I would suggest we not create not a noticeboard for this issue specifically.
How about putting it in the form of a Systemic Bias Noticeboard? That way it
could accomodate other such issues we may uncover, or already have (i.e., U.S-
and U.K.-centrism, general English-speaking
Before I say anything: Happy International Women's Day, everyone!
Fred wrote:
Having some experience in caring for elderly parents, that is one
activity which, restricting your movement and forcing you to stay home,
offers a great opportunity to get involved online.
My response:
From the other
Remote possibility: Would more front-page featured pictures like today's:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MARTAKIS1.jpg
perhaps entice at least some women to edit who aren't otherwise doing so? Or at
least even out the Wikipe-tan effect? Cf. this album cover:
I am struck by how few voices of reason there are on this mailing list, and
this post is a prime example of why those people have probably mostly thrown up
their hands and left. If the suggestion that we put more hot guys on our main
page was a joke, it was was not constructive; if it was
Ryan Kaldari wrote:
If women don't edit Wikipedia because they don't have free time, why are
there more women bloggers than men? Keeping a blog requires a lot more time and
dedication than editing Wikipedia.
I respond:
As someone who has extensive experience with both, I humbly
Ryan wrote again:
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
I think you'd make a darned fine admin, and would be glad to support
you. We need more than just the technogeeks; indeed, virtually ZERO of
what I do as an admin is technogeekery.
+1, Sarah (and I say this with even more conviction having met you in
person). Wasn't there some data recently
The article for [[childfree]] is just as weird, including this odd photo:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childfree#Motivations
So glad we have a photo of a guy doing research to illustrate
this:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childfree#Statistics_and_research
The same user, Tesseract2, added
(I am particularly concerned with bulk uploads from other services
that don't have such policies in place, such as Flickr, because
provenance and consent becomes very difficult to trace in that case.)
climb on favorite hobby horse at first
This is, of course, another side effect of our overly
Sarah:
I was trying to think of an example of something that might be relevant to men.
I looked at the [[vasectomy]] article and was happy to see that there was a
medical drawing of a groin, and not someone's privates at the first image
(aguug), but, you scroll down a bit and there it is,
It's actually a serious point, though. It would be great to provide
images for those articles that don't portray women the way certain men
want to see them portrayed. I recall the Body Shop did that a couple
of decades ago -- started using images of women that fell outside the
usual range
Feel free. I'm going to continue to use they, which usually fits
without violating gender grammar too much.
I use they when referring to the third person of a gender-unknown someone
I'm not expecting to join the conversation and s/he when I am (possibly as
a prod to clarification on said
I don't have very good examples in mind, but maybe user Valorum27 fits
the description here :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sleeveless_shirt#Is_this_necessary.3F
He is alone in this example but if there were more, it would bring back
sexual focus.
A better example is this, which
The GLAM industry is a female dominated industry, and this is the first
conference of it's type to examine feminism, technology and museum culture. I
encourage you all to follow the conference throughout the weekend...
-Sarah
As an aside, I've noticed how a lot of active female editors
I love the idea of having articles of gender concern in a one stop shopping
space. Going through the NPOV collection is long, painful and is filled with
lots of advertising articles for tech companies. Blarg
-Sarah
I agree with a gender-specific tag as well. NPOV is (by design)
Risker wrote:
I confess that this post made me smile. Back in the day when my feminist
streak was first being nurtured, the differentiation of men and women doing the
same job by the use of suffixes was a major thorn in the side of most
feminists. Over time, there was often a complete
The use of the term collegial to describe the editing milieu. Anyone who has
spent much time in the academe will recognize a lot of the problem
behaviours we see on our own project, particularly personalization of
disputes, which is one of the major elements leading to the perception of
Wow, did everybody here just blame the victim? “If you had done x this
wouldn't have happened.” No. This is exactly the point that keeps women from
participating in everything, incluiding being visible in Wikipedia and talking
openly about their interests!
It was inappropriate of the guy to
Do you think whoever flagged it really meant it just needs to be cited better,
or is there something I'm not seeing?
Thanks,
Alexa
I think they used the wrong template ... {{story}} would be more appropriate
From: Sarah Stierch
Hi everyone - this is the announcement for WIki Loves Monuments. The US will
be participating (in some capacity) for the 2012 event, and we're of course
looking for participants around the world. And since this is gender gap -
perhaps you know some cool women's groups, or
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.
Then how come I had two posts returned to me last week with the message:
5.x.0 - Message bounced by administrator
They
From: Risker
On the Commons side of things, I think there has been an over-aggressive
campaign to extract license compliant images from Flickr and other non-WMF
repositories that include subjects who were very unlikely to know that their
image was going to be made available on Commons. I
A little over a week after Wikimania, where I participated in the “10 women in
10 minutes” session Sarah led, I have gotten the article my group worked on,
[[Adrienne Bolland]], through DYK to the Main Page queue, with two other
editors who worked on it sharing in the credit. It is currently
http://www.marketplace.org/topics/tech/inside-sexual-harassment-online-gaming
I just caught this on the podcast. They mentioned trolls (that some people
say to just ignore them) but no mentions of Wikipedia.
-Jeremy
This coincides nicely with this highly-discussed article on the same subject
When we’ve focused on making article content more gender-inclusive here, we’ve
usually considered only the text. But a recent edit of mine reminded me that
that’s not the only place we can do this.
A month or so ago, on a short train trip to a city near us, my son (at my
suggestion) took a
One reason Violentacrez continued to occupy such a high-profile position
on Reddit was of course his free speech rhetoric. But Violentacrez has
historically had a close relationship with Reddit's staff, a fact far less
well-known than his controversial behavior.
For all his unpleasantness,
I'm not entirely certain that this has a lot to do with civilityalthough
it does certainly have a lot to do with respect for women. (It also
reassures me that my decision to not create a facebook account was wise in
more ways than one.)
+1
Nonetheless, one difference that was
Hmmm, I can't help thinking: every time Romney or a fellow Republican open
their mouths, a new wiki article pops up? Hopefully the elections will be done
and over with soon enough...!
Actually, this one has nothing to do with the campaign.
Daniel Case
In the parallel-issues department, here’s an interesting narrative in Slate by
Rebecca Watson about the experiences of herself and other women with sexism
offline and on in the skeptic/atheist community.
My happily coincident contribution to our festivities tomorrow:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrie_Chapman_Catt_House
Which I've nominated for DYK as well.
It suggests to me that perhaps a couple more potential stubs could be added
to the list (basically the other two corners of the love
It's witty and one of the best-written things I've read on WP.
I think it was actually once proposed for the Main Page April Fool’s FA. Can’t
remember why it got turned down, though—people probably thought it would be too
controversial.
Daniel
Thank you for sharing this Jane. It's amazing that it's still such an issue
but yeah, a great example of how deeply rooted our presumptions are.
This actually happened to me, in a way, with one now long-departed Wikipedia
editor. Despite a female-suffixed username*, I assumed this editor was a
It’s not directly related to what we do here, but I thought that today’s
xkcd strip gets the message just right for the broader goal of what we’re
all trying to do, particularly in the STEM field:
http://xkcd.com/1202/
The rollover text is good too.
Since Randall licenses his strips under
Came across this kerfuffle today. I'd love to see what more gendergap-focused
people think about the following progression of events (note: the image is
NSFW, but each of the links I'm providing are SFW if you don't click through
to the image/article):
a..
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
Compare it to the weaknesses of the current category system. 98% of editors
don't know what they are doing. Categories and subcategories are applied
inconsistently all the time. Nobody has an overview of the entire tree
structure, or even a major branch of it.
And would this be any less truer
Sarah wrote:
Adrianne raises a good point -
No women who edit Wikipedia have been featured in the press regarding the
recent categorygate (As we've started calling it!).
Indeed. If this were covered accurately, reporters would have to note that one
of the most ardent defenders of the
I know women (Cristamuse, Slim Virgin, just to name two) who deal with plenty
of crap and *ARE NOT* admins.
Actually, Sara, Slim Virgin is an admin:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:UserRights/SlimVirgin
And are you sure you’ve got the other username right?
It took me one minute to find the uploads of this user:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Austin_photoguy50
Please nominate all of them for deletion. I will be interested in watching how
what goes.
Done. With the WMF resolution linked and quoted at length.
Andreas wrote:
At the moment, I believe the only editors required to identify are arbitrators
and chapter members.
For the first, no, all functionaries (I had to provide proof of identity when I
got the oversight bit) as well as arbs have to identify to the Foundation.
Chapter members ... do
I use Commons to look at bird pr0n (birds..like...real...birds...the one's
that fly and have feathers) and pinball machines. So whatever.
Confession: I have taken and uploaded one of those bird-porn photos:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cockatiels_mating.jpg
We still have one of
I
believe that over time the weight of coverage will change in favor of
her preference, and our article can evolve accordingly.
Since when is Wikipedia about beliefs?
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus#Consensus_can_change
Daniel Case
In the US we call it pink washing.
It does attract some women. And then there are others who absolutely turned
off by it.
I'll let you guess what category I fall into ;)
I wonder if this might have—or might be defended as—something to do with Breast
Cancer Awareness Month:
Sladre om de andre brugere
Bwahahahahaha, if that's not reinforcing stereotypes, what is? :)
For those of you too afraid to try it at home, Google Translate rendered
this as Gossip about other editors. (Or something to that effect).
Then again, does the Danish word Sladre have the
Subject: [Gendergap] Blogger and Wikipedian Adrianne Wadewitz died
whilerock-climbing
This is to inform you that one of the contributors to this list who
spent a lot of time working on the Gendergap issue and ways to solve
it, has died in a rock-climbing accident.
I wondered if anyone knew of a case where any of our projects had been
involved in a revenge porn incident - I.e. someone maliciously uploading
and publicising pornographic pictures to control and humiliate someone else
(most frequently an ex - girlfriend).
Not that *I* know of, but I did
Welcome to our lives Daniel :)
Good efforts all around. I stopped participating in DYK's (nominating my own
stuff) after drama llamas claimed promotional language about long dead
subjects and more.
Yeah, well, I’ve been nominating DYKSs for almost as long as I’ve been editing,
so I have come
Eppstein was off-base, but you escalated it into the realm of the personal
attack. That's both counterproductive and even somewhat hypocritical. In
particular, your blanket denigration of academics is amazingly offensive to
many more Wikipedians than just your wayward reviewer.
I apologize
MediaWiki's mostly impersonal interaction helps a lot here.
No image avatars, no upvoting or downvoting of comments (something I don't
see the utility of on either Reddit or Quora, FTM). Maybe the features are
what we *don't* have.
Daniel Case
Actually, I think there's something to be said for downvoting. Not in the
reddit i disagree sense, but in the slashdot/ meta filter comments
downvoted/flagged past a certain point will be hidden/deleted sense. It would
obviously take a lot of work to make that work within the media wiki
The UK values freedom of speech but it is on a horizontal plane along with
other rights and freedoms, NOT a vertical one with freedom of speech at the
top. Hate speech not only gets you blocked in the UK, it gets you jailed, and
quite rightly in my opinion.
Spot on description, Sarah, of why not to nominate an article at DYK, ...
drama, rude people, too complex of a process for something so simple. Yup,
DYK can be (is) dysfunctional and the DYK project doesn't take criticism well.
As an admin who was heavily involved with DYK in the past but now
I don't think it is helpful to assign gender based systemic bias every time an
edit is questioned on women related topic.
To put it in perspective, this was the article as it existed just before the
{{notability}} tag was applied—three days after it was created, and two days
after the
Thank you. But I do not believe these Guidelines are used fairly when it
comes to author's gender. Again..why would every novel by Clive Cussler get
its own page but there be a notability query about one by Zoë Wicomb??
This seems to me pure gender bias.
Interestingly, in the process of
She's an African woman. She's won Yale's big prize.
Which, as I’ve noted, wasn’t even mentioned in the article at the time the tag
was placed.
She is notable except this guy thought she wasn't.
The placing of the tag doesn’t mean (necessarily) that he doubted her
notability, as Jodi just
Well I suppose it would be more technically accurate if 1 of 4, not 2 of 4
were women
Better to reflect our goal than our reality.
Daniel Case___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
Eric Corbett is going to be under a new regimen of non-appealable civility
blocks under the aegis of Arbitration Enforcement.
One wonders if it’s really time for someone to just initiate a discussion on AN
as to whether the community’s patience with him is exhausted enough to
community-ban
There have never been anywhere near that many people voting for Arbcom
elections; in fact, that's more people than voted in the last Board of
Trustees elections for the elected seats, and hugely more than get a vote
for the chapter/affiliate-selected Board seats.
I wonder if the apparent
Unfortunately despite multiple complaints about this group hijacking
users from a Wikimedia list by maliciously harvesting email addresses,
Google has yet to take any visible action.
Fae
I unsubscribed from that group after some particularly vitriolic abuse
directed at Fae, something
What’s missing from this?:
I don’t think most disputes get “resolved”. I think one person simply gives
up. Maybe they don’t think the issue is that important, maybe they feel that
they don’t have the time to argue it, maybe they feel that the other person
involved is too unpleasant to want to
The WP article is a stub,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Day_of_Zero_Tolerance_to_Female_Genital_Mutilation
Yet at the same time we should point out that the article on female genital
mutilation is not only an FA developed to that point by one of the contributors
to this list,
Hmm, I think the list of most-thanked people actually tells us more about
who is doing the thanking. I see at least 5 names on that list that I
recognise from my watchlist and therefore I may have thanked (statistically
unlikely I would recognise 5 out of 10 random Wikipedia user names) and 2
of
The litmus test is whether what they have said is not only 'offensive' but,
'grossly offensive'. Wikipedia's internal systems and thresholds would make
no difference to the authorities in the UK. It would be interesting to see
what the public fall-out would be if Wikipedia decided that no
After reading an interesting related discussion on GenderGap, I have
queried the top 10 users of the thanks feature last month, on both the
English Wikipedia and Commons. Snapshot image attached and report link
below.
I note that the Commons list is heavy with people like myself who nominate,
You also need to avoid making such a change in uRLs and quotations, or at
least quotations that were originally in English.
And filenames, too, in image syntax (although of course we should probably
rename the image files, too).
Daniel Case
___
Yes, the idea is to be extra inclusionary by reaching out to all these groups
explicitly, and in particular to representing different cultural identities
in rather non-monolithic African American / African Diasporic communities.
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
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
Hmm, it just occurred to me that Jesus was probably not notable until after
his death. I wonder if anyone has ever tried to move Jesus = Murder of
Jesus.
I think the correct title would be “Execution of Jesus Christ”.
Daniel Case___
Gendergap
The newspaper that did this and heavily moderated trolling comments had
higher participate by women than most news comment areas.
Like. Like. LIKE.
It never fails to amaze me that, for all the complaining people do about
barely-moderated comment sections and the driveby hate speech they
Hi Hahahammond,
I like the idea of figuring out what Pinterest is doing well and attempting to
attract some of its users to Wikimedia.
Because of the visual nature of Pinterest, I wonder if VisualEditor would be
helpful in this case. I also think that you might try encouraging uploads and
And how is this guy, with a self-published blog and self-published books,
notable enough for a WP article[?]
All the third-party reliable-source coverage that things like petitioning
Amazon to stop selling his “work” generates.
Daniel Case
___
>We have to do something. Suggestion: women coming before the committee could
>require that certain >committee members not participate.
How about anyone? (As I think your next comment seems to realize)
>We could extend that to any harassment case. Or we could set up a jury system,
>instead of
Not to keep harping on how important it is to vote for arbcom, but I'm
still just flummoxed by the fact that arbcom is elected by about half
a percent of very active editors, and a smaller portion still of
editors who meet the requirements and have edited in say, the last
year.
Speaking as
Daniel: your suggestion doesn't reflect the fact that 2014's election
had roughly 60% the voters of the year before. We definitely didn't
have anywhere near that much of a drop in editing metrics.
It wasn't a "suggestion". My point, more bluntly, was that there are an
awful lot of
I'm pretty sure it was at least the year before, though I could be
wrong. I don't agree that arbcom is irrelevant to WP editors
generally speaking.
Neither do I, because it wasn't a claim I was making, although perhaps I
could have been clearer in my wording and said that there is a
>(Minor quibbles: Eric is not an admin, and the New York Times piece was not
>written by a NYT reporter. Corrections possible?)
I would also that the “lists” referred to were in fact the category pages, a
distinction that I allow may be lost outside of the project but means something
to us
>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.
Perhaps
Oh, this is “women in architecture” ... I was thinking this might have
something to do with ravens and the number of the beast.
Daniel Case___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including
"Abusing people they have power over" isn't a behavior that's linked
in any way to being on the autism spectrum, and I've not seen any
mention that Linus self-identifies as being on the spectrum, so let's
please refrain from Diagnosing People Via The Internet :)
Oh, I wouldn't say he is;
Welsh? Last time I checked you can sue for libel anywhere in the UK or in any
other Western Liberal Democracy.
You can use the truth of the statements made as a defense in almost all of the
other western liberal democracies, however.
Daniel Case___
From having looked only at the headlines:
1) I really don't see the direct relevance of these to this list.
2) Consider the sources: a British newspaper so notorious for its sympathies
to the Conservative Party and its associated politics that it's known
informally as the Torygraph, and an
>I like a few of the ideas, such as geeky nerds may become more misogynist than
>non-geeky non-nerdy men because of the bullying >they underwent as schoolkids.
>I would say that fits with studies of perpetrators who end up in prison. That
>could also be the reason >for >the weirdly harsh
>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
>At least in the USA, we have to be cautious about "what is an obituary."
>Newspapers also run "death notices" which (both in print and >online) look
>much like obituaries, but are actually paid advertisements. I'm not even
>certain that the terminology ("obituary"=editorial, >"death
>if I understand this correctly, there will be no Wikimania 2017.
My understanding, having been part of the recent discussion on Meta about the
future of Wikimania, is that Wikimania 2017 will take place in Montreal as
scheduled. Beyond that, the question is whether the next Wikimania will be
March 25th? If so, this notice is a little on the late side …
Daniel Case
Sent from Mail for Windows
From: Cassie Casares
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2022 7:08 PM
To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Gendergap] [Friendly reminder] Community Development Team second
community call!
Hello
87 matches
Mail list logo
