I can't answer for her, but I believe she was only gathering data. Since
she isn't Brazilian or Indian or Dutch, maybe might be difficult for her to
know what is excatly relevant or not.

I put in my list correct Brazil's and Portugal's entry, but I still didn't
find time to do so, but please - If anyone has the time, do it for your
country (and for mine if you have spare time)  :-)
_____
*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. Ajude-nos a
construir esse sonho. <http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos>*


On 1 February 2012 13:51, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I suspect people have been hesitant to remove the information because it's
> not clear why it was added in the first place; on the whole, Wikimedians
> are content collectors rather than content removers, unless they are very
> comfortable that the information being removed is of no significant value
> or is actively harmful.
>
> Having a quick glance, I see comments like "no women were elected to
> Arbcom" for projects that don't have Arbcoms, and references to no women on
> projects that don't exist for that language group.
>
> As the majority of the data was completed by Laura (thanks for all your
> research!), perhaps she could help the list to understand what the
> intention was in including some of this information.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> Risker/Anne
>
>
> On 1 February 2012 10:41, Béria Lima <beria.l...@wikimedia.pt> wrote:
>
>> Again, I would like to point that meta is a wiki and all of us have
>> usernames there. So I would suggest all of you to *be bold *and correct
>> what is not correct in your opinion.
>> _____
>> *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. Ajude-nos a
>> construir esse sonho. <http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos>*
>>
>>
>> On 1 February 2012 13:18, Sarah Stierch <sarah.stie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>  Laura - Thanks for asking for more contributions. I was wondering what
>>> was going on, since the project has seemed a bit quiet lately! Glad to know
>>> it's catching steam again. I made some edits a few months ago to the US
>>> section.  (See comments below)
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/1/12 5:18 AM, Lodewijk wrote:
>>>
>>> Perhaps it would be helpful if you could add some explanation why you
>>> are collecting this information, what you want to make clear. Because as I
>>> explained before to you privately (and I see nothing has changed) at least
>>> for the Netherlands the stats that have been put up are almost hilarious.
>>> Lots of percentages, but every Dutch person will be able to tell you that
>>> many of them are of no meaning (Ripuarian is not a language spoken at any
>>> significant level in the Netherlands, Zealandic is considered mainly a
>>> dialect and has 1 admin, of course there are no Dutch women in the enwiki
>>> arbcom, because to my best knowledge there are no Dutch people in there at
>>> all at this moment, and I would wonder why there are no Dutch female admins
>>> on the Portuguese Wikinews...) I am not sure if it is just me, but reading
>>> this page (
>>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiWomenCamp/FAQ/Perspectives/Netherlands )
>>> I would almost think that this is a parody of something - I can't tell if
>>> it is the same in other countries.
>>>
>>>
>>> I've also been highly confused by these statistics. It confused me so
>>> much that I acted boldy and removed them from the United States section.
>>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiWomenCamp/FAQ/Perspectives#United_States
>>> When I started to see information on how there were no Portuguese women
>>> involved in Algerian Wikipedia I was like "why would there be? and is this
>>> information here?"
>>>
>>> I rewrote the majority of the section to just discuss women's roles in
>>> the United States - at WMF, as fellows, as researchers, as Wikimedians and
>>> active editors, etc. I created a list of people who are active US
>>> Wikimedians who are known to be women (didn't want to make assumptions
>>> about anyone) and some of the cool things they've been doing. Of course,
>>> these are limited to people I know, so I hope others are added (as someone
>>> did me). I also removed the "US related on Wikipedia" in regards to the
>>> subject matter (which was added back). I wasn't really sure why netball
>>> would be featured because it's not popular in America at all, so to me it
>>> doesn't really tell us anything, but it's not popular. Same with roller
>>> derby. (But other women's sports aren't discussed?) So I guess if someone
>>> has interest in discussing American women's sports, this area has room for
>>> expansion, or IMHO removal. And the list of popular biographies makes sense
>>> - Amy Winehouse died when this data was retrieved and I'm sure her
>>> popularity has been replaced. And it's no surprise that "someone from
>>> Barbados" is in the top 10 - it's Rhianna, and same for Nicki Minaj (two of
>>> the most famous pop stars in the world, at least in the US.)  I just don't'
>>> think this shows much about women who contribute to Wikipedia except that
>>> people of all genders like reading articles about pop stars and media
>>> frenzies.
>>>
>>> I'm more curious about how women are active and what women are doing.
>>> Who are planning events, have those been successes? Are people being hired
>>> by Wiki companies? (Not just Wikimedia.) What is participation like
>>> regarding women and other Wiki websites? (This conference is about that
>>> right, not just Wikimedia?). Sadly I can't gather data on those, nor do I
>>> know how, but it would be cool to know what the most popular Wiki's are for
>>> women and so forth.
>>>
>>>
>>>  I am sure your intentions are good though, so perhaps it would be
>>> helpful to state somewhere what kind of information you're looking for that
>>> is *really* informative, and get rid of the non-relevant parts? I would say
>>> that the semi-automated adding of information isn't exactly helpful in at
>>> least the Dutch case - again, I can't vouch for other countries. Some
>>> information *is* interesting (interest ratios on Facebook or other external
>>> websites) and it would be a waste if that gets discarded because of the
>>> irrelevance of the rest of the page.
>>>
>>>
>>> +1. I think this has really cool potential to focus on "original
>>> research" - just knowing who is doing what and sharing that information. I
>>> took the time on the US section to not only celebrate who is doing what,
>>> but, opportunities that women have been given in the movement in the US. I
>>> wanted people to see what women were doing in the United States, not what
>>> they *aren't* doing. We already know the statistics are depressing
>>> about women's participating - so what are women doing to change that or to
>>> be a part of that?
>>>
>>> Thanks Lodewijk and Srikanth for sharing your thoughts! I was beginning
>>> to think I was the only person who had these thoughts!
>>>
>>> And thanks Laura for spearheading a unique and interesting opportunity
>>> to learn more about women around the world in the community. I hope people
>>> be bold and participate!
>>>
>>> Sarah
>>>
>>> --
>>> *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
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

Reply via email to