Re: [Gendergap] Proposal: Forking gendergap: Main list for women and transgender, sublist for male supporters

[Ryan Kaldari]

On 3/15/11 9:34 AM, Nicole Willson wrote:
 Lastly, I had a question about Fred's statement about rules. If 
 following rules isn't that important in the beginning, how come I have 
 only gotten feedback once about what I've done wrong with date 
 formatting and never gotten a message about what I've done right on 
 Wikipedia? I've made at least 150 edits, so one of them must have been 
 good, right? Instead I get a message about date formatting (which 
 someone else could probably fix easily) and told to look at the MoS 
 (which assumes that I know that it stands for Manual of Style). It 
 seems to me that there may be a disconnect here.

Yes, there is definitely a disconnect. I proposed adding some positive 
user feedback templates to the widely-used Twinkle gadget a while back, 
but was shot down due to concerns that it would be abused(?!). So 
instead, I created a new WikiLove user script and have proposed it as 
a new gadget. This script makes it just as easy to add barnstars, 
cookies, kittens, cupcakes, etc. to user talk pages as it is to add 
warning templates via Twinkle. The response to my proposal was baffling: 
doesn't seem to have any practical purpose, I don't think most people 
would be pleased to see an increase in barnstar-giving, the current 
level of barnstar-giving is sufficient. Apparently the community puts 
little to no values in positive user feedback. This is probably a 
symptom of the Eternal September effect mentioned by Sue in the March 
Update. I think the culture can change, but it's going to take a 
sustained and concerted effort.

Kaldari

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] How to use Wiki videos

[Ryan Kaldari]

A video incorporating the new RefToolbar (the thing that appears when 
you click Cite in the editor) would be helpful in this regard. 
Citation templates and citation formatting are definitely one of the 
biggest barriers to truly integrating newbies into Wikipedia editing 
(i.e. getting beyond doing spelling corrections). I think that people 
would be a lot less intimidated if they knew they could just paste in an 
ISBN number and click a button and the citation is automatically created 
for them. (I remember my own amazement at learning this.)


Ryan Kaldari

On 3/15/11 4:04 PM, Carissa Wodehouse wrote:

Hi,
Yep I do find both of those videos too basic 
(http://www.howcast.com/videos/317521-How-To-Edit-a-Wikipedia-Article 
and http://www.commoncraft.com/wikipedia-video). I get the nuts and 
bolts of how to click around, I know basic html when I see it, and I 
remember neutral tone and proper citations from college and time in 
publishing (but gotta love a video on the internet that explains that 
you need an internet connection). The Howcast referenced the Wiki:Cite 
page, which I then find confusing because I don't get when to use each 
citation method.


A Strunk  White version of the rules is what I need! There's so many 
women in publishing, that could be a good group to target for women on 
Wiki involvement, as someone said before. I just need to know how wiki 
editing is similar and different from AP Style, for example.


I would also be interested in a video that explains the community, 
which is both one of the primary barriers and primary motivations I 
have for participating. I didn't know about barnstars and awards, for 
example. Then I eventually found this Editor Assistance page 
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Editor_assistance) which looks 
like something handy-- I didn't know there was a place to ask for 
help. Then, what are user talk, user boxes, who gives awards, who are 
some key figures (Jimbo, etc), what is the user/editor/moderator 
relationship, and what are some things that can happen once I start 
editing and interacting. That's what a video would be handy for. It 
all feels like trying to get into Lost in the last season-- all these 
time tunnels and smoke monsters that I couldn't trace to their 
original form if I tried.


Sadly, I see no meet ups in Portland or Mexico City, yet...

Thanks,
Carissa


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Resigning as moderator

[Ryan Kaldari]

Steven asked me a while back to help moderate this list. Unfortunately, 
I just haven't had time to keep up with the volume of discussion here, 
so I don't feel like I'm doing a very effective job of keeping the 
discussions on track. Rather than keep up the pretense, I think it would 
be better if I resign and let someone else take my place. I've asked 
SlimVirgin if she would be willing to take over this responsibility and 
she has graciously agreed to do so. I'm still going to be participating 
in the list, I just won't be moderating.

Kaldari

___
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?

[Ryan Kaldari]

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] A: a way to encourage new female editors

[Ryan Kaldari]

It also looks like Rice University is doing a Wikipedia class project 
for the class Poverty, Gender, and Human Development. We're totally 
inundated with enthusiastic newbie editors over at 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Feminism. If 
anyone wants to help answer questions there, it would be greatly 
appreciated! Now that the floodgates have opened, I'm not sure we can 
keep up with them all!

Ryan Kaldari

On 3/29/11 10:35 AM, Amy Roth wrote:
 hi All,

 The Public Policy Initiative is proud to support an all women class this
 term. Georgetown University's Professor Kelley is teaching Women and
 Human Rights, and joined the project after hearing about the gendergap
 in Wikipedia. She is seeking the assistance of other editors to watch
 and aid her students' progress. You can find out more and her course and
 new student editors at
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_United_States_Public_Policy/Courses
 (This class just joined the project, so the course page is not fully
 developed yet, but there is a list of students.)

 If you have the time, please help make the new editor experience a
 positive one for these new women editors.

 - Amy

 ___
 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] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons

[Ryan Kaldari]

So you're arguing that the woman is topless in order to conform to realistic
portrayals of indigenous people? That's the biggest pile of bullshit I've
heard in years.

Every few months one of the usual suspects nominates porn to be featured on
Commons and we have to go through the same circus-show all over again. It's
always porn for a male heterosexual audience, and it's always defended with
cries against the evils of censorship and disingenuous arguments about the
educational value of the image. I'm all for Commons hosting a wide array
of uncensored images, but I'm tired of seeing the Main Page being used as a
fap gallery for fanboys. Whether you agree with it or not, featuring such
images is distasteful to a lot of people - and not necessarily because they
are prudish or religious. I don't see how exercising editorial judgement
about our public image and being respectful of women is compromising our
core values. Driving people away from the site and eroding our reputation
as a serious educational resource do nothing to improve the project. If you
want to fight against censorship, help defend the Rape, Rape statistics,
and False accusation of rape articles against antimisandry.com. Or better
yet, file a DMCA counter-notice to restore the links in the Texas
Instruments signing key controversy article. For some reason people don't
seem as concerned about the real incidents of censorship on our projects.

Ryan Kaldari

On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 4:53 AM, Aaron Adrignola
aaron.adrign...@gmail.comwrote:

 Commons is not censored.  It's a beautiful scene and it would be expected
 that the an imaginary tribal member would not have the American
 sensitivities to toplessness.  Some images may offend.  Some articles may
 offend.  We're not going to compromise our core values just to try to close
 a gap that some feel is such a big issue, if it even exists.

 On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 9:31 PM, CherianTinu Abraham 
 tinucher...@gmail.com wrote:

 FYI

 Regards
 Tinu Cherian

 -- Forwarded message --
 From: Sarah Stierch sa...@sarahstierch.com
 Date: Mon, May 16, 2011 at 7:33 AM
 Subject: [Gendergap] Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons
 To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects 
 gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org


  Surely I'm not the only one who noticed this lovely gem of a photo of the
 day today. In my work environment - NFWS.

 http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

 Direct link to image:

 http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:On_the_edge_-_free_world_version.jpg

 I mean really? /facepalm

 This is the kind of imagery I have no desire to see on the front page of
 Commons. I'm a very liberal person, but, this makes me not want to even
 allow my MOTHER to use Commons.

 #wikilove,

 Sarah


 --
 Wikipedia Regional Ambassador, D.C. Region
 Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Art

 Sarah Stierch Consulting
 Historical, cultural  artistic research, advising  event planning.
 --
 http://www.sarahstierch.com/

 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



 ___
 Commons-l mailing list
 common...@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l



 ___
 Commons-l mailing list
 common...@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons

[Ryan Kaldari]

I'm sure all the persecuted fans of big tits will appreciate your efforts.

Ryan Kaldari

On 5/26/11 5:01 PM, Béria Lima wrote:

carol,

en.wiki aproved that, Commons didn't. You can't use a rule from one 
wiki in another. IF - and that is a BIG if, if commons community 
approve such kind of rules, you people can remove all comments you can 
find


Until there, is censure, and you people will not do it while i'm there 
to watch commons RC.

_
/Béria Lima/
Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt
(351) 963 953 042

/Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter 
livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que 
estamos a fazer./



2011/5/27 carolmoor...@verizon.net mailto:carolmoor...@verizon.net

Racist, homophobic and anti-semitic comments are certainly
criticized and people ask for their removal. A pattern of such
comments could get one banned. The same should be true for
obviously sexist comments. In fact, it's here
See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Civil#Identifying_incivility -
after a long debate with some editors strongly opposed to adding
such sexist comments.

* (b) personal attacks
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks, 
including
  racial, ethnic, sexual, gender-related and religious slurs,
  and derogatory references to groups such as social classes
  or nationalities;



On 5/26/2011 2:53 PM, Sarah wrote:

2011/5/26 Ryan Kaldarirkald...@wikimedia.org  
mailto:rkald...@wikimedia.org

Those types of comments are a lot worse than unnecessary. They create a
sexualized environment that is exclusionary to anyone who isn't a
heterosexual male. If this doesn't make sense to you, please read through
http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Sexualized_environment

These types of comments should be removed on sight. If you see them,
please delete them or email me. Thanks.

On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:34, Béria Limaberia.l...@wikimedia.pt  
mailto:beria.l...@wikimedia.pt  wrote:

If you start the censure in Commons, Ryan, your cause will be in Adm
noticeboard on sight
_
Béria Lima
Wikimedia Portugal
(351) 963 953 042

Béria, you've rightly asked that people not generalize their
responses, where they assume everyone feels as they do. But the same
applies to you. You're not offended by these comments. You would see
their removal as censorship. Others disagree, and their arguments are
valid too.

It would be interesting if we could try to find common ground.

I agree with you that it's important not to be over-sensitive. But a
big problem is that women have been taught for hundreds of years that
they're just over-reacting when they say they see discrimination.

So the question is: how do we create an environment that's welcoming
for as many groups as possible -- including groups who are sensitive
to perceived discrimination, and groups who are sensitive to perceived
censorship?

Sarah

_



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Why don't people edit wikipedia? Small survey results provide some insights.

[Ryan Kaldari]

It may not be statistically meaningful, but the results are certainly 
valuable to discussion. The idea that women have better things to do, 
i.e. don't think contributing to Wikipedia is valuable, is a new one for 
me. Since I consider editing Wikipedia to be one of the most valuable 
ways I can possibly spend my time (more so than raising children or 
curing cancer), this idea had never occurred to me. Is it possible that 
men are more indoctrinated to value knowledge, information, 
epistemology, etc. and thus see Wikipedia as inherently more important 
than women do? I'm not saying this is the case—indeed, it seems like too 
easy a scapegoat—I'm just wondering if it's a valid hypothesis. Perhaps 
someone should conduct a survey asking How valuable do you consider 
Wikipedia? and correlate this with the respondent's gender. This also 
seems to relate to empathizing–systemizing theory,[1] which 
controversially suggests that men (whether due to social or biological 
factors) prefer systemizing over empathizing, while women tend towards 
the opposite. It may also relate to the fact that men are much more 
likely than women to be diagnosed with autism and Asperger syndrome, 
although no one is sure why. These are just hypotheses, however, and we 
shouldn't jump to any conclusions. I do think, however, that we should 
incorporate this idea into future research and see if there are any 
significant results.


1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empathizing%E2%80%93systemizing_theory

Ryan Kaldari


On 7/10/11 9:32 AM, Nepenthe wrote:
To be frank, a sample this small really doesn't support much of 
anything. If the results had been more extreme, perhaps they would be 
meaningful, but these data are not sufficient to reject any hypothesis 
besides men and women have totally and utterly different motivations 
for editing and for not editing. The survey results do, however, play 
into our theory of the situation; I think we have to be aware of 
confirmation bias.


Nepenthe

On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Laura Hale la...@fanhistory.com 
mailto:la...@fanhistory.com wrote:


Cross posted this to my blog at

http://ozziesport.com/2011/07/why-dont-people-edit-wikipedia-small-survey-results-provide-some-insights/



I tend to be a bit obsessive. An issue that keeps cropping up in
my personal sphere is women editing Wikipedia. Various reasons
keep being offered as to why women don’t edit, if their reasons
are different from those of men, if women don’t edit because they
don’t have time as they are too busy taking care of their
families, etc. I wanted to know why women and men in my particular
peer group didn’t edit Wikipedia. Thus, I posted surveys to my
Facebook and to my LiveJournal. The raw data, as of 10:13am
American Central Standard time could be found at Facebook

http://www.facebook.com/notes/laura-hale/if-you-dont-edit-wikipedia-why-dont-you-edit/10150232414360642,
LiveJournal http://partly-bouncy.livejournal.com/923973.html.
Please feel free to continue to vote. If I have bigger samples, I
can always update this. I had responses from 22 people, 12 males
and 10 females. This isn’t necessarily a representative sample and
if I was looking for that, I’d try much harder to get a larger
response from a bigger group of people. I don’t think you can
necessarily extrapolate out much from this, except to have it help
confirm other smaller samples.As a side note, the Facebook poll
allows people to add their own responses. (The sample size isn’t
statistically significant for one thing and one response can
really change the percentages.) People have and it is possible
that people may have chosen responses had they been available. In
any case, on with the findings.

There were several options offered that no one selected. Those
answers have not been included as the totals would have been 0%
and given the small sample size, it didn’t seem as relevant.

ResponseAll MaleFemale  All %   Male %  Female %
The atmosphere on Wikipedia is not conducive to random user
editing.10  4   6   45.5%   33.3%   60.0%
I have better things to do. 8   3   6   36.4%   16.7%   
60.0%
Not enough time to contribute.  5   2   3   22.7%   16.7%   
30.0%
I don’t want to research citations to support my edits. I can fix
grammar/typos.  4   2   1   18.2%   25.0%   10.0%
I know people who were treated poorly. Why subject myself to
that?   3   2   1   13.6%   16.7%   10.0%
There is no community.  2   2   0   9.1%16.7%   0.0%
They keep deleting my edits.2   0   0   9.1%16.7%   
0.0%
The editing window is confusing and I don’t understand the
markup. 1   1   1   4.5%0.0%10.0%
I used to edit but people treated me poorly so I quit

Re: [Gendergap] Oversight request

[Ryan Kaldari]

Really excellent post! I love how you show that you don't have to give 
up after someone reverts your edit. You can actually fight for it if you 
believe it is correct (or bring in reinforcements).


Your post make me wonder if women are more indoctrinated by society to 
acquiesce when they are corrected by others, and thus are less likely to 
fight for their edits. If so, this is a big problem for Wikipedia since 
getting reverted on controversial or popular articles is pretty much par 
for the course. I've heard anecdotal stories from several women that 
they actually restrict there editing to obscure topics so that they 
don't have to deal with such conflicts. Thankfully, though, we have 
women like Carol Moore and SlimVirgin who take the opposite approach!


I also love how you pointed out the obvious gender biases at work in the 
Man article. As someone who has worked on both the Femininity and 
Patriarchy articles, I can vouch for the 1950s viewpoint that tends to 
dominate gender-related articles on Wikipedia.


Ryan Kaldari

On 8/31/11 10:57 AM, Amy Senger wrote:

Hi All -

I've just posted the 2nd in a 3-piece blog series on diversity in 
Wikipedia: 
http://1x57.com/2011/08/31/how-i-redefined-man-for-the-world-wikipedias-battle-for-diversity-part-ii/


I'd appreciate any thoughts and comments. The final post will cover 
what's been going on at Wikipedia wrt to increasing diversity 
(including this distro list) and how more people can get involved.


Sarah, if you could add the post to Scoop.It, I'd appreciate it.

Best,
Amy Senger
--
*
*co-f*ounder, 1X57
www.1x57.com http://1x57.com/
M: 202.423.6609
T: @sengseng http://twitter.com/sengseng
*
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com 
mailto:slimvir...@gmail.com wrote:


Thanks, Fred.

Sarah

On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 11:43, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
mailto:fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
 I've done this. The link is both degrading and defamatory. Absent
 repeated problems semi-protection is not justified but can be if
such
 postings are repeated.

 Fred

 Adding semiprotection might help, too.
 Andreas

 --- On Wed, 31/8/11, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com
mailto:slimvir...@gmail.com wrote:

 From: Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com mailto:slimvir...@gmail.com
 Subject: [Gendergap] Oversight request
 To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
 gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
mailto:gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 Date: Wednesday, 31 August, 2011, 17:23

 If there are oversighters on this list (Fred?), I'd appreciate an
 oversight at [[Jessica Valenti], where an anon (58.175.246.206) has
 linked to an attack site about her.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jessica_Valentiaction=history
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jessica_Valentiaction=history

 I've edited the article a lot myself so I'd prefer not to
admin-delete
 it, and oversight would be better anyway. I've emailed the
oversight
 team, but no response yet.

 Sarah

 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap




 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap





*

*


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] fyi: Gender Bias in Wikipedia and Britannica

[Ryan Kaldari]

Thanks for the article link, Joseph. I haven't yet finished the article, 
but I do have a couple of preliminary questions:


* Do you know what the ratio of male to female contributors is at 
Encyclopedia Britannica?
* Why the emphasis on female biographies? It seems like a weak indicator 
of gender bias (as reflected by the WikiSym study). Do we really know 
that women are significantly more likely to write about women than men 
are? If so, how much more likely?


Ryan Kaldari


On 9/2/11 6:54 AM, Joseph Reagle wrote:


http://reagle.org/joseph/blog/social/wikipedia/gender-bias-in-wp-eb

Abstract: Is there a bias in the against women's representation in 
Wikipedia biographies? Thousands of biographical subjects, from six 
sources, are compared against the English-language Wikipedia and the 
online Encyclopædia Britannica with respect to coverage, gender 
representation, and article length. We conclude that Wikipedia 
provides better coverage and longer articles, that Wikipedia typically 
has more articles on women than Britannica in absolute terms, but 
Wikipedia articles on women are more likely to be missing than 
articles on men relative to Britannica. For both reference works, 
article length did not consistently differ by gender.



___
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] Pregnancy article lead-image RFC

[Ryan Kaldari]

I have to say that viewing pregnancy as a medical article seems to be 
a rather male point of view :) I also find it telling that maternity 
clothing isn't even mentioned in the article (but I guess that makes 
sense if pregnant women don't wear clothes).

Ryan Kaldari

On 9/6/11 12:04 AM, Arnaud HERVE wrote:
 Intuitively I was not shocked by the nude pregnant woman. I found it
 very casual instead. Might be my European education, I don't know.

 I think that for medical articles, all the relevant body parts must be
 fully exposed. And believe me I have seen much worse than a healthy
 pregnant woman, because i do website editing for a faculty of medicine.

 In that case the part to be expose would be the whole swell of the
 belly, from pelvis to thorax. Including the breasts is ok to me.

 Showing that part exclusively would not only be more medically relevant
 (because thighs and neck are not relevant here), it would also make the
 person non identifiable.

 The clothed photograph seems to me more improper than the nude one for a
 medical article. If it is medical, then the body part must be exposed
 without clothes. Even if it might sound surprising, I also disagree all
 photographs showings hands on belly, nude or clothed. I acknowledge that
 it shows the mother's care, but for medical purpose it is the belly
 alone that must be shown.

 What I find much more disturbing is WP being used to publish pictures of
 the photographer's wife. Even if he is very proud of her. It might be an
 unwanted precedent, first of people posting pictures of their children
 to show blond hair, tennis playing, whatever, second of people posting
 photos of their girl-friend at the first opportunity.

 That might against the interests of female participation.

 Arnaud

 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Consent for photographs on Commons

[Ryan Kaldari]

I'm both a long-time admin on Commons and an OTRS volunteer. I've been 
wanting to chime in on this thread, but haven't really had the time. I'm 
worried though that I'm about to see history repeat itself, so I want to 
quickly share a few thoughts...

First, the issue of consent on Commons has been passionately debates for 
years, and has a long and tortured history. Before proposing anything, 
please make yourself familiar with the previous discussions and their 
outcomes. Most notably the discussions surrounding these pages:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Sexual_content
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archives/User_problems_7#Privatemusings
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Photographs_of_identifiable_people
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Nudity

The point I can't emphasize enough is that if you put forward any 
proposal on Commons that implies there is anything possibly problematic 
about sexual or nude images in any way, you will be completely shut 
down. The only way you have any chance to shape the policies and 
guidelines on Commons is if you approach the problem from a 
sex/nudity-agnostic point of view. Here's a good example of what NOT to do:

I think a general statement that permission of the subject is desirable 
/ necessary for photos featuring nudity would be a good thing - 
thoughts? Privatemusings (talk) 00:49, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 I think the horse is beyond dead by now. --Carnildo (talk) 22:46, 8 
January 2009 (UTC)

If the horse was beyond dead in January 2009, imagine where it is now. 
That said, there is still lots of room for improvement. In particular...

Commons already requires consent for photos of identifiable people in 
private spaces. In addition, many countries require consent even for 
public spaces. (Take a look at 
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Photographs_of_identifiable_persons#Country_specific_consent_requirements.)
 
The way this requirement works, however, is completely passive and 
reactive - there is no impetus to proactively assert consent, only to 
assert it when an image is challenged. This is a very inefficient 
system. There are no templates or categories or anything to deal with 
consent on Commons (apart from Template:Consent which is tied up with 
the tortured history of Commons:Sexual_content and can't be used currently).

I don't think it would be incredibly controversial to introduce a very 
simple consent template that was specifically tailored to the existing 
policies and laws. This would make things easier for Commons reusers, 
professional photographers who use model releases, and admins who have 
to constantly deal with these issues. In short, it would be a win for 
everyone and it would introduce the idea of thinking proactively about 
consent on Commons in a way that isn't threatening to people who are 
concerned about censorship.

As soon as I have some free time, I'll whip up such a template and throw 
it into the water. It'll be interesting to see how it is received.

Ryan Kaldari

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Wikiquotes

[Ryan Kaldari]

Speaking of topics that need expansion, there are still HUGE gaps in 
Wikipedia's coverage of art outside of the United States. For example, 
there are no articles for Mexican art, Polish art, Swiss art, etc. 
(not even stubs!) and don't even bother looking for African, South 
American, or Asian countries.


Ryan Kaldari

On 9/15/11 6:17 AM, Sarah Stierch wrote:
Yes! I have never edited or contributed anything to wikiquote. I have 
contributed to Wikisource, and I'm starting to think I'm the only 
woman who ever has, even though it was two documents. I don't even 
think there is much of anything related to women's history on 
Wikisource...


We were discussing in #wikimedia-gendergap a few days ago about the 
need for more featured images of women and related subjects on 
Commons. I kept rolling my eyes everytime I saw the ATV that was a 
featured image the other day.


I'm actually developing a wikipage that will showcase a collection of 
topics that need expansion, watching, clean up, etc, and/or photos for 
English Wikipedia, which I naturally assume will be the same for other 
languages. Once it's a little fleshed out we can see if it's useful in 
any way. I think it's interesting just to see what we're lacking 
on...on top of the 1009232 other things I'm doing...


-Sarah

On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 9:08 AM, carolmoor...@verizon.net 
mailto:carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote:


Looking at my wikiquotes talk page for the first time in a while,
I was reminded that is another area women's contributions may not
be taken as seriously.

Example: the deletion in 2009 of poet Marcella Boccia's quotes
from English wikipedia after her article had been deleted from En
wikipedia.

Actually, I just checked and it's not in the Italian wikipedia
version either.  Despite
http://www.google.com/search?ned=ushl=enq=Marcella+Bocciatbm=nwstbs=ar:1

http://www.google.com/search?ned=ushl=enq=Marcella+Bocciatbm=nwstbs=ar:1
notability in Italian I noted at time of deletion discussion.

So let's not forget Wikiquote!!





___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap




--
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia http://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Art 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch

and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
/Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising./
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] A translation request

[Ryan Kaldari]

It looks like we have biographies for slightly less than half of these 
people on the English Wikipedia. I would hazard that not all of them are 
actually notable per our guidelines, but I'm sure we're missing a lot 
that are.

Ryan Kaldari

On 9/19/11 2:12 PM, Ole Palnatoke Andersen wrote:
 I compiled a small article about FastCompany.com's Most Influential
 Women in Technology. Most or all of these women are notable, I guess
 - they are on the list for a reason...

 http://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/FastCompany.com%27s_Most_Influential_Women_in_Technology
 - it is in Danish, but should be fairly readable.

 Regards,
 Ole



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] 13 year old joins WP Pornography?

[Ryan Kaldari]

What are some questions we could ask the user that only a real 13 year 
old would know?

Actually, I have a better idea, let's ask him Who founded Wikipedia? :)

Ryan Kaldari

On 9/23/11 1:04 PM, Michael J. Lowrey wrote:
 On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Sarah Stierchsarah.stie...@gmail.com  
 wrote:
 Entertaining...bizarre...scary...odd? Real? fake?

 Don't get me wrong. If Wikipedia was around when I was 14, I so would have
 joined WP:Feminism. But, I was a 14 year old riot grrrl using BBSes. ;-)

 -- Forwarded message --
 From: Kim Bruningk...@bruning.xs4all.nl
 Date: Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 1:26 PM
 Subject: [Foundation-l] Larry Sanger tweets about 13 yo in Wikiproject
 Pornography
 To: foundatio...@lists.wikimedia.org



 Dear Press: a self-described 13 YO joined Wikiproject Pornography.
 Wikipedians support him. webcitation.org/61v0ykxJe
 webcitation.org/61v1FfW3K
 - http://twitter.com/#!/lsanger/status/117299089439334400


 The on-wiki argument is that there are many areas in that project that don't
 actually involve nudie pics, but rather cover
 areas of law, etc.scratches head

 sincerely,
 Kim Bruning
 Even before Sanger got involved in publicizing this to the press, I
 was suspicious that this was some kind of agente provocateur thing.
 The supposed 13-year-old hasn't actually been doing much of anything.


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Ryan Kaldari]

Arnaud, I think you should not underestimate the impact of poverty as 
compared to religion. Before the Western world became the 1st World, the 
typical Christian was just as intolerant, bigoted, and patriarchal as 
your most extreme Muslim. Once Westerners went from being peasants to 
middle-class professionals, business became more important than 
religion, and the enemies of capitalism (communists) became the bogeyman 
rather than other religions. This pulled the rug out from Christianity, 
which used to have a monopoly on bogeymen. So Christianity had to go for 
the soft-sell and reinvent itself as a feel-good spiritual social club 
rather than fire and brimstone. All the sudden women could wear pants 
and run for office (and become priests). Of course the Christian Bible 
still says that women are subservient to their husbands (as Michelle 
Bachmann recently reminded us). It also endorses slavery, says that 
adulterers must be put to death, and requires men to grow beards. But 
who cares? If you live a comfortable life, religious dogma doesn't have 
much appeal.


Sociological studies have shown a strong correlation between patriarchal 
attitudes and lack of economic development. Look at the difference 
between Pakistan and Indonesia. Both are majority Muslim countries which 
officially endorse Sharia law. In Pakistan, religious fundamentalism is 
strong and women have little access to education, employment, or power. 
In Indonesia, there is far less religious fundamentalism and women have 
far more access to education, employment, and power (though still 
pitiful by Western standards). Women can even serve as Sharia judges in 
Indonesia, which would be heresy in Pakistan. If you compare the GDP per 
capita between the 2 counties, Indonesia's is over twice that of 
Pakistan. The effect is even more pronounced if you compare rural areas 
to urban areas rather than country to country.


Ryan Kaldari


On 9/23/11 1:56 AM, Arnaud HERVE wrote:

Ok I will be a bit long here.

On 23/09/2011 01:07, Emily Monroe wrote:
Personally, I really don't understand why people get upset about 
Islamic women /choosing/ to wear hijabs, or niqabs, under the 
pretense of feminism. Part of what feminism fights for is the right 
to choose. This is the unintended consequence.


I get the practical arguments (ie, I don't know who this person is 
etc.) is, though, and I think any girl or women who has their 
wardrobe dictated by another person is being abused, unless there's a 
non-abusive reason behind it; I doubt that anyone wearing a work or 
school uniform would qualify as being abused.


That is probably because you still consider the niqab as a piece of 
garment only. But the niqab doesn't come alone, it comes in a set, 
with Islamic law included. And that law necessarily includes the 
submission of women to men.


It is very important to understand that Islam is not exactly a 
personal choice faith, in the sense that you would consider tolerance 
between different churches of Protestantism on the American territory. 
Islam doesn't do tolerance, in the sense that we understand it. In 
Islam you cannot leave, it is death penalty if you chose another religion.


It is not either to be considered with a benevolent multicultural 
mind, like you would tolerate the differences of Buddhist immigrants. 
A law-abiding good-citizen attitude is recommended to Muslims only if 
they are a minority in a Western country. If they become a majority, 
then they must take power, and impose Islamic law. This entails 
dividing the population into three categories ; Muslims who have full 
dignity, Christians and Jews who are sub-citizens subjected to 
occasional abuse, non believers or heathens who have no rights. This 
also necessarily includes a loss of civic rights for all women.


During the twentieth century there were positive signs from the Muslim 
world. They were due to :


- local customs atoning Islamic law
- The modernist mentalities of post-colonization Nation-States

However this is disappearing now, due to :

- New globalized generations who conceive Islam not as local custom 
but as globally opposed to the Western world

- The systematic destruction of the modern Muslim Nation-States by NATO

Only in the mainstream media you hear that Bin Laden was captured 
because it suddenly became possible, and Lybian democratic forces 
suddenly rebelled against dictator Khadafi. In fact Bin Laden's 
capture was a public relations operation, which helped conceal the 
fact that Nato has been promoting Al-Qaida to fight in Lybia. This in 
turn helps establishing business interests in NATO-controlled Muslim 
countries, with Western capital controlling the big business, the 
local population subjected to religious obscurantism and not 
participating to the democratic defense of their rights, and in 
between a zealots mafia..


In Islam women do have rights, yes, like your teenage daughter has 
rights. Not like an adult professional woman has

Re: [Gendergap] Sue's new blog

[Ryan Kaldari]

Can I nominate Sue for the Executive Director's Barnstar? :)

Kaldari

On 9/29/11 4:06 PM, Amory wrote:
I normally hate +1s, but I would like to echo this.  Really 
exceptionally well crafted, and even for people following it's a very 
good writeup.  Thank you, Sue.


~A


On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 09:36, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@yahoo.com 
mailto:jayen...@yahoo.com wrote:


Thanks for the link Sarah. It's an outstanding post by Sue, and a
courageous one, too.

Andreas




--- On *Thu, 29/9/11, Sarah Stierch /sarah.stie...@gmail.com
mailto:sarah.stie...@gmail.com/* wrote:


From: Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com
mailto:sarah.stie...@gmail.com
Subject: [Gendergap] Sue's new blog
To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
mailto:gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Thursday, 29 September, 2011, 7:47


http://suegardner.org/2011/09/28/on-editorial-judgment-and-empathy/


A lot of things I think about, and I'm sure a lot of other
people here think about.

I'm sure this blog won't be well received on other WMF-related
mailing lists, but, I have to admit - for me - I feel like
she's speaking for me.

I don't want to be a censor, I just want people to have common
sense, good judgement, customer service and logic. And when
people call /me/ a censor, it's just as offensive as the other
names I've been called.

I have beencalled a prude, bitch, agitator, bore,
conservative, censor, anti-woman... someone with an
agenda...etc. I can only thank you Sue for speaking on behalf
of me - when I clumsily try to express myself on Foundation-L
and fear being shot-down and having my Wiki self-esteem torn
down.I just feel like giving up.

Thanks. And I promise everyone, some of us are working towards
this, and working towards a change and a towards a
conversation that is adult, logical and respectful.

3

-Sarah



-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia

http://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Art
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
/Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising./
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/


-Inline Attachment Follows-

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
http://mc/compose?to=Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Sue's new blog

[Ryan Kaldari]

Would you like to elaborate?

Ryan Kaldari

On 9/29/11 4:35 PM, Béria Lima wrote:
I think it works both ways: There you might get stomped on by people 
who disagree with the lies Sue told in the post, and here I will be 
stomp up for even mentioned that she did lied in that blog post.


Safe environment do not exist in this case. Is safeR for supports to 
come here, and safeR for opposers to go there. That does not make any 
list safe, only shows that the POV here is different than the POV there.

_
/Béria Lima/
Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt
(351) 963 953 042

/Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter 
livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que 
estamos a fazer./



On 30 September 2011 00:25, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com 
mailto:sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote:


I'm sure there are some people on this mailing list who also
disagree as well! We try to provide a safe haven for discussion
about sensitive topics.

But, if any of us spoke up on Foundation-L we'd be risking getting
torn up by often heavily opinionated Foundation-L subscribers, and
it gets really tiring :( It is also nice to have a change in
opinion - for those who dislike the post, there are also many of
that support it. Thanks for bringing up that a different type of
conversation is taking place on Foundation-L! I've been following it.

-Sarah


On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Béria Lima
beria.l...@wikimedia.pt mailto:beria.l...@wikimedia.pt wrote:

ehhh, sorry for be the different, but you people are reading
the thread about that same blog post in Foundation-l ? The
opinions there seems to be quite different than yours.
_
/Béria Lima/
Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt
(351) 963 953 042

/Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a
possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o
conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer./



On 30 September 2011 00:09, Ryan Kaldari
rkald...@wikimedia.org mailto:rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote:

Can I nominate Sue for the Executive Director's Barnstar? :)

Kaldari


On 9/29/11 4:06 PM, Amory wrote:
I normally hate +1s, but I would like to echo this. 
Really exceptionally well crafted, and even for people

following it's a very good writeup.  Thank you, Sue.

~A


On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 09:36, Andreas Kolbe
jayen...@yahoo.com mailto:jayen...@yahoo.com wrote:

Thanks for the link Sarah. It's an outstanding post
by Sue, and a courageous one, too.

Andreas




--- On *Thu, 29/9/11, Sarah Stierch
/sarah.stie...@gmail.com
mailto:sarah.stie...@gmail.com/* wrote:


From: Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com
mailto:sarah.stie...@gmail.com
Subject: [Gendergap] Sue's new blog
To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia
projects gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
mailto:gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Thursday, 29 September, 2011, 7:47



http://suegardner.org/2011/09/28/on-editorial-judgment-and-empathy/


A lot of things I think about, and I'm sure a lot
of other people here think about.

I'm sure this blog won't be well received on
other WMF-related mailing lists, but, I have to
admit - for me - I feel like she's speaking for me.

I don't want to be a censor, I just want people
to have common sense, good judgement, customer
service and logic. And when people call /me/ a
censor, it's just as offensive as the other names
I've been called.

I have beencalled a prude, bitch, agitator, bore,
conservative, censor, anti-woman... someone
with an agenda...etc. I can only thank you Sue
for speaking on behalf of me - when I clumsily
try to express myself on Foundation-L and fear
being shot-down and having my Wiki self-esteem
torn down.I just feel like giving up.

Thanks. And I promise everyone, some of us are
working towards this, and working towards a
change and a towards a conversation that is
adult, logical and respectful.

3

-Sarah



-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia

http

[Gendergap] vulgar jokes and sexualized environments on Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

Twice recently I have been reverted for removing vulgar jokes from 
article talk pages on the English Wikipedia - most recently for removing 
a joke who's punchline was A woman's anus after she was sodomized!. 
Although I appreciate the use of humor on Wikipedia, and support the 
inclusion of potentially offensive material within appropriate contexts, 
I think these type of jokes are not appropriate on talk pages and create 
a sexualized environment that is often unwelcoming for women (as well as 
people from other cultures/religions/backgrounds). I think this issue is 
pertinent to the gender gap (unlike my other recent posts), and would 
like to hear other people's opinions. I've also started a discussion at 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Civility#Vulgar_jokes for 
broader input.

Ryan Kaldari

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] vulgar jokes and sexualized environments on Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

It seems from my experience that WP:RD2 is usually interpreted fairly 
narrowly, at least in the cases I've tried to use it. Specifically it 
requires the material to be grossly offensive and excludes 'ordinary' 
incivility. In the world of Wikipedia, grossly offensive is a pretty 
high bar it seems. Right now, I have a hard time even convincing people 
that this sort of stuff is incivil, much less worthy of revision deletion.

My favorite example is the Talk Page for Rubyfruit Jungle. It took 4 
years, 10 editors, and a couple of edit wars to remove a joke posted by 
an anonymous IP about vaginas smelling like fish.

Ryan Kaldari

On 9/30/11 3:19 PM, Fred Bauder wrote:
 Twice recently I have been reverted for removing vulgar jokes from
 article talk pages on the English Wikipedia - most recently for removing
 a joke who's punchline was A woman's anus after she was sodomized!.
 Although I appreciate the use of humor on Wikipedia, and support the
 inclusion of potentially offensive material within appropriate contexts,
 I think these type of jokes are not appropriate on talk pages and create
 a sexualized environment that is often unwelcoming for women (as well as
 people from other cultures/religions/backgrounds). I think this issue is
 pertinent to the gender gap (unlike my other recent posts), and would
 like to hear other people's opinions. I've also started a discussion at
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Civility#Vulgar_jokes for
 broader input.

 Ryan Kaldari
 Such material may not only be removed but may be deleted under WP:RD2 as
 grossly offensive and degrading.

 I have not done so pending resolution of the discussion.

 Fred



 ___
 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] Looking for success stories of article improvement

[Ryan Kaldari]

I remember the article [[Sun tanning]] for a long time was mostly bikini 
pictures, one topless. There are several threads on the talk page about 
it. I think the first one is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sun_tanning/Archive_1#Image_discussions

The article [[Ochre]] had a topless photo for a while. [[Shorts]] and 
[[Girl]] have both had their images toned down to be less sexual. 
[[Lolicon]] is an interesting case. It is a clearly sexual topic, but 
has had its lead image changed several times over the years to be 
slightly less provocative. Same for several other sex-related articles 
(although some have moved in the opposite direction). For a non-nudity 
related example, see [[Abortion]], or rather see 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Abortion/Lead_image. Another 
non-nudity case is [[Bahá'u'lláh]]. This is slightly similar to the 
Mohammad case, and I'm not sure you could call it a successful 
resolution, but the compromise was to keep the image at the bottom of 
the article. The full discussion is at 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bah%C3%A1%27u%27ll%C3%A1h/Photo. Those 
are the ones I remember off the top of my head.

The best example of successful use of editorial judgment on en.wiki 
isn't actually for an article, but for the main page: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Picture_of_the_day/Unused

Ryan Kaldari

On 10/3/11 5:24 PM, Sue Gardner wrote:
 Hi folks,

 I'm wondering if anyone here has examples of articles that contain
 potentially-objectionable imagery being significantly improved
 following normal discussion among editors?

 I'm looking for examples of good editorial judgment being exercised in
 the normal article improvement processes -- like, an upskirt image
 being removed from the 'skirt' article, or, commercial porn being
 replaced by images that are more informative/educational. That kind of
 thing.

 I know that kind of editing happens all the time -- I'm hoping people
 here can point me towards particularly good examples.

 Thanks,
 Sue


 --
 Sue Gardner
 Executive Director
 Wikimedia Foundation

 415 839 6885 office
 415 816 9967 cell

 Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
 the sum of all knowledge.  Help us make it a reality!

 http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

 ___
 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] Oh, painters

[Ryan Kaldari]

This is a gallery page, which is slightly different than a category, in 
that it is hand-curated. There are thousands of gallery pages on Commons 
that share the same scope as a category, so I don't think there's 
anything wrong with it existing. Per Commons:Galleries: Categories 
should contain /all/ files related to the subject while galleries should 
contain /a sample/ of files related to the subject. Ideally, galleries 
should contain the best of what we have.


Gallery pages are quite neglected on Commons and most people don't care 
about them and rarely use them. You guys should feel free to go crazy 
cleaning them up or adding to them. The Painters gallery for example has 
only been touched by 2 editors in its entire 5-edit history.


Ryan Kaldari

On 10/7/11 2:39 PM, Risker wrote:



On 7 October 2011 17:22, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com 
mailto:sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote:


I never knew all painters were male ;-)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Painters


Hmmm.  That page shouldn't exist, because there is already the 
category of painters, with hundreds of entries. 
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Painters


Perhaps one of the Commons editors might wish to address that.

Risker/Anne


___
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] washington dc

[Ryan Kaldari]

As a member of the DC Chapter who does not live in DC, I would suggest 
allowing proxy voting to encourage broader participation.


Ryan Kaldari

On 10/10/11 6:39 AM, Tiffany Smith wrote:

Hi all,
I'm on the DC Chapter Board with Katie.  Thanks for giving us an 
opportunity to discuss this.


To Joanna's and others' questions (particularly in the DC area, but 
anyone's welcome!): one of the best ways to help out would be to join 
the Chapter, participate in events, and help us find ways to include 
more diverse voices in Wikipedia and other Wiki projects.  Most 
importantly, consider running for a leadership position in the future 
- our chapter needs leaders who care about these issues and actively 
look for opportunities to address them and advocate for improvement.


More generally, Wikimedia DC looks forward to helping increase female 
participation.  Indeed, two members of the Board are women, all of our 
Board members recognize the importance of these issues, and we 
continue to invite in more women to Wiki projects through the multiple 
outreach projects we are hosting in our community.


Please feel free to reach out to any of us directly...especially if 
you want to get involved!


Best,
Tiffany

On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Joanna Monastra 
joanna.monas...@gmail.com mailto:joanna.monas...@gmail.com wrote:


I live in the DC area, but so far I have not become active in the
DC chapter. Is there some way I could help out?

Joanna

On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 9:49 PM, Sandra ordonez
sandratordo...@gmail.com mailto:sandratordo...@gmail.com wrote:

sooo, i've heard some buzz about what is going on in the d.c.
chapter, and I've been thinking of writing a post about it, bc
frankly if the buzz is accurate, i'm a little disappointed.
Does anyone know what is going on there? Thought this might be
a good place to ask before I open my big mouth.

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap




-- 
Mulier sum, audite me fremere


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] User blocked for sexist comment, many disagree - it wasn't sexist.

[Ryan Kaldari]

BaseballBugs has a problematic history at the reference desk. This isn't 
the first time he's made sexist comments there.[1] Unfortunately, none 
of this context was brought up in the discussion about the block. The 
unblock was a knee-jerk reaction from a superficial evaluation. 
Arguably, the block was a knee-jerk reaction as well. Bad behavior all 
around, in my opinion.


Ryan Kaldari

1. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Science/2010_January_21#Orgasm


On 10/12/11 7:10 PM, Sarah Stierch wrote:
I never said that I agreed or disagreed with the block. I was merely 
expressing that some of the comments made in regards to the comment 
the blocked user made were interesting. A nice selection of people 
didn't see anything sexist about the comment, or the potential to find 
anything sexist within it. I also think it's not a healthy environment 
when people think a witty person is just being, well, witty and clever 
as always, and that it's acceptable and perhaps doesn't require any 
reprimanding, perhaps on any level.


And I do agree with Fred, the admin was perhaps just reacting to what 
they saw - after some of the stories, talk page comments, and behavior 
of some users - of any gender - I can see how the occasional admin 
jumps the gun.  It's very easy to do when you have good faith while 
trying to defend the users of an environment you care so deeply about.


I have also been described as a snarky, witty, clever (among other 
names) person and even to this day I open my big mouth and regret 
what I say, on occasion. I also expect to be reprimanded when I'm out 
of line and while that comment might not have been extreme (as 
Fluffernutter pointed out), other comments have been that other users 
have been made on Wikipedia and related projects, and people most 
often walk off without being taught a lesson.


I think it's fascinating. But, perhaps I'm in the minority (oh wait, I 
am ;-)...ok..just being witty!)...


-Sarah


On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 9:22 PM, icewe...@gmail.com 
mailto:icewe...@gmail.com wrote:


Is there any way to criticize a any action justified with sexism
without adding to the persecution complex here? Honest question.

Blocking a user for comments made a week prior falls a mile out of
standard process. Blocking a user who tries to explain himself without
begging for mercy falls a mile out of process. It was a ridiculous
power trip by the blocking admin and was over turned as such.

The only concerning thing in the thread was how a bogus block was
sized upon and defended as an opportunity to crusade against the
boyzone [sic].

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap




--
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia http://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Art 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch

and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
/Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising./
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Commons Searches

[Ryan Kaldari]

One easy way to fix all of these searches is to create Gallery pages for 
these terms. If a gallery page for cucumber existed, all searches for 
cucumber would go immediately to that gallery page rather than pulling 
up random images.


Ryan Kaldari

On 10/12/11 3:49 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:

Thanks for the link, Brandon.

I had raised this in the image filter discussions on Foundation-l 
yesterday (as well as on 
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Diskussion:Kurier ), and it 
seems to have triggered some thought, which is all for the good.


Here are searches that deliver similar results in Wikipedia and Commons:

pearl necklace

cucumber

Zahnbürste (German for toothbrush)

toothbrush

electric toothbrushes

jumping ball

underwater

... and likely many, many others.

Andreas


*From:* Brandon Harris bhar...@wikimedia.org
*To:* gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
*Sent:* Wednesday, 12 October 2011, 21:31
*Subject:* Re: [Gendergap] Commons Searches


Funnily, I just answered that question on Quora:


http://www.quora.com/Why-is-the-second-image-returned-on-Wikimedia-Commons-when-one-searches-for-electric-toothbrush-an-image-of-a-female-masturbating


On 10/12/11 7:48 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
 Brandon,

 On a matter that originally arose in Meta and on the Foundation
list,
 but may be of interest to this list as well, do you know the
answer to the
 question posed here ...


http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/commons-l/2011-October/006290.html

 ... or do you know someone who does?

 Andreas

   


*From:* Brandon Harris bhar...@wikimedia.org
mailto:bhar...@wikimedia.org
*To:* Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
 gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
mailto:gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
*Sent:* Wednesday, 12 October 2011, 6:13
*Subject:* Re: [Gendergap] Mind the Gap Award is here.

(offlist)

I think your efforts are perfect, and above and beyond. I
don't need to
step in here.



On 10/11/11 10:10 PM, Jutta von Dincklage wrote:
  Brandon, I still think we need to remake the logo. This was just
a quick, basic whiz.
  I would still love your graphic skills on this one if you can
spare the time
 
  ... cause I am a woman and I truly appreciate amazing design
  ... and this award deserves it ;-)
 
  Ah, too fast for me! I was about to remake the entire thing,
but got
  stuck trying to find an acceptable replacement font (the real
one is for
  sale at the princely sum of $299.00!).
 
 
 
  ___
  Gendergap mailing list
  Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
  https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

--
Brandon Harris, Senior Designer, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

___
Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap




 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

-- 
Brandon Harris, Senior Designer, Wikimedia Foundation


Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] No sources - argh!!

[Ryan Kaldari]

Does Urubamba have a library? If they do, I would check there first and 
ask the librarian if they have any books on local history/culture. If 
not, you may want to check out http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Oral_citations


Ryan Kaldari

On 10/24/11 9:03 PM, Erin O'Rourke wrote:

Hey all,

I'm currently living in Urubamba, Peru I want to improve the article 
on the town. Unfortunately I'm not sure where to start given so little 
is published about it. My efforts to find history I could source has 
come up with little to nothing, but given I'm living here I now know 
the official founding date of the town is November 9th and is 
considered a holiday. That's just one example of the many things I'm 
finding out that one would never find published. I'm thinking not but 
I figured I'd ask anyway - does Wikipedia make any provision for local 
or unsourced knowledge?


Also, I think the question is relevant and interesting to this list if 
only in terms of what kind of information is privileged as important 
enough to get published - there is much in the way of critiquing 
knowledge regarded as official due to its published status while 
minority, indigenous and womens' voices go unheard due to power 
structures that result in erasure.


Any feedback would be much appreciated!

--
Erin O'Rourke
http://erin-orourke.com


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] the state of civility on en.wiki

[Ryan Kaldari]

On 10/26/11 7:19 AM, ChaoticFluffy wrote:
 The only way to remove these people that has worked in the past has 
 been via arbcom, with enablers screaming bloody murder the whole way.

Yes, I've been down that road before, but I will never do it again. The 
only arbcom case I ever pursued was against a vested contributor who 
was clearly misogynistic and driving away other editors. Even though I 
was uninvolved in the dispute that led to the ArbCom case, I was 
pilloried, harassed, baited, name-called, and threatened with a lawsuit 
solely because I was willing to confront this editor's behavior and 
present evidence against them. This editor's friends overwhelmed the 
ArbCom discussion with absurd conspiracy theories about me, and made 
their best effort to make my life miserable for the duration of the 
ArbCom proceeding (including trying to drum up support to have me 
de-admined). After all was said and done, all of my evidence and 
arguments were ignored and the editor was banned for a year due to the 
legal threat.

So I'm definitely not going to pursue ArbCom again, and there's no way 
I'm going to give a vested editor a 6-month block (which would 
immediately be reversed), so I guess the only solution is to just be 
silent and allow their abusive behavior to continue. Issuing multiple 
warnings in these cases is a joke (they are just removed with snarky 
edit summaries) and peacefully discussing the issue gets absolutely 
nowhere (at least from my experience), apart from momentarily deflecting 
their invective towards myself instead of their original target.

A friend of mine works as a moderator for Huffington Post and I have to 
admit that I am quite jealous of their system. The moderators are free 
to enforce civility and use their best judgement to keep out trolls and 
trouble-makers. I imagine this is one of the reasons that they have such 
a vibrant community with a healthy gender balance (according to my friend).

Ryan Kaldari

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] the state of civility on en.wiki

[Ryan Kaldari]

I also believe that ArbCom _could_ provide good solutions for these 
situations, but the existing model isn't very scalable and doesn't work 
for many cases. One potential solution would be for ArbCom to offer the 
services of a prosecutor for certain cases, when the person bringing 
the complaint doesn't want to be subjected to further harassment. The 
problem with ArbCom currently is that you have to have a very tough skin 
to go through the process, and in many cases it just makes things worse 
in the short term (which can last for months).


Ryan Kaldari

On 10/27/11 11:50 PM, Gillian White wrote:
Apologies for the formatting - the machine stripped the breaks that 
would have made my post readable. G (I'm a workman blaming the 
tools ...) It should have looked like this:


I’d like to agree with Daniel that “purgative rituals” should be
added to the repertoire of ways to deal with these very difficult
problems. In modern times, the label for this is
behaviourally-based change or [[behaviour modification]] and it
works better than exclusion or punitive strikes. As Daniel said,
these methods remind people what the point of things is (things
like other people and the society we all have to work in) and they
provide a way forward. Exclusion, excommunication, imprisonment,
whatever you call it in the real world, is like banning – it not
only loses any contribution they can make but more importantly,
gives time and space for anger and resentment to build and then
burst out when the opportunity arises (in this case when the block
expires).

Dealing with graffiti is an examples of this in operation –
punishing and ranting at them gives them the fame they seek, so
what works best is painting it over quickly. In WP terms this is
reverting but it doesn’t work for this level of incivility, I
suggest this is because the motivation is power, not fame (or
possibly power as well as fame). That brings us back to the
“collaborative goal setting” that Daniel suggests.

Perhaps some options chosen by the individual could be added to
Daniel’s idea of editing – it could be any quantifiable,
self-chosen contribution, including editing some other favourite
topic or being a wikignome or wikifairy etc. Or, the person could
work one-on-one with someone from an opposing point of view to
reach consensus on another sort of article. These are productive
responses, the goal of which should be to keep the person
productively engaged and have them experience their work as valued.

Other organisations have to deal with anti-social behaviour and
perhaps we could learn from them. The excuse that they are “making
such good contributions”, for example, has also confronted other
industries/ organisations. Some groups use the money they pay for
a service as an excuse for appalling behaviour. Examples include
drunken football teams being destructive in aeroplanes (the
airlines have had to ban some teams) or rock stars in hotels
(making the behaviour public helps get pressure for change in
these cases).

It is very similar to customer complaints that every organisation
has to deal with. When I worked on this for a big organisation, I
found that the customer complaints process ranged across and
touched on everything from the trivial to the criminal and the
process needed to take account of that range. So adding this tool
(i.e. working on the encyclopaedia in some other way before being
banned) to the box should help.

In intractable cases, banning will be the only solution, but for
the middle range of people who once enjoyed contributing
productively, being given a “cooling off” period in which they can
return to that for a while might work.

I am assuming that ArbCom is the most appropriate place for these
kinds of resolutions to be handled because it is not likely to be
feasible for every admin to hand out such injunctions, nor would
they be enforceable. Does ArbCom consider that behavioural
disputes are as worthy of arbitration as content disputes? If not,
is there a reason? If they do consider such intractable (and
apparently easily identifiable) cases as within their scope, can
these approaches be introduced to their repertoire of sanctions?

Thankfully, I have never had to deal with these types of people on
WP, but if I did, it would chase me away. While I think the issue
is broader than the gender one, they are inextricably related.

Gillian

User: Whiteghost.ink



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] study about gendered names and IRC

[Ryan Kaldari]

I just read the following paper which describes an interesting study 
that was conducted regarding IRC:
http://www.enre.umd.edu/content/rmeyer-assessing.pdf

The researchers created several IRC bots with different names - some 
female, some male, and some ambiguous. They put the bots in several high 
traffic IRC channels, and had them record all the private messages they 
received. The bots themselves were completely silent.

The bots with male names received an average of 3.7 private messages per 
days that were sexually explicit or threatening. The bots with ambiguous 
names received an average of 24.9 such messages per day. The bots with 
female names received an average of 100 such messages per day!

This is a very sad statistic, and probably goes a long way towards 
explaining why there aren't that many women on IRC these days.

On a happier note, if you want to hang out on IRC and not get sexually 
harassed, you can always join #wikimedia-gendergap!

Ryan Kaldari

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Research into causes of the gender gap?

[Ryan Kaldari]

On 12/17/11 3:54 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
 * Johannes Rohr wrote:
 So in essence you are saying that Wikipedia is a game that boys like
 to play more than girls. And there is not much you can do about it,
 because editing Wikipedia is more like building Lego space ships than
 like playing with dolls?
 Almost a quarter of Wikipedia contributors also happen to
 contribute to open source software

[citation needed] :)

Ryan Kaldari

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Research into causes of the gender gap?

[Ryan Kaldari]

Looks like your right. This is a pretty amazing statistic. If 23% of our 
editors are open source programmers, I can't believe we don't have more 
volunteer MediaWiki developers. I guess that's another gap we need to 
work on fixing.

Ryan Kaldari

On 12/17/11 6:13 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
 * Ryan Kaldari wrote:
 On 12/17/11 3:54 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
 Almost a quarter of Wikipedia contributors also happen to
 contribute to open source software
 [citation needed] :)
 Read [[File:Editor Survey Report - April 2011.pdf]] on commons; Q9.

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] He/she vs. she/he

[Ryan Kaldari]

Yes, the traditional usage has been predominantly masculine, but in 
modern usage, they is the dominant form. See my reply at 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Gender-neutral_language#She_before_he.3F


Ryan Kaldari


On 12/28/11 4:50 PM, Theo10011 wrote:
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 6:06 AM, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org 
mailto:rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote:


I responded to the inquiry and replaced all the gendered pronouns at
issue with singular they. On a related note, I'm very disappointed to
learn that the Chicago Manual of Style (which provided the basis
for the
original Wikipedia Manual of Style) has stopped recommending the
use of
singular they. As the use of singular they has been steadily
increasing
since the 1960s (Pauwels 2003), it is curious that the Chicago Manual
would be moving backwards. I have to wonder if there was some sort of
political pressure involved. On a positive note, the 2011 edition
of the
New International Version Bible now uses singular they.


And I defended the reverting editor. 
(http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3AGender-neutral_languageaction=historysubmitdiff=468184170oldid=468179760 
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3AGender-neutral_languageaction=historysubmitdiff=468184170oldid=468179760).


It's an interesting topic, but the original editor seems to be taking 
a political stance, which the reverting editor might not know about. 
The usage of Generic Antecedents, by definition require the gender to 
be unknown or irrelevant. The traditional usage has been predominantly 
masculine.


I am not a native English speaker so I might be wrong on this, but the 
article is using Generic Antecedents. The approach taken in English 
language has certain usage hard-wired in the brain. There has been a 
long standing argument about the political undertone about its usage 
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_antecedents#Political_opinions).


What Kaldari did, while ideal to avoid any conflict or debate, is 
debatable in the grammatical sense. The usage note in Dictionary.com 
(http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/they) and other sources 
(http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/26/magazine/26FOB-onlanguage-t.html?_r=2) 
dispute usage of singular they as a gender neutral singular pronoun 
rather than a plural pronoun.  The usage note mentions This increased 
use is at least partly impelled by the desire to avoid the sexist 
implications of he as a pronoun of general reference.


I'm sure Dominic can correct me if I'm wrong on this one.

Regards
Theo


___
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] Facebook Group re pornography on Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

I'm not familiar with the discussion you are referring to, but I'm 100% 
sure Jimmy would never say that as it is completely antithetical to his 
position on Wikipedia editing. Do you happen to remember where you read 
that?


Ryan Kaldari

On 2/1/12 11:53 PM, Caroline Becker wrote:
Yeah, and yesterday yet another intellectual said that Wikipedia 
cannot be trust because it is written by everyone, so Jimmy mentioned 
that only scholars will edit Wikipedia in the futur ?


Caroline


2012/2/2 Andreas K. jayen...@gmail.com mailto:jayen...@gmail.com

A Wikimedian has just started a Facebook page Stop pornography on
Wikipedia

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Stop-pornography-on-Wikipedia/307245972661745


following an earlier post by her to [[User talk:Jimbo Wales]] in
Wikipedia:


http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Walesoldid=474195137#The_animated_gif_file_of_a_man_mastrubating_is_in_a_public_domain._Do_we_need_it_in_public_domain.3F

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Walesoldid=474195137#The_animated_gif_file_of_a_man_mastrubating_is_in_a_public_domain._Do_we_need_it_in_public_domain.3F


Jimmy mentioned that the image filter is on the agenda of this
week's board meeting again.

Andreas



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Facebook Group re pornography on Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

Yeah, I'm a little dense sometimes :) I promise if you put a ;) at the 
end of your post, though, I won't reply to your sarcasm with shocked 
indignation.


Ryan Kaldari

On 2/3/12 11:52 AM, emijrp wrote:
2012/2/2 Caroline Becker carobecke...@gmail.com 
mailto:carobecke...@gmail.com


That was irony, sorry :) I'm against image filtering and I think
image filtering has nothing to do with gender gap, so I answered
with my guts instead of my brain :(

Caroline


I got your sarcasm Caroline. Is Ryan the new Sheldon? Attention: sarcasm.



2012/2/2 Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org
mailto:rkald...@wikimedia.org

I'm not familiar with the discussion you are referring to, but
I'm 100% sure Jimmy would never say that as it is completely
antithetical to his position on Wikipedia editing. Do you
happen to remember where you read that?

Ryan Kaldari


On 2/1/12 11:53 PM, Caroline Becker wrote:

Yeah, and yesterday yet another intellectual said that
Wikipedia cannot be trust because it is written by everyone,
so Jimmy mentioned that only scholars will edit Wikipedia in
the futur ?

Caroline


2012/2/2 Andreas K. jayen...@gmail.com
mailto:jayen...@gmail.com

A Wikimedian has just started a Facebook page Stop
pornography on Wikipedia


http://www.facebook.com/pages/Stop-pornography-on-Wikipedia/307245972661745


following an earlier post by her to [[User talk:Jimbo
Wales]] in Wikipedia:


http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Walesoldid=474195137#The_animated_gif_file_of_a_man_mastrubating_is_in_a_public_domain._Do_we_need_it_in_public_domain.3F

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Walesoldid=474195137#The_animated_gif_file_of_a_man_mastrubating_is_in_a_public_domain._Do_we_need_it_in_public_domain.3F


Jimmy mentioned that the image filter is on the agenda of
this week's board meeting again.

Andreas



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org  mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Giving Women the Access Code

[Ryan Kaldari]

As someone who has worked as a computer programmer for 20 years and took 
several Calculus classes, I would like to vouch for the fact that in 
order to have a successful career in computer programming, it is 
necessary to have at least 4 years of math education - in elementary school.


I find it strange that biology, which is actually a fairly math 
intensive field, requires virtually no mathematics in college, while 
computer science requires absurd levels of math that have no relevance 
to the field. And yet classes that are extremely relevant, like How to 
Use UNIX, are optional. I think it has far more to do with the academic 
computer science culture than what is actually useful to teach people.


On a related note, I noticed recently that the English Wikipedia only 
has 2 paragraphs about women in mathematics: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematician#Women_in_mathematics. Compare 
with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_science or 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_engineering (which was recently 
expanded).


Ryan Kaldari


On 4/3/12 7:31 AM, Sarah Stierch wrote:

Nice article, thanks for sharing Lennart!

She was consistently told by teachers in adolescence 
http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides/specialtopic/puberty-and-adolescence/overview.html?inline=nyt-classifier, 
then later by colleagues, that the things she was interested in were 
things women didn't do, and that there were no good female 
mathematicians, Dr. Pippenger said.


It's reasoning like this, and the one that you quoted below about 
stereotypes, kept me from pursuing a degree in computer science. I 
remember looking into the school when I was a young undergrad and I 
felt so intimidated, and then was told that I'd have to take certain 
math classes. Which frustrated me, as I could do basic language coding 
and write html off the top of my head. I flunked the math classes I 
had to take, and 10 years later found out I had a math disability. 
(And it wasn't my parents who were telling me not to do it, it was 
professors, etc. Regardless of my poor math skills, almost every 
single person I know who codes jokes that you don't /need/ to know 
math.  Someday I'll take some classes in something (just for fun, I 
suppose)..or perhaps there will be a N00bs super simple MediaWiki fun 
day that even your grandma could learn to code at! event.


I'm not disappointed with how my path curved and turned thus far, but, 
after reading /Unlocking the Clubhouse/[1] and every time I read an 
article like this, it just reminds me more and more of the experiences 
I had as a young person that kept me out of the lab. The odd thing, is 
that I ended up entering into a field that is upwards of 80% dominated 
by women. I wonder of computer science can take any cues from museum 
studies.


On that note, I'm sure I'm not the only person on this mailing list 
that took a different path than the one they wanted due to popular and 
personal pressure.


Sarah

[1]http://www.amazon.com/Unlocking-Clubhouse-Computing-Jane-Margolis/dp/0262133989


On 4/3/12 3:36 AM, Lennart Guldbrandsson wrote:

Hello,

Via Mike Godwin:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/science/giving-women-the-access-code.html?pagewanted=1_r=1

snip

Most of the female students were unwilling to go on in computer 
science because of the stereotypes they had grown up with, said 
Zachary Dodds, a computer scientist at Mudd. We realized we were 
helping perpetuate that by teaching such a standard course.


To reduce the intimidation factor, the course was divided into two 
sections --- gold, for those with no prior experience, and black 
for everyone else. Java, a notoriously opaque programming language, 
was replaced by a more accessible language called Python. And the 
focus of the course changed to computational approaches to solving 
problems across science.


We realized that we needed to show students computer science is not 
all about programming, said Ran Libeskind-Hadas, chairman of the 
department. It has intellectual depth and connections to other 
disciplines.



/snip

Most of the article is about Dr Maria Klawe, who seems to be a very 
inspiring person.



Best wishes,

Lennart


Lennart Guldbrandsson,
Tfn: 031 - 12 50 48 Mobil: 070 - 207 80 05
Epost: l_guldbrands...@hotmail.com / lenn...@wikimedia.se
Användarsida: http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anv%C3%A4ndare:Hannibal
Blogg: http://mrchapel.wordpress.com/
Wikimedia Sverige http://wikimedia.se
http://www.1av3.se


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



--
*Sarah Stierch*
*/Wikimedia Foundation Community Fellow/*
Support the sharing of free knowledge around the world: donate today 
https://donate.wikimedia.org/



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

Fun fact: Female ejaculation is the most viewed Wikipedia article 
related in any way to feminism (at least since WikiProject Feminism 
started keeping stats). It's 3 times as popular as the next article on 
the list, Abortion.


Ryan Kaldari

On 4/27/12 2:52 PM, Laura Hale wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_ejaculate would be an equivalent.

--
twitter: purplepopple
blog: ozziesport.com http://ozziesport.com


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

Speaking of gender and nudity, it seems the bias towards female nudity 
at en.wiki's Featured Picture Candidates is still as strong as ever. And 
check out the quality comments at 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/The_Pearl_and_the_Wave


After you guys are finished photographing your all-male cumshots, maybe 
you could find some nice nude male art to nominate at Featured Picture 
Candidates. Too bad Robert Mapplethorpe is still copyrighted.


Ryan Kaldari

On 4/28/12 12:17 AM, Paolo Massa wrote:

If you are curious about the images used in the same article on other
language editions of Wikipedia you can use Manypedia.
For the page Cumshot, it seems currently the same image is used on
all language editions, while the Spanish one uses one more image
http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Cumshot|es
and the Japanese a different additional one.
http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Cumshot|ja

Of course this is not to say that if all language editions of
Wikipedia represent the same concept using the same images, this is
the best way of representing it. But at least you can appreciate
differences in representations of different language communities.
For example see the page Underwear on English and Arabic Wikipedia,
http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Underwear|ar

Hope it helps.

On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Emily Monroeemilymonro...@gmail.com  wrote:

I'm not sure the technical term for it either, but the laymen's term is
female ejactulation. *shrugs*

From,
Emily


On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 8:39 PM, Carol Moore DCcarolmoor...@verizon.net
wrote:

On 4/27/2012 3:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:

I could have a go again, Carol.:)

Gay porn is underrepresented in these articles.

Andreas

So if I was too implicit in my statement. As Andreas surmised, I meant
re-do that photo to make it male on male. Or do a second one that's male on
male.  Go for it!

As for female ejaculation since ejaculation is putting out sperm, I
don't think women do it.

Women obviously -- geez, I don't what you call it besides get wet. And
maybe orgasms squeeze some of it out an orifice. But I don't think that's
ejaculation.  But I do now know I don't what the technical terms are or if
there are any!!

CM


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap






___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

That's a good point. Even here in San Francisco it's much easier to find 
female nudity in art and advertising than male nudity. I just wish 
people would stick to commenting on the art instead of the woman's body.


Ryan Kaldari


On 5/2/12 12:40 AM, Caroline Becker wrote:
The problem is, we live in a biased world where you can find much, 
much more female nudity in fine art musem than male nudity. I'm 
currently post-treating and uploading pictures from the Museum of Fine 
Arts of Rennes (France) and the only naked male body is a sculpture of 
a boy/young teenager playing, while they are lot of naked women, both 
in sculpture and paintings. Half-naked men are more often corpses than 
sexy budies.  (If you want I can create a gallery with all artworks 
showing naked or half-naked women).


What can I do with that ? Not uploaded pictures of artworks with naked 
women ? Working harder to have awesome pictures of artworks with naked 
men ?


Caroline


2012/5/2 Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com 
mailto:petefors...@gmail.com


It seems strange to talk about Featured Pictured Candidates as
though it is a process, or talk about bias -- from what I could
discern when I looked into it last time around, it's basically a
system that lets anybody promote their own work, as long as they
know how to jump through a couple pretty straightforward hoops and
wait a few months.

I still think that simply, clearly, *documenting* the process in a
practical sense would be a useful first step toward thinking up
and building interest in a more refined system. Until somebody
puts in the effort to do something like that, we're going to
continue to see weird entries on the front page of Commons (and
many other projects that use Commons' front page image on their
own front page) simply because one person took the initiative to
make it happen.

Not because the community at Commons made a bad decision. The
community didn't make a decision at all.

-Pete


On May 1, 2012, at 10:23 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:

 Speaking of gender and nudity, it seems the bias towards female
nudity at en.wiki's Featured Picture Candidates is still as strong
as ever. And check out the quality comments at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/The_Pearl_and_the_Wave

 After you guys are finished photographing your all-male
cumshots, maybe you could find some nice nude male art to nominate
at Featured Picture Candidates. Too bad Robert Mapplethorpe is
still copyrighted.

 Ryan Kaldari

 On 4/28/12 12:17 AM, Paolo Massa wrote:
 If you are curious about the images used in the same article on
other
 language editions of Wikipedia you can use Manypedia.
 For the page Cumshot, it seems currently the same image is
used on
 all language editions, while the Spanish one uses one more image
 http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Cumshot|es
http://www.manypedia.com/#%7Cen%7CCumshot%7Ces
 and the Japanese a different additional one.
 http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Cumshot|ja
http://www.manypedia.com/#%7Cen%7CCumshot%7Cja

 Of course this is not to say that if all language editions of
 Wikipedia represent the same concept using the same images, this is
 the best way of representing it. But at least you can appreciate
 differences in representations of different language communities.
 For example see the page Underwear on English and Arabic Wikipedia,
 http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Underwear|ar
http://www.manypedia.com/#%7Cen%7CUnderwear%7Car

 Hope it helps.

 On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Emily
Monroeemilymonro...@gmail.com mailto:emilymonro...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 I'm not sure the technical term for it either, but the
laymen's term is
 female ejactulation. *shrugs*

 From,
 Emily


 On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 8:39 PM, Carol Moore
DCcarolmoor...@verizon.net mailto:carolmoor...@verizon.net
 wrote:
 On 4/27/2012 3:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:

 I could have a go again, Carol.:)

 Gay porn is underrepresented in these articles.

 Andreas

 So if I was too implicit in my statement. As Andreas
surmised, I meant
 re-do that photo to make it male on male. Or do a second one
that's male on
 male.  Go for it!

 As for female ejaculation since ejaculation is putting out
sperm, I
 don't think women do it.

 Women obviously -- geez, I don't what you call it besides
get wet. And
 maybe orgasms squeeze some of it out an orifice. But I don't
think that's
 ejaculation.  But I do now know I don't what the technical
terms are or if
 there are any!!

 CM


 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
mailto:Gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

Perfect opportunity to share one of my favorite blog memes:
http://thehairpin.com/2011/11/women-struggling-to-drink-water

Ryan Kaldari

On 5/2/12 2:20 PM, Thomas Morton wrote:


Advertising not sexist. Really.


Well I'd be interested to hear rational arguments that it is...

I've always found advertising to be highly sexualised, but 
refreshingly free of sexism.


Tom


___
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] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

Perfect opportunity to share one of my favorite blog memes:
http://thehairpin.com/2011/11/women-struggling-to-drink-water

Seriously though, it doesn't seem that controversial to say that 
mainstream advertising heavily skews to female nudity. Next time you 
pass a magazine stand, count the number of covers with female nudity and 
male nudity. I'll bet you a wiki-beer it's greater than 2 to 1. Judging 
by the last time I was in Paris, I would guess 10 to 1.


Ryan Kaldari

On 5/2/12 2:28 PM, Thomas Morton wrote:
On 2 May 2012 22:22, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com 
mailto:petefors...@gmail.com wrote:


On May 2, 2012, at 2:20 PM, Thomas Morton wrote:

 I've always found advertising to be highly sexualised, but
refreshingly free of sexism.

I tend to agree with Heather...this strains credibility. It's hard
to know whether to take this statement seriously.


Seriously? I mean, I don't want to derail this discussion further, but 
as someone who responds fairly equally to nudey boys and girls both 
are very visibly in use in advertising.


Although; Alison raises a point about stereotypes that I didn't really 
think about :) as the discussion was about the relative numbers of 
nudey genders... in terms of playing on /stereotypes/, sure, it can be 
sexist to men and women.


Tom


___
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] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

On 5/2/12 2:38 PM, Thomas Morton wrote:
On 2 May 2012 22:36, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org 
mailto:rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote:


Perfect opportunity to share one of my favorite blog memes:
http://thehairpin.com/2011/11/women-struggling-to-drink-water

Seriously though, it doesn't seem that controversial to say that
mainstream advertising heavily skews to female nudity. Next time
you pass a magazine stand, count the number of covers with female
nudity and male nudity. I'll bet you a wiki-beer it's greater than
2 to 1. Judging by the last time I was in Paris, I would guess 10
to 1.

Ryan Kaldari


On the principle of genuine interest I will take you up on that 
challenge :) and will report back tomorrow.


Tom


I'll be very happy to be proven wrong. I'm certainly subject to 
perception bias, but perception isn't always wrong. Don't forget to take 
a cell-phone photo if you want to collect your wiki-beer :)


Ryan Kaldari
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] civility/behavioral standards

[Ryan Kaldari]

I don't care who is moderating, but it would be nice to have more 
civility on this list. When I resigned as moderator, I invited several 
people to take my place (all women). They all declined citing the 
contentious nature of the list, except for SlimVirgin. SlimVirgin, 
unfortunately, was not able to moderate for very long due to health 
issues. That leaves us with Sue, SarahS, and Kevin. Sue is far too busy 
to actually moderate the list and SarahS often has a COI in moderating 
since she is frequently the target of attacks. So that leaves Kevin. Now 
that SlimVirgin has rejoined the list, perhaps she would be interested 
in helping to moderate again?


Ryan Kaldari

On 5/6/12 2:16 PM, Laura Hale wrote:



On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 7:03 AM, Kevin Gorman kgor...@gmail.com 
mailto:kgor...@gmail.com wrote:


Hi all -

Given this, I'm going to change how the moderation of this list is
handled a little bit moving forward.  Previously, there has been no
hands-on moderation of this list.  From now on, there will potentially
be some.  It won't be draconian - and really, I hope it'll never be
used at all - but I think it's important to guarantee that the
atmosphere of this list remains friendly, and I wanted to announce how
I will be approaching it.



This really makes this place safe.  Thank you very much.  We've done 
an excellent job resolving the leadership gendergap on WMF with male 
+1, female +0.


Honestly though, I can tell you that while I am glad for a moderator, 
having a male come in and tell me they will be making this a safe 
place, given the historical problems of men making this feel UNSAFE on 
this list and the increase in male participation, this makes me 
uncomfortable and more like this will be an even more unsafe space. :( 
The first thing you, as a male who knows there are issues with women 
who feel unsafe participating in this list because of those problems, 
is make a declaration of firm male leadership and less tolerance of 
this type of behavior.  It feels like a major disconnect, where the 
end result is women will feel MORE silenced lest they offend you.


--
twitter: purplepopple
blog: ozziesport.com http://ozziesport.com



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Asking Reddit's /r/asktransgender about Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

I've found that Wikipedia handles transgender issues fairly well. A good 
example is the Chaz Bono article. This article is an example of what 
should be the most problematic case on Wikipedia: A BLP of a transgender 
person mostly known for being the child of a celebrity. You would expect 
the article to be a horrible embarrassment, but it's actually well done 
and uses the correct pronoun throughout. The article has been frequently 
attacked over the years as you can see from the talk page, but it's 
always been dealt with promptly and thoughtfully. In general, I find 
that Wikipedia does a good job of covering gay and transgender issues 
and seems to have a healthy community of editors in those demographics. 
In fact I wouldn't be surprised if the percentage of such editors on 
Wikipedia is higher than in the population in general, but this is just 
a guess based on anecdotal evidence. I would love to hear other people's 
impressions.


Ryan Kaldari

On 5/9/12 12:57 PM, Tom Morris wrote:

Earlier today, I posted a thread on Reddit's AskTransgender group asking for 
feedback on how Wikipedia handles transgender issues, specifically BLP and 
pronoun issues.

http://www.reddit.com/r/asktransgender/comments/tejwl/is_wikipedia_handling_transgender_identity_well/

Feel free to respond here or there.

This followed discussions relating to the widely-reported announcement by Tom 
Gabel, the lead vocalist and guitarist for the punk band Against Me!, of their 
intention to transition, and also previous discussions I've had by email with a 
UK-based transgender non-profit.

It almost feels like how we handle gender identity and transgender issues 
on-wiki is a nice little litmus test for the community's wider attitudes to 
inclusion (as well as handling of sensitive BLPs).



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Article for deletion Fanny Imlay

[Ryan Kaldari]

Too bad she wasn't nominated for any porn awards, then she would be 
clearly notable.[1] As it stands, she only has 1 biography and a couple 
hundred years of scholarly commentary, so it seems like a borderline 
case to me./sarcasm


1. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28people%29#Pornographic_actors_and_models


Ryan Kaldari


On 5/15/12 8:50 AM, Christine Meyer wrote:

I thought that I'd bring an AfD discussion to the attention of this
list: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Fanny_Imlay#Fanny_Imlay

It really is ridiculous that this discussion is even happening, and is
yet another example of the gender bias on en:Wikipedia.  I've followed
the discussion on the article's talk page, and it goes into absurdity.
  I wouldn't say it there, but how in the world is Imlay not notable
but one of the articles I've been working on lately, [[Anthony
Field]], is?  (I think that Field is notable, but it proves my point,
I think.)  I bring it to your attention because the article needs our
support.

Christine
User:Figureskatingfan

___
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] Larry Sanger's blog post: Should there be a Wikipedia boycott over the lack of an image filter?

[Ryan Kaldari]

The best way to make sure an image filter is never implemented on 
Wikipedia is to have Larry Sanger endorse it :P


Ryan Kaldari

On 5/30/12 9:01 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:

From Larry Sanger's blog:

---o0o---

I want to start a conversation. [...Larry says, in his blog]

I. Problem? What problem?

So, you didn't know that Wikipedia has a porn problem?

Let me say what I do not mean by Wikipedia's porn problem. I do not 
mean simply that Wikipedia has a lot of porn. That's part of the 
problem, but it's not even the main problem. I'm 100% OK with porn 
sites. I defend the right of people to host and view porn online. I 
don't even especially mind that Wikipedia has porn. There could be 
legitimate reasons why an encyclopedia might want to have some adult 
content.


No, the real problem begins when Wikipedia features some of the most 
disgusting sorts of porn you can imagine, while being heavily used by 
children. But it's even more complicated than that, as I'll explain.


(Note, the following was co-written by me and several other people. I 
particularly needed their help finding the links.)


Here is the short version:

Wikipedia and other websites of the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) host a 
great deal of pornographic content, as well as other content not 
appropriate for children. Yet, the Wikimedia Foundation encourages 
children to use these resources. Google, Facebook, YouTube, Flickr, 
and many other high-profile sites have installed optional filters to 
block adult content from view. I believe the WMF sites should at a 
minimum install an optional, opt-in filter, as the WMF Board agreed to 
do in 2011. I understand that the WMF has recently stopped work on the 
filter and, after a period of community reaction, some Board members 
have made it clear that they do not expect this filter to be finished 
and installed. Wikipedians, both managers and rank-and-file, 
apparently do not have enough internal motivation to do the 
responsible thing for their broad readership.


But even that is too brief. If you really want to appreciate 
Wikipedia's porn problem, I'm afraid you're going to have to read the 
following.


http://larrysanger.org/2012/05/what-should-we-do-about-wikipedias-porn-problem/ 



Feel free to repost!

---o0o---

There is further discussion of this, with Larry in attendance, on 
Wikipediocracy.com:


http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15t=429 
http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15t=429


Note that the related thread is in the Sexualisation subforum, which 
is only accessible to registered Wikipediocracy members. Registration 
is free though, and anyone wishing to have a look is welcome to join 
up and participate!


http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/

Best,
Andreas


___
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] gendergap research

[Ryan Kaldari]

On 5/30/12 7:19 PM, Béria Lima wrote:
I think that better than ask why people don't contribute, is better 
tell them why SHOULD they? For us is easier to pass by the fact that 
not everyone knows why they should contribute. We should give they as 
much info as possible to make them a contributor, not asking why they 
don't do it.


Contribution is almost always a question of motivation, if you don't 
motivate people to do it, they simply won't.


I think this is a good point. One of the most surprising results from 
our editor surveys was large disparity between the importance that men 
assign to editing Wikipedia and the importance that women assign to it. 
(A significantly higher percentage of men said they edit Wikipedia 
because it is important.) How is it possible that men and women view the 
importance of the exact same activity in dramatically different ways? I 
have a lot of theories, but I'd love to see more research into this.


Ryan Kaldari
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Holly Graf

[Ryan Kaldari]

WP:BLP: Given their potential impact on biography subjects' lives, 
biographies must be balanced and fair to their subjects... regardless 
of what the media chooses to focus on. Clearly the article should 
mention the relief of command and the circumstances around it 
(apparently she had a tendency to swear at people), but it shouldn't 
constitute the major focus of her biography.


Ryan Kaldari

On 6/18/12 1:50 PM, Russavia wrote:

Is that an edit of the article, or a whitewashing of the article?

It turns out that she is most notable for the relief of command, and
the blanket removal of material from the article is not adhering to
WP:UNDUE, but seems more to be a whitewashing of the article.

What you have done is removed any context of the dismissal from the
article, and that is not a good thing.

Russavia


On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 4:40 AM, Nathannawr...@gmail.com  wrote:


On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Laura Halela...@fanhistory.com  wrote:



On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:29 PM, Nathannawr...@gmail.com  wrote:

Seems like another 1E candidate. The over-emphasis on the controversy at
the end of her career can be addressed by wiping out most of the detail, or
by removing the article entirely (since the notability argument is somewhat
fragile, and all the references about the subject relate to her dismissal).


Coincidentally, others thought that too! :) It was taken to AfD and the
MilHist project determined she was notable based on her being the first
woman to command the ship type. :)  If you want to try that Nathan, you can
but your efforts and the efforts of other men like Andreas are probably
better spent improving the article about her to remove this material.  I
eagerly anticipate y'all working together  on this  article as you've both
identified it needs work. :)

--
twitter: purplepopple
blog: ozziesport.com


I've already edited it, but thanks as always for your confidence.

~Nathan

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Surplus women and World War I

[Ryan Kaldari]

Nice work! Looking forward to seeing it on the Main Page.

Ryan Kaldari

On 6/20/12 12:48 PM, Thomas Morton wrote:
(just to note; it's in my userspace - I got the singled out book the 
other day, and hopefully we can finish the article in the next day or so)


Tom

On 20 June 2012 20:22, Chris Keating chriskeatingw...@gmail.com 
mailto:chriskeatingw...@gmail.com wrote:


Dear all,

Just wanted to let you know about some interesting contributions
to the Wikimedia article gender balance from a slightly unexpected
source.

On Saturday, Wikimedia UK had a World War I-themed Editathon[1],
where we essentially put a lot of Wikimedians and a group of
academics in a room and asked them to help improve coverage of
World War I.

The gender balance was markedly better amongst the academics we'd
invited (4 men, 3 women) than among the Wikimedians (20 men, no
women at all) - which prompted quite a lot of debate about gender
balance among Wikimedia volunteers (not very good) and also about
the gender balance of Wikipedia's coverage of  the topic (also,
not very good!). It might also be that we'd taken a lot of steps
to promote the event amongst the English Wikipedia's large and
active military history community (which probably has worse than
average gender balance, at a guess).

I'm pleased to say that one of the outcomes from the event is an
article, currently in sandbox but well worthy of a DYK nom when in
due course, on the topic of Surplus women - a demographic
imbalance that existed (or was perceived) in Western Europe in the
industrial era, accentuated by the mass slaughter of World War I,
and hitherto completely absent from Wikipedia. You can have a look
at it here :-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ErrantX/Sandbox/Surplus_women

Many thanks,

Chris
Wikimedia UK


[1] http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/World_War_I/World_War_I_Editathon



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap




___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Surplus women and World War I

[Ryan Kaldari]

This is probably getting off topic, but the main articles on this 
subject on en.wiki would probably be sex-selective abortion and 
gendercide.


Ryan Kaldari

On 6/20/12 2:37 PM, Carol Moore DC wrote:
One comment on your draft, is that the langugage makes it a bit 
unclear for the average reader if/that the imbalance in England was 
because the males left the country and/or were killed in overseas 
wars.  It's implied but not sufficiently explicit so some people might 
get confused.


Also, the topic of surplus males is probably more timely today and 
I've thought about writing an article about it, so this certainly is 
relevant.


More males are born in general since they aren't as hearty as females. 
Today with modern medicine more survive accident and disease, there 
are more males that females in the post 1960s generations and more 
single angry males mean more violence. It's worse in countries like 
China and India where they abort so many female fetuses.


A number of things have been written on this topic, which I have filed 
someplace. The one that jumps out at me without much research is:
Bare Branches: The Security Implications of Asia's Surplus Male 
Population


Studies show married or co-habitating males have generally lower 
testosterone levels.  I'm sure some of my research notes that times of 
surplus females tend to be times of peace and peace activism. 1920s 
saw great peace activity led by women.  1960s when there was a slight 
surplus of women ready to make love, peace was a big issue among all 
those happy males who didn't want to trade making love for making war.


Today all those young guys worldwide want to do to deal with their 
frustrations is fight in sports riots or join the Black Bloc and break 
windows or overthrow their tyrants - or edit wikipedia?   India and 
China may need a big land war to deal with their excess male 
problems.  Iraq and Iran didn't have that problem after they sent 
millions of young men to die in 1980s Iraq-Iran land war.


In fact, I'm sure if I researched I'd find that I'm not the only one 
to speculate that older males don't like all that poltiical and sexual 
competition from younger males so regularly they have to decrease the 
population by sending them off to foreign wars or colonies.  So 
there's a method to the old warmonger male's madness


So this is quite a big topic - though I'm not sure if it calls for one 
article called Surplus males or females or Surplus gender 
demographics or whatever the experts call the broader topic.


Busy on a writing deadline so just don't have time to do the research 
right now. But I think I've thrown enough hints out there to help 
anyone go frolicking through the internet for lots of good WP:RS :-)



CM



___
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] Awareness of gender gap at Olympics

[Ryan Kaldari]

On 7/30/12 2:14 PM, Laura Hale wrote:
Did you hear any stories about how Patrick Mills left the NBA early in 
order to spend more time training with the national team in order to 
try to get gold?  No.  Of course not. The men are not expected to win 
gold.  They don't want to hold early training camps.  No one expects 
them to win even medal.  The Australian question should be: Why are we 
even bothering to send the men?   They should sit home.  The 
Australian media largely does not care about them.


sarcasmOf course they have to send the men! They're the ones that 
really count. And why aren't the women wearing skirts like they're 
supposed to!/sarcasm


The bigger Australian gender stories are actually Michelle Jenneke's 
butt jiggle, (which ironically, the USA paid more attention to then 
Australia) and Leisel Jones fat story, which was a very deliberate 
story on the part of the Australian media. Media watch shows how this 
story was crafted: 
http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s3556770.htm/


Reminds me of the U.S. obsession with the appearance of female 
politicians, e.g. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Michelle_Obama%27s_arms


That said, Wikipedia's main page has generally been dominated by 
female Olympians instead of male Olympians on Did You Know.  If you 
want to submit for DYK about women, I highly urge you to.  It is one 
of the best ways to highlight topics that might otherwise get 
overlooked because of systematic bias.


Thanks for the tip. I did a couple of female athlete articles recently, 
but forgot to DYK them :(


Ryan Kaldari

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Ada Lovelace Day organised by Wikimedia UK - 19 October 2012, London

[Ryan Kaldari]

Just uploaded a new file that might be useful :)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Engraved_portrait_of_Ada_Lovelace.jpg

Ryan Kaldari

On 9/17/12 8:49 AM, Daria Cybulska wrote:

Dear all,

It's Ada Lovelace Day on 16 October and it's most suitable for 
Wikimedia UK to get involved. The day exists to celebrate the 
contributions of women in the fields of science, technology, 
engineering and mathematics. As you may know, Ada Lovelace is 
considered the first programmer, due to her work on Charles Babbage's 
analytical engine. As such, she's someone we can very much hold up as 
a role model. Wikimedia UK is organising a Women in Science themed 
editing event for Ada Lovelace Day on*Friday 19 October* 2012 and 
would like to invite you to attend!


We have organised a group 'Edit-a-thon' to improve Wikipedia articles 
about women in science, held at the Royal Society's library, London, 
2:30-6pm. We had a very high response from the academic community, and 
we filled many more spaces than expected! However, there are still a 
couple of places free for people who would like to help train new 
contributors - please get in touch if you are interested. There will 
also be opportunities to get involved online, which we will publish at 
our Wikimedia UK event's page 
http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ada_Lovelace_Day_2012 (see below).


Following the Edit-a-thon there will be an panel discussion with Uta 
Frith from the Royal Society and other female scientists on women in 
science (the focus will be much broader than just the representation 
of the topic on Wikipedia). The panel discussion will take place 
from* 6:30pm - 8:00pm, *and you are most welcome to attend - there are 
still free places available, so please feel free to register here

*http://royalsociety.org/events/2012/wikipedia-workshop/*

Wikimedia UK also has a page for the event, which you can see here 
http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ada_Lovelace_Day_2012


Hope to see many of you there.

Best,
Daria


--
Daria Cybulska - Events Organiser, Wikimedia UK
+44 (0) 207 065 0994 tel:%2B44%20%280%29%20207%20065%200994
+44 7803 505 170 tel:%2B44%207803%20505%20170
--

Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England 
and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. 
Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, 
London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a 
global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the 
Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).


*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal 
control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*





___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Civility enforcement RfC Questionnaire

[Ryan Kaldari]

The 2nd phase of the Civility Request for Comment is now live at 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Civility_enforcement/Questionnaire


I believe this issue is relevant to gendergap since how we treat each 
other on Wikipedia affects our ability to retain new editors, and if we 
don't retain significant numbers of new editors, we don't have much hope 
of improving the gender gap.


The organizers of the RfC are hoping to attract wide participation, so 
please fill out the questionnaire and post your responses if you have 
the time.


Ryan Kaldari
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Civility enforcement RfC Questionnaire

[Ryan Kaldari]

After you finish your questionnaire, don't forget to add...
[[Category:Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Civility enforcement/Questions]]
to the bottom. Otherwise, it will never be seen.

Ryan Kaldari

On 10/30/12 10:50 AM, Carol Moore DC wrote:
It did take a while, but there really IS a lot of opposition to 
civility and the more we fill it out to the end - where they ask for 
suggestions - the better!


Mine was that they have a chart or much clearer examples of what is 
uncivil and proper sanctions for it to guide editors, complainers and 
admins.


On 10/30/2012 2:32 AM, Sarah Stierch wrote:
Only does Wikipedia create such a complex system to exploring 
this You have to create your own subpage.. oy vey...!


Thanks Kaldari for letting us know this exists..! (regardless)

-Sarah

On 10/29/12 10:37 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:
The 2nd phase of the Civility Request for Comment is now live at 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Civility_enforcement/Questionnaire


I believe this issue is relevant to gendergap since how we treat 
each other on Wikipedia affects our ability to retain new editors, 
and if we don't retain significant numbers of new editors, we don't 
have much hope of improving the gender gap.


The organizers of the RfC are hoping to attract wide participation, 
so please fill out the questionnaire and post your responses if you 
have the time.


Ryan Kaldari




___
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] Excellent Women's Portal on French Portuguese Wikis, missing in the English Wiki

[Ryan Kaldari]

English Wikipedia tends to have more specific portals than many of the 
other Wikipedias. For example, Women's sport, Feminism, Jane Austen, and 
even Celine Dion have their own portals. Typically, portals are created 
by corresponding WikiProjects. Although English Wikipedia has several 
women-related WikiProjects (Women's history, Women's sport, Women 
scientists, Feminism, etc.), there is currently no Women WikiProject. 
There are arguments for and against creating such a project...

For:
* Would facilitate communication between the more specific women-related 
WikiProjects

* Would facilitate the creation and maintenance of a Women Portal
* Could potentially spin-off other women-specific WikiProjects
Against:
* The scope of the project would be enormous and potentially difficult 
to organize
* Parent or meta WikiProjects tend to have lower levels of 
participation than more specific WikiProjects
* Considering the small number of active female editors on Wikipedia, it 
might cannibalize energy from the other women-specific WikiProjects.

I would love to hear other people's thoughts on this.

Ryan Kaldari

On 1/15/13 2:43 PM, Sylvia Ventura wrote:

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

Disclaimer: I'm a newbie (please be gentle)

I'll be brief. I've made my first (minor) edit on Wikipedia in 
December and have since then try to learn as much as possible about 
the movement and the various projects. I'm still a long way to go.


I'm particularly interested in the work done around Women's 
Participation (contributors) and Women's Voices (the actual content 
covering women topics/work). I believe the teaHouse and WikiWomen 
Collaborative are a huge step in helping onboard women contributors. 
While perusing other language Wikis to see how the Women 
participation/content is handled, I found the French Portal Femmes 
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portail:Femmes and the Portuguese 
Portal Mulheres https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Mulheres to be 
well designed and a useful gateway for content, it clearly catalogues 
and consolidates women related knowledge in one space. I didn't find 
an equivalent portal in the English version, is there a reason not to 
have something like this on the english Wikipedia?


I see a couple of valid reasons to having a Women Portal in English 
(particularly while the topic is being built and major gaps are being 
identified/filled). One is to offer a quick inventory of content, 
where one can see what's already covered and what's missing (without 
having to actively search for it). The other is that 'forcing' some 
level of content structure will help rally the community around 
specific topics to focus on (gaps), and possibly identify new ones. A 
successful example is Sarah Stierch WikiProject Women Scientists 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_scientists, 
it's a great project and it should sit in a larger portal with other 
master headers to Women in History, Women in Art, Women in Politics, 
Women in Academia, Women in Technology  all of which features the 
names, photos, bios, subgroups, and links to their work. This 
structure applies to any group/topic that is underrepresented - it 
makes it easier for newcomers (intimidated) and experts (busy) to 
identify areas they can contribute to right the way. How do I go about 
doing this?


So much for being brief :)

Sylvia



___
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] Relevant Post “About Female Action Heroes” + Thoughts about empowering women and youth

[Ryan Kaldari]

On 3/24/13 6:32 AM, Shlomi Fish wrote:

And all that while not depriving themselves of sexuality and sexiness among
members of the appropriate sexes (MOTAS), in part because being sexually
attractive (and naturally - not only physically) is indicative of
competence and values, rather than the opposite as was sometimes implied
recently.


You had me up until this point. How is being sexually attractive 
indicative of competence and values? By this logic, only Miss/Mr. 
Universe winners should run for President.


Ryan Kaldari

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Categories hit NPR

[Ryan Kaldari]

Sigh. Of course they only took my two quotes about how there's sexism on 
Wikipedia, and not a word of my explanation about how categorization on 
Wikipedia works and how half of what Ms. Filipacchi wrote was 
misleading. I also talked extensively about the real sexist problems 
on Wikipedia (whitewashing of rape and domestic violence articles by 
men's rights groups, over-representation of female porn stars, 
under-representation of female academics, etc.) and how these issues 
have been largely ignored by the media. Of course they were still 
ignored, so I guess it was wasted effort :P


Ryan Kaldari

On 4/29/13 6:09 PM, Sarah Stierch wrote:

Gender gap's  WikiProject Feminism's own Kaldari is interviewed here:

http://www.npr.org/2013/04/29/179850435/what-s-in-a-category-women-novelists-spark-wiki-controversy

and User:Qworty in a not so pleasant light here:

http://www.salon.com/2013/04/29/wikipedias_shame/

O_o


--
*Sarah Stierch*
*/Museumist and open culture advocate/*
Visit sarahstierch.com http://sarahstierch.com


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Joseph Reagle on Wikipedia's category taxonomy

[Ryan Kaldari]

On the issue of using tags instead of categories (which is mentioned in 
Joseph Reagle's article), I've been involved in some discussions on this 
issue. The two major hurdles for this are how do you make tagging work 
across languages (for projects like Commons and Meta), and figuring out 
whether tags should augment or replace the categorization system. The 
first problem may be solved by Wikidata; the 2nd problem is probably 
solved by using both for a while and then eventually abandoning 
categories. There's a possibility that the multimedia development team 
that is being spun up over the next few months may try to tackle this, 
but there's nothing concrete on the agenda yet.


Ryan Kaldari

On 4/29/13 11:15 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 5:43 AM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case 
danc...@frontiernet.net mailto:danc...@frontiernet.net wrote:


This system keeps the categories more straightforward, and pretty
well avoids the sort of subtle bias Wikipedia has been caught
with here. Defining the precise intersection of interest is up to
the user.

But the corresponding weakness is that it depends on the editors
hitting all the right categories to work properly (as well as the
tool itself, which as heavy toolserver users know is not always
the case). Someone may categorize in two of three but not the
third (guess which one might get forgotten?)



Compare it to the weaknesses of the current category system. 98% of 
editors don't know what they are doing. Categories and subcategories 
are applied inconsistently all the time. Nobody has an overview of the 
entire tree structure, or even a major branch of it. Something that is 
a subcategory of American novelists today may stop being one tomorrow, 
just by dint of a single edit, and no one would be the wiser (unless 
they keep hundreds of categories on their watchlist). The category 
tree (or weave, as categories can have several parents) changes daily, 
with categories created, renamed, recategorised, and deleted. There 
are incessant arguments about how to name, categorise and diffuse 
categories, and about perceived iniquities. Wiki-gnomes spend days 
working and undoing each other's work. It's insane.


Using a defined set of basic tags in combination with something like 
CatScan – ported across to the Foundation server if you like, and 
given a friendly front-end with shortcuts to the most common searches 
– would do away with that.



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Topless image retention -don't give up

[Ryan Kaldari]

On 5/7/13 9:57 AM, Russavia wrote:

Frankly, I don't know why this is a feminist issue; rather than an
issue of common sense.


Agreed. I often find it is counter-productive to frame these sort of 
debates in terms of feminism/sexism/etc. This immediately triggers the 
censorship-defense mechanism in those who believe that feminists want to 
ban nudity from the internet (or something like that). You're not going 
to convince these editors that it is important to examine the biased 
representation of women on Wikipedia. What you might convince them of is 
that Gandhi is a more notable vegetarian than Serenity, the exotic 
dancer. Or that a photograph of a 3rd trimester pregnancy is a better 
illustration of 'pregnancy' than a photograph of a 1st trimester 
pregnancy. In other words, if you don't have to debate the nudity, 
don't. It will only steer the discussion into a culture war in which you 
will be hopelessly outnumbered.


Ryan 'Mansplainer' Kaldari


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] avoiding another categorygate

[Ryan Kaldari]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Feminism#Help_cleaning_up_Category:Prostitutes

Ryan Kaldari

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Topless image retention -don't give up

[Ryan Kaldari]

On 5/13/13 2:58 PM, Pete Forsyth wrote:
there is no broadly agreed model of what that consent form might look 
like.

Actually there is: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Consent


So images like this one would have to be deleted:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Michelle_and_Barack_Obama_paint_at_a_Habitat_for_Humanity_site.jpg


That image should be tagged with {{consent|published}}, which states the 
following:
 This media was copied from the source indicated, which adheres to 
professional editorial standards, allowing the status of consent to be 
reasonably inferred.
Thus there is no reason it should be deleted. There are several such 
options available with the consent template.


Ryan Kaldari
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Topless image retention -don't give up

[Ryan Kaldari]

On 5/13/13 5:03 PM, Pete Forsyth wrote:



So images like this one would have to be deleted:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Michelle_and_Barack_Obama_paint_at_a_Habitat_for_Humanity_site.jpg


That image should be tagged with {{consent|published}}, which
states the following:
 This media was copied from the source indicated, which adheres
to professional editorial standards, allowing the status of
consent to be reasonably inferred.
Thus there is no reason it should be deleted. There are several
such options available with the consent template.


This certainly seems like an improvement to me (in terms of due 
diligence and providing the reader with useful information) -- but how 
does it address the image's compatibility with the board resolution? 
It remains true that all 5 people were in a private setting, and did 
not (to our knowledge) express their consent to be published on 
Wikimedia Commons. (Or perhaps mere consent to be published is what 
the board meant - ?)


That's a good point. I wonder if it would be useful to circle back 
around with the Board and see if they would be interested in a more 
realistic baby-steps approach to the issue of consent.


Ryan Kaldari
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Don't let the man get you down

[Ryan Kaldari]

Awesome! I mean... Radical!

Ryan Kaldari

On 5/13/13 8:03 PM, Sarah Stierch wrote:

All the more reason why I love free knowledge and open sharing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Angela_Davis_enters_Royce_Hall_for_first_lecture_October_7_1969.jpg

An image of Angela Davis, never published until recently, now 
available under an open license.


Radical simply means 'grasping things at the root. - Angela Davis

-Sarah

--
--
*Sarah Stierch*
*/Museumist, open culture advocate, and Wikimedian/*
*/www.sarahstierch.com http://www.sarahstierch.com/*


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Women on the list: what have you been editing lately?

[Ryan Kaldari]

Wow, that's an amazing list! I wish all artists had lists like that.

Ryan Kaldari

On 5/18/13 9:35 AM, Jane Darnell wrote:

Good luck with the AfC backlog Sarah - it depresses me to just think
about that.

Here in Haarlem we are celebrating the 100 year anniversary of the
Frans Hals Museum. There are copies of Frans Hals paintings placed
strategically around town to show what the museum has to offer. One of
the men who is featured in 3 paintings in the museum was plastered all
over town in the bus stops on a poster. His portrait as an individual
is not here though, it's in Cincinnati. Haarlem basically only has the
group portraits left, the rest have all left town. There are still
over 70 people featured in those group portraits though, and I thought
it would be cool to reunite them on wiki with their individual
portraits.

After talking about it for 2 years, I have finally created the list of
Frans Hals paintings, and though I promised myself I would be done by
the museum's birthday of May 14th, of course people keep reminding
me now about other paintings to include.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_paintings_by_Frans_Hals

2013/5/18, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com:

I figure it's high time to start a positive (or call to action oriented)
focus thread again that is focused on empowering women on this list to
share.

Women - and those who identify as - what have you been editing lately?

---

I've been working hard at building my to do lists for the crowdsourcing
aspect of my World Digital Library project. I miss having time to edit and
write larger articles, but, that isn't in the cards yet.

On the flipside, I've been helping out at Articles for Creation again. We
have a backlog of over 1000!!!
  :)

Sarah

--
--
*Sarah Stierch*
*Museumist, open culture advocate, and Wikimedian*
*www.sarahstierch.com*


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Sex Ratios in Wikidata, Wikipedias, and VIAF

[Ryan Kaldari]

An interesting blog post about sex ratio data from Wikipedia and Wikidata:
http://hangingtogether.org/?p=2877

Interestingly, Wikidata only allows assigning a 'sex' to a person, not a 
'gender'.


Ryan Kaldari

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Sex Ratios in Wikidata, Wikipedias, and VIAF

[Ryan Kaldari]

Ack, they were also defining 'transgender' as a synonym of intersex! 
I've removed it for now.


Ryan Kaldari

On 5/24/13 8:31 AM, Jodi Schneider wrote:

There are lots of related discussions on the talk page:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property_talk:P21

Translation seems like one of the major issues!

So far, sex and gender are not distinguished as far as I can tell.

-Jodi

On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Powers 
ltpowers_w...@rochester.rr.com 
mailto:ltpowers_w...@rochester.rr.com wrote:


I wonder if that's a translation issue.  English Wikipedia is mostly
concerned with gender, but other languages might only consider
sex, or use
the same word for both concepts.


Powers  8^]



 -Original Message-
 From: Ryan Kaldari [mailto:rkald...@wikimedia.org
mailto:rkald...@wikimedia.org]
 Sent: Tuesday 21 May 2013 19:07
 To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
 Subject: [Gendergap] Sex Ratios in Wikidata, Wikipedias, and VIAF

 An interesting blog post about sex ratio data from Wikipedia and
Wikidata:
 http://hangingtogether.org/?p=2877

 Interestingly, Wikidata only allows assigning a 'sex' to a
person, not a
 'gender'.

 Ryan Kaldari




___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap




___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Changing the Chelsea Manning article (and how women were shouted down)

[Ryan Kaldari]

Looks like the Chelsea Manning article has been changed back to Bradley
Manning:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Chelsea_Manning/August_2013_move_request

There is still a discussion ongoing about which name to lead the article
text with, however:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bradley_Manning#First_sentence

Ryan Kaldari


On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 6:18 AM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.netwrote:

 There have been similar problems at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**
 Chelsea_Manning http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelsea_Manning
 Obviously there have been a number of comments that are obviously
 transphobic. However, there also have been repeated false charges of
 transphobia against those who cite good policy reasons for not changing the
 name.  I personally oppose the change to Chelsea as premature for a number
 of reasons, FYI.

 And there are good reasons to question what happened at that article
 process wise (the policy reasons for and against the change are discussed
 ad nauseam at the talk page where editors are just trying to get it changed
 back to Bradley Manning, though I think that's morphed into a final
 discussion - hard to tell!! ):
 * an admin changed the title to Chelsea Manning with no discussion on the
 talk page, given it's a controversial move in such a high publicity figure
 *the admin then spoke to the press about it, wrote a blog entry with their
 opinion, tweeted about it, and got even more media publicity for their blog
 entry and/or tweets
 *I would not be surprised if a number of editors also alerted the media to
 her writings and actions in order to try to influence the outcome of a
 Wikipedia policy decision
 *I don't know how much off wiki canvassing there was, but I did start a
 list of wikiprojects alerted, so at least that aspect of WP:Canvass would
 be covered
 *an editor threatened anyone moving the title back would become a minor
 celebrity for a few days, a threat only to those whose actual names were
 used, which implied outing (there's a subsection of the larger ANI thread
 on that threat and related insults)

 Wonder if I'll get shouted down *here* yet again for expressing my
 opinions... sigh...

 CM




 On 8/24/2013 7:34 AM, Helga Hansen wrote:

 In the German Wikipedia a huge discussion has erupted over the question
 how to change the Wikipedia page for Chelsea Manning and it's another
 textbook example over how to drive women of Wikipedia. You can see the gory
 details here (in German of course): http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/**
 Diskussion:Bradley_Manninghttp://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diskussion:Bradley_Manning

 I don't want to discuss this because it has already exhausted me to no
 end but it's another example of “How not to deal with women” and especially
 “How not to deal with transwomen” and it's important to understand the
 dynamics.

 After her statement on Today, one user went over the article, changing it
 from Bradley to Chelsea. When discussions about this started, two other
 users set up a section Namensänderung that addressed some of the
 criticism (confusion over names, before „Breanna“ was mentioned, how the
 support network has handled the name question) and provided sources. They
 did this on an etherpad and then moved the complete section into Wikipedia.
 By the way a modus operandi that I have heard from several women, to
 minimize chances of their work being deleted again.
 One admin locked the article title to Chelsea Manning. Some friends told
 me how happy they were to see the page presenting her in this way.

 Over the night, though, the discussion exploded. Changes were made by the
 minute, or rather, the article was reverted. Every try, to change something
 back or to reason with people was made impossible. To keep up, you would
 have had to be there, writing and fighting not only during the day but also
 the night. That is just not possible for anybody except students.

 Somebody mentioned that “commonly referred to names” were ok to use, so I
 tried to get people to acknowledge that the final article will influence
 how Manning is referred to in German speaking countries. No avail. Instead,
 the amount of transphobic statements was disgusting. People wanting to
 check her therapy progress, ID documents or in her pants. I cannot blame
 anybody who doesn't want to deal with this sort of violence.

 Every try to get people consider US laws and customs, which differ from
 much stricter German transgender laws and guidelines, was totally ignored.
 Also, guidelines by transgender organizations on how to write about
 transpeople were ignored. Somebody brought up the fact that Manning hat
 entered the military in a profession reserved for men at the time. Instead
 of asking an expert how to deal with it, it was solely used as an argument.
 It was all just opinions, instead of facts. While some people were still
 talking about knowledge, someone else would start a vote and then the
 majority decided.
 (In case you wonder: one way

Re: [Gendergap] Seeking advice on how to talk to other lists about sex-issue.

[Ryan Kaldari]

The attribute that is being assigned by property 21 on Wikidata (as it is
actually being used) is not sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity. It
is simply gender, and should be labeled as such. For the majority of
people, we don't actually know for sure what their sex, sexual orientation,
or gender identity is (especially for historical figures), but we do know
their gender, i.e. the role they assume within society. I really don't see
why this is even controversial.

Ryan Kaldari


On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:

 I remember seeing something about this on Wikidata and just not having
 enough hours in the day to comment at the time.

 There are three issues being intermingled here:

 *Sex, which is a biological marker determined by primary and secondary
 sexual characteristics such as breasts, penises, uteruses, etc.  As such,
 the sex category is mostly correct, but should add 'unknown'.

 *Sexual orientation, which identifies the manner in which the subject
 expresses their sexuality.  This would include heterosexual,
 homosexual/lesbian/gay, transsexual, bisexual, asexual, pansexual, and a
 host of other variables.

 *Gender identity, which is almost always male or female, but is not
 directly related to sex as identified in the first definition. Thus gender
 identity includes males who identify as females, intersex who identify as
 male or female, females who identify as male, females who identify as
 female, males who identify as male.  Elements of sexual orientation may
 also play a role, as in bisexuals who identify as both male and female, or
 as neither male nor female.

 It is important that assumptions not be made, particularly for sexual
 orientation or gender identity.  Most notable people do not discuss their
 orientation or gender identity.  I also would suggest that it be considered
 perfectly acceptable to leave those categories blank for the vast majority
 of subjects and include the response only where the subject has personally
 confirmed their sexual orientation or gender identity.  Frankly, this is
 pretty much none of our business and is only notable where the subject says
 it is.

 Risker/Anne
 On 25 October 2013 13:30, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote:

  By the way, I started a proposal to change 'sex' to 'gender' back in
 May:

 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property_talk:P21#Rename_.28en.29_label_.27sex.27-.3E.27gender.27
 But so far virtually no one has commented on it.

 Ryan Kaldari


 On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.orgwrote:

  Hey Max,
 The sex property at Wikidata definitely needs to be changed. This has
 nothing to do with the gender gap. The terminology is simply wrong. Let's
 continue this conversation at
 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property_talk:P21.

 Ryan Kaldari


  On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Klein,Max kle...@oclc.org wrote:

   Hello Gendergappians,

 I was recently chatting on Wikidata-l about the model that exists on
 Wikidata for classifying sex [1].

 If you didn't know of Wikidata, people are supposed to be classified as
 Male, Female, or Intersex. I once did some research on the composition
 Wikidtata given that classification [2] then Markus Kroetzscher
 investigated linking personal names to sex using this data [3].

 Well when Markus released his research on-list, I applauded his
 innovative methods and techniques. I also wanted to remind that forcing
 this binary or trinary classification onto people is not something that the
 software is making us do, but rather the us inflicting our bias onto the
 database. At that point I received a dismissive answer that if I wanted to
 talk about the gendergap that I should this mailing list, and that my
 comments were off topic. Then another user responded saying that my
 comments were very much on topic, and that's where the conversation
 stopped.

 I haven't wanted to continue the thread because of the emotional
 investment in what seems to be a fruitless debate. Although recently I was
 chatting to a friend of mine about my dissatisfaction who said something I
 really liked:

 basically since the categories are male, female, intersex, that means
 1) you are talking about a person's gonads, not their gender identity,
 which means 2) applying that category to most historical figures should
 count as original research it's not like anybody's done a major
 interdisciplinary study to confirm the chromosomes of every historical
 figure we aren't even sure shakespeare was a real person. how in the world
 should we guess what medical conditions he had in conclusion, sex: male
 female intersex is utter nonsense

 I would like to send the point to the list, but am fearful that it will
 be muddied again in that this is gendergap issue not a wikidata one when
 I am really just trying to talk about classification schemes.

 Do you have any advice on whether a) I should re-engage the debate, and
 if so b) how to best deliver my

Re: [Gendergap] Follow-on from the model FP image discussion

[Ryan Kaldari]

Personally, I doubt the image you're referring to would meet much resistance 
from gender-gappers. It clearly isn't cheesecake like the Michelle Merkin 
photo. In other words, its purpose isn't just to be sexually arousing to men.

That said, I think the image has little chance of being featured on Wikipedia 
anyway due to it being over-processed, but you're welcome to nominate it.

Ryan Kaldari

On Jun 11, 2014, at 3:47 AM, Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi all,
 
 I read with interest recent discussions on the issue of having a
 photograph of a glamour model on the front page of English Wikipedia.
 I don't agree with most of the reasoning against having such photos on
 the front page, but respect those opinions.
 
 I came across an image on Commons of Patricia de Leon which I have to
 say is AMAZING.[1] I have nominated it for FP on Commons, and it is in
 use on en.wp[2] and similarly could be nommed on that project for FP
 too.[3]
 
 I'd be interested hear from gendergappers what opinions on images such
 as this appearing on the front page of Wikipedia would be.
 
 Cheers
 
 Russavia
 
 
 [1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Patricia_De_Le%C3%B3n.jpg
 [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patricia_de_Leon_(actress)
 [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates
 
 ___
 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] Oh man, I feel like a woman ...

[Ryan Kaldari]

Awesome article. Sorry to hear about your troubles with the peanut gallery.

Ryan


On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 6:45 PM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case 
danc...@frontiernet.net wrote:

   It’s one thing to read about the sort of harsh reactions women get
 while editing that discourages them from continuing.

 It’s a second thing to experience it yourself.


 Late last week I was browsing *Slate* when I read their reprint (
 http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2014/06/11/lolly_wolly_doodle_brandi_temple_s_north_carolina_children_s_clothing_startup.html)
 of this month’s *Inc.* magazine cover story, about a company called Lolly
 Wolly Doodle, a children’s clothing company started by Brandi Temple a
 woman in North Carolina with no real prior business experience, who had by
 her own admission never wanted to be anything more than a trophy wife when
 she was younger. She apparently figured out how to sell on Facebook,
 something major retailers have failed to do, and she’s now the CEO of a
 rapidly-growing company that’s gotten some serious venture-capital funding,
 doing over half of its $10 million+ annual business on FB and by their own
 lights the largest retailer on that site.

 I checked to see if we had an article on this company. We didn’t, so I
 started one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lolly_Wolly_Doodle, complete
 with an infobox with the company logo and a free image of one of its
 dresses I found on Flickr. I reflected as I did so that the reason that
 this company had gotten all the media coverage it had in the tech and
 business press yet remained off our radar said entirely too much about our
 gender gap ... if we had just a few more probably regular editors who also
 are avid Pinterest users, I bet, we’d have had at least a stub a long time
 ago.

 But, that was all water under the bridge. Or so I thought.

 I nominated it for DYK on Friday. Late today, I get these responses:


 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Lolly_Wolly_Doodlediff=613195333oldid=612812989

 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Lolly_Wolly_Doodlediff=613195754oldid=613195333

 They were enough to ruin the good mood I was in following the USA’s World
 Cup win over Ghana and our neighbor coming over to invite my wife and I to
 her daughter’s graduation party. I have real trouble believing that
 Eppstein even read it (“whole paragraphs” are sourced to the company’s own
 history on its webpage? Huh? That it’s not neutral and too promotional?
 Everything it is sourced and attributed. And that dismissive conclusion
 about “story-telling mode about the struggles of the founders to find
 their way in the world” Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t think a
 similarly-written story about a business set up by men would get this level
 of criticism.

 Sorry if anyone was bothered by this, but I had to vent. I will be going
 into greater detail about why this review was so off base when I request
 that someone else review it instead (something I have very rarely done with
 all the DYKs I’ve nominated).

 Daniel Case



 ___
 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] Addressing incivility (was: men on lists)

[Ryan Kaldari]

What if...

Wikiquette assistance were resurrected as a list of volunteer admins that
you could privately email about problems rather than a public noticeboard?

Ryan Kaldari


On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 4:05 AM, Jane Darnell jane...@gmail.com wrote:

 I would assume that WMF has an ombudsman who would do just that, but I see
 that there is only this:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman_commission


 On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 7:50 AM, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 9:55 PM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case 
 danc...@frontiernet.net wrote:


   ​A major problem with our dispute-resolution processes is that the
 person being harassed has to endure more harassment to draw attention to
 the problem.

  This is, of course, hardly unique to Wikipedia or even online
 communities in general, I think.


 ​Hi Daniel, the very public nature of it on Wikipedia makes it unusual
 and very stressful.​


  ​

 I have long thought the Foundation ought to employ a team of
 specialists who can take up those cases when they see them, so that the
 pursuit of sanctions is not laid at the victim's door. This is perhaps
 similar to Sumana's suggestion that communities need dedicated helpers who
 will do the emotional labour in conflict situations.

 Would there be a good existing example of such a program we could take a
 look at?

  Daniel Case


 ​Sumana talked
 https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Hospitality,_Jerks,_and_What_I_Learned
 about the situation at Hacker School: ​
 If you don’t understand why something you did broke the rules, you don't
 ask the person who corrected you. You ask a facilitator. You ask someone
 who’s paid to do that emotional labor, and you don't bring everyone else's
 work to a screeching halt. This might sound a little bit foreign to some of
 us right now. Being able to ask someone to stop doing the thing that’s
 harming everyone else’s work and knowing that it will actually stop and
 that there’s someone else who’s paid to do that emotional labor who will
 take care of any conversation that needs to happen.
 ​

 The idea of having people paid to do this is very attractive for
 Wikipedia. I think they would have to be professionals with appropriate
 training, otherwise there's a big risk of making things worse. The
 Foundation probably has enough of an income to consider this, given the
 potential impact on the atmosphere and editor retention.

 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


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons

[Ryan Kaldari]

Personally, I don't think it's worth having a discussion here about the
merits of deleting these images. There's no chance in hell they are going
to be deleted from Commons. What I'm more interested in is the locker-room
nature of the discussions and how/if this can be addressed, as I think that
is actually more likely to dissuade female contributors than the images
themselves.

Ryan Kaldari


On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote:

 Ryan, thanks for bringing this up for discussion. I've put a lot of
 thought into the series of photos this comes from over the years, and it's
 well worth some discussion. I'd like to hear what others think about this.
 Here is a link to the category for the larger collection; warning, there's
 lots of nudity and sexual objectification here, so don't click if you don't
 want to see that:
 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Nude_portrayals_of_computer_technology

 First, I agree with Ryan that in the (various) deletion discussions I've
 seen around this and similar topics, there is often a toxic level of
 childish and offensive comments. I think that's a significant problem, and
 I don't know what can be done to improve it. Scolding people in those
 discussions often a backfires, and serves only to amplify the offensive
 commentary. But silence can imply tacit consent. How should one participate
 in the discussion, promoting an outcome one believes in, without
 contributing to or enabling the toxic nature of the discourse? I think I've
 done a decent job of walking that line in similar discussions, but I'm sure
 there's a lot of room for better approaches. I would love to hear what has
 worked for others, here and/or privately.

 Also, my initial reaction to these images is that they are inherently
 offensive; my gut reaction is to keep them off Commons.

 But after thinking it through and reading through a number of deletion
 discussions, the conclusion I've come to (at least so far) is that the
 decision to keep them (in spite of the childish and offensive commentary
 along the way) is the right decision. These strike me as the important
 points:
 * We have a collection of more than 20 million images, intended to support
 a wide diversity of educational projects. Among those 20 million files are
 a great many that would be offensive to some audience. (For instance, if I
 understand correctly, *all images portraying people* are offensive to at
 least some devout Muslims.)
 * Were these images originally intended to promote objectification of
 women? To support insightful commentary on objectification of women?
 Something else? I can't see into the minds of their creators, but I *can*
 imagine them being put to all kinds of uses, some of which would be
 worthwhile. The intent of the photographer and models, I've come to
 believe, is not relevant to the decision. (apart from the basic issue of
 consent in the next bullet point:)
 * Unlike many images on Commons, I see no reason to doubt that these were
 produced by consenting adults, and intended for public distribution.

 If they are to be deleted, what is the principle under which we would
 delete them? To me, that's the key question. If it's simply the fact that
 we as individuals find them offensive, I don't think that's sufficient. If
 it's out of a belief that they inherently cause more harm than good, I
 think the reasons for that would need to be fleshed out before they could
 be persuasive.

 Art is often meant to be provocative, to challenge our assumptions and
 sensibilities, to prompt discussion. We host a lot of art on Commons. On
 what basis would we delete these, but keep other controversial works of
 art? Of course it would be terrible to use these in, for instance, a
 Wikipedia article about HTML syntax. But overall, does it cause harm to
 simply have them exist in an image repository? My own conclusion with
 regard to this photo series is that the net value of maintaining a large
 and diverse collection of media, without endorsing its contents per se.,
 outweighs other considerations.

 (For anybody interested in the deletion process on Commons, the kinds of
 things that are deliberated, and the way the discussions go, you might be
 interested in my related blog post from a couple months ago:
 http://wikistrategies.net/wikimedia-commons-is-far-from-ethically-broken/
 )

 -Pete
 [[User:Peteforsyth]]



 On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org
 wrote:

 If anyone ever needs a good example of the locker-room environment on
 Wikimedia Commons, I just came across this old deletion discussion:

 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Radio_button_and_female_nude.jpg

 The last two keep votes are especially interesting. One need look no
 farther than the current Main Page talk page for more of the same (search
 for premature ejaculation).

 Kaldari

 ___
 Gendergap mailing

Re: [Gendergap] Noiva do Cordeiro

[Ryan Kaldari]

Well, it is the Daily Mirror, so I wouldn't take it too seriously:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mirror#mediaviewer/File:The_Daily_Mirror_-_Sorry_We_Were_Hoaxed.jpg


On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Krystle krys...@wikihow.com wrote:

 Is this for real?
 http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/town-entire-population-made-up-4113722

 And if so, should there be a Wikipedia entry about it? I started to draft
 one but am a little worried because there seems to be only one article
 about this mysterious town. Hoax, maybe.

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Noiva_do_Cordeiro

 ___
 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] Huge list of Gender Gap resources

[Ryan Kaldari]

Wow, nice work Carol!


On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 9:09 AM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net
wrote:

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1
 It took me a month to put together, including by rereading 2/3 of threads
 here and grabbing links.

 The big objection to working to end the gender gap has been that there's
 no proof it exists/its important/we can change it/etc.  I do expect there
 to be fierce objection to listing 80% of this material from the Gender Gap
 task force naysayers. But the entries are wikiproject relevant, if not
 always useable as reliable sources in articles.

 Additions and constructive suggestions welcome.

   Contents

- 1 Books
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Books
- 2 Mainstream and tech publication articles

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Mainstream_and_tech_publication_articles
- 3 Research studies

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Research_studies
   - 3.1 Wikimedia Foundation sponsored studies
   
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Wikimedia_Foundation_sponsored_studies
   - 3.2 Outside studies
   
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Outside_studies
   - 3.3 Studies on similar topics and/or communities
   
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Studies_on_similar_topics_and.2For_communities
 - 4 Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Wikimedia_Foundation_and_Wikimedia
   - 4.1 Gender gap projects
   
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Gender_gap_projects
   - 4.2 Diversity projects
   
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Diversity_projects
   - 4.3 Outreach project
   
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Outreach_project
   - 4.4 Wikimedia blog entries
   
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Wikimedia_blog_entries
   - 4.5 Wikimania
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Wikimania
   - 4.6 Essays
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Essays
   - 4.7 Civility issue
   
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Civility_issue
 - 5 En.Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#En.Wikipedia
   - 5.1 Gender gap-related projects
   
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Gender_gap-related_projects
   - 5.2 Workshops and Edit-a-thons
   
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Workshops_and_Edit-a-thons
   - 5.3 *Sign Post* articles
   
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Sign_Post_articles
   - 5.4 Wikipedia articles
   
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Wikipedia_articles
   - 5.5 Women-related article lists
   
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Women-related_article_lists
   - 5.6 Relevant essays
   
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Relevant_essays
 - 6 Help pages
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Help_pages
- 7 Audio and video

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Audio_and_video
- 8 Civility issue

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Civility_issue_2
- 9 Images
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Images
- 10 Related sites and projects

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Related_sites_and_projects
- 11 Interesting blog and other articles

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1#Interesting_blog_and_other_articles



 ___
 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] Polish Wikipedia momument has two women

[Ryan Kaldari]

Nice! Can we get one for the WMF office? ;)

Kaldari

On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 4:53 PM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net
wrote:

  The final momument was unveiled and it looks like, and I was told, it
 has two, women in it. Yeah!
 https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomnik_Wikipedii_w_S%C5%82ubicach
 Article on Polish Wikipedia with photo

 Images.google search of Polish monument Wikipedia gets a couple more
 good photo returns.

 ___
 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] [arbcom-appeals-en] [Child Protection Policy]Gender Gap issues

[Ryan Kaldari]

Yeah, I don't see how this is at all relevant to the gender gap. Please
moderate the sender.

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 1:27 PM, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com
wrote:


 I was going back and forth on speaking up myself, but I concur.

 George William Herbert
 Sent from my iPhone

 On Nov 18, 2014, at 1:21 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hello the moderators, I think the legal threats implied in this e-mail
 (and the other) are sufficient to warrant moderating the sender.

 On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Romana Busse romana.bu...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Dear Mr. Davies

 From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee#Members
 I observe you are an inactive Member of this alleged committee. I
 hence suspect that your email is bogus.

 Accordingly I would appreciate receiving a signed email, or even a
 scanned signed email clearly given on behalf of the Arbitration
 Committee listing its physical address for service of legal process.

 I am shocked by the casual and secretive approach adopted to such
 concerns of child pornography, especially when it was previously made
 on another website http://wikipediocracy.com, naming 2 of your users
 Sitush and Bishonen using sexually colored language and referring
 to child pornography on your website. This Sitush is a serial stalker
 and harasser of female Wikipedia editors as your Arbcom knows well..

 It is certainly strange that I was blocked as a sock puppet at the
 instance of these same 2 users (1 of whom is your Admin) when I
 brought that message to their attention.  It seems Wikipedia actively
 discourages reporting such sexual harassment to Admins and wipes out
 all trace of it from public gaze, to the extent of terminating the
 account of the person who reported me for being an alleged
 sockpuppet..

 It is even stranger that you will not disclose / specify the multiple
 accounts and IPs I am accused of using as an alleged sock puppet or
 why I am accused of being an India Against Corruption sockpuppet when
 I have never edited any page concerned with that body. It is very
 strange that Arbcom will not comply with its own policies for this. .

 It is clear that the Arbcom is covering up the actions of its
 anonymous users implicated in child pornography by another website.

 I urge you to reconsider as I firmly intend to pursue this matter and
 investigate all your own antecedents on your inactions..

 On 11/19/14, Roger Davies roger.davies.w...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  Romana Busse:
 
  This is to acknowledge receipt of your emails of yesterday and today.
 
  The Arbitration Committee is unable to assist you further in this
  matter. Any further communications should be sent to:
 
  le...@wikimedia.org
 
  Roger Davies
  Arbitration Committee
 
 
 
  On 18/11/2014 15:41, Romana Busse wrote:
  Dear Anthony (AGK)
 
  I'm very sorry to bother you, but could I have a timeline with respect
  to deletion, or not, of those images ?
 
  With the welfare of the children in mind, I feel that the school, the
  children's parents and the local child welfare committees, magistrates
  and police should be properly sensitized  to the incidents of that
  day, and to ensure it cannot reoccur
 
  I'm sure the police and the Indian Govt Cyber Advisory Committee would
  be interested in learning from you or NYBrad  the finer points of law
  whereby Citizendium encyclopedia decides to completely wipes out the
  images within 12 hours but Wikipedia has not done anything till now on
  identical complaint.
 
  I would also like to know by when you will publish across all
  Wikipedia projects the complete list of accounts and IPs I have
  allegedly used, and also if I am a sockpuppet of User:MehulWB as
  alleged or not. This is required by your same policy WP:SOCK under
  which was blocked.
 
  Thanks
 
  On 11/18/14, Romana Busse romana.bu...@gmail.com wrote:
  This is about a potential threat to clearly identifiable Indian minor
  school children whose images are retained on WMF servers in USA and
  India despite legal notice to remove them.
  Taken within their school (where their parents expected the same
  degree of privacy as they enjoy at home) and uploaded without their
  permission, consent or knowledge, at a location where they allegedly
  viewed grossly obscene pornography accessed on a Wikimedia Foundation
  service which has now been disabled on complaint by a body called
  [[India Against Corruption]].
 
  ___
  ArbCom-appeals-en mailing list
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BASC
  https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-appeals-en
 
 

 ___
 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] [Research] Communicating on Wikipedia while female

[Ryan Kaldari]

A very interesting study, and rather depressing. I love that I'm cited as a
radical feminist though :)

On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Netha Hussain nethahuss...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Dear all,

  I found an interesting research done by Laura Hale about Communicating
 on Wikipedia while female : A discursive analysis of the use of the word
 cunt on English Wikipedia user talk pages on meta wiki. The link to the
 research page is here:

 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Communicating_on_Wikipedia_while_female

 Regards
 Netha

 -- Forwarded message --
 From: Laura Hale la...@fanhistory.com
 Date: Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 9:57 PM
 Subject: [Wiki-research-l] Communicating on Wikipedia while female
 To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities 
 wiki-researc...@lists.wikimedia.org


 Hey,

 I posted some new research to meta at
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Communicating_on_Wikipedia_while_female
 .  It is titled: Communicating on Wikipedia while female A discursive
 analysis of the use of the word cunt on English Wikipedia user talk pages.
 Thought it might be of some interest to people on this list.

 Sincerely,
 Laura Hale

 --
 twitter: purplepopple

 ___
 Wiki-research-l mailing list
 wiki-researc...@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l




 --
 Netha Hussain
 Student of Medicine and Surgery
 Govt. Medical College, Kozhikode
 Blogs :
 *nethahussain.blogspot.com
 http://nethahussain.blogspot.comswethaambari.wordpress.com
 http://swethaambari.wordpress.com*


 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] What's happening at ArbCom re WP:GGTF

[Ryan Kaldari]

If Carol Moore is banned from Wikipedia and Eric Corbett is not, I will be
retiring from Wikipedia, as it will prove that the project is completely
dysfunctional.

Kaldari

On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 11:09 AM, LB lightbreath...@gmail.com wrote:

 This is what is about to happen at the English Wikipedia ArbCom re
 disruption at the Gender Gap Task Force:
 *Five men and two women were involved parties in the case.
 *One women is about to be site banned.
 *The other woman is about to be topic banned from the GGTF.
 *All five men are going to be free to edit.

 It is noteworthy, IMO, that only 1 of the 12 arbitrators is a woman
 (GorillaWarfare, bless her, who is not for giving WP's #1 trouble-maker,
 Eric Corbet, yet *another* chance). Here is a link to the Proposed
 decision page:
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gender_Gap_Task_Force/Proposed_decision

 And to the talk page:
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gender_Gap_Task_Force/Proposed_decision

 Lightbreather

 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] a gender gap meet-up?

[Ryan Kaldari]

Does anyone else feel like it might be time for a gender gap meet-up? I
love the mailing list, but it's such a limited (and formal) means of
communication. I'm curious what kind of ideas and discussion would come
from an in-person get together. I know several of the people on this list
are in the Bay Area, so maybe we could put something together in San
Francisco or Oakland. Does this sound like an interesting idea to anyone?

Kaldari
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] [Gendergap-I] GGTF interactions arbcom case has now closed

[Ryan Kaldari]

Rationalobserver has posted a survey related to the Gender Gap Task Force
Arbitration decision on the Civility talk page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Civility#Survey

Seems pretty relevant to the recent discussions here.

Kaldari

On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 1:16 AM, Russia Aviation russiaviat...@gmail.com
wrote:

 The answer to a hypothetical query by TDA
 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=367632.10;wap2
 Simon Tushingham [Sitush]

 I was an active user in Wikipedia for the past many many years. I had
 more than 30,000 edits to my name. From 2011, most of the sections in
 Wikipedia were under the control of organized cabals. I wrote to Jimmy
 Wales many times warning against this. But many of the users who
 voiced against this were later banned. In the section I was following,
 the leader of the Cabal was from Manchester, known by his alibi Simon
 Tushingham. Despite this guy committing all sorts of one-sided edits,
 Wales supported him. Tushingham frequently bragged in Wikipedia that
 he regularly talked to Wales in his cell phone and were good friends
 in real life. I had enough and quit Wikipedia in 2011. I know many
 more who did the same.
 Wikipedia is similar to a ponzi scheme. They publicized themselves as
 a free and unbiased online encyclopedia. Once they had enough
 following, they kicked out the old users and showed their true
 colors.

 In reply to :


 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Walesoldid=636276109#GGTF_interactions_arbcom_case_has_now_closed

 So you won't comment on the case, but how about a hypothetical? Let's
 say there is a male editor who, after the conclusion of an arbitration
 case, begins following a female editor from the same case all over the
 site for months. When that editor is reported for this behavior and
 there is a proposal to bar the male editor from interacting with the
 female editor, another male editor comes to his defense and suggests
 if the male editor is barred from interacting with the female editor
 that maybe he will start following her around instead. After the
 proposal is passed the other male editor announces he is going to be
 doing work on Wikipedia regarding a link, which just happens to be the
 personal website of the female editor. The female editor objects and
 questions his intentions. This male editor then begins taunting her
 with personal details researched online and plainly expresses his
 intentions to write a bio about her here. Despite several other
 objections and the female editor's own protests, this male editor
 creates a draft that he explains is fully intended to be made into a
 live article all about the female editor. It is apparent that certain
 details have been cherry-picked from primary sources and articles
 about the female editor and presented in a way that is clearly aimed
 at being unflattering towards her. Despite numerous editors suggesting
 his actions are woefully inappropriate he insists that he is a
 perfectly good editor who is being neutral towards this person he
 detests. Would you consider it acceptable for the Arbitration
 Committee to ban the female editor for commenting about this male
 editor's behavior, while giving the male editor essentially nothing
 more than a warning after praising his efforts on this site?--The
 Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 21:23, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

 --
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
 Gender Gap group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
 email to gender-gap+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] [Gendergap-I] GGTF interactions arbcom case has now closed

[Ryan Kaldari]

The URL I just posted goes to the wrong survey (since there are two
sections with the same header on that page). Here is a better URL:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Civility#Arbcom.27s_position_on_expletives

Kaldari

On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 12:39 AM, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org
wrote:

 Rationalobserver has posted a survey related to the Gender Gap Task Force
 Arbitration decision on the Civility talk page:
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Civility#Survey

 Seems pretty relevant to the recent discussions here.

 Kaldari

 On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 1:16 AM, Russia Aviation russiaviat...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 The answer to a hypothetical query by TDA
 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=367632.10;wap2
 Simon Tushingham [Sitush]

 I was an active user in Wikipedia for the past many many years. I had
 more than 30,000 edits to my name. From 2011, most of the sections in
 Wikipedia were under the control of organized cabals. I wrote to Jimmy
 Wales many times warning against this. But many of the users who
 voiced against this were later banned. In the section I was following,
 the leader of the Cabal was from Manchester, known by his alibi Simon
 Tushingham. Despite this guy committing all sorts of one-sided edits,
 Wales supported him. Tushingham frequently bragged in Wikipedia that
 he regularly talked to Wales in his cell phone and were good friends
 in real life. I had enough and quit Wikipedia in 2011. I know many
 more who did the same.
 Wikipedia is similar to a ponzi scheme. They publicized themselves as
 a free and unbiased online encyclopedia. Once they had enough
 following, they kicked out the old users and showed their true
 colors.

 In reply to :


 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Walesoldid=636276109#GGTF_interactions_arbcom_case_has_now_closed

 So you won't comment on the case, but how about a hypothetical? Let's
 say there is a male editor who, after the conclusion of an arbitration
 case, begins following a female editor from the same case all over the
 site for months. When that editor is reported for this behavior and
 there is a proposal to bar the male editor from interacting with the
 female editor, another male editor comes to his defense and suggests
 if the male editor is barred from interacting with the female editor
 that maybe he will start following her around instead. After the
 proposal is passed the other male editor announces he is going to be
 doing work on Wikipedia regarding a link, which just happens to be the
 personal website of the female editor. The female editor objects and
 questions his intentions. This male editor then begins taunting her
 with personal details researched online and plainly expresses his
 intentions to write a bio about her here. Despite several other
 objections and the female editor's own protests, this male editor
 creates a draft that he explains is fully intended to be made into a
 live article all about the female editor. It is apparent that certain
 details have been cherry-picked from primary sources and articles
 about the female editor and presented in a way that is clearly aimed
 at being unflattering towards her. Despite numerous editors suggesting
 his actions are woefully inappropriate he insists that he is a
 perfectly good editor who is being neutral towards this person he
 detests. Would you consider it acceptable for the Arbitration
 Committee to ban the female editor for commenting about this male
 editor's behavior, while giving the male editor essentially nothing
 more than a warning after praising his efforts on this site?--The
 Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 21:23, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

 --
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
 Gender Gap group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
 email to gender-gap+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

[Ryan Kaldari]

The rediculous thing is that none of the people defending that article were 
'feminists'. They were just defending the mainstream point of view from an 
endless onslaught of 8channers. The feminist point view isn't even represented 
in the article.

On Jan 23, 2015, at 7:14 PM, J Hayes slowki...@gmail.com wrote:

 http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/23/wikipedia-bans-editors-from-gender-related-articles-amid-gamergate-controversy
 
 http://internet.gawker.com/wikipedia-purged-a-group-of-feminist-editors-because-of-1681463331/+cushac
 
 
 ___
 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] WikiProject Women

[Ryan Kaldari]

Cool idea. I added some questions on the talk page.

Kaldari

On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 3:35 PM, LB lightbreath...@gmail.com wrote:

 Well, I don't know if I did it right, but per Sarah's and Siko's
 suggestion, I started this:

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

 Just bare bones for now. I will work on it some more tomorrow.

 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

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

[Ryan Kaldari]

I'm sure it's hard to remain calm and thoughtful when 8chan is running 24/7
discussion threads to:
1. Strategize on how to subvert the consensus process to take over the
article
2. Target Wikipedia editors for doxxing and harassment so that they will
stop defending the article

The assault was literally relentless. I think Ryulong nearly had a nervous
breakdown and the other editors didn't fair much better. They all deserve a
barnstar and some kittens, IMO...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ryulong
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TaraInDC
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TheRedPenOfDoom
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tarc
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:NorthBySouthBaranof

On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 3:17 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:



 On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com
 wrote:


 After reviewing the Arbcom case, I don't even know who got the idea that
 any of the contributing editors are feminist, per se. No one even mentions
 the word, except once, when describing a subject that was slandered in
 the gamer gate article(s).


 ​Hi Sarah, I think the point is that editors who were defending the
 rights and privacy of the women involved in Gamergate are being sanctioned
 because (I assume) they did it in some sense inappropriately, perhaps too
 aggressively, I don't know. (I don't know the details.)

 In that sense it looks like a repeat of the gender gap task force
 decision. In the latter, those trying to stop disruption were sanctioned
 even harder than those causing it.

 The message those cases send is that, if you're trying to protect women's
 interests, you have to creep around and not stick your neck out. The
 Chelsea Manning case had similar problems, and Sceptre recently expressed
 the same concern about the Sexology case.

 Another aspect of this is that we've been undermining admins for years so
 that they (we) are reluctant to act at an early stage to nip things in the
 bud. As Tony Sidaway wrote: The administrator corps must be coaxed out
 of their inappropriate and destructive timidity. I was glad to see the
 ArbCom's proposed decision thank the admins who have worked on this.

 Sarah



 I think the lesson it sends is that a righteous cause is not a defense
 against accusations of disruption, nor a license to violate other policies.
 I'm sure that among the restricted people are those with positions I'd
 support along with many others, but that doesn't put their behavior above
 reproach. Tony Sidaway was hardly the paragon of a calm and thoughtful
 administrator - insightful as he often was, there was a reason he was fired
 as a clerk and barred from simply requesting his bit back.

 ___
 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] The (non-existent) Farkhunda Wikipedia article--victim or rallying point

[Ryan Kaldari]

Is there an article on vaginal fistula? I would look it up myself, but
I'm at work :)

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:

 It could just as easily be argued the other way, I think. It's
 presumptuous and perhaps insulting to purport to create a biography on a
 person, under her own name, while merely recounting a single tragic
 occurrence in her life. Since there is often not enough verifiable
 information to create a biography, it makes some sense to not assert that
 Wikipedia is doing so. Moreover... It's generally bad practice to apply
 principles of search engine optimization to editing an encyclopedia.

 And as for fistula... That article isn't great, I agree. However, vaginal
 fistulas are not the only or even the most common use of that term. Even in
 medicine, they are a subset of the broader phenomena.

 On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Neotarf neot...@gmail.com wrote:

 Articles about women are getting lost.  Lost that is, to Google searches.

 For the last two days, Afghanistan has been exploding in demonstrations
 over Farkhunda, a Kabul woman who was beaten to death and torched by a mob.
 Even though every major news source has done a piece on her, I can't find
 an article for her yet in Wikipedia.  When it does get written, and finally
 starts showing up in the search engines, what will it say? Farkhunda, the
 logical search term?  Or more likely, the more common format: the
 murder/lynching/battering/victimization/humiliation of [insert woman's name
 here].


 For quite some time, the article for Ozgecan Aslan was hidden from
 Google searches as well, because due to the English Wikipedia's unique
 naming conventions, the article was called Murder of Özgecan Aslan.


 Maybe it's time to reconsider naming articles about women for the
 horrible things that were done to them, and give them the simple dignity of
 their own names.  I'm not sure the victimization narrative is the right one
 anyhow.  The Farkhunda story seems to be about her death becoming a
 rallying point for the way women are treated in Afghanistan, much as Aslan
 was in Turkey.


 What else?  Iraqi lawyer Samira Salih al-Nuaimi still comes up 6th in a
 Google search, *after* the entry for the Daily Mail, because of the
 idiosyncratic spelling of her name in the article title. But at least you
 can find her (very, very short) article now.


 And since I've already written this much, the article on fistula
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fistula, a problem for a huge number of
 girls in parts of the Global South, is not very well explained.  Compare 
 Female
 genital mutilation or even Women's rights in 2014
 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Women%27s_rights_in_2014redirect=no.
 (thx, SV).   Also reference the short article on Fatimata Touré
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatimata_Tour%C3%A9, whose group in Mali
 works against fistula.


 Note: for Farkhunda, see Twitter photos
 https://twitter.com/hashtag/Farkhunda?src=hash and WaPo http://
 www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/03/23/afghan-woman-beaten-to-death-for-a-crime-she-didnt-commit-becomes-a-rallying-point-for-activists/


 ___
 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] Tomboy on Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

Adding a criticism section sounds like a good idea (assuming some sources
can be found). I added a criticism section to the article Feminazi, lest
someone think that everyone is fine with the use of that term :)

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net
wrote:

  Found this blog item of interest. Perhaps the article needs some RS
 objections to the use of the term.


 http://www.adviceformydaughter.com/2015/04/18/girls-are-not-tomboys-they-are-girls/
 Starts with...

 According to Wikipedia:

 A *tomboy* is a girl who exhibits characteristics or behaviors considered
 typical of a boy,  including wearing masculine clothing and engaging in
 games and activities that are physical in nature and are considered in many
 cultures to be “unfeminine” or the domain of boys.

 Just because there is a wikipedia entry, doesn’t mean we have to subscribe
 to it.

 Some girls climb trees.

 Some girls wear dresses.

 Some girls climb trees while wearing dresses


 ___
 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] Women's health articles

[Ryan Kaldari]

Should I be surprised that only one of the six participants in the current
discussion at the vaginal yeast infection article is a woman? Maybe it's
time to create a 'Women's health' WikiProject!

Kaldari
___
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 health articles

[Ryan Kaldari]

On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Netha Hussain nethahuss...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Hi Ryan,

  Thank you for bringing this to my notice! Could I get the link to the
 article?


It's a little hard to find (which is actually the subject of the
discussion): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candidal_vulvovaginitis

Wikiproject: Women's Health has been my personal dream for a long time, but
 I couldn't yet get myself working on it because of commitments elsewhere.
 :-(


I would be happy to officially propose such a project (and help set it up)
if there is interest from 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] Women's health articles

[Ryan Kaldari]

I created a proposal here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals/Women%27s_health

Feel free to add yourself as a supporter or discuss the proposal in the
discussion section.

On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Sydney Poore sydney.po...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Set it up and sign me up, too.

 Sydney
 On May 14, 2015 8:39 PM, keilanawiki keilanaw...@gmail.com wrote:

 Let's do it - I'm happy to help set it up! :)


 Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device


  Original message 
 From: Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org
 Date:05/14/2015 1:23 PM (GMT-06:00)
 To: Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the
 participation of women within Wikimedia projects. 
 gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 Cc:
 Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Women's health articles

 On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Netha Hussain nethahuss...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Hi Ryan,

  Thank you for bringing this to my notice! Could I get the link to the
 article?


 It's a little hard to find (which is actually the subject of the
 discussion): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candidal_vulvovaginitis

 Wikiproject: Women's Health has been my personal dream for a long time,
 but I couldn't yet get myself working on it because of commitments
 elsewhere. :-(


 I would be happy to officially propose such a project (and help set it
 up) if there is interest from people.


 ___
 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] Wikipedia and Feminism.

[Ryan Kaldari]

I find the entire premise of this essay to be a bit misguided. Do we really
need to worry about tamping down the trickle of feminists editing art
articles on Wikipedia? There are easily ten times more men's rights
activists editing Wikipedia than feminists, and they actively organize
off-wiki to subvert NPOV. Why does no one care about that? Why not write a
blog post about men's rights activists running meat-puppet campaigns and
trying to white-wash articles about rape and domestic violence? If
anything, having a handful of feminists on Wikipedia might serve to keep
them in check.

Also, don't revise existing articles because you feel there is a male bias
in them.
This is terrible advice. For example, I significantly revised the dating
article a few years ago because it had an obvious male bias and seemed to
be intended only for a male audience. Why should people leave articles with
a male bias? NPOV doesn't mean leave articles with whatever bias they
started with.

Also, I find it strange that your article implies that feminists can't
write from a neutral point of view. Feminism is about equality of the sexes
and opposing stereotypes and biases. It isn't about making women look
better than men or excluding the male point of view. I think feminists make
great Wikipedia editors. Look at Adrianne Wadewitz: 37 featured articles! I
would gladly take 1000 more Adrianne Wadewitzs as Wikipedia editors!

Kaldari

On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 8:23 AM, J Hayes slowki...@gmail.com wrote:

 nice wiki-splaining - the problem with your thesis:
 

 *What we don't need, however, is more feminists.*
 is labeling and the double standard of civility enforcement

 as Djembayz said at Signpost:
 the rules on Wikipedia are not clear, the enforcement on disruptive
 behavior is arbitrary or non-existent. Online game players, vulgarians, and
 sea-lioning http://simplikation.com/why-sealioning-is-bad/ randos who
 congregate here can be as disruptive and outrageous as they wish, with
 impunity. They don't care, because they don't have to.

 until the systemic bias in civility enforcement is dealt with, your
 thesis will be a dead letter with me.

 On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Sydney Poore sydney.po...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 This part of the we of Wikipedians...me..wants feminist to edit
 Wikipedia, as well as people who want to solely add articles about women.

 What I ask of you is to stand back so that those of us who are interested
 in creating an inclusive editing community can do so without being
 hindered. Because there is simply no way that Wikipedia's content can be
 neutral without a large and inclusive body of people creating it.

 Warm regards,
 Sydney Poore
 User:FloNight
 On Apr 9, 2015 10:27 AM, Lukas Mezger (Wikipedia) 
 lukas.mez...@wikipedia.de wrote:

 Dear readers of the gender gap mailing list,

 My name is Lukas and I am a German Wikipedian (User:Gnom).

 I recently wrote a blog post on Wikipedia and feminism
 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Gnom/Blog#2_April_2015:_A_blog_post_on_Wikipedia_and_feminism.
 and was encouraged to share it with this list.

 As I am very new to the gender gap debate, I would appreciate your
 comments.
 Regards,

 Lukas Mezger

 ___
 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] Women's health articles

[Ryan Kaldari]

Since the WikiProject proposal got a lot of positive feedback, I've gone
ahead and created the page for the WikiProject here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women's_health

It's extremely basic right now, but I'll try to flesh it out some more this
weekend. If you're interested, please sign-up as a member on the project
page and help tag articles using the project template: {{WikiProject
Women's health|class=|importance=}}

On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 2:33 PM, Neotarf neot...@gmail.com wrote:

 Has anyone given any thought to Simple English Wikipedia?  I started
 Fistula https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fistula which has so far
 escaped the deletionists, and have FGM,
 https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_mutilation which is very
 incomplete, on my list, since SV updated the enwiki article. BTW, I took
 the fistula illustration from another language wikipedia, as it seemed more
 appropriate to a younger and possibly more conservative readership.

 As a side note, since I don't know of any women who use Visual Editor, VE
 has done something with its image search function.  If you have ever tried
 to find an image about some subject on Commons, you know it can be almost
 impossible.  But if you enable VE, go to the insert function, and tell it
 to upload an image, it will suggest images to you that you would never be
 able to find otherwise.

 On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 5:07 PM, keilanawiki keilanaw...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Awesome!!!


 Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device


  Original message 
 From: Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org
 Date:05/14/2015 3:22 PM (GMT-06:00)
 To: Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the
 participation of women within Wikimedia projects. 
 gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 Cc:
 Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Women's health articles

 I created a proposal here:

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals/Women%27s_health

 Feel free to add yourself as a supporter or discuss the proposal in the
 discussion section.

 On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Sydney Poore sydney.po...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Set it up and sign me up, too.

 Sydney
 On May 14, 2015 8:39 PM, keilanawiki keilanaw...@gmail.com wrote:

 Let's do it - I'm happy to help set it up! :)


 Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device


  Original message 
 From: Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org
 Date:05/14/2015 1:23 PM (GMT-06:00)
 To: Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the
 participation of women within Wikimedia projects. 
 gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 Cc:
 Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Women's health articles

 On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Netha Hussain nethahuss...@gmail.com
  wrote:

 Hi Ryan,

  Thank you for bringing this to my notice! Could I get the link to the
 article?


 It's a little hard to find (which is actually the subject of the
 discussion): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candidal_vulvovaginitis

 Wikiproject: Women's Health has been my personal dream for a long time,
 but I couldn't yet get myself working on it because of commitments
 elsewhere. :-(


 I would be happy to officially propose such a project (and help set it
 up) if there is interest from people.


 ___
 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] Atlantic article..."How Wikipedia is Hostile to Women"

[Ryan Kaldari]

Personally I'm skeptical of our (this mailing list's) ability to reform
ArbCom. The candidates who are the most tolerant of harassment and misogyny
seem to always be the most popular candidates. Thus the outcome of the
ArbCom cases are hardly surprising. Do we even have a slate of candidates
that are worth supporting?

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Sarah (SV)  wrote:

> Jonathan and Fae, I see the disagreement about details as part of the
> systemic bias. The evidence in question was widely available; one did not
> have to be a functionary to see it. I looked at it with a view to searching
> for the holes, because of course it was possible that someone was making
> mischief. (And I don't mean Lightbreather; I mean simply that someone may
> have taken the opportunity to troll.) So I examined it extremely carefully,
> but I found no holes.
>
> It's important to bear in mind that the porn images were just the last
> straw. The person suspected of posting them had been harassing
> Lightbreather onwiki for about a year. The ArbCom either looked at that
> evidence and didn't see harassment, or didn't look at it. We don't know
> which.
>
> The LB and GGTF cases are mirrors of the O. J. Simpson verdict, in that
> two groups of Wikipedians appear to have examined the same evidence, but
> ideology inclined them to radically different conclusions.
>
> What can we do to bridge that gap? I would say that one of the things we
> should do is question whether we need an Arbitration Committee. But if we
> do, we urgently need to fill the committee with people who can demonstrate
> insight into sexism, racism, homophobia and harassment, and who are deeply
> committed to ending it on Wikipedia. As things stand too many people feel
> excluded by the committee and fearful of becoming involved with it, either
> as a committee member or party to a case.
>
> Sarah
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Fæ  wrote:
>
>> Jonathan, I think there's a bit of talking past each other going on.
>> Rehashing details of one of the many dramafest Arbcom cases is not
>> worthwhile.
>>
>> From my viewpoint Sarah hit the nail on the head with "Something
>> systemic is happening here. As a result of those cases and many other
>> examples Wikipedia now has a terrible reputation for being sexist."
>>
>> Improving reputation and recognizing that there is a systemic problem
>> is a far more useful direction to take. Think about a bit of
>> "reframing".
>>
>> P.S. I was approached by the Atlantic due to my work in the area of
>> revert-wars and the potential relationship to bias. I did a little
>> digging around it, but my thoughts are too slow to satisfy
>> journalists' deadlines. ;-)
>>
>> Fae
>>
>>
>> On 22 October 2015 at 18:12, WereSpielChequers
>>  wrote:
>> > Hi Sarah,
>> >
>> > I'm not a "functionary" so I haven't seen the evidence - clearly it
>> > convinces you, but it did not quite convince the functionaries.
>> Reading the
>> > result and for example Yunshui's comment I would simply prefer that the
>> > record shows we were not fully convinced by the evidence, rather than
>> that
>> > we were convinced, but chose not to act. I think what we have here is
>> more
>> > than a detail difference. If the decision had been, as reported in the
>> > Atlantic, that Arbcom had decided this "on the grounds that it may
>> “out” the
>> > editor that had posted the pictures, or link his username to his real
>> name."
>> > Then I would have supported a change in policy, or Arbcom membership, so
>> > that future Arbcoms in similar situations would be willing to risk
>> outing
>> > someone, or just ban them without public reason, rather than leave a
>> > harasser unpunished. But if the issue is not that, but instead that the
>> > evidence was inconclusive, then I think we have a very different
>> problem to
>> > work on. As for the broader picture I don't dispute that Wikipedia has
>> > several problems around gender, and some terrible publicity, but if one
>> took
>> > that article at face value the obvious next step would be to get a
>> change in
>> > policy so that if Arbcom were convinced of the evidence they could and
>> would
>> > have acted.
>> >
>> >
>> > Jonathan
>> >
>> > On 22 October 2015 at 17:37, Sarah (SV)  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> WSC, the evidence as to who posted the porn images was, I would say,
>> >> conclusive. We nevertheless ended up with a situation in which a man
>> who had
>> >> been engaged in harassment (much of which was onwiki and had been
>> going on
>> >> for about a year) was let off the hook, and the harassed woman was
>> banned.
>> >>
>> >> There was a similar situation in the GGTF case, so the Lightbreather
>> case
>> >> was not an unfortunate one-off. For example, the man who was blocked
>> for
>> >> harassment during the Lightbreather case should have been blocked for
>> it
>> >> during the GGTF case, but wasn't. He only ended up 

Re: [Gendergap] Linux's culture problem

[Ryan Kaldari]

True, people are different. Some people I would like to work with, and some
people I wouldn't (like Linus Torvalds). His argument that social norms are
irreverent to creating software (or should be) rings pretty hollow, in my
opinion. Collaborating on software (or encyclopedias) is a social process,
and basic civility goes a long way towards lubricating social processes. I
also don't buy Linus's argument that being professional is being fake. No
one is asking Linus to wear a suit and tie and use marketing buzzwords.
They're just asking him to chill out and not be an asshole. Of course he's
welcome to act out his "normal urges", as he puts it, but I don't think
he's doing any favors for the cultural health of the free software movement.

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Leigh Honeywell  wrote:

> Sarah did actually have some great suggestions on how to do things better:
> http://sarah.thesharps.us/2015/10/06/what-makes-a-good-community/
>
> -Leigh
>
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Pine W  wrote:
>
>> I wish that we had a proven solution for that kind of issue in online
>> communities in general. It's quite disappointing. Thanks for forwarding
>> that post.
>>
>> Pine
>> On Oct 7, 2015 6:44 AM, "Jason Radford"  wrote:
>>
>>> 
>>>
>>> I think folks here will understand this story.
>>> 
>>>
>>> http://sarah.thesharps.us/2015/10/05/closing-a-door/
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Leigh Honeywell
> http://hypatia.ca
> @hypatiadotca
>
> ___
> 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] Linux's culture problem

[Ryan Kaldari]

On the topic of social contracts and communities, I'd like to invite anyone
who's interested to take a look at the draft version of the Code of Conduct
for Wikimedia Technical Spaces -
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_conduct_for_technical_spaces/Draft.
Any feedback is welcome on the talk page.

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Moriel Schottlender 
wrote:

> moriel, i do not agree to the abstraction you introduce here. a
>> community consists of persons afaik. it is a person which feels, not a
>> community. if there is a rule for the community its purpose is to
>> apply to a person part of the community. sarah sharp tried to make a
>> rule "do not curse or go away". as linus torvalds curses from time to
>> time it is not rocket science to understand that rule as: (1) linus
>> please change and do not curse, or (2) linus please leave the
>> community if you cannot stop cursing.
>>
>
> I am simplifying the bottom line, because the bottom line is fairly simple.
>
> When a group of individuals form a community, they are no longer
> completely individuals; they have set for themselves a social contract that
> binds them. We can discuss the minutia of the social contract forever, of
> course, as these arguments went for ages, from John Locke's extensive
> individual liberties, to Hobbes' absolute authoritative rule, to Jean Jack
> Rousseau's general will -- but that still leaves the conclusion the same:
> What type of community do we *want* to have?
>
> I find it somewhat ironic that we are arguing for respecting an almost
> absolute individual rights and liberties of people in the community who are
> (sometimes self-professed) assholes and bully others, but we neglect the
> individual rights and liberties of the people who are being bullied. The
> entire point of having a *community* (rather than a disconnected grouping
> of individuals) is to find the balance to give the liberties to its members
> not on the expense of other members' liberties.
>
> And yet, it seems that in the arguments that are raised, the "sides" keep
> being presented as the extreme choices, as if no other middle ground is
> available. That is false, and we don't have to read historical
> philosophical treatises to see that.
>
> The option is not to either "have liberty" or "be oppressed". That is a
> strawman representation of our options. There are many more options, which
> many governments and societies around the world adapt -- some more
> successfully than others -- without crushing the individual rights of
> people who don't seem to care about the individual rights of others.
>
> Sarah Sharp's leaving Linux' community is not about Linus Torvalds'
> individual rights to be an asshole. He can continue being an asshole all he
> wants, and he, I assume, knows the pros and cons of being an asshole in his
> personal life. It's his right, and he deserves to make that personal choice.
>
> The community of people who gathered for a shared purpose, however, needs
> to make a conscious, collective decision about the type of community they
> care to have. That is the point of having a community in the first place.
>
> It is a very simple give and take, a simple mathematical consideration:
> You get one thing on the expense of another, such is life.
> *Which is why in life, most often, we look for middle ground rather than
> extremes.*
>
> If the social contract the community agrees on implicitly or explicitly
> results in making certain sub-groups marginalized, bullied and feel
> unwelcome, then these groups will not stay as part of that community.
>
> If the community thinks this is a correct price to pay for absolute
> liberties, then all the John Locke for it.
>
> If, however, we recognize that this price is too steep -- and that the
> "corrective step" of "don't be a jerk to others" is acceptable -- then the
> community should demonstrate it in its social contract and find the balance
> between oppressing the bullies and supporting the bullied.
>
> I don't see what's so complicated in this concept, really. We're just
> making it complicated by concentrating on the small details.
>
> So I will repeat my paragraph from my first email, the one that makes
> everything really really simple:
>
> "If people don't think that having an abusive community is a problem,
> then they should understand they are *losing* the people they are abusing,
> and keeping the people who are abusing others. That means that we are not
> keeping the good contributors and weeding out the lazy/bad contributors --
> it means we're keeping the jerks, whether they're effective contributors or
> not, and weeding out the ones who give up and don't want to be abused,
> whether they're awesome or not."
>
>
>
>
>>
>> >>> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 12:44 PM, rupert THURNER
>> >>>  wrote:
>>  to let wikipedia NPOV also have a word, here what linus torvalds
>>  thought about it two years ago:
>> 

[Gendergap] Arbcom election

[Ryan Kaldari]

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

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

[Ryan Kaldari]

What I don't understand is if administrators like Risker and Mike Peel are
so concerned about civility on Wikipedia that they object to Keliana's
swearing, why aren't they the people that are making hard blocks against
vested contributors who are unambiguously violating civility with personal
attacks? Instead, Keliana is the one doing that. She's the one actually
putting herself on the line to try to change the civility climate on
Wikipedia. Banning swear words from the Signpost isn't going to do that.
Consistently blocking users who attack other editors as "worthless" or
"low-lifes" or "idiots" (or a million other non-swearing insults) will.

Risker: I will be happy to support a ban on swearing if you will support a
ban on personal attacks and be willing to act on it. What do you say?


On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Pete Forsyth  wrote:

> Regarding "swearing is not in itself uncivil" --
>
> I agree strongly with that sentiment. However, in group communication it
> can be valuable to have clear lines that must not be crossed, in order to
> keep everybody on the same page. As an analogy, it seems to me that a clear
> expectation of avoiding ALL CAPS in various Internet forums has been
> positive. It's not that anybody thinks all caps is in itself uncivil or
> disrespectful; but very often, they are used in ways that accompany
> disrespectful communication. Establishing, and adhering to, a clear
> expectation of avoiding that format tends to keep people cognizant of the
> idea that their mode of expression matters.
>
> I am not suggesting that the Signpost should rigidly adhere to a "no
> swearing" rule. But I do think it would be good (as you have already
> acknowledged) for varying expectations around swearing to be incorporated
> more carefully into future decisions.
>
> Also, Daniel raises a good point. I had forgotten that Emily had joined
> ArbCom. I agree, that probably colors many people's reactions, whether or
> not it's consciously acknowledged. Another analogy...a good friend of mine
> is a judge, and also a big fan of rock music. I have always been impressed
> with her courage in resisting the unwritten expectation that she would
> steer clear of dive bars and house parties. But as I got to know her, I
> realized that she put a great deal of thought into how she conducted
> herself in such venues. You might find her at a table of people
> pontificating about a local news story, but you wouldn't find her weighing
> in. You might see her with a drink in her hand, but you wouldn't see her
> drunk. And you might hear her expressing strong opinions (unrelated to what
> she would hear in court), but you wouldn't hear her swearing. It's not that
> she felt that strong opinions, getting drunk, or swearing were awful things
> -- but given her position, they were things that could compromise her
> relationship with the people she served. My takeaway -- I think there are
> many good reasons for people (and perhaps publications) in a position of
> trust observing rules of decorum that *exceed* expectations of civility
> that they might apply to others, in order to earn and retain the respect of
> their peers.
>
> Rob, I very much appreciate your perspective on this as an experiment that
> yields worthwhile lessons. I am glad that a diverse set of opinions have
> emerged, and that you are engaging with them. I believe that in the long
> run, the heightened emotions around this one will seem unnecessary...but of
> course, the emotional responses are real, and I don't want to discount what
> drives them. At any rate, I appreciate the candor everybody is bringing to
> this conversation, and continue to read with interest.
> Pete
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Robert Fernandez 
> wrote:
>
>> A number of us who are concerned about civility on Wikipedia do not see
>> swearing in and of itself as uncivil.  Many people may include
>> professionalism and decorum under the umbrella of civility, but others do
>> not, and they are not hypocritical because they do not.   The problem is
>> not the words themselves, but when those words are used by editors to
>> attack other editors.
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 7:08 PM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case <
>> danc...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>>
>>> >In any case, it seems like it has long been settled that the general
>>> use of profanity on Wikipedia is accepted but not celebrated. Only in
>>> >extreme cases is it considered actionable when *actually directed at
>>> an individual*. So it's hard to understand why many editors of
>>> long->tenure have reacted in such a strongly negative manner to this op-ed;
>>> it may be the unique nature of the Signpost, but like Gamaliel I >would be
>>> surprised to learn that many users regard the Signpost in the same way
>>> devotees do the New York Times. The most likely >conclusion is that
>>> profanity and vulgar language are almost exclusively deployed by men on

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

[Ryan Kaldari]

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  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  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

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

[Ryan Kaldari]

>"Badass" isn't a compliment.

And "cunt" is a friendly term of camaraderie in British English. Apparently
I just don't have a good command of the English language.

On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 4:39 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.
>
> Further, I'm incredibly disappointed that this got published in The
> Signpost.  On Emily's own page...well, okay.  But instead of drawing
> attention to the women who are the subjects of the articles, almost all of
> the discussion is about the language used to describe themand pointing
> out that several of them already had articles about them that were
> improved, rather than that they'd not been written about at all.
>
> All in all, it impressed me as an island of lovely flowers in a garden
> with a winter's worth of St. Bernard droppings.
>
> Risker
>
> On 21 February 2016 at 17:13, Pete Forsyth <petefors...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 Ryan.
>>
>> This was one article, and no Wikipedians, readers, or article subjects
>> were injured as a result of its publication. I don't really have a strong
>> opinion one way or the other about whether using language in this way is
>> OK. But the main lesson to me is how much the English Wikipedia community
>> has come to value the Signpost as an institution. It's hard to imagine such
>> any Signpost column inspiring so much passion, say, five years ago. Above
>> all, I think this constitutes a strong endorsement of the general value of
>> 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

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

[Ryan Kaldari]

On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Risker  wrote:

> Unless my vision has completely eroded, I do not see the word "cunt"
> anywhere in that article, Ryan.  Nobody on this list has ever said that
> calling someone a cunt is a good thing.
>

I was referring to the common defense of that term on English Wikipedia
(which I imagine you are familiar with). It's hard to notice the outcry
against Keilana's Op-ed and the acceptance of other editors' use of the
C-word (sorry, Fae)[1] without feeling like there is some kind of
double-standard.

What I do not understand is why anyone on this list would think that
> calling someone a "badass" is a good thing.
>

According to Wiktionary it means "Having extreme appearance, attitude, or
behavior that is considered admirable." Synonyms are listed as "cool" and
"awesome".[2] It's obviously slang, but still sounds like a compliment to
me.

1.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Communicating_on_Wikipedia_while_female
2. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/badass#Adjective
___
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)

[Ryan Kaldari]

Compare the reaction that Keilana's Op-ed got with the reaction that the
Signpost article "Wikipedia's cute ass" got:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2012-12-17/Featured_content

Notice any differences?

On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 6:38 PM, 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.
>>
>> Further, I'm incredibly disappointed that this got published in The
>> Signpost.  On Emily's own page...well, okay.  But instead of drawing
>> attention to the women who are the subjects of the articles, almost all of
>> the discussion is about the language used to describe themand pointing
>> out that several of them already had articles about them that were
>> improved, rather than that they'd not been written about at all.
>>
>> All in all, it impressed me as an island of lovely flowers in a garden
>> with a winter's worth of St. Bernard droppings.
>>
>> Risker
>>
>> On 21 February 2016 at 17:13, Pete Forsyth <petefors...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 Ryan.
>>>
>>> This was one article, and no Wikipedians, readers, or article subjects
>>> were injured as a result of its publication. I don't really have a strong
>>> opinion one way or the other about whether using language in this way is
>>> OK. But the main lesson to me is how much the English Wikipedia community
>>> has come to value the Signpost as an institution. It's hard to imagine such
>>> any Signpost column inspiring so much passion, say, five years ago. Above
>>> all, I think this constitutes a strong endorsement of the general value of
>>> 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
>>>&

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

[Ryan Kaldari]

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 
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
>>
>>
> ---
> 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