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

[Natacha Rault]

Hi Jessy, 
Sorry to learn about this sad experience. I had the impression - on the French 
wiktionnary, things were easier (but I am not contributing myself).
Kind regards,
Nattes à chat 

> Le 26 avr. 2017 à 19:27, Jessy D. King  a écrit :
> 
> 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. 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Wiktionary *desperately* needs more gender-aware editors

[Risker]

Hello Jessy -

I see that your second effort[1], where you eliminated all references to
physical appearance of either gender was accepted.  I think that was
appropriate.  I think what was a bigger issue in your first effort was that
you just switched male to female and vice versa, but left in the part about
physical appearance in both cases.  Your second effort was exemplary - it
reflected completely gender-neutral attributes (cleverness, athletic
ability) and is an excellent way to have addressed the gender bias in the
information.  Just switching the gender without changing the attribute
didn't really make the references less biased or more gender-neutral.  That
you identified positive gender-neutral attributes with a woman in these
examples was a major coup on your part, and is possibly one of the best
examples of addressing a systemic bias I've seen in a while.

It occurs to me that you figured out all by yourself how to improve the
Wiktionary entry while also removing the systemic bias, by sticking to it
and thinking more broadly about the issue.  I'm not sure that you'll get
recognition for this work, mostly because most editors get very little
recognition.  One thing that I personally have found to be rewarding is to
receive a "thanks" message from another editor, which I have received for
edits on Meta, English Wikipedia, and Commons.   It appears to me that the
"Thank" extension isn't active on English Wiktionary.  If someone is more
technically minded than me, perhaps this can be verified and a phabricator
task initiated in order to get it active.  Then I would encourage you to
use it; many editors on Wiktionary will recognize (and probably appreciate)
being thanked since it is active on other projects they probably edit, and
will start reciprocating.


Risker/Anne


[1]
https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=so=revision=42599094=42598962

On 26 April 2017 at 13:27, Jessy D. King  wrote:

> Hi,
> I'm new to this list, this is my first post.
>
> If Wikipedia is a boy's club, Wiktionary is an uber boy's club. It *so*
> desperately needs people interested in addressing systemic bias.
>
> Every time I try to make completely legitimate fixes to address systemic
> bias of the male privilege variety (for example,
> https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=so=
> 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.
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Wiktionary *desperately* needs more gender-aware editors

[J Hayes]

because better to leave and do productive work elsewhere, and let
wictionary die, than to fight and get burnt out and blocked.

we all have to decide where we are on exit versus voice - many people are
choosing to leave, it is a rational alternative. SItranscribe is built on
ex-wikipedia volunteers

j

On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 4:57 PM, J Hayes <slowki...@gmail.com> 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.
>
> cheers.
>
> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> *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.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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] 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 <hwa...@wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Inline replies to 3 people...
>
> On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 1:57 PM, J Hayes <slowki...@gmail.com> 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.
>>&

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

[JJ Marr]

I, personally, would rather that this list not be used to criticize
specific editors in a forum that they have no opportunity to respond in.
I'm not a list admin, but I'm pretty sure this list is for talking about
general issues relating to the gender gap.

I would strongly recommend to use the existing dispute resolution methods
available onwiki instead of coming to this list to complain about specific
editors and their actions.

I'd also take this opportunity to ask that the list admins create a
transparent set of rules for messages sent to this list, because there has
been a lot of uncivil discourse before on this mailing list and I think it
would be prudent to ensure a clear set of guidelines are in force to ensure
civility in the future.

On May 27, 2017 21:16, "Heather Walls" <hwa...@wikimedia.org> wrote:

Inline replies to 3 people...

On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 1:57 PM, J Hayes <slowki...@gmail.com> 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.
>>
>
Hello Jessy, I appreciate your efforts to remove gender issues from
Wiktionary. I am disappointed that you found a similar reaction in this
list.

Warmly,
Heather




>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Wiktionary *desperately* needs more gender-aware editors

[Heather Walls]

Inline replies to 3 people...

On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 1:57 PM, J Hayes <slowki...@gmail.com> 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.
>>
>
Hello Jessy, I appreciate your efforts to remove gender issues from
Wiktionary. I am disappointed that you found a similar reaction in this
list.

Warmly,
Heather




>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Wiktionary *desperately* needs more gender-aware editors

[Peter Southwood]

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

 

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 
<https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=so=revision=42598962=42598906>
 =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. 

 

 

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

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

[Jessy D. King]

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