Re: [Gendergap] What to do about sexism when we see it on WP?
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 15:34, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote: The behavior you describe is all too common on Wikipedia (and even worse on Commons). I could quote some much more blatant examples than the one you cite, but I'll spare everyone the groans. I think the problem is that most guys do not understand that creating an unwanted sexualized environment is a form of sexism and an abuse of male privilege (and that it has a real effect on women's participation in the project). Indeed, I imagine some do not even comprehend the concept of unwanted sexualized environment. Perhaps it would be helpful to point them to: http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Sexualized_environment This reminds me of my unsuccessful attempt to get WP:HOTTIE deleted :( For the long term, we should think about trying to get wording added to either the Civility policy or the Harassment policy about offensive verbal comments and sexual innuendo. Ryan, thanks for the link to the sexualized environment page. http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Sexualized_environment Perhaps the best thing to do when we see these comments is just add a link to that page. I'd like to try to add something to the civility policy about sexual innuendo. I think so long as it's low key we could manage that fairly easily (famous last words). Sarah ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] What to do about sexism when we see it on WP?
I've added sexual innuendo to the en:WP civility policy, under other uncivil behaviours: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ACivilityaction=historysubmitdiff=419506099oldid=416379114 Andreas --- On Fri, 18/3/11, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com wrote: From: Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Gendergap] What to do about sexism when we see it on WP? To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Friday, 18 March, 2011, 13:53 On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 15:34, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote: The behavior you describe is all too common on Wikipedia (and even worse on Commons). I could quote some much more blatant examples than the one you cite, but I'll spare everyone the groans. I think the problem is that most guys do not understand that creating an unwanted sexualized environment is a form of sexism and an abuse of male privilege (and that it has a real effect on women's participation in the project). Indeed, I imagine some do not even comprehend the concept of unwanted sexualized environment. Perhaps it would be helpful to point them to: http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Sexualized_environment This reminds me of my unsuccessful attempt to get WP:HOTTIE deleted :( For the long term, we should think about trying to get wording added to either the Civility policy or the Harassment policy about offensive verbal comments and sexual innuendo. Ryan, thanks for the link to the sexualized environment page. http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Sexualized_environment Perhaps the best thing to do when we see these comments is just add a link to that page. I'd like to try to add something to the civility policy about sexual innuendo. I think so long as it's low key we could manage that fairly easily (famous last words). Sarah ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] What to do about sexism when we see it on WP?
However, I also do worry about double standards. For example, earlier somewhere someone suggested we visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ochre where a barebreasted woman was used to illustrate the use of it as a body paint in Africa. I made the point that I really would like to know if men were painted and if the penis also was painted on men. Something tells me under that rule someone might have jumped all over me for innuendo since innuendo is in the mind of the behold. I actually in my mind had a heavy innuendo intention, but objectively speaking it probably didn't look that way. Others might have seen it as more of an innuendo than even I meant. So bottom line, whether or not it's debated, i think a little more detail needs to be added to make it clear that strong and intentional innuendo is a problem. Yes, sexual innuendo is a rather ambiguous term, although certain expressions obviously fall within its definition, and not just in the mind of the beholder. Fred ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] What to do about sexism when we see it on WP?
The behavior you describe is all too common on Wikipedia (and even worse on Commons). I could quote some much more blatant examples than the one you cite, but I'll spare everyone the groans. I think the problem is that most guys do not understand that creating an unwanted sexualized environment is a form of sexism and an abuse of male privilege (and that it has a real effect on women's participation in the project). Indeed, I imagine some do not even comprehend the concept of unwanted sexualized environment. Perhaps it would be helpful to point them to: http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Sexualized_environment This reminds me of my unsuccessful attempt to get WP:HOTTIE deleted :( For the long term, we should think about trying to get wording added to either the Civility policy or the Harassment policy about offensive verbal comments and sexual innuendo. Kaldari On 3/17/11 2:15 PM, Sarah wrote: I saw an incident recently on WP that's fairly common, but it's not clear to me what we should do about it, if anything. A woman editor did something that a few male editors didn't like, and she was taken to task for it. In the course of the discussion, the Wikipedia biography of a woman was mentioned and linked to, and her photograph showed her as attractive. One of the men taking part in the discussion said something positive about the image -- then he added that policy prevented him from going into detail about his feelings about it. (I won't quote him so as not to identify him, but it was words to that effect.) It's a remark typical of young men, and he almost certainly intended no harm. But the effect on me as a reader was that it undermined the woman taking part in the discussion. She also felt that way, and said so. The response was that her objection was laughable. What should we do when we witness this kind of thing? I've never said anything in these situations, because I see them so often, and there's a risk of turning it into a dramafest. I also know that some people, men and women both, would say it's too minor a thing to comment on. So -- should we be saying something, and if so what and how, or is it best to ignore? Sarah ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] What to do about sexism when we see it on WP?
I saw an incident recently on WP that's fairly common, but it's not clear to me what we should do about it, if anything. A woman editor did something that a few male editors didn't like, and she was taken to task for it. In the course of the discussion, the Wikipedia biography of a woman was mentioned and linked to, and her photograph showed her as attractive. One of the men taking part in the discussion said something positive about the image -- then he added that policy prevented him from going into detail about his feelings about it. (I won't quote him so as not to identify him, but it was words to that effect.) It's a remark typical of young men, and he almost certainly intended no harm. But the effect on me as a reader was that it undermined the woman taking part in the discussion. She also felt that way, and said so. The response was that her objection was laughable. What should we do when we witness this kind of thing? I've never said anything in these situations, because I see them so often, and there's a risk of turning it into a dramafest. I also know that some people, men and women both, would say it's too minor a thing to comment on. So -- should we be saying something, and if so what and how, or is it best to ignore? Sarah Please look at Wikipedia:Revision_deletion#Criteria_for_redaction particularly: 2. Grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive material that has little/no encyclopedic or project value and/or violates our Biographies of living people policy. This includes slurs, smears, and grossly offensive material of little or no encyclopedic value, but not mere factual statements, and not ordinary incivility, personal attacks or conduct accusations. When attack pages or pages with grossly improper titles are deleted, the page names may also be removed from the delete and page move logs. 3. Purely disruptive material that is of little or no relevance or merit to the project. This includes allegations, grossly inappropriate threats or attacks, browser-crashing or malicious HTML, shock pages, phishing pages, known virus proliferating pages, and links to web pages that disparage or threaten some person or entity and serve no other valid purpose, but not mere spam links. but keep in mind: A certain low degree of inappropriate or disruptive posting is normal within a large community. In general, only material that meets the criteria below should be deleted. Users should consider whether simply reverting or ignoring would be sufficient in the circumstances. If deletion is needed, only redact what is necessary (i.e. leave non-harmful fields visible), and give a clear reason for the removal. The community's decision was that RevisionDelete should not be used without prior clear consensus for ordinary incivility, attacks, or for claims of editorial misconduct. The wider community may need to fully review these at the time and in future, even if offensive. If whatever it is poses a risk of turning it into a dramafest it is not within the normal range of inappropriate or disruptive posting, as in this case there may be a need to not single out the offender, therefore it may be useful to use Wikipedia mail to bring the matter to the attention of OTRS, which is the people with the oversight tool. Even if suppression is not appropriate deletion can still be done and a quiet and private warning given. So, if it is serious, in your opinion, (tell them why if you think it is) email User:Oversight https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Special:EmailUser/Oversight Fred ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] What to do about sexism when we see it on WP?
Just for information - Whoever starts actioning this needs to be careful. The community lashbacks over trying to limit abusive behavior in other areas (the civility arguments, etc) have been severe at times. A lot of men will take That was sexist and is creating a hostile environment, please stop to be a challenge and insult rather than believe it. If an offense was marginal, they may get others to support that obstructionism. This is not a Don't try to do this, it's a Be careful and aware. -george On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote: Nice find Fred. I hadn't read those before. It sounds like revision deletion might be an option in more extreme cases. There was discussion recently about setting up a Gender issues noticeboard on English Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Feminism#Gender_issues_noticeboard.3F), but no consensus was reached. Also, although it is not an official forum for such matters, some editors bring problematic cases to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Feminism At least it's better than getting laughed at by going to Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts. Kaldari On 3/17/11 6:04 PM, Fred Bauder wrote: I saw an incident recently on WP that's fairly common, but it's not clear to me what we should do about it, if anything. A woman editor did something that a few male editors didn't like, and she was taken to task for it. In the course of the discussion, the Wikipedia biography of a woman was mentioned and linked to, and her photograph showed her as attractive. One of the men taking part in the discussion said something positive about the image -- then he added that policy prevented him from going into detail about his feelings about it. (I won't quote him so as not to identify him, but it was words to that effect.) It's a remark typical of young men, and he almost certainly intended no harm. But the effect on me as a reader was that it undermined the woman taking part in the discussion. She also felt that way, and said so. The response was that her objection was laughable. What should we do when we witness this kind of thing? I've never said anything in these situations, because I see them so often, and there's a risk of turning it into a dramafest. I also know that some people, men and women both, would say it's too minor a thing to comment on. So -- should we be saying something, and if so what and how, or is it best to ignore? Sarah Please look at Wikipedia:Revision_deletion#Criteria_for_redaction particularly: 2. Grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive material that has little/no encyclopedic or project value and/or violates our Biographies of living people policy. This includes slurs, smears, and grossly offensive material of little or no encyclopedic value, but not mere factual statements, and not ordinary incivility, personal attacks or conduct accusations. When attack pages or pages with grossly improper titles are deleted, the page names may also be removed from the delete and page move logs. 3. Purely disruptive material that is of little or no relevance or merit to the project. This includes allegations, grossly inappropriate threats or attacks, browser-crashing or malicious HTML, shock pages, phishing pages, known virus proliferating pages, and links to web pages that disparage or threaten some person or entity and serve no other valid purpose, but not mere spam links. but keep in mind: A certain low degree of inappropriate or disruptive posting is normal within a large community. In general, only material that meets the criteria below should be deleted. Users should consider whether simply reverting or ignoring would be sufficient in the circumstances. If deletion is needed, only redact what is necessary (i.e. leave non-harmful fields visible), and give a clear reason for the removal. The community's decision was that RevisionDelete should not be used without prior clear consensus for ordinary incivility, attacks, or for claims of editorial misconduct. The wider community may need to fully review these at the time and in future, even if offensive. If whatever it is poses a risk of turning it into a dramafest it is not within the normal range of inappropriate or disruptive posting, as in this case there may be a need to not single out the offender, therefore it may be useful to use Wikipedia mail to bring the matter to the attention of OTRS, which is the people with the oversight tool. Even if suppression is not appropriate deletion can still be done and a quiet and private warning given. So, if it is serious, in your opinion, (tell them why if you think it is) email User:Oversight https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Special:EmailUser/Oversight Fred ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
Re: [Gendergap] What to do about sexism when we see it on WP?
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote: Nice find Fred. I hadn't read those before. It sounds like revision deletion might be an option in more extreme cases. Less extreme cases should be taken here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts I agree with George that care is needed. Progress will be made when the more obvious etiquette issues are tackled first. Reporting lots of marginal offenses will result in a backlash. -- John Vandenberg ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
