Re: [Gendergap] "Is Wikipedia Woke?"

[J Hayes]

was it normal release, or release of user name + name?
i believe Erika Herzog  may
not have understood about the user name issue.

perhaps i am overly sensitive to this issue, since a WMDC editor was outed,
in a less friendlier venue

On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Pharos 
wrote:

> Yes, Rob is right, the Bloomberg photographer did seek individual
> information and permission.  Most people just put their given names on the
> nametags anyway, the photographer followed up with asking if they wanted to
> be included and how they wanted to be attributed.
>
> Thanks,
> Pharos
>
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Robert Fernandez 
> wrote:
>
>> Some of the editors were identified by names which did not appear on
>> their name tags, and at least one was not identified by name in the
>> caption, only by user name.  That appears to indicate that the photographer
>> sought individual information and permission. I'll ping some of the NYC
>> folks who were there and ask them to clear this up.
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Pete Forsyth 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> If BBW failed to confirm that photos with nametags were OK with any of
>>> those they depicted, yes, that would be a problem. I'm confident they would
>>> want to know about that, and I'd be happy to pass that feedback along if it
>>> hasn't already been delivered.
>>>
>>> But is there any reason to believe that happened?
>>> Pete
>>> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:39 AM, J Hayes  wrote:
>>>
 yes and some time  dilation
 and taking pictures of people with user name tags on, so outing

 On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Pete Forsyth 
 wrote:

> This feature article from Bloomberg BusinessWeek does, IMO, a great
> job of exploring and contextualizing Wikipedia's diversity issues. The
> reporters really did their homework on this one, taking the time to 
> explore
> all angles.
>
> There are certainly a few factual errors, the most egregious are
> probably the confusing between policy and guideline on paid editing, and
> the conflation of Wikipedia and WMF in a couple places.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> Is Wikipedia Woke?
> The ubiquitous reference site tries to expand its editor ranks beyond
> the Comic Con set.
> by Dimitra Kessenides and Max Chafkin
> December 22, 2016
>
> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-12-22/how-woke-
> is-wikipedia-s-editorial-pool
>
> -Pete
> --
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>
> ___
> 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] "Is Wikipedia Woke?"

[Pharos]

Yes, Rob is right, the Bloomberg photographer did seek individual
information and permission.  Most people just put their given names on the
nametags anyway, the photographer followed up with asking if they wanted to
be included and how they wanted to be attributed.

Thanks,
Pharos

On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Robert Fernandez 
wrote:

> Some of the editors were identified by names which did not appear on their
> name tags, and at least one was not identified by name in the caption, only
> by user name.  That appears to indicate that the photographer sought
> individual information and permission. I'll ping some of the NYC folks who
> were there and ask them to clear this up.
>
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Pete Forsyth 
> wrote:
>
>> If BBW failed to confirm that photos with nametags were OK with any of
>> those they depicted, yes, that would be a problem. I'm confident they would
>> want to know about that, and I'd be happy to pass that feedback along if it
>> hasn't already been delivered.
>>
>> But is there any reason to believe that happened?
>> Pete
>> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:39 AM, J Hayes  wrote:
>>
>>> yes and some time  dilation
>>> and taking pictures of people with user name tags on, so outing
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Pete Forsyth 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 This feature article from Bloomberg BusinessWeek does, IMO, a great job
 of exploring and contextualizing Wikipedia's diversity issues. The
 reporters really did their homework on this one, taking the time to explore
 all angles.

 There are certainly a few factual errors, the most egregious are
 probably the confusing between policy and guideline on paid editing, and
 the conflation of Wikipedia and WMF in a couple places.

 Thoughts?


 Is Wikipedia Woke?
 The ubiquitous reference site tries to expand its editor ranks beyond
 the Comic Con set.
 by Dimitra Kessenides and Max Chafkin
 December 22, 2016

 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-12-22/how-woke-
 is-wikipedia-s-editorial-pool

 -Pete
 --
 [[User:Peteforsyth]]

 ___
 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] "Is Wikipedia Woke?"

[Robert Fernandez]

Some of the editors were identified by names which did not appear on their
name tags, and at least one was not identified by name in the caption, only
by user name.  That appears to indicate that the photographer sought
individual information and permission. I'll ping some of the NYC folks who
were there and ask them to clear this up.

On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Pete Forsyth  wrote:

> If BBW failed to confirm that photos with nametags were OK with any of
> those they depicted, yes, that would be a problem. I'm confident they would
> want to know about that, and I'd be happy to pass that feedback along if it
> hasn't already been delivered.
>
> But is there any reason to believe that happened?
> Pete
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:39 AM, J Hayes  wrote:
>
>> yes and some time  dilation
>> and taking pictures of people with user name tags on, so outing
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Pete Forsyth 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> This feature article from Bloomberg BusinessWeek does, IMO, a great job
>>> of exploring and contextualizing Wikipedia's diversity issues. The
>>> reporters really did their homework on this one, taking the time to explore
>>> all angles.
>>>
>>> There are certainly a few factual errors, the most egregious are
>>> probably the confusing between policy and guideline on paid editing, and
>>> the conflation of Wikipedia and WMF in a couple places.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>>
>>> Is Wikipedia Woke?
>>> The ubiquitous reference site tries to expand its editor ranks beyond
>>> the Comic Con set.
>>> by Dimitra Kessenides and Max Chafkin
>>> December 22, 2016
>>>
>>> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-12-22/how-woke-
>>> is-wikipedia-s-editorial-pool
>>>
>>> -Pete
>>> --
>>> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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] "Is Wikipedia Woke?"

[Pete Forsyth]

If BBW failed to confirm that photos with nametags were OK with any of
those they depicted, yes, that would be a problem. I'm confident they would
want to know about that, and I'd be happy to pass that feedback along if it
hasn't already been delivered.

But is there any reason to believe that happened?
Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]

On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:39 AM, J Hayes  wrote:

> yes and some time  dilation
> and taking pictures of people with user name tags on, so outing
>
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Pete Forsyth 
> wrote:
>
>> This feature article from Bloomberg BusinessWeek does, IMO, a great job
>> of exploring and contextualizing Wikipedia's diversity issues. The
>> reporters really did their homework on this one, taking the time to explore
>> all angles.
>>
>> There are certainly a few factual errors, the most egregious are probably
>> the confusing between policy and guideline on paid editing, and the
>> conflation of Wikipedia and WMF in a couple places.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>>
>> Is Wikipedia Woke?
>> The ubiquitous reference site tries to expand its editor ranks beyond the
>> Comic Con set.
>> by Dimitra Kessenides and Max Chafkin
>> December 22, 2016
>>
>> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-12-22/how-woke-
>> is-wikipedia-s-editorial-pool
>>
>> -Pete
>> --
>> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>>
>> ___
>> 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] "Is Wikipedia Woke?"

[J Hayes]

yes and some time  dilation
and taking pictures of people with user name tags on, so outing

On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Pete Forsyth 
wrote:

> This feature article from Bloomberg BusinessWeek does, IMO, a great job of
> exploring and contextualizing Wikipedia's diversity issues. The reporters
> really did their homework on this one, taking the time to explore all
> angles.
>
> There are certainly a few factual errors, the most egregious are probably
> the confusing between policy and guideline on paid editing, and the
> conflation of Wikipedia and WMF in a couple places.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> Is Wikipedia Woke?
> The ubiquitous reference site tries to expand its editor ranks beyond the
> Comic Con set.
> by Dimitra Kessenides and Max Chafkin
> December 22, 2016
>
> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-12-22/how-
> woke-is-wikipedia-s-editorial-pool
>
> -Pete
> --
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>
> ___
> 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] "Is Wikipedia Woke?"

[Pete Forsyth]

This feature article from Bloomberg BusinessWeek does, IMO, a great job of
exploring and contextualizing Wikipedia's diversity issues. The reporters
really did their homework on this one, taking the time to explore all
angles.

There are certainly a few factual errors, the most egregious are probably
the confusing between policy and guideline on paid editing, and the
conflation of Wikipedia and WMF in a couple places.

Thoughts?


Is Wikipedia Woke?
The ubiquitous reference site tries to expand its editor ranks beyond the
Comic Con set.
by Dimitra Kessenides and Max Chafkin
December 22, 2016

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-12-22/how-woke-is-wikipedia-s-editorial-pool

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