
@J Hayes "cultural buzzsaw" tweet?


On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 1:08 PM, J Hayes  wrote:

> yes,
> nice for arbcom to see how they are perceived
>
> and Andrew Lih mentioned the "cultural buzzsaw" tweet for importance of
> fixing culture as one of the things wikipedia must do.
>
> this was for an audience of the US powers that be; it will be interesting
> to see the impact on future conduct.
>
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Jane Darnell  wrote:
>
>> Yes, that was an interesting Q - I was familiar with most of the
>> material discussed in the talk (and a lot of it has been discussed here
>> before), but I was surprised by the emotional response afterwards and the
>> number of comments/questions.
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Fæ  wrote:
>>
>>> Links:
>>> 1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kS-Y-FuzAH4=85m30s
>>> 2.
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee#Comments_on_ArbCom_and_gender
>>>
>>> Folks may be interested in watching the Q session at the recent
>>> WikiConference USA where gender and harassment was discussed for about
>>> 45 minutes.[1] It makes for an interesting summary of how Arbcom is
>>> perceived with regard to handling harassment cases, and the types of
>>> harassment of significant concern for our community.
>>>
>>> This has been raised on the Arbcom noticeboard[2], it will be
>>> interesting to see how many current Arbcom members make a public
>>> comment, or indeed if they are perfectly happy with the way Arbcom
>>> currently works, or not.
>>>
>>> Fae
>>> --
>>> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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

Re: [Gendergap] WP:Harassment finally links to solution for threats!

[Neotarf]

Could you post a link to one or two of the discussions, and how they went
down?  I really need to read something like that right now.

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 8:50 PM, Nathan <nawr...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 8:20 PM, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> That said, everyone I know of who has ever publicly objected to sexual
>> harassment has subsequently been indeffed.  Maybe that's what the essay
>> should say.
>>
>
> Really? I can name a half dozen off the top of my head that became admins,
> functionaries, arbitrators, etc. At least some are still active. I don't
> think "if you report harassment you'll be blocked indefinitely" would be an
> accurate thing to tell people.
>
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] WP:Harassment finally links to solution for threats!

[Neotarf]

@Risker: "I have a simple question to ask:  How many people in this thread
have publicly or privately requested to the Wikimedia Foundation ED that
additional resources be assigned to trust and safety issues such as death
threats?"

Answer: 26.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Community_discussion_on_harassment_reporting

That said, everyone I know of who has ever publicly objected to sexual
harassment has subsequently been indeffed.  Maybe that's what the essay
should say.

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 12:37 AM, Carol Moore dc 
wrote:

> On 9/27/2015 1:49 AM, rupert THURNER wrote:
>
>> anne, thank you so much, for the first time i think i understand the
>> problem. "rot in hell" is a very good example of anger. anger is
>> something common on wikipedia, anger management is something
>> surprisingly ignored.
>>
>
> Just in case people don't understand what kind of threats we're discussing
> here I just pulled up the 2011 messages, about half of those I got, and
> found:
> *Several introductory ones saying they knew where I lived because info so
> easily found on the internet
> *Around 100 calling me a bitch and saying they'd murder me
> *Only one a few days later saying "you will die"
> *Another hundred calling me a stupid whore and making nasty accusations
> *265 only called me a spineless leftist hypocrite
> *84 calling me a whore and accusing me of having sex with the admin who
> started somehow interrupting his emails (which he continued sending through
> the wikipedia system until he stopped)
>
> I have another 500 odd in another file from a year or so later but don't
> feel like uploading and searching...
>
> On wikipedia, 8/11/11 there was a relatively tame one predicting I'd be
> dead "12 months from now". It was removed but I kept the JPG. Don't have
> JPGs for other ones that were removed that day. My pages were protected vs.
> non-verified users after that.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ACarolmooredc=history=2011=8=
>
> Like I've said, having put up with nonsense - and death threats - from
> guys already since 1990 online, I wasn't scared just really annoyed.
> Especially knowing some people WOULD be scared by this sort of thing...
>
> So a clear statement not to get upset and know there are clear and
> escalating steps you can take would help...
>
>
>
>
> And then there was the gif of me being beaten to death with my name on it
> that lasted on wikicommons a couple days before it was taken down. Still
> have a copy...
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] WP:Harassment finally links to solution for threats!

[Neotarf]

@Carol Moore, I believe that link is about suicide threats.  Did you mean
to link to something else?

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Carol Moore dc 
wrote:

> Because of an offline discussion about the 1000 odd death threats I got
> directly through the Wikimedia Foundation email system and my failure to
> remember personally contacting them (as opposed to admins) about it, I
> decided to see if the Harassment article mentioned that option.
>
> I did a little research and found it was not til July 22, 2015 that the
> harassment article section on "threats" provided a link to the WP:Essay
> that specifically advises this!
>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Harassment=672630056=672391122
>
> Now why can't the threats section include that info? Certain some
> well-connected editors have learned how to work that angle with the
> foundation for even minor issues...
>
> There's a huge section on what to do about threats of legal action, but
> zilch on death threats. Pretty absurd...  Safe space, NOT!!*
>
> Thanks...
>
>
> CM
>
> *Of course, there's a difference between legitimate safe space from actual
> direct insults or threats of harm and the absurd degree of hypersensitivity
> now a days where there are trigger warnings on any opinion that someone
> might disagree with and protests against opinions that just aren't
> politically correct enough... but don't get me started...
>
> A lot of articles about it lately have exposed the absurdities and
> hypocrisy of some individuals and groups. And I can understand the fear of
> some male wikipedians they will be exposed to the most extreme varieties.
> It also gives the most oppressive guys an excuse to label minor and
> legitimate demands for safe space as "extremist." ("You extremist, you want
> to mention contacting the Foundation on the Harassment page!!!")
>
> Glad I'm not in college! Or any "progressive" political groups any more.
> Especially now that I am finally free of having to be a "good girl" on
> Wikipedia and can engage in anti-establishment mockery and sarcasm in my
> writings/artistic endeavors without worrying about wikistalkers slamming me
> all over Wikipedia ;-)
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] "Harvard students edit Wikipedia in effort to ‘dismantle the patriarchy’ "

[Neotarf]

A little quick fact-checking, on the original Crimson article, not the
spin-off articles:

1) "Erica X. Eisen ’16, a former Crimson arts chair, beefed up the text on
the Wikipedia page on American feminism, deeming it 'too short' and what
the site considers a 'stub'...”

A quick check of "Feminism in the United States", which is a redirect of
"American feminism", shows it was in fact edited on September 7, however
not by Eisen but by someone names Acire93, who appears to be an experienced
editor, not a newbie, and who made some routine heading and link formatting
changes. The article is most certainly not a stub, and was not a stub on
Sept. 7.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Feminism_in_the_United_States=history

2) "WikiProject page on feminism ... suggests that users delete a comic
strip stereotyping lesbian women."

Um, no, it doesn't. And a quick check of the page history shows the page
has not been changed recently. It's not on the talk page either.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Feminism

3) "Users can choose to delete a page..."

*facepalm*

4) "Zhang now has her own Wikipedia page."

Read it while you can, because it looks like the event sponsors did not
explore the concept of WP:NOTABLE.

5) The rather polemical and provocative statements about “dismantling the
patriarchy” and "taking out phrasing they saw as offensive" are not linked
to anything that can be verified, and are certainly no where on the
Manifesta Magazine website, but are only sourced to an unpublished email.
Given the accuracy of the rest of the article, all I can say is {{citation
needed}}.

Someone needs to point the Harvard University student writers (and their
faculty overseers, if there are any) to this blog post: "“We were missing
1,500 women scientists [in 2013],” [Temple-Wood] says. “What’s the next
massive content gap we’re going to find because we engaged someone who
wasn’t engaged before?”
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/31/funding-projects-pizza-grants/

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 5:50 PM, Rob  wrote:

> Saw this earlier today: http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=6785.  I
> expect we will see more.
>
> This is why we can't have nice things.
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 4:03 PM, Carol Moore dc 
> wrote:
> > http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/24150/
> >
> > "Meanwhile, these college feminist Wikipedia attacks have become
> something
> > of a regular thing: (Conservative woman author lists "examples")"
> >
> > We'll see if they post my reply... ;-)
> >
> > ___
> > 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] Another Amazon story

[Neotarf]

You can’t claim to be a data-driven company and not release more specific
numbers on how many women and people of color apply, get hired and
promoted, and stay on as employees. In the absence of meaningful public
data — especially retention data — all we have are stories. This is mine.

https://medium.com/@jcheiffetz/i-had-a-baby-and-cancer-when-i-worked-at-amazon-this-is-my-story-9eba5eef2976

The article she links to is worth reading as well.
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] The Virginia killings: he says bitch as he aims the weapon at her

[Neotarf]

Is there any doubt what this kind of language is for?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIdrUHKkG6Y
It's not for a collaborative environment, that's for sure.
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Amazon petition

[Neotarf]

Does anyone know anything about these petition things?  I usually ignore
them, but this one is...strange. And how is this guy, with a self-published
blog and self-published books, notable enough for a WP article, when a list
of black PhD's gets deleted?

https://www.change.org/p/amazon-com-amazon-stop-selling-rooshv-daryush-valizadeh-rape-books?recruiter=56673634utm_source=share_petitionutm_medium=facebookutm_campaign=autopublishutm_term=des-lg-action_alert-no_msg
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] What on earth is second generation gender bias?

[Neotarf]

For anyone who has a hard time keeping up with current permutations of
gender theory, the* Harvard Business Review* has a useful explanation of
What Is Second-Generation Gender Bias? in this article side box. An
excerpt:

Research has moved away from a focus on the deliberate exclusion of women
and toward investigating “second-generation” forms of gender bias as the
primary cause of women’s persistent underrepresentation in leadership
roles. This bias erects powerful but subtle and often invisible barriers
for women that arise from cultural assumptions and organizational
structures...

Double binds.

In most cultures masculinity and leadership are closely linked: The ideal
leader, like the ideal man, is decisive, assertive, and independent. In
contrast, women are expected to be nice, caretaking, and unselfish. The
mismatch between conventionally feminine qualities and the qualities
thought necessary for leadership puts female leaders in a double bind.
Numerous studies have shown that women who excel in traditionally male
domains are viewed as competent but less likable than their male
counterparts. Behaviors that suggest self-confidence or assertiveness in
men often appear arrogant or abrasive in women. Meanwhile, women in
positions of authority who enact a conventionally feminine style may be
liked but are not respected. They are deemed too emotional to make tough
decisions and too soft to be strong leaders.

https://hbr.org/2013/09/women-rising-the-unseen-barriers
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Research: men who harass women online

[Neotarf]

Re: The study [1] doesn't even mention harassment

If someone is being singled out for frequent negative comments based on
their gender, that's pretty much the definition of sexual harassment.

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 6:11 AM, Joseph Reagle joseph.2...@reagle.org
wrote:

 Interesting and important study! But the press glosses are
 mis-representative. The study [1] doesn't even mention harassment; also,
 because of the small sample size and only 13% of that (11 individuals)
 uttered hostile sexist statements We found that the presence of sexist
 statements was not determined by differences in maximum skill achieved.
 The paper is really about the extent to which lower-status male players are
 bigger jerks to women players. They did find this with respect to negative
 and positive statements, but didn't have the statistical power to conclude
 a correlation about hostile sexist statements.

 What I found interesting methodologically is that for the analysis they
 had two exclude two jerks as outliers. For the examination of negative
 statements, there were two focal players in the female-voiced manipulation
 that made 10 more negative statements than the next highest individuals
 (greater than 5 standard deviations from the mean). As a result, we removed
 them from our analysis to ensure they did not skew our results towards
 significance. Given the rotten apple thesis (a minority of jerks can
 spoil the barrel), what they had to do for the purposes of their thesis and
 statistical analysis doesn't correspond to the experience women players may
 have. That is, I believe, if we excluded 5% of the most awful people online
 as outliers, the Net would be lovely!

 [1]:
 http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0131613

 On 07/22/2015 10:02 PM, Neotarf wrote:
  For their latest study, published in the journal PLOS One last week,
 [Michael Kasumovic and Jeffrey Kuznekoff, researchers at the University of
 New South Wales and Miami University, respectively] watched how men treated
 women during 163 plays of the video game Halo 3.
 
  As they watched the games play out and tracked the comments that
 players made to each other, the researchers observed that — no matter their
 skill level, or how the game went — men tended to be pretty cordial to each
 other. Male players who were good at the game also tended to pay
 compliments to other male and female players.
 
  Some male players, however — the ones who were less-skilled at the
 game, and performing worse relative their peers — made frequent, nasty
 comments to the female gamers. In other words, sexist dudes are /literally/
 losers.
 
 
 http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/07/20/men-who-harass-women-online-are-quite-literally-losers-new-study-finds/

 ___
 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

Re: [Gendergap] sexual harassment policy for English Wikipedia

[Neotarf]

I addressed these issues in my proposal at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Comprehensive_harassment_and_privacy_policy

Sexual harassment policy has been around for a good 30 years or so and by
now is pretty much boilerplate stuff.  Every company has something, whether
they have new employees sign a simple statement that they will not engage
in sexual harassment, or whether there is a formal training program they
have new employees read and sign as part of the new hire orientation.

There is a ton of stuff on the internet about the subject, for instance see
NOLO:
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/preventing-sexual-harassment-workplace-29851.html

For my grant proposal, I borrowed heavily from NOLO's Avoid Employee
Lawsuits: Commonsense tips for responsible management
http://www.amazon.com/Avoid-Employee-Lawsuits-Commonsense-Responsible/dp/0873374630/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?s=booksie=UTF8qid=1437760629sr=1-1-fkmr0keywords=NOLO+prevent+employee+lawsuits,
mostly condensing the ideas that were applicable to online interactions.
While the same ideas are common to most HR policies, this book presents
them fairly succinctly, as you would want in a policy written to be
understood by a wide variety of users.

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Marie Earley eir...@hotmail.com wrote:

 A proposed policy page now exists as well:
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sexual_harassment

 However, personally I think the third proposal suggested by
 User:EvergreenFir is the one to go with: A harassment policy that
 specifically mentions identity-based harassment (including, but not limited
 to, sex, gender, race, age, ability, etc.)

 Marie

 --
 Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 13:48:50 -0500
 From: rkald...@wikimedia.org
 To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 Subject: [Gendergap] sexual harassment policy for English Wikipedia

 An RfC has been created proposing a sexual harassment policy for English
 Wikipedia:

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Harassment#Sexual_harassment_policy

 ___ 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

Re: [Gendergap] Semi-retirement retirement

[Neotarf]

LB, if you don't want to answer this question it's totally understandable,
but I hope the WMF has offered you legal assistance with the situation you
had off-wiki.  It happened because you are a woman and it happened because
you edit Wikipedia.  Unless it is dealt with, it could easily happen to any
other women who edits. I know they have helped other editors, for instance
the one who had the problems with WikiTravel.

On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 7:26 PM, Lennart Guldbrandsson 
l_guldbrands...@hotmail.com wrote:

 I am so sorry to hear that, LightBreather. This situation is horrendous.
 Best of luck with all your other projects.


 Best wishes,

 Lennart Guldbrandsson

 070 - 207 80 05
 http://www.*elementx*.se http://www.elementx.se
 *Skriv som ett proffs http://www.elementx.se/skriv-som-ett-proffs/* -
 min senaste bok
 Få regelbundna skrivtips direkt till din inkorg
 http://elementx.us7.list-manage1.com/subscribe?u=ab2080465c6cd11b5b253f940id=8a2b974a62

 @aliasHannibal http://twitter.com/AliasHannibal - på Twitter

 *Tänk dig en värld där varje människa på den här planeten får fri
 tillgång till **världens samlade kunskap*
 http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Huvudsida*. Det är vårt mål.*
 Jimmy Wales

 --
 Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2015 14:53:52 -0700
 From: lightbreath...@gmail.com
 To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 Subject: [Gendergap] Semi-retirement  retirement

 I semi-retired back in May, planning to retire after the arbcom case
 against me was closed. However, it's been over two months since Karanacs
 requested the case on April 29, the proposed decision phase has been going
 nowhere since June 7, and I've got no energy left for the thing, so I've
 retired today. I will be taking my name off the gender gap mailing list
 next.

 Thanks again to those of you who were friendly to me.

 Lightbreather


 ___ 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] Silencing women

[Neotarf]

Got a RS for this now:

In this environment, revenge pornography and other abusive behaviour, like
trolling, constitute a kind of gendered hate speech – designed to silence
women and other gender, sexual and racial minorities...Trolling tells women
(and others) that the digital space, a communal space, is not for their
voices. Gendered hate speech online actively restricts the free speech of
women.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jun/22/revenge-porn-women-free-speech-abuse?CMP=ema_565
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Retired

[Neotarf]

Totally understandable.  I too have also been sexually harassed and doxxed,
on at least two other sites besides WP.  The ArbCom and the WMF are well
aware of it, and have been unwilling to lift a finger against it.

There is a book about cyber harassment making the rounds: Hate Crimes in
Cyberspace by Danielle Keats Citron ISBN 978-0-674-36829-3 describing both
the horrible price that individuals pay and the legal underpinnings of the
problem. It's a pity WP is not in the vanguard of this movement in the same
way it has pioneered in other areas.  Instead, those who report harassment
will find themselves treated worse than the harassers.

On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 9:49 PM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net
wrote:

 On 5/26/2015 8:35 PM, LB wrote:

 Due to off-wiki harassment, I have retired. Thank you to those of you who
 have been friendly with me over the past year.

 Lightbreather


  Plus all that on-wiki harassment!

 I did notice something interesting and actually positive in
 Lightbreather's arbitration, compared to GGTF and others I've seen.

 Which is that now editors only can comment on Arbitration talk pages in
 their own sections.  This lessens opportunities for drive-by harassing
 taunts against, and replies against, various editors who harassers are
 trying to get kicked off Wikipedia.  They have to take responsibility in
 their own sections. Perhaps my screaming about institutionalized
 harassment at Arbcom had at least this minor effect...  I hope they keep
 it for all future arbitrations...

 Announcement on this page, after which went into effect.

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Lightbreather/Evidence#Sectioned_discussion_is_now_in_effect_on_this_page

 Also in effect here.

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Lightbreather/Workshop

 ___
 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

Re: [Gendergap] Retired

[Neotarf]

This might also be a good time to mention the conversation about harassment
on the recent Inspire grant project.  Fourteen of the proposals were
concerned with managing harassment.  I don't believe I ever saw anyone from
the Foundation comment on this.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Community_discussion_on_harassment_reporting

Instead we now have the English Wikipedia's Arbcom taking on their third or
fourth sexual harassment within the year, without having even established a
working definition of what it is.

On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 12:06 AM, Neotarf neot...@gmail.com wrote:

 Totally understandable.  I too have also been sexually harassed and
 doxxed, on at least two other sites besides WP.  The ArbCom and the WMF are
 well aware of it, and have been unwilling to lift a finger against it.

 There is a book about cyber harassment making the rounds: Hate Crimes in
 Cyberspace by Danielle Keats Citron ISBN 978-0-674-36829-3 describing both
 the horrible price that individuals pay and the legal underpinnings of the
 problem. It's a pity WP is not in the vanguard of this movement in the same
 way it has pioneered in other areas.  Instead, those who report harassment
 will find themselves treated worse than the harassers.

 On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 9:49 PM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net
 wrote:

 On 5/26/2015 8:35 PM, LB wrote:

 Due to off-wiki harassment, I have retired. Thank you to those of you
 who have been friendly with me over the past year.

 Lightbreather


  Plus all that on-wiki harassment!

 I did notice something interesting and actually positive in
 Lightbreather's arbitration, compared to GGTF and others I've seen.

 Which is that now editors only can comment on Arbitration talk pages in
 their own sections.  This lessens opportunities for drive-by harassing
 taunts against, and replies against, various editors who harassers are
 trying to get kicked off Wikipedia.  They have to take responsibility in
 their own sections. Perhaps my screaming about institutionalized
 harassment at Arbcom had at least this minor effect...  I hope they keep
 it for all future arbitrations...

 Announcement on this page, after which went into effect.

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Lightbreather/Evidence#Sectioned_discussion_is_now_in_effect_on_this_page

 Also in effect here.

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Lightbreather/Workshop

 ___
 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

Re: [Gendergap] Article: Wikipedia trolls now vs. women architects

[Neotarf]

Does anyone know what's going on with the Spanish Wikipedia?  The last two
articles I created, of Laxmi_Aggarwal and Maha Al Muneef--women who have
been awarded the International Women of Courage Award--have been nominated
for speedy deletion as not being encyclopedic. See my talk page
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usuario_discusi%C3%B3n:Neotarf.  My article
on the award itself http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujer_coraje remains
untouched, but you can see the only articles that remain as blue links are
of Hispanic women.

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 4:22 AM, Jane Darnell jane...@gmail.com wrote:

 Interesting, thanks for the links! We also now have mix-n-match and
 Charles Matthews has matched the complete Oxford Dictionary of National
 Biography, With autolist I could probably look at those male-female ratios
 per occupation. Might be interesting. I don't know how to get at the
 deleted  recreated data though

 On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 8:01 PM, Joseph Reagle joseph.2...@reagle.org
 wrote:

 On 04/13/2015 01:18 PM, Jane Darnell wrote:
  Actually I think it would be useful to measure all existing female bios
  vs all existing male bios for the proportion of those which have been
  previously deleted and recreated. I have a theory that it is much more
  difficult to create bios of females in whatever category due to the
  systemic academic bias aginst including women's biographies in the list
  of reliable sources mostly used in Wikipedia. I would be especially
  interested in comparison of male-female ration of bios in established
  dictionaries of biography and how these compare to Wikipedia, and of
  those, how many such bios were previously deleted on Wikipedia and
  recreated.

 Hi Jane, I've done comparative work on coverage bias in biographies
 between WP and Britannica [1]. I've also shared my data [2] with an
 author of [3] who is extending that  analysis to include structural,
 lexical, and visibility bias. I think addressing deletion and recreation
 wouldn't be too hard...

 [1]: http://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/777/631
 [2]: http://reagle.org/joseph/2010/06/gender/results
 [3]: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1501.06307v1.pdf

 ___
 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] Sexual harassment proposal

[Neotarf]

I know some people have been wishing for a sexual harassment policy.  I
have just made such a proposal, titled Comprehensive harassment and
privacy policy, at the Grants:IdeaLab
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Comprehensive_harassment_and_privacy_policy

Suggestions for improvement welcome, or feel free to email me with any
private suggestions.

Regards,
Neotarf
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Metrics

[Neotarf]

It is perhaps a truism that if you want to concentrate on fixing something
(i.e., gendergap) , first you need to measure it.

Has anyone looked at the Inspire grant proposals to see if any of them
include metrics?

So far, we have the 2008 survey, conducted by UN University in Maastrict
(UNU-MERIT), and posted in 2010.  The survey showed that *only 12.64% of
contributors are female*.
https://web.archive.org/web/20130717211630/http://wikipediastudy.org/

The next survey was conducted in 2011.  It found that *only 8.5% of
editors are women*.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Editor_Survey_Report_-_April_2011.pdfpage=3

The results of the 2012 survey were never published.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_Editor_Survey_2012#Results
 Questions about it remain unanswered.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research_talk:Wikipedia_Editor_Survey_2012#Looking_for_survey_results

So what surveys need to be done, how often, and by whom?  (It seems that
this UN University in Maastrict group did a pretty good job.) The
editathons are new, has anyone actually talked to any of the women who
participated?  Shouldn't there be some focus groups at this point?

This is really basic to the whole project. Can someone figure out what is
needed and whether anyone has submitted a workable proposal?  Andreas?
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Sorted by category... Progress of Inspire Grants – Gender gap campaign

[Neotarf]

There were several proposals made before the Inspire campaign was
officially announced, but most of them have now been included in the
campaign.

Still missing is:
Grants:IdeaLab/Code of conduct synchronization
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Code_of_conduct_synchronizationGrants:IdeaLab/Human
resources complaint processing best practices
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Human_resources_complaint_processing_best_practicesGrants:IdeaLab/Human
resources complaint receiving
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Human_resources_complaint_receiving

all by Bluerasberry and
Grants:IdeaLab/Gender Gap Allies training
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Gender_Gap_Allies_training
by Slowking4
These were all quite good.  How can they get added to the Inspire campaign?



On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 9:02 PM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net
wrote:

 There are definitely dozens of really good projects in there. But the one
 that I think has the most promise for making a real sea-change is this one
 because it deals with males changing their behavior.

 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Allies

 Hopefully some guys - including and especially here - will help make it
 happen! :-)


 CM

 ___
 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

Re: [Gendergap] A path back for day-two editors (was: Wikipedia Day NYC 2015 mini-conferenceh for te project's 14th birthday)

[Neotarf]

Someone should ping Kevin Gorman on this, I believe he knows of some
research.  Does anyone know about his health?  Is he able to respond?

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Sydney Poore sydney.po...@gmail.com
wrote:

 I agree with Christine. There is good work being done as learning has
 taken place about the strengths and weaknesses of edit-a-thons.

 Because it has been know for a few years that one off edit-a-thons create
 content but don't grow new users, now many people have been experimenting
 with different ways to use edit-a-thons other than editor recruitment.
 Having an edit-a-thon on a specific topic can increase the quantity and
 quality of content on that topic even if the people never edit again. And
 the people leave with a better understanding of Wikipedia and the behind
 the scene working or the community that seem very mysterious to the outside
 world.

 And also regular meet ups to edit like WikiSalons or /Wiki Editing Clubs
 are being tried in as a way to create a stable group of people who enjoy
 editing together. These people are true Wikipedians even thought they might
 not be high volume users. The can fill a needed niche in Wikipedia
 especially if they are editing about topics that are under represented on
 Wikipedia or they have an alternative perspective than the average
 Wikipedian.

 I'm launching an editing club in the topic area of oral health soon.
 Because I always mention gender in my Cochrane Collaboration presentations
 the women who edit in these clubs know that they are helping to balance the
 gender gap on Wikipedia even though that was not their primary reason for
 editing.Like most outside organizations Cochrane is at least 50% women. So
 by doing these initiatives we are automatically helping the gender gap.
 They see this aspect as an added benefit of our collaboration.

 Sydney



 Sydney Poore
 User:FloNight
 Wikipedian in Residence
 at Cochrane Collaboration

 On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 1:11 AM, Christine Meyer 
 christinewme...@gmail.com wrote:

 Kerry and all,

 I've been thinking about much of what you wrote.  Being in this list has
 made me think about how to recruit and retain more female editors.  I
 attended Emily's training about how to conduct workshops and edit-athons in
 Washington, D.C. last fall, which was a very valuable experience.  Many
 things germinated during the training, including Rosiestep's creation of
 the Women Writers Project (I'm proud to say that I was present, in the same
 room, when she created it) and the planning stages of the GA Cup, which was
 hugely successful.  There was an off-hand remark made during the training
 that I think all the edit-athons and workshops that have occurred since has
 borne out--that the most successful edit-athons in terms of recruiting new
 editors have been reoccurring.

 I wonder if the answer is the creation of editing clubs, something that
 has been discussed here before.  The reason I'm thinking this way is that
 I'm preparing an educational session I'm leading at the end of April, at
 the District 9 Toastmasters spring conference in Yakima, Washington.  (I'm
 a very active Toastmaster, like I'm a very active Wikipedian.)  It won't be
 a workshop about how to edit WP, but a more general session about how to
 more effectively use WP to write speeches, although I am providing
 participants with a resource list about editing.  So I've been thinking
 about how being a Toastmaster has made me a better WP editor, and how being
 an editor has made me a better Toastmaster.

 I'm starting to believe that a more effective way to recruit editors is
 to create clubs like Toastmasters, which meet regularly (once or twice a
 month) and have a core of 7 or 8 people.  TM states that 20 members make a
 healthy club, and they should know; they've been in existence for 90
 years.  I agree that editors are born, not made.  (Which is ironic, because
 TM's tag line is, Where leaders are made.)  Editing clubs, though, are
 ways to find those folks, and to mentor them through the complex WP
 policies.  If they exist on college campuses, they can be folded into the
 university's existing club structure.  They can, like TM clubs, be held in
 church basements or in hotel conference rooms or in hospital meeting rooms.

 I get what you say about experienced editors have little patience with
 the bungling newbies.  However, if it weren't for a few more experienced
 editors who mentored me through my bungling stage, I probably wouldn't be
 here today.  Adrienne Wadewitz, btw, was one of them.  I think that we, as
 experienced editors, have a responsibility to mentor newbies--to pay it
 forward like others helped us when we were newbies.  Shoot, I still need
 it.  For example, I'd say that I'm a very experienced editor, and I'm
 stupid when it comes to creating tables.  I'm getting assistance with that
 as we speak, in my most recent FLC (