[Gendergap] Re: #MEMORY (WAS: Re: List update)

[LB]

So sad to hear that Sarah/Slim Virgin has passed. I wish I could leave my
condolences. I wasn't aware of her until she invited me to join the Gender
Gap Task Force, but from then on she was someone whose take on Wikipedia
and Wikipedians - including myself - was important to me. I especially
appreciate the hard work she put into improving the articles' and the
community's gender representation.

Lightbreather


On Sat, May 15, 2021, 9:21 PM Risker  wrote:

> The overwhelming majority of Wikimedians work only on one or two projects.
> I don't think Meta is a good place to memorialize them; in many cases, Meta
> is a project they have never gone to, where they are mostly unknown, and it
> is disconnected in almost all cases from the project where the deceased
> editor worked and called home. Their home project(s) or projects where they
> have made significant contributions are the best place to recognize them.
> There are a few Wikimedians who have worked at what may be considered the
> "global" level - which includes many people on this list - who might be
> recognized, in addition, on Meta or through a blog post or similar.
>
> Certainly, most of the contributions of our deceased colleagues are, in
> fact, preserved forever in the edit histories of the content areas in which
> they have worked.  Those who do not participate in content
> creation/management or on any of the projects...I really don't know where
> they would best be memorialized.
>
> I do know that the memorial messages on SlimVirgin/SarahSV's English
> Wikipedia user talk page
>  have been a great
> comfort to her family, and I'd encourage anyone who would like to leave a
> message of condolence to do so there.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
>
> On Wed, 12 May 2021 at 05:21, Željko Blaće  wrote:
>
>> Hey Folx -
>> I am new to the list and relatively new to organizing in this spectrum
>> and context. My work is mainly in bringing queer, but also feminist, green
>> and
>> other progressive practices (mostly to troubled Croatian Wikipedia,
>> but also in the region and trans-locally to peers elsewhere).
>>
>> Leigh thanks for the honest update and I am sorry to hear of email
>> losses,
>> as well as happy to hear of recovery of control due to tech update :-)
>> Dysfunctional Croatian language mailing list still needs to recover
>> control.
>>
>> I am very sorry to hear of losses of so many Wikimedians and though I did
>> not know them, their work as volunteers should maybe at least
>> systematically saved and presented for the collective memory of the
>> movement.
>>
>> I feel that corporate social media silos do not support that well (as
>> there is little value to extract there), so self hosting and preserving
>> information, knowledge, expressions and impressions should be organized in
>> some way.
>>
>> I wonder if there is already an established way on META or elsewhere to
>> keep track of people who contributed to the movement and specifically to
>> causes like the people you mentioned here. If not maybe it makes sense to
>> start something.
>>
>> Best Z. Blace
>>
>> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 10:45 AM Marielle Volz 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Welcome back!
>>> Just to piggyback on this post, I'd also like to let people know that
>>> we've recently lost two editors who were a significant part of working on
>>> content gaps.
>>> Flyer22, who made significant contributions to articles on women's
>>> health, died in January:
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2021-01-31/Obituary
>>>
>>> And just recently, SlimVirgin (Sarah), who among her many significant
>>> contributions overall, also founded the Gender Gap Task Force in 2013 and
>>> wrote an essay on how to write about women on Wikipedia:
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deceased_Wikipedians/2021#SlimVirgin
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 9:34 PM Leigh Honeywell 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hey folks! it's been a while.

 The Gendergap mailing list just got migrated to Mailman 3, which means
 I now have my admin access back (I'd lost access to the previous system and
 hadn't had a chance to restore it for... several years.)

 The list had been set to new posters being moderated, which resulted in
 a number of messages being caught and I wasn't able to release them.
 Unfortunately those messages didn't survive the migration, but I've
 adjusted the moderation settings and going forward new messages should go
 through.

 I've adjusted the list description to be a bit more concise: it is now
 "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase gender diversity
 in Wikimedia projects."

 This part is sad, but as a heads up and for transparency's sake:
 I also went ahead and removed Kevin as an Owner/Moderator of the list
 as I don't know who now controls his former email accounts. For those who
 had missed his passing, there is a lovely tribute to his life a

[Gendergap] How may Trump win effect the WP working environment

[LB]

In light of Trump boasting of grabbing women "by the pussy" and of him
calling Clinton a "nasty woman" on national TV during a formal presidential
debate, I wonder what effect, if any, his election may have on the WP
working environment.

Since the election there have been numerous reports of women and minorities
being openly attacked by emboldened men and women and who supported Trump
and his... values. Apparently this was the case in Englad post-Brexit, too?

Has anyone else thought about this?

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] Semi-retirement > retirement

[LB]

I semi-retired back in May, planning to retire after the arbcom case
against me was closed. However, it's been over two months since Karanacs
requested the case on April 29, the proposed decision phase has been going
nowhere since June 7, and I've got no energy left for the thing, so I've
retired today. I will be taking my name off the gender gap mailing list
next.

Thanks again to those of you who were friendly to me.

Lightbreather
___
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] Retired

[LB]

FYI: I've set my page notice to semi-retired, as I may have to comment at
my arbcom until it's over, but I am otherwise retired.

Thanks for the kind words I'm receiving. There really are some nice people
on Wikipedia.

Lightbreather

On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 5:35 PM, LB  wrote:

> Due to off-wiki harassment, I have retired. Thank you to those of you who
> have been friendly with me over the past year.
>
> Lightbreather
>
>
___
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] Retired

[LB]

Sorry to hear that you were ill, and thank you for the kind thoughts.

Lightbreather

On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 5:39 PM, Kevin Gorman  wrote:

> Hi Lightbreather -
>
> I know I haven't been very active lately (I wound up with sepsis,) but I
> am sorry to see you go.  I'm not very familiar with the on-wiki side of
> what happened to you, but I think it should be an urgent priority for WMF
> to develop better tools (and a culture that uses them) to handle both
> on-wiki and off-wiki harassment.  I wish you the best, thank you for your
> contributions so far, and hope there's a time in the future where changes
> have been made to the point that you are interested in and comfortable
> coming back.
>
> Best,
> Kevin Gorman
>
> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 5:35 PM, LB  wrote:
>
>> Due to off-wiki harassment, I have retired. Thank you to those of you who
>> have been friendly with me over the past year.
>>
>> 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
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Retired

[LB]

Due to off-wiki harassment, I have retired. Thank you to those of you who
have been friendly with me over the past year.

Lightbreather
___
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 reluctant to comment online - any relation to the WP gender gap?

[LB]

A reminder to women on this list, if there is something you want to discuss
privately with other women Wikipedia editors, go to this page - Anita Borg
Institute - Systers Technical Interests
 - and
scroll down, you will see a link to "Join Systers-Wikipedia."

If you would like to know more about the Anita Borg Institute or
the Systers list, please visit:

   - Anita Borg Institute 
   - Systers 

*I encourage everyone to keep commenting on this discussion here*, but I
want to remind women WP editors that there is a private, women-only list
for when you feel the need. FWIW: Applicants are vetted.

Lightbreather

On Sat, May 2, 2015 at 5:05 PM, Kerry Raymond 
wrote:

>  Could this provide any insights into women contributing to Wikipedia?
>
>
>
>
> http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/23/women-are-silenced-online-just-as-in-real-life-it-will-take-more-than-twitter-to-change-that
>
>
>
> Kerry
>
>
>
> ___
> 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 reluctant to comment online - any relation to the WP gender gap?

[LB]

*The newspaper that did this and heavily moderated trolling comments had
higher participate by women than most news comment areas.*

Like. Like. LIKE.

Lightbreather

On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 8:56 AM, Sydney Poore  wrote:

> Likely yes. Women not making public statements in the same way as men is
> not isolated to Wikipedia or the internet.
>
> The article mentions the use of a respect button in addition to) a like
> button to encourage people to stop trashing other peoples opinions. The
> newspaper that did this and heavily moderated trolling comments had higher
> participate by women than most news comment areas.
>
> Sydney
> On May 2, 2015 8:05 PM, "Kerry Raymond"  wrote:
>
>>  Could this provide any insights into women contributing to Wikipedia?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/23/women-are-silenced-online-just-as-in-real-life-it-will-take-more-than-twitter-to-change-that
>>
>>
>>
>> Kerry
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Systers-Wikipedia

[LB]

No-one claiming to be male on-wiki has asked to join the list. That would
be a problem for me and I would take it up with the other list members. I
probably would divulge the editors username to see if the existing (vetted)
list members have any history with the editor. However, list members agree
to abide by certain rules, so "outing" would be bad. This is the
Systers-Wikipedia FAQ, which is based on the original Systers list FAQ, and
which list members must read an agree to abide by in order to join:
http://systers.org/wiki/communities/doku.php?id=wiki:systers:systers-wikipedia-faq#what_is_appropriate_content_for_mail_sent_to_the_list

I won't spend a lot of time here discussing the list, but women (including
transgender) are welcome to apply.


Lightbreather

On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 11:08 PM, Spike Lechat  wrote:

> Sounds like a good idea.  I have a question, though: if a woman has not
> publicly disclosed her gender (or claims to be male) to avoid harassment,
> and she joins the list, can she expect to be "outed" elsewhere by members
> of the list, or criticised for "lying"?  It may be an impossible problem,
> but it's worth thinking about because there are probably several people who
> fit that description.
>
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:51 PM, Fæ  wrote:
>
>> Thanks for setting it up.
>>
>> Please keep in mind the benefits of bringing back good discussions to
>> the open forum, including self-governance to avoid creating an
>> echo-chamber. The new list excludes me, and at the same time I support
>> experimenting with different types of safe spaces when there is a
>> perceived need.
>>
>> Fae
>>
>> On 21 April 2015 at 19:49, LB  wrote:
>> > There is now a Systers-Wikipedia private mailing list for Wikipedia
>> women
>> > editors only. If you are a Wikipedia woman editor (including
>> transgender),
>> > contact me for info on how to join.
>> >
>> > I meant to announce this a few weeks ago, but an unplanned, personal
>> > business trip and a broken elbow held me up.
>> >
>> > Lightbreather
>>
>> --
>> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Systers-Wikipedia

[LB]

Actually, Fae, there isn't much going on now except trying to build the
list up a little. After how much resistance (to put it mildly) the idea of
a women-only area received on-wiki, I think some women are or would be
afraid to be associated with such a group. (I believe that is part of why
so much "resistance" (disdain and anger, really) was put up.)

As I've explained in the past, it's mostly there for woman-to-woman to
support, not for gossiping about individuals, or for discussing (at length
anyway) Wikipedia articles or policies. In fact, no gossiping or discussing
articles or policies has taken place to date.

Lightbreather

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 8:51 PM, Fæ  wrote:

> Thanks for setting it up.
>
> Please keep in mind the benefits of bringing back good discussions to
> the open forum, including self-governance to avoid creating an
> echo-chamber. The new list excludes me, and at the same time I support
> experimenting with different types of safe spaces when there is a
> perceived need.
>
> Fae
>
> On 21 April 2015 at 19:49, LB  wrote:
> > There is now a Systers-Wikipedia private mailing list for Wikipedia women
> > editors only. If you are a Wikipedia woman editor (including
> transgender),
> > contact me for info on how to join.
> >
> > I meant to announce this a few weeks ago, but an unplanned, personal
> > business trip and a broken elbow held me up.
> >
> > Lightbreather
>
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> ___
> 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] Systers-Wikipedia

[LB]

There is now a Systers-Wikipedia private mailing list for Wikipedia women
editors only. If you are a Wikipedia woman editor (including transgender),
contact me for info on how to join.

I meant to announce this a few weeks ago, but an unplanned, personal
business trip and a broken elbow held me up.

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] Outcome of IdeaLab/Inspire campaign

[LB]

WikiProject Women was actually at the top of the Leaderboard:
*https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Inspire/Leaderboard
*

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] Outcome of IdeaLab/Inspire campaign

[LB]

My arm is in a cast/splint. Not in good spirits, not getting around well.
Got a request to participate in a survey re the Inspire campaign. Made me
wonder: What was the result? Which, if any, ideas are going to be supported.

I gave up on WikiProject Women because there was so much hatred thrown at
the idea and I had no idea how to proceed, even though a lot of people did
support it.

Finally: Could someone please tell me if this posts? I don't seem to get
things that I post to this list!

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] 5 days left to Inspire Campaign: What to do about WikiWomen Project

[LB]

I worried over this earlier in the month, then I got a brief vacation with
my sisters. Now I'm back and I need to make up my mind whether or not I
want to pursue the WikiProject Women proposal that I made back in January.
(Since there are only five days left in the Inspire Campaign.)

Here's a link for those who aren't familiar, or who haven't thought about
it in awhile:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Women

The original proposal was for a women-only Wikipedia (English) project, but
because of the hostility of some in opposing the idea (and the
Kaffeeklatsch test area), I'm leaning now toward a women-only area at meta
(right term? I mean at wikimedia.org).

Feedback? Suggestions? There was lots of support, but there was also, as
most of you know, plenty of opposition.

Lightbreather
___
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] Thank someone today.

[LB]

I agree, Kerry. I try to use the "thank" button at least once a day.

Lightbreather

On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Kerry Raymond 
wrote:

>
> We talk a lot of about the culture of Wikipedia being negative, critical,
> abrasive etc; this is a turn-off to a lot of women (and also to a lot of
> men). But what can we do to change that? Well, I thought about the way that
> postings get Liked on Facebook. Indeed, most postings get many Likes on
> Facebook. It seems if you read something and appreciate the post in any way
> (which includes when you agree with the poster that it is unhappy matter
> and
> hence unlikeable matter), you click Like.
>
> Well, I decided to try it on Wikipedia. Now, when I run through my
> watchlist
> (which I do most mornings), instead of just looking for what's wrong and
> needs to be fixed, instead if I see a positive contribution to an article,
> even a small one, I "thank" the contributor for the edit.
>
> And if I notice I am thanking someone quite a bit, I send them some
> Wikilove
> or a Barnstar. I notice a small increase in the number of thanks I am
> receiving. While I realise this may be simple reciprocation, I'd like to
> think I might be creating a small culture of appreciation in my topic
> space,
> hoping that people choose to Pay It Forward.
>
> So, that's my suggestion. Try thanking people on-wiki in the various ways
> available.  Become part of the niceness culture that we'd like Wikipedia to
> become known for.
>
> Kerry
>
>
>
> ___
> 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

[LB]

Marie I always find your replies so interesting. Glad you share.
On Jan 30, 2015 5:46 AM, "Marie Earley"  wrote:

> There is something I thought I should mention as a UK member of this list.
>
> Hate speech (including online) is illegal in the UK.
>
> When the Bank of England announced that Elizabeth Fry would be dropped
> from the new £5 notes and replaced with Winston Churchill, it meant that
> there would be no women on sterling bank notes (apart from the Queen).
>
> Caroline Criado-Perez successfully campaigned for Jane Austin to be added
> to £10 notes and received threats of rape and death.
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/10207231/Woman-who-campaigned-for-Jane-Austen-bank-note-receives-Twitter-death-threats.html
>
> That instigated an online campaign which resulted in Twitter adding its
> 'report' button.
>
> Isabella Sorley, 23, of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, tweets included: "die you
> worthless piece of crap", "go kill yourself" and, "I've only just got out
> of prison and would happily do more time to see you berried!!"
>
> John Nimmo, 25, of South Shields, made references to rape and added: "I
> will find you (smiley face)".
>
> Sorley was sentenced to 12 weeks in prison, and Nimmo was jailed for 8
> weeks. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25886026
>
> The law they broke was Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003
> http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127
>
> If UK-based Wikipedian 'X' breaches s.127 of the Comms. Act due to
> something they said on Wikipedia about UK-based Wikipedian 'Y' then they
> face criminal prosecution and possibly jail.
>
> 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 action
> should be taken against X whilst the UK jailed him / her.
>
> Marie
>
>
> --
> Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 11:41:36 -0500
> From: neot...@gmail.com
> To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case
>
> Double standard.  Where are all the usual voices protesting about
> "civility police"?  Where are all the arbitrators opining that they cannot
> set objective standards for language?
>
> Beeblebrox used to have an article about "fuck off" in his user space.  It
> didn't get him banned. In fact, he went on to become an administrator and
> arbitrator.
>
> In the absence of objective standards, subjective standards are emerging,
> based on gender.  Using the f-word, or even criticizing male users, is
> becoming a male privilege on en.wp.  Anyone else who uses the word is
> "hostile" and exhibiting "battleground behavior". I must also say I am very
> disappointed in GorillaWarfare's role here.
>
> Maybe, just maybe, instead of just dismissing anything that is said by a
> woman editor, the arbitration committee should investigate it. I am looking
> in particular at this one
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring&diff=prev&oldid=631322169
> If it is true, there are a huge number of users recruited on external
> sites, who are not there to build an encyclopedia, that will have huge
> implications for the survival of women editors on Wikipedia. The
> arbitration committee is looking at WP:SPA, they should look at WP:MEAT.
> And they should pay attention to who the ringleaders are, not just the
> throwaway accounts.
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Women&diff=next&oldid=10928257
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Women&diff=10938964&oldid=10936831
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Women&diff=10952260&oldid=10951344
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Women&diff=10991140&oldid=10979378
>
>
> But, as has been pointed out on the current RFC,
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Harassment#RfC:_should_the_policy_extend_harassment_to_include_posting_ANY_other_accounts_on_ANY_other_websites.3F
> that would change the WP:OUTING policy to prohibit all mention of outside
> accounts, including Reddit Men's Rights and Reddit Gamergate, "trying to
> address the issues without being able to talk openly about the evidence is
> difficult".
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 11:05 PM, Marie Earley  wrote:
>
> I don't know a lot about this case, but taking a cursory look at the
> diffs...
>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gamergate_controversy&diff=prev&oldid=628547686
>
> ...presumably an "excessive edit" is a derogatrory way of saying "a single
> large edit". In which case I would probably have said the same as this:
>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gamergate_controversy&diff=prev&oldid=628548723
>
> To be feminist

[Gendergap] Goings-on at WER

[LB]

Some of you may already be aware of this, but there is a "did you ask any
women" question that has blown up all out-of-proportion at WP Editor
Retention.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Editor_Retention#How_many_women_have_been_involved_in_these_discussions.3F

Lightbreather
___
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

[LB]

I just went and read GorillaWarfare's votes. She is my eyes and ears there.
that is, I trust her judgement. She is an excellent arbitrator, and I wish
the Committee had 4 or 5 more like her.
 On Jan 23, 2015 10:07 PM, "Ryan Kaldari"  wrote:

> 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  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
>
___
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

[LB]

I think one thing that could help is to reclaim the GGTF. The thing is to
remain unflappable and ignore The Troll.
 On Jan 24, 2015 9:36 AM, "Sarah"  wrote:

> On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 7:26 AM, J Hayes  wrote:
>
>> well, they did not revdel it.
>> arbcom can drive the  discussion off wiki,
>> but cannot ban the Guardian for "bad journalism"
>> certain account behaviors are being favored
>> you should expect to see a lot more of those behaviors in the future
>>
>> this will necessitate a lot of wiki-splaining
>>
>> thank-you arbcom for firing up every up coming feminist editathon
>> you may not care how how you are perceived,
>> but the negative blowback will tarnish all of wikimedia
>>
>> ​Smallbones has suggested
> 
> on the GGTF talk page that a group of Wikipedians petition the Foundation
> to ​
>
> ​"​take steps to identify and remove institutionalized sexism on
> Wikipedia."
>
> One issue that has concerned me is that editors who care about these
> issues don't combine our weight. We have the GGTF, this mailing list, the
> Twitter and Facebook accounts, but we don't act with one voice when it
> matters. I'm not sure of the reasons for that, but I think it damages our
> efforts. What can we do to start pulling together more?
>
> Sarah
>
> ___
> 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] Stepping down as list mod - volunteers needed

[LB]

I might be interested. What all's involved?

Lightbreather

On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Leigh Honeywell  wrote:

> Hey Kevin, don't worry about getting Emily added - I'll handle it. Sorry
> to hear you've been ill!
>
> To the rest of the list, another volunteer or two would be really great.
> Thanks!
>
> -Leigh
>
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 4:04 PM, Kevin Gorman  wrote:
>
>> Hi all -
>>
>> Unfortunately I collapsed in severe septic shock several weeks ago, and
>> thus Wikimedia related business hasn't been on my radar.
>>
>> Thank you Leigh, for service. I'll be appointing Emily/Keilana the next
>> time on my mobile, but more volunteers are welcome.
>>
>> Best,
>> Kevin Gorman
>>
>>
>> On Monday, January 19, 2015, Leigh Honeywell  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi folks! I've decided that in 2015 I'm going to try to do fewer things
>>> but do them better, so in that spirit I'm stepping down as a moderator of
>>> this list. This means we need another moderator (or two or three) to step
>>> up. Please email gendergap-ow...@lists.wikimedia.org if you're
>>> interested in this.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> -Leigh
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 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

[Gendergap] Question at the Village Pump

[LB]

There is a question at the Village Pump that should be of interest to
members of this list.

Risk in identifying as a woman editor on Wikipedia


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] Request re the Gendergap mailing list subscription page

[LB]

I would like to suggest that the Gendergap mailing list subscription page
 include the five
bullet points in the Gender Gap "Discuss" section



   - No personal attacks
   - Try to stay on topic and take other things off-list
   - Try to turn fighting into constructive discussion, or disengage/take
   it off-list
   - Help guide discussion toward concrete action
   - Be aware that using an aggressive or argumentative tone (or even just
   posting too much) can discourage people from participating


Lightbreather
___
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] Opinion pieces on cisgender...Test Kaffeeklatsch area for women-only

[LB]

You know what I want? A place where women can come together and talk. I
hope they won't get hung up on - or especially belittle each other - if
they prefer to say *about themselves* "I am a woman," or "I am a cisgender
woman," or "I am a woman-born-woman," or "I am a trans-woman," or whatever.

And I sure hope that wouldn't be the main thing we talked about.


Lightbreather

On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 9:42 PM, Carol Moore dc 
wrote:

> Since I started a minor brouhaha on cisgender, I figured I should provide
> some examples of women (and feminists) who dislike the phrase.  Frankly, I
> never have gotten a handle on what gender means and never use the phrase
> gender at all except in gender gap, only because "sex gap" obviously is not
> useable.  I think sexual stereotypes - and the resultant imposed sexual
> roles, sexual discrimination, sexual abuse, etc. -  are the problem; all
> this talk about gender confuses the issue. People who are born intersex may
> choose to use that phase or identify with one sex or the other. Those who
> state they are really individuals of the opposite sex trapped in the wrong
> body certainly can define themselves as transgenders or transsexuals.  But
> trying to redefine all individuals (straight, gay/lesbian or bi) by whether
> or not they are transgender or cisgender is absurd.
>
> http://sarahditum.com/2014/04/21/notes-from-a-non-cis-woman/
>
> http://liberationcollective.wordpress.com/2012/06/08/a-
> feminist-critique-of-cisgender/
>
> http://bugbrennan.com/2012/12/12/cisterhood-is-powerful/
>
> http://uppitybiscuit.wordpress.com/2007/01/19/do-
> not-call-me-cisgender-you-do-not-have-my-permission-to-name-me/
>
> http://www.nationalreview.com/article/378511/cis-ridiculous-
> christine-sisto
>
> http://bmgnedra.wordpress.com/2014/03/28/sscabdscab-
> reframing-the-conversation/
>
> http://glosswatch.com/2014/04/20/beauty-and-the-cis/
> http://glosswatch.com/2014/04/24/9-reasons-why-cis-isnt-working/
>
> http://bigboobutch.com/2013/09/16/cis-queerly-not-yours/
>
>
> ___
> 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] Diversity training for functionaries. In London?

[LB]

Thanks, Leigh. That guy attacked me regularly during the "cuntgate"
business on WP, and especially while the GGTF ArbCom was open.


Lightbreather

On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Leigh Honeywell  wrote:

> Tim, this kind ofsnippiness is inappropriate and unhelpful. I'll be
> unsubscribing you from the list.
>
>
> On Sunday, January 18, 2015, Tim Davenport  wrote:
>
>> >>>[Jonathan Cardy wrote:] "I have no problem arranging the room,
>> putting up a geonotice and being an attendee."
>>
>> It seems to me that Jonathan is a little unclear with Lightbreather's
>> concept
>>
>> You are male. You make "safe" spaces unsafe by your very existence. You
>> are not welcome. Go away.
>>
>> Sorry, well-meaning paternalistic friend, you just don't have the right
>> chromosomes to play.
>>
>>
>> Tim Davenport
>> "Corvallis, OR"
>> Corvallis, OR USA
>>
>>
>>
>> =
>>
>> Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2014 22:43:52 +
>> From: WereSpielChequers 
>> To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the
>> participation   of women within Wikimedia projects."
>> 
>> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Diversity training for functionaries. In
>> London?
>> Message-ID: 
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> It would be very easy for us to host a two hour session in London on a
>> weekday evening at the UK offices. I am fairly sure we could get a bunch of
>> admins and others to attend, aside from some of the London regulars who
>> have agreed in principle, a geonotice would likely attract more.
>>
>> I have no problem arranging the room, putting up a geonotice and being an
>> attendee. However I would need a volunteer to run the session. That isn't
>> just because I'm the wrong gender to run such an event, but at the moment I
>> don't know what changes in behaviour you would be hoping to train people
>> into.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Jonathan Cardy
>>
>
>
> --
> 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] Diversity training for functionaries. In London?

[LB]

My auto correct changed on-wiki to on-line. I did/do mean on-wiki.
On Jan 18, 2015 9:53 AM, "LB"  wrote:

> Please don't misrepresent me. Wanting ONE safe place on-line for women
> only (which is what I want) is not the same as wanting no men anywhere
> where women are (not wanted by anyone, that I've seen) . Besides, isn't
> this thread about diversity training? Did it change to talk off a
> women-only space? If so, I missed that segue.
>
> Carrite/Tim, are you a men's rights advocate?
> On Jan 18, 2015 9:26 AM, "Tim Davenport"  wrote:
>
>> >>>[Jonathan Cardy wrote:] "I have no problem arranging the room,
>> putting up a geonotice and being an attendee."
>>
>> It seems to me that Jonathan is a little unclear with Lightbreather's
>> concept
>>
>> You are male. You make "safe" spaces unsafe by your very existence. You
>> are not welcome. Go away.
>>
>> Sorry, well-meaning paternalistic friend, you just don't have the right
>> chromosomes to play.
>>
>>
>> Tim Davenport
>> "Corvallis, OR"
>> Corvallis, OR USA
>>
>>
>>
>> =
>>
>> Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2014 22:43:52 +
>> From: WereSpielChequers 
>> To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the
>> participation   of women within Wikimedia projects."
>> 
>> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Diversity training for functionaries. In
>> London?
>> Message-ID: 
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> It would be very easy for us to host a two hour session in London on a
>> weekday evening at the UK offices. I am fairly sure we could get a bunch of
>> admins and others to attend, aside from some of the London regulars who
>> have agreed in principle, a geonotice would likely attract more.
>>
>> I have no problem arranging the room, putting up a geonotice and being an
>> attendee. However I would need a volunteer to run the session. That isn't
>> just because I'm the wrong gender to run such an event, but at the moment I
>> don't know what changes in behaviour you would be hoping to train people
>> into.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Jonathan Cardy
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Diversity training for functionaries. In London?

[LB]

Please don't misrepresent me. Wanting ONE safe place on-line for women only
(which is what I want) is not the same as wanting no men anywhere where
women are (not wanted by anyone, that I've seen) . Besides, isn't this
thread about diversity training? Did it change to talk off a women-only
space? If so, I missed that segue.

Carrite/Tim, are you a men's rights advocate?
On Jan 18, 2015 9:26 AM, "Tim Davenport"  wrote:

> >>>[Jonathan Cardy wrote:] "I have no problem arranging the room, putting
> up a geonotice and being an attendee."
>
> It seems to me that Jonathan is a little unclear with Lightbreather's
> concept
>
> You are male. You make "safe" spaces unsafe by your very existence. You
> are not welcome. Go away.
>
> Sorry, well-meaning paternalistic friend, you just don't have the right
> chromosomes to play.
>
>
> Tim Davenport
> "Corvallis, OR"
> Corvallis, OR USA
>
>
>
> =
>
> Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2014 22:43:52 +
> From: WereSpielChequers 
> To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the
> participation   of women within Wikimedia projects."
> 
> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Diversity training for functionaries. In
> London?
> Message-ID: 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> It would be very easy for us to host a two hour session in London on a
> weekday evening at the UK offices. I am fairly sure we could get a bunch of
> admins and others to attend, aside from some of the London regulars who
> have agreed in principle, a geonotice would likely attract more.
>
> I have no problem arranging the room, putting up a geonotice and being an
> attendee. However I would need a volunteer to run the session. That isn't
> just because I'm the wrong gender to run such an event, but at the moment I
> don't know what changes in behaviour you would be hoping to train people
> into.
>
> Regards
>
> Jonathan Cardy
>
> ___
> 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] Test Kaffeeklatsch area for women-only

[LB]

It's tempting, but I'm not ready to make that leap yet for my purpose. I
really want it for women only, which isn't quite the same as "not men." I'm
leaning toward Anne's "those who self-identify as women." It was my first
instinct, and that's usually the way to go.

Lightbreather

On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 7:40 PM, GorillaWarfare <
gorillawarfarewikipe...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm a member of a feminist safe space that simply uses "not men," and
> leaves it to members to judge if this applies to them. Just a thought.
>
> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
>
> ___
> 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] Test Kaffeeklatsch area for women-only

[LB]

Whatever we want to that doesn't break WP policy or the klatsch's rules. I
envision it along the lines of the WikiProject Women proposal
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Women#Project_idea>
at the IdeaLab.


Lightbreather

On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 3:06 PM, JJ Marr  wrote:

> What will be discussed in this Kaffeeklatsch area?
>  On Jan 16, 2015 4:56 PM, "Risker"  wrote:
>
>> Whatever else "cis" is, it's not a scientific term.  It's a buzzword that
>> sounds scientific because it derives from the Latin, but in fact it's a
>> coined term that is not used in science.
>>
>> Risker/Anne
>>
>>
>>
>> On 16 January 2015 at 16:33, Sarah Stierch 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not cis..and it was a term I only learned about a few years ago...
>>> but, here's the Wikipedia article:
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisgender
>>>
>>> It means that someone identifies as the gender they were born with. So,
>>> if you're born with female parts and you identify as a woman and it's
>>> totally inline with who you are as said woman... you're cis.
>>>
>>> I think Lightbreather used it in the correct way. I'm not sure why it's
>>> an insult. It's more like a scientific term, it seems, then a cultural
>>> movement.
>>>
>>> But, I've learned by now I'm rather an epic fail at trying to use all of
>>> these phrases properly. I blame being from Indiana.  ;-)
>>>
>>> Sarah
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Katherine Casey <
>>> fluffernutter.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *"Also note many women consider "cis" to be an insult that eliminates
>>>> womens experience as women, who've been identified as and identify as women
>>>> from birth, and are happy and even proud to be women."*
>>>> ...wha?
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Carol Moore dc <
>>>> carolmoor...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>  On 1/16/2015 2:20 PM, LB wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Based on a discussion at the WikiProject Women IdeaLab talk page
>>>>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Women#best_practice.3F>,
>>>>> I have started a test Kaffeeklatsch
>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lightbreather/Kaffeeklatsch> area
>>>>> for women (cis, lesbian, transgender) only. Participation of interested
>>>>> women would be welcome.
>>>>>
>>>>>  Lightbreather
>>>>>
>>>>> Since "cis" means non-trans male or female, where's the woman only?
>>>>>
>>>>> Also note many women consider "cis" to be an insult that eliminates
>>>>> womens experience as women, who've been identified as and identify as 
>>>>> women
>>>>> from birth, and are happy and even proud to be women.
>>>>>
>>>>> CM
>>>>>
>>>>> ___
>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Sarah Stierch
>>>
>>> -
>>>
>>> Diverse and engaging consulting for your organization.
>>>
>>> www.sarahstierch.com
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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] Test Kaffeeklatsch area for women-only

[LB]

I hesitated to use the term, but it seemed to be shorthand for exactly what
you just said, Sarah. At least that's how I meant it, and I didn't mean to
suggest that it's scientific.

Lightbreather

On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 2:33 PM, Sarah Stierch 
wrote:

> I'm not cis..and it was a term I only learned about a few years ago...
> but, here's the Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisgender
>
> It means that someone identifies as the gender they were born with. So, if
> you're born with female parts and you identify as a woman and it's totally
> inline with who you are as said woman... you're cis.
>
> I think Lightbreather used it in the correct way. I'm not sure why it's an
> insult. It's more like a scientific term, it seems, then a cultural
> movement.
>
> But, I've learned by now I'm rather an epic fail at trying to use all of
> these phrases properly. I blame being from Indiana.  ;-)
>
> Sarah
>
> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Katherine Casey <
> fluffernutter.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> *"Also note many women consider "cis" to be an insult that eliminates
>> womens experience as women, who've been identified as and identify as women
>> from birth, and are happy and even proud to be women."*
>> ...wha?
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Carol Moore dc > > wrote:
>>
>>>  On 1/16/2015 2:20 PM, LB wrote:
>>>
>>> Based on a discussion at the WikiProject Women IdeaLab talk page
>>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Women#best_practice.3F>,
>>> I have started a test Kaffeeklatsch
>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lightbreather/Kaffeeklatsch> area
>>> for women (cis, lesbian, transgender) only. Participation of interested
>>> women would be welcome.
>>>
>>>  Lightbreather
>>>
>>> Since "cis" means non-trans male or female, where's the woman only?
>>>
>>> Also note many women consider "cis" to be an insult that eliminates
>>> womens experience as women, who've been identified as and identify as women
>>> from birth, and are happy and even proud to be women.
>>>
>>> CM
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Sarah Stierch
>
> -
>
> Diverse and engaging consulting for your organization.
>
> www.sarahstierch.com
>
> ___
> 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] Test Kaffeeklatsch area for women-only

[LB]

Based on a discussion at the WikiProject Women IdeaLab talk page
,
I have started a test Kaffeeklatsch
 area for
women (cis, lesbian, transgender) only. Participation of interested women
would be welcome.

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] How to proceed?

[LB]

So I made the WikiProject Women proposal at the IdeaLab:

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

10 days ago now, with some remarkable support
,
IMO.

I'd like to proceed with this, but how? I am completely unfamiliar with
this process, so there the proposal sits. I would appreciate some guidance.

Thanks.

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] Article: How to Edit Wikipedia: Lessons from a Female Contributor

[LB]

Published today by the Anita Borg Institute. Please share, if you're
inclined.
How to Edit Wikipedia: Lessons from a Female Contributor


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] WikiProject Women

[LB]

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

Re: [Gendergap] Strong support for grants directly related to addressing the gender gap

[LB]

I put my name down as a volunteer back in October - October 7, to be
precise. On New Year's Eve I asked the simple question: Is it possible to
start a Wikipedia project that's open to women, or people who identify as
women?

There are a handful of people on this list who are opposed to the idea, but
I for one would have loved such a thing when I first started actively
editing. Further, upon reading WP:PROJECT and nothing jumps out at as
prohibiting a WP:WOMEN project. Sarah Stierch suggested proposing it.
Heather Walls, who designed the Teahouse, could maybe help to make a
similar, women-only space? I would be very much interested in helping with
such a project, but I don't know where to start.

*First thing*, I suppose, would be a broad survey to see if other Wikipedia
women would be interested in a project tasked by women, for women, to recruit,
encourage, and support other women editors. *Not* about any specific
topics, or points-of-view - because I think women's interests and POVs are
as varied as men's - but to increase the numbers of women editing, and to
provide a refuge when you just want to talk *with other women* about
whatever it is you want to talk about that's WP related. Because even
though I believe we may share interests and POVs with men, I think (and the
evidence shows) that women *in general* (that is, far more women than men)
prefer a different communication style than has developed here under 85% to
90% male participation.

Lightbreather

On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 11:06 AM, Siko Bouterse 
wrote:

> Thanks for putting this out here, Risker. I've been waiting for my blood
> pressure to drop a bit before posting a happy announcement of the plan to
> this list  :) Glad to hear that folks are excited. I'm really looking
> forward to what comes next!
>
> We're going to need some help to make this first campaign happen, so next
> week I'll be back with a bit of a more formal ask and some further details
> about ways to get involved in the pre-campaign planning we're doing in
> January and February.
>
> One thing to think about: we'll want some extra volunteers with gender-gap
> experience to serve on the committee helping select these grants. If you
> aren't planning to execute a project yourself, but would like to help
> others develop ideas into proposals and proposals into grants, please be in
> touch with me, or join on the project page:
>
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Inspire_Grants_%E2%80%93_Gender_gap_campaign
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 8:36 AM, Sarah Stierch 
> wrote:
>
>> Yes! Thank you Risker for the positive energy. This is what I want in
>> 2015!!
>>
>> This is GREAT news!! I can't wait to see what happens.
>>
>> -Sarah
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Risker  wrote:
>>
>>> (Changing the perspective on the previous thread a bit)
>>>
>>> Well, it's official - the Individual Engagement Grants (IEG) and Project
>>> & Event Grants (PEG) will be focused almost exclusively for a 3-month
>>> period on providing financial support and mentorship for requests focused
>>> specifically at addressing the gender gap.  The funding allocated -
>>> $250,000, roughly equivalent to the annual budget of many large chapters -
>>> is very significant and should help to promote good experimentation
>>> throughout this area.
>>>
>>> If you've been thinking about a project you'd like to organize that is
>>> specifically gender-gap related, now's the time to start drafting your
>>> ideas and asking for support from the broader grants and GG community.
>>> You'll need to describe your idea, set some targets, and collaborate with
>>> others as a team for the best chance of success.
>>>
>>> In particular, IEGs are intended to be experiments, and there's a
>>> recognition that some are going to be successful, while others (even if
>>> they look good on paper) are not going to produce results.  The key is
>>> ensuring that there is some learning derived from the experiments.  Don't
>>> be afraid to try something!
>>>
>>> Risker/Anne
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
>>> visit:
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Sarah Stierch
>>
>> -
>>
>> Diverse and engaging consulting for your organization.
>>
>> www.sarahstierch.com
>>
>> ___
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
>> visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Siko Bouterse
> Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
>
> sboute...@wikimedia.org
>
> *Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
> sum of all knowledge. *
> *Donate  or click the "edit" button today,
> and help us make it a reality!*
>
> _

Re: [Gendergap] WikiProject Women

[LB]

I hear you. But I think there are women who would be interested in a
women-only space. There are plenty of places on-wiki to talk with men only,
or women and men, but no place to talk with women only. For some women,
especially women who have been abused or harassed, a women-only space feels
safer, and they might not venture editing at all if there is no place to
take refuge.
On Jan 1, 2015 6:40 PM, "Marie Earley"  wrote:

> Okay, deep breath. I have to say this... I am not a fan of women only
> groups and I probably wouldn't join.
>
> I don't live in a women only world and I wouldn't want to.
>
> Yes we do get some men on GGTF and elsewhere who are either MRA and would
> rather see us all rot, or they fall into the category of telling us what is
> relevant or not in terms of the discussion, and that is frustrating. But
> equally there are men who do not presume to understand our experiences and
> are embarrassed that they belong to the same gender as the MRA and the
> I-know-best merchants.
>
> I would not want to join a group that barred entry to this second group.
> Frankly we this is fight where we need all the genuine help we can get.
>
> Marie
>
> --
> Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2015 20:16:04 -0500
> From: risker...@gmail.com
> To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] WikiProject Women
>
> So perhaps the question is how many women would be interested in
> participating in off-wiki...I'm not really sure entirely what exactly it
> is, although hypothetically it's mentoring and... well, I keep coming back
> to I'm not sure what it is.
>
> I have a hard enough time keeping up with my current load, and am not
> particularly interested in going to more venues, but I may be the exception.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On 1 January 2015 at 19:49, LB  wrote:
>
> Thank you, Heather! This is what we run into on the WP GGTF every time we
> open something up for discussion.
>
> All I wanted to discuss the possibility of such a group. Are there any
> policies that would make it impossible? How would we determine who is a
> woman? Could inclusion/exclusion be automated? What might the benefits of
> such a group be? The liabilities? What would its scope be? It's goals?
>
> Can we discuss this?
> On Jan 1, 2015 5:30 PM, "Heather Walls"  wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Tim Davenport  wrote:
>
> I for one would immediately be running the project through the Miscellany
> for Deletion process.
>
> You don't see anything slightly wrong with this idea? Really?!?
>
> This is 100% unadulterated identity politics.
>
>
> You say that as if identity politics is somehow inherently negative.
>
>
>
> Tim Davenport
> Carrite on WP /// Randy from Boise on WPO
> Corvallis, OR
>
>
> >>Is it simply impossible to start a Wikipedia project that's open to
> women,
> or people who identify as women? (I'm sorry if I don't use the correct
> terms, but I haven't kept up with them in recent years.)
>
> >>I mean if we did it... what would the consequences be?
>
> >>Lightbreather
>
> ___
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
> visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
>
>
>
> --
> *Heather Walls*
> Communications Design Manager I Wikimedia Foundation
> 149 New Montgomery Street I San Francisco, CA 94105
> heat...@wikimedia.org
>
> ___
> 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] WikiProject Women

[LB]

My question was about having an on-wiki, women-only project. Just
discussing if/how it could be done.
On Jan 1, 2015 6:16 PM, "Risker"  wrote:

> So perhaps the question is how many women would be interested in
> participating in off-wiki...I'm not really sure entirely what exactly it
> is, although hypothetically it's mentoring and... well, I keep coming back
> to I'm not sure what it is.
>
> I have a hard enough time keeping up with my current load, and am not
> particularly interested in going to more venues, but I may be the exception.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On 1 January 2015 at 19:49, LB  wrote:
>
>> Thank you, Heather! This is what we run into on the WP GGTF every time we
>> open something up for discussion.
>>
>> All I wanted to discuss the possibility of such a group. Are there any
>> policies that would make it impossible? How would we determine who is a
>> woman? Could inclusion/exclusion be automated? What might the benefits of
>> such a group be? The liabilities? What would its scope be? It's goals?
>>
>> Can we discuss this?
>> On Jan 1, 2015 5:30 PM, "Heather Walls"  wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Tim Davenport 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I for one would immediately be running the project through the
>>>> Miscellany for Deletion process.
>>>>
>>>> You don't see anything slightly wrong with this idea? Really?!?
>>>>
>>>> This is 100% unadulterated identity politics.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You say that as if identity politics is somehow inherently negative.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tim Davenport
>>>> Carrite on WP /// Randy from Boise on WPO
>>>> Corvallis, OR
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> >>Is it simply impossible to start a Wikipedia project that's open to
>>>> women,
>>>> or people who identify as women? (I'm sorry if I don't use the correct
>>>> terms, but I haven't kept up with them in recent years.)
>>>>
>>>> >>I mean if we did it... what would the consequences be?
>>>>
>>>> >>Lightbreather
>>>>
>>>> ___
>>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
>>>> please visit:
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Heather Walls*
>>> Communications Design Manager I Wikimedia Foundation
>>> 149 New Montgomery Street I San Francisco, CA 94105
>>> heat...@wikimedia.org
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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] WikiProject Women

[LB]

Thank you, Heather! This is what we run into on the WP GGTF every time we
open something up for discussion.

All I wanted to discuss the possibility of such a group. Are there any
policies that would make it impossible? How would we determine who is a
woman? Could inclusion/exclusion be automated? What might the benefits of
such a group be? The liabilities? What would its scope be? It's goals?

Can we discuss this?
On Jan 1, 2015 5:30 PM, "Heather Walls"  wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Tim Davenport  wrote:
>
>> I for one would immediately be running the project through the Miscellany
>> for Deletion process.
>>
>> You don't see anything slightly wrong with this idea? Really?!?
>>
>> This is 100% unadulterated identity politics.
>>
>
> You say that as if identity politics is somehow inherently negative.
>
>
>>
>> Tim Davenport
>> Carrite on WP /// Randy from Boise on WPO
>> Corvallis, OR
>>
>>
>> >>Is it simply impossible to start a Wikipedia project that's open to
>> women,
>> or people who identify as women? (I'm sorry if I don't use the correct
>> terms, but I haven't kept up with them in recent years.)
>>
>> >>I mean if we did it... what would the consequences be?
>>
>> >>Lightbreather
>>
>> ___
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
>> visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Heather Walls*
> Communications Design Manager I Wikimedia Foundation
> 149 New Montgomery Street I San Francisco, CA 94105
> heat...@wikimedia.org
>
> ___
> 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] GGTF talk page

[LB]

A women's project might be a nice complement to the collaborative and the
teahouse. The collaborative is a great choice for women who like to use
Facebook and Twitter, but some don't. The teahouse is OK (and I'd like to
offer myself as a mentor for women editors there), but even there the
testosterone can run high sometimes.

Lightbreather

On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 9:56 AM, Sarah Stierch 
wrote:

> Some thoughts...some ok some negative about a project for women.
>
> Spaces that promote sisterhood and women only that are public generally
> have overwhelming woman. participation and men often play the role of
> observers.
>
> That's why I created the WikiWomens Collab. While men "like it", it's
> extremely rare they interact with it. A place can be public and be focused
> on women.
>
> But, I do think it will be a challenge on EN WP. That is why WWC was a
> social media campaign. Women are there. There is a wiki women's group on
> Facebook too and a few guys have joined but they don't interact on it. its
> clearly for Women by women (those identifying as women).
>
> I am concerned about a shit storm starting a woman centric space on WP. As
> long as there is research to prove to the community it might work. You have
> to show it - we had to do it with the Teahouse. It was nominated for
> deletion when it was created!!
>
> I put together an entire project page on meta with this research
> someplace..
>
> There is also an editor retention project already. People will ask - why
> not just work in that space?
>
> Also, the wikiprojects for WP feminism, women art/science/writers are also
> overwhelmingly female. I recruited at the beginning but now I am just burnt
> out so I don't spend time doing it..and the subject gets little press
> coverage anymore so cries to engaging women have lowered in the press. So
> this will require more on the boots support. And how will you promote it -
> especially if you don't know the gender of editors. I guess you can build
> it and they will come.
>
> So I would think hard before creating something new and thing about what
> already exists and how to leverage it. And if you cannot leverage it...try
> it.
>
> I spent a year of my life at WMF working on all of this. We had that idea
> and canned it and ended up creating the Teahouse. That was created to
> welcome and help new editors with research focusing on women. It worked. It
> sounds like you would just be making another Teahouse but for women.
>
> It's funny seeing this conversation happening again. :) it's good though
>
> Sarah
> (Sent from my phone)
> On Dec 31, 2014 8:38 AM, "LB"  wrote:
>
>> I've started two separate mailing list topics today  - Women of GGTF and
>> WP:WOMEN - but they haven't posted. You do send to
>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org, right? I think that's what I've used
>> before.
>>
>> Lightbreather
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 9:25 AM, Risker  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 31 December 2014 at 11:18, LB  wrote:
>>>
>>>> I can imagine the complaints and hurdles. The discussion is it
>>>> possible? Could it work?
>>>>
>>>> To your specific questions, if there's no page-protection option, can
>>>> there be? If it's absolutely impossible, then the moderators would have to
>>>> keep an eye on those things. Also, I think there would be parts of the
>>>> project that would be vehemently opposed, but others who wouldn't care one
>>>> way or another, and some who would welcome such a space with open arms.
>>>>
>>>> I don't know about EEML. I will read that.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> The EEML (Eastern European Mailing List) was an invitation-only mailing
>>> list populated by a group of editors who supported each other in content
>>> contributions, deletion discussions, and other on-wiki activities related
>>> generally to the Eastern European region of the world (including articles
>>> on the  history, economics, politics,  notable persons, geography, etc. of
>>> the region).  The mailing list was non-public.  Almost all participants on
>>> the list were very significantly sanctioned (including some permanent bans,
>>> some topic bans, and a desysop) because of the attempt to manage content in
>>> a non-transparent way, in addition to the entire canvassing aspect.
>>>
>>> There was once a Wikichix mailing list, moderated and very similar to
>>> the one described by Lightbreather.  It died a slow death several years

Re: [Gendergap] GGTF talk page

[LB]

As I'm imagining this right now, it would be public. It would be open to
those who've identified as women to edit, and to others to read. I suppose
it might touch upon content issues, but those would more likely go to the
project and article talk pages for specific subjects and topics.

What its focus would be at first would be to recruit more women. To mentor.
To discuss policies, guidelines, essays of interest to women. Since, per
WP:PROJ, a project has no special rights or privileges, it can't impose
anything on articles, policies, etc. It would be a place where women could
talk without men - even well-intentioned men - jumping in and commandeering
or derailing the discussions. It could be held to a high standard of
civility - or even simply to the published civility policy that is
overlooked elsewhere on the project.


Lightbreather

On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 9:25 AM, Risker  wrote:

>
> On 31 December 2014 at 11:18, LB  wrote:
>
>> I can imagine the complaints and hurdles. The discussion is it possible?
>> Could it work?
>>
>> To your specific questions, if there's no page-protection option, can
>> there be? If it's absolutely impossible, then the moderators would have to
>> keep an eye on those things. Also, I think there would be parts of the
>> project that would be vehemently opposed, but others who wouldn't care one
>> way or another, and some who would welcome such a space with open arms.
>>
>> I don't know about EEML. I will read that.
>>
>>
>>
>
> The EEML (Eastern European Mailing List) was an invitation-only mailing
> list populated by a group of editors who supported each other in content
> contributions, deletion discussions, and other on-wiki activities related
> generally to the Eastern European region of the world (including articles
> on the  history, economics, politics,  notable persons, geography, etc. of
> the region).  The mailing list was non-public.  Almost all participants on
> the list were very significantly sanctioned (including some permanent bans,
> some topic bans, and a desysop) because of the attempt to manage content in
> a non-transparent way, in addition to the entire canvassing aspect.
>
> There was once a Wikichix mailing list, moderated and very similar to the
> one described by Lightbreather.  It died a slow death several years ago
> because, essentially, nobody really had much to say there, absent the
> ability to discuss actual content.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> ___
> 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] GGTF talk page

[LB]

I've started two separate mailing list topics today  - Women of GGTF and
WP:WOMEN - but they haven't posted. You do send to
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org, right? I think that's what I've used before.

Lightbreather

On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 9:25 AM, Risker  wrote:

>
> On 31 December 2014 at 11:18, LB  wrote:
>
>> I can imagine the complaints and hurdles. The discussion is it possible?
>> Could it work?
>>
>> To your specific questions, if there's no page-protection option, can
>> there be? If it's absolutely impossible, then the moderators would have to
>> keep an eye on those things. Also, I think there would be parts of the
>> project that would be vehemently opposed, but others who wouldn't care one
>> way or another, and some who would welcome such a space with open arms.
>>
>> I don't know about EEML. I will read that.
>>
>>
>>
>
> The EEML (Eastern European Mailing List) was an invitation-only mailing
> list populated by a group of editors who supported each other in content
> contributions, deletion discussions, and other on-wiki activities related
> generally to the Eastern European region of the world (including articles
> on the  history, economics, politics,  notable persons, geography, etc. of
> the region).  The mailing list was non-public.  Almost all participants on
> the list were very significantly sanctioned (including some permanent bans,
> some topic bans, and a desysop) because of the attempt to manage content in
> a non-transparent way, in addition to the entire canvassing aspect.
>
> There was once a Wikichix mailing list, moderated and very similar to the
> one described by Lightbreather.  It died a slow death several years ago
> because, essentially, nobody really had much to say there, absent the
> ability to discuss actual content.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> ___
> 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] WP:WOMEN

[LB]

So, I'm reading Wikipedia:WikiProject
 and nothing is
jumping out at me as prohibiting a WP:WOMEN project. It says,

A *WikiProject* is a group  of
contributors who want to work together as a team
 to improve Wikipedia. These groups
often focus on a specific topic area (for example, women's history
), a specific location or
a specific kind of task (for example, checking newly created pages).

Couldn't our task be to recruit, encourage, and support women editors?

Lightbreather
___
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] GGTF talk page

[LB]

I can imagine the complaints and hurdles. The discussion is it possible?
Could it work?

To your specific questions, if there's no page-protection option, can there
be? If it's absolutely impossible, then the moderators would have to keep
an eye on those things. Also, I think there would be parts of the project
that would be vehemently opposed, but others who wouldn't care one way or
another, and some who would welcome such a space with open arms.

I don't know about EEML. I will read that.

Again, I am brainstorming here. Discussing how it *could* work, not whether
or not it will or would.


Lightbreather

On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Katherine Casey <
fluffernutter.w...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Well, how would you limit participation to just those people? There's no
> page-protection option for "check person's gender, then allow edits only if
> 'female'," and Wikipedia doesn't currently have any policies that would
> allow, like, topic bans from a Wikiproject based on gender rather than
> problematic behavior. I imagine the community would be vehemently opposed
> to such things, and for good reason. Forcing people to identify to
> participate, or sanctioning people when they've done nothing but been the
> wrong gender, are antithetical to Wikipedia's "anyone can participate"
> ethos.
>
> If you were setting something up offwiki, not in association with
> Wiki[m|p]edia, you'd be as free as anyone else to set your own criteria for
> membership, but the problem then becomes a) attracting enough high-quality
> participation b) without becoming a "cabal" in the style of the EEML
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Eastern_European_mailing_list>
> that got people in so much trouble a few years ago.
>
> On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 10:59 AM, LB  wrote:
>
>> Well, I'm brainstorming, but yes... a project that is only open to women
>> or those who identify as women. And yes, that would mean identifying (via
>> one's "she edits" preference - as I know of no other ways to identify,
>> right?) Hypothetically, is there anything to prevent us from doing it?
>>
>> (I just went and re-identified as "she edits." I had turned that off for
>> a while when I first started getting harassed, but WTF. I'm tired of
>> hiding. I'll bet other women are tired of hiding, too.)
>>
>>
>> Lightbreather
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Risker  wrote:
>>
>>> Could you please clarify, Lightbreather?  Do you mean a wikiproject that
>>> is *only* open to women/those who identify as women?  Because all
>>> wikiprojects are open to all interested editors, generally speaking.
>>>
>>> Would that not require editors to have to publicly self-identify?  How
>>> would that be done?
>>>
>>> Risker/Anne
>>>
>>> On 31 December 2014 at 10:31, LB  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is it simply impossible to start a Wikipedia project that's open to
>>>> women, or people who identify as women? (I'm sorry if I don't use the
>>>> correct terms, but I haven't kept up with them in recent years.)
>>>>
>>>> I mean if we did it... what would the consequences be?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Lightbreather
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 10:45 PM, Sarah  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 7:43 PM, LB  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Why abandon it? Let's reclaim it. Just ignore those who try to
>>>>>> distract and derail. There are sanctions so no nastiness, but nastiness 
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> not my usual style anyway.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ​I don't know whether it's better to abandon, reclaim or move it. But
>>>>> it has been a lesson in how deep Wikipedia's sexism runs. Any journalists
>>>>> in future wanting examples of it need only read those archives and the
>>>>> dispute-resolution threads that failed to deal with it (which one of us
>>>>> ought to compile at some point).
>>>>>
>>>>> Marie, I saw the suggestion on GGTF that women might prefer to edit
>>>>> "[f]ashion, cookery, domestic affairs, childrearing". Is it worth
>>>>> continuing with it when that's what we have to deal with?
>>>>>
>>>>> Sarah
>>>>>
>>>>> ​
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>

Re: [Gendergap] GGTF talk page

[LB]

I know you can use the "they" template to see if a user prefer "he," "she,"
or "they." It seems like that could be queried to find out who identifies
as "she" and send out an invitation to join the women-only project... if
such a thing were created. In addition, a notice could go up saying that
women editors can join the project, and letting them know that to identify
as women they must A) set their preference to "she," and B) swear that they
are indeed a woman or identify as a woman.

Again, just brainstorming.

Also, I like what Marie mentioned yesterday. It seems like we should be
capturing gender info when users register, giving them the option to be
public about it or not I guess. But for demographics, we ought to be
capturing that data.


Lightbreather

On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Risker  wrote:

> Ahh.  I am not certain how "public" that particular preference is; I'm
> fairly certain there's no public list.  The preference was installed on all
> WMF wikis at the request of projects where there is a different term for
> "user" depending on the self-identified gender of the user. (For example,
> the user pages of self-identified female editors on our German projects
> uses the feminine term for "user".)  Not quite sure what the result is on
> English Wikipedia - is there a list somewhere?
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On 31 December 2014 at 10:59, LB  wrote:
>
>> Well, I'm brainstorming, but yes... a project that is only open to women
>> or those who identify as women. And yes, that would mean identifying (via
>> one's "she edits" preference - as I know of no other ways to identify,
>> right?) Hypothetically, is there anything to prevent us from doing it?
>>
>> (I just went and re-identified as "she edits." I had turned that off for
>> a while when I first started getting harassed, but WTF. I'm tired of
>> hiding. I'll bet other women are tired of hiding, too.)
>>
>>
>> Lightbreather
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Risker  wrote:
>>
>>> Could you please clarify, Lightbreather?  Do you mean a wikiproject that
>>> is *only* open to women/those who identify as women?  Because all
>>> wikiprojects are open to all interested editors, generally speaking.
>>>
>>> Would that not require editors to have to publicly self-identify?  How
>>> would that be done?
>>>
>>> Risker/Anne
>>>
>>> On 31 December 2014 at 10:31, LB  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is it simply impossible to start a Wikipedia project that's open to
>>>> women, or people who identify as women? (I'm sorry if I don't use the
>>>> correct terms, but I haven't kept up with them in recent years.)
>>>>
>>>> I mean if we did it... what would the consequences be?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Lightbreather
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 10:45 PM, Sarah  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 7:43 PM, LB  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Why abandon it? Let's reclaim it. Just ignore those who try to
>>>>>> distract and derail. There are sanctions so no nastiness, but nastiness 
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> not my usual style anyway.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ​I don't know whether it's better to abandon, reclaim or move it. But
>>>>> it has been a lesson in how deep Wikipedia's sexism runs. Any journalists
>>>>> in future wanting examples of it need only read those archives and the
>>>>> dispute-resolution threads that failed to deal with it (which one of us
>>>>> ought to compile at some point).
>>>>>
>>>>> Marie, I saw the suggestion on GGTF that women might prefer to edit
>>>>> "[f]ashion, cookery, domestic affairs, childrearing". Is it worth
>>>>> continuing with it when that's what we have to deal with?
>>>>>
>>>>> Sarah
>>>>>
>>>>> ​
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Dec 30, 2014 10:25 AM, "Marie Earley"  wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We're abandoning the GGTF on Wikipedia? Fair enough.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It was just that I had an editor accused me of radical feminism POV
>>>>>>> pushing on GGTF via my talk page (I dared to say that it was 
>>>>>>> "interesting"
>&g

[Gendergap] Women of GGTF

[LB]

You may be interested in the Systers forum at the Anita Borg Institute:

http://anitaborg.org/get-involved/systers/

It is women only. Sorry guys.

Lightbreather
___
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] GGTF talk page

[LB]

I joined the Systers mailing list - women only - administered by the Anita
Borg Institute some months ago, and it basically involved swearing that you
are female. There are a few moderators who manages the list.

Lightbreather

On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Risker  wrote:

> Could you please clarify, Lightbreather?  Do you mean a wikiproject that
> is *only* open to women/those who identify as women?  Because all
> wikiprojects are open to all interested editors, generally speaking.
>
> Would that not require editors to have to publicly self-identify?  How
> would that be done?
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On 31 December 2014 at 10:31, LB  wrote:
>
>> Is it simply impossible to start a Wikipedia project that's open to
>> women, or people who identify as women? (I'm sorry if I don't use the
>> correct terms, but I haven't kept up with them in recent years.)
>>
>> I mean if we did it... what would the consequences be?
>>
>>
>> Lightbreather
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 10:45 PM, Sarah  wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 7:43 PM, LB  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Why abandon it? Let's reclaim it. Just ignore those who try to distract
>>>> and derail. There are sanctions so no nastiness, but nastiness is not my
>>>> usual style anyway.
>>>>
>>>
>>> ​I don't know whether it's better to abandon, reclaim or move it. But it
>>> has been a lesson in how deep Wikipedia's sexism runs. Any journalists in
>>> future wanting examples of it need only read those archives and the
>>> dispute-resolution threads that failed to deal with it (which one of us
>>> ought to compile at some point).
>>>
>>> Marie, I saw the suggestion on GGTF that women might prefer to edit
>>> "[f]ashion, cookery, domestic affairs, childrearing". Is it worth
>>> continuing with it when that's what we have to deal with?
>>>
>>> Sarah
>>>
>>> ​
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Dec 30, 2014 10:25 AM, "Marie Earley"  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> We're abandoning the GGTF on Wikipedia? Fair enough.
>>>>>
>>>>> It was just that I had an editor accused me of radical feminism POV
>>>>> pushing on GGTF via my talk page (I dared to say that it was "interesting"
>>>>> that the example topics that he thought women would be interested in
>>>>> editing, other than feminism, might be "*fashion, cookery, domestic
>>>>> affairs and childrearing*" rather than "*science, business,
>>>>> filmmaking or politics*"). There was then this follow-on swipe on
>>>>> GGTF.
>>>>>
>>>>> > "...one of the reasonable first steps toward seeing what women in
>>>>> wikipedia thinks needs to be done most would be to actively ask women who
>>>>> have self-identified as women what content of particular interest to women
>>>>> might be underrepresented or undercovered here. Those women would
>>>>> presumably be in a better position to clearly state their concerns than
>>>>> would be individuals who can only speculate on them or draw potentially
>>>>> flawed assumptions based on limited previous personal experience."
>>>>>
>>>>> So, my potentially flawed assumptions and limited previous personal
>>>>> experience are surplus to requirements at the GGTF. The plan now seems to
>>>>> go out and find answers that fit a pre-existing narrative about what is
>>>>> causing the Gender Gap.
>>>>>
>>>>> So...  "I believe the Gender Gap is caused by women who want to write
>>>>> about knitting thinking that Wikipedia does not welcome articles about
>>>>> knitting." I will create a skewed survey to fit this narrative and get the
>>>>> "right kind of women" to fill it in and prove my pre-conceived notions
>>>>> correct.
>>>>>
>>>>> I really don't see the point of it. If you ask 1,000 female editors,
>>>>> "What kind of articles do you like to edit?", then you'll get 1,000 
>>>>> answers
>>>>> with a wide variety of topics. What would that prove? Suppose you find 90%
>>>>> of them edit traditionally feminine topics, what conclusion would you draw
>>>>> from it? Would it prove that they clearly prefer to edit those topics, or
>>>>

Re: [Gendergap] GGTF talk page

[LB]

Well, I'm brainstorming, but yes... a project that is only open to women or
those who identify as women. And yes, that would mean identifying (via
one's "she edits" preference - as I know of no other ways to identify,
right?) Hypothetically, is there anything to prevent us from doing it?

(I just went and re-identified as "she edits." I had turned that off for a
while when I first started getting harassed, but WTF. I'm tired of hiding.
I'll bet other women are tired of hiding, too.)


Lightbreather

On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Risker  wrote:

> Could you please clarify, Lightbreather?  Do you mean a wikiproject that
> is *only* open to women/those who identify as women?  Because all
> wikiprojects are open to all interested editors, generally speaking.
>
> Would that not require editors to have to publicly self-identify?  How
> would that be done?
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On 31 December 2014 at 10:31, LB  wrote:
>
>> Is it simply impossible to start a Wikipedia project that's open to
>> women, or people who identify as women? (I'm sorry if I don't use the
>> correct terms, but I haven't kept up with them in recent years.)
>>
>> I mean if we did it... what would the consequences be?
>>
>>
>> Lightbreather
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 10:45 PM, Sarah  wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 7:43 PM, LB  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Why abandon it? Let's reclaim it. Just ignore those who try to distract
>>>> and derail. There are sanctions so no nastiness, but nastiness is not my
>>>> usual style anyway.
>>>>
>>>
>>> ​I don't know whether it's better to abandon, reclaim or move it. But it
>>> has been a lesson in how deep Wikipedia's sexism runs. Any journalists in
>>> future wanting examples of it need only read those archives and the
>>> dispute-resolution threads that failed to deal with it (which one of us
>>> ought to compile at some point).
>>>
>>> Marie, I saw the suggestion on GGTF that women might prefer to edit
>>> "[f]ashion, cookery, domestic affairs, childrearing". Is it worth
>>> continuing with it when that's what we have to deal with?
>>>
>>> Sarah
>>>
>>> ​
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Dec 30, 2014 10:25 AM, "Marie Earley"  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> We're abandoning the GGTF on Wikipedia? Fair enough.
>>>>>
>>>>> It was just that I had an editor accused me of radical feminism POV
>>>>> pushing on GGTF via my talk page (I dared to say that it was "interesting"
>>>>> that the example topics that he thought women would be interested in
>>>>> editing, other than feminism, might be "*fashion, cookery, domestic
>>>>> affairs and childrearing*" rather than "*science, business,
>>>>> filmmaking or politics*"). There was then this follow-on swipe on
>>>>> GGTF.
>>>>>
>>>>> > "...one of the reasonable first steps toward seeing what women in
>>>>> wikipedia thinks needs to be done most would be to actively ask women who
>>>>> have self-identified as women what content of particular interest to women
>>>>> might be underrepresented or undercovered here. Those women would
>>>>> presumably be in a better position to clearly state their concerns than
>>>>> would be individuals who can only speculate on them or draw potentially
>>>>> flawed assumptions based on limited previous personal experience."
>>>>>
>>>>> So, my potentially flawed assumptions and limited previous personal
>>>>> experience are surplus to requirements at the GGTF. The plan now seems to
>>>>> go out and find answers that fit a pre-existing narrative about what is
>>>>> causing the Gender Gap.
>>>>>
>>>>> So...  "I believe the Gender Gap is caused by women who want to write
>>>>> about knitting thinking that Wikipedia does not welcome articles about
>>>>> knitting." I will create a skewed survey to fit this narrative and get the
>>>>> "right kind of women" to fill it in and prove my pre-conceived notions
>>>>> correct.
>>>>>
>>>>> I really don't see the point of it. If you ask 1,000 female editors,
>>>>> "What kind of articles do you like to edit?", then you'll get 1,000 
>>>>> answer

Re: [Gendergap] GGTF talk page

[LB]

Is it simply impossible to start a Wikipedia project that's open to women,
or people who identify as women? (I'm sorry if I don't use the correct
terms, but I haven't kept up with them in recent years.)

I mean if we did it... what would the consequences be?


Lightbreather

On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 10:45 PM, Sarah  wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 7:43 PM, LB  wrote:
>
>> Why abandon it? Let's reclaim it. Just ignore those who try to distract
>> and derail. There are sanctions so no nastiness, but nastiness is not my
>> usual style anyway.
>>
>
> ​I don't know whether it's better to abandon, reclaim or move it. But it
> has been a lesson in how deep Wikipedia's sexism runs. Any journalists in
> future wanting examples of it need only read those archives and the
> dispute-resolution threads that failed to deal with it (which one of us
> ought to compile at some point).
>
> Marie, I saw the suggestion on GGTF that women might prefer to edit
> "[f]ashion, cookery, domestic affairs, childrearing". Is it worth
> continuing with it when that's what we have to deal with?
>
> Sarah
>
> ​
>
>
>> On Dec 30, 2014 10:25 AM, "Marie Earley"  wrote:
>>
>>> We're abandoning the GGTF on Wikipedia? Fair enough.
>>>
>>> It was just that I had an editor accused me of radical feminism POV
>>> pushing on GGTF via my talk page (I dared to say that it was "interesting"
>>> that the example topics that he thought women would be interested in
>>> editing, other than feminism, might be "*fashion, cookery, domestic
>>> affairs and childrearing*" rather than "*science, business, filmmaking
>>> or politics*"). There was then this follow-on swipe on GGTF.
>>>
>>> > "...one of the reasonable first steps toward seeing what women in
>>> wikipedia thinks needs to be done most would be to actively ask women who
>>> have self-identified as women what content of particular interest to women
>>> might be underrepresented or undercovered here. Those women would
>>> presumably be in a better position to clearly state their concerns than
>>> would be individuals who can only speculate on them or draw potentially
>>> flawed assumptions based on limited previous personal experience."
>>>
>>> So, my potentially flawed assumptions and limited previous personal
>>> experience are surplus to requirements at the GGTF. The plan now seems to
>>> go out and find answers that fit a pre-existing narrative about what is
>>> causing the Gender Gap.
>>>
>>> So...  "I believe the Gender Gap is caused by women who want to write
>>> about knitting thinking that Wikipedia does not welcome articles about
>>> knitting." I will create a skewed survey to fit this narrative and get the
>>> "right kind of women" to fill it in and prove my pre-conceived notions
>>> correct.
>>>
>>> I really don't see the point of it. If you ask 1,000 female editors,
>>> "What kind of articles do you like to edit?", then you'll get 1,000 answers
>>> with a wide variety of topics. What would that prove? Suppose you find 90%
>>> of them edit traditionally feminine topics, what conclusion would you draw
>>> from it? Would it prove that they clearly prefer to edit those topics, or
>>> those are the topics that they feel less likely to encounter intimidation,
>>> or a combination of the two? I just think the GGTF board is currently being
>>> used to promote a truly pointless exercise.
>>>
>>> Marie
>>>
>>
> ___
> 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] GGTF talk page

[LB]

Why abandon it? Let's reclaim it. Just ignore those who try to distract and
derail. There are sanctions so no nastiness, but nastiness is not my usual
style anyway.
On Dec 30, 2014 10:25 AM, "Marie Earley"  wrote:

> We're abandoning the GGTF on Wikipedia? Fair enough.
>
> It was just that I had an editor accused me of radical feminism POV
> pushing on GGTF via my talk page (I dared to say that it was "interesting"
> that the example topics that he thought women would be interested in
> editing, other than feminism, might be "*fashion, cookery, domestic
> affairs and childrearing*" rather than "*science, business, filmmaking or
> politics*"). There was then this follow-on swipe on GGTF.
>
> > "...one of the reasonable first steps toward seeing what women in
> wikipedia thinks needs to be done most would be to actively ask women who
> have self-identified as women what content of particular interest to women
> might be underrepresented or undercovered here. Those women would
> presumably be in a better position to clearly state their concerns than
> would be individuals who can only speculate on them or draw potentially
> flawed assumptions based on limited previous personal experience."
>
> So, my potentially flawed assumptions and limited previous personal
> experience are surplus to requirements at the GGTF. The plan now seems to
> go out and find answers that fit a pre-existing narrative about what is
> causing the Gender Gap.
>
> So...  "I believe the Gender Gap is caused by women who want to write
> about knitting thinking that Wikipedia does not welcome articles about
> knitting." I will create a skewed survey to fit this narrative and get the
> "right kind of women" to fill it in and prove my pre-conceived notions
> correct.
>
> I really don't see the point of it. If you ask 1,000 female editors, "What
> kind of articles do you like to edit?", then you'll get 1,000 answers with
> a wide variety of topics. What would that prove? Suppose you find 90% of
> them edit traditionally feminine topics, what conclusion would you draw
> from it? Would it prove that they clearly prefer to edit those topics, or
> those are the topics that they feel less likely to encounter intimidation,
> or a combination of the two? I just think the GGTF board is currently being
> used to promote a truly pointless exercise.
>
> Marie
>
> --
> Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 07:56:24 -0800
> From: sarah.stie...@gmail.com
> To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] GGTF talk page
>
> That's what I have been doing. That's what Adrianne and I practice(d) and
> it's worked well so far.
>
> Now it's a global movement devoid of the drama that happens here. I am
> proud of that.
>
> Sarah
> On Dec 30, 2014 5:30 AM, "Tim Davenport"  wrote:
>
> Ms. Stierch's comments are exactly on target.
>
> Do the GGTF-type organizing off wiki, not on-wiki. That's not the place
> for it.
>
> Start your own message board akin to Wikipediocracy. Organize (and vent)
> there.
>
> Use Facebook, etc.
>
> Concentrate on developing new feminist editors, helping them through the
> steep learning curve, with an emphasis on content, content, content. Nobody
> is going to have a problem with that.
>
>
> Tim Davenport
> Carrite on WP /// Randy from Boise on WPO
> Corvallis, OR
>
>
>
> 
>
> Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2014 14:25:33 -0800
> From: Sarah Stierch 
>
> My tips are:
>
> 1) No talk pages if I can avoid it
> 2) Other channels (sorry people, but not all revolutions can take place in
> front of everyone)
> 3) Social media
>
> I get more value asking for help on Twitter and Facebook than I do on any
> other medium.
>
> ANd that's why the WikiWomen's Collaborative was created - social media
> brings more females (since we use it more than males!).
>
> -Sarah
>
> ___
> 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] Wikimedia Conference (was - Diversity training for functionaries)

[LB]

Absolutely agree with doing something like this on Wikipedia.
On Dec 30, 2014 12:56 PM, "Marie Earley"  wrote:

> I don't know how it goes in other parts of the world but here in the UK if
> you apply for a job, take a one day course in a particular subject, or do
> just about anything, there is always an equal opportunities monitoring form
> like this one:
> http://www.city.ac.uk/about/working-at-city/hr-policies-and-health-and-safety/hr-policies/equal-opps-form
> to fill in.
>
> I found it a bit shocking when I registered for Facebook, Wikipedia and
> other US-based websites that they had no apparent interest in the
> demographic make up of those opening accounts. If Wikipedia had an equal
> opps form at the point of registering a lot of this talk of doing surveys
> and trying to figure this stuff out retrospectively could be avoided.
>
> It's just not the kind of conversation that takes place in the UK because
> the first thing that happens is the equal opps forms are collected into a
> pile, there is an afternoon set aside for data entry, and there are your
> stats. I find talk of surveys a bit frustrating.
>
> Marie
>
> --
> Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2014 21:56:44 -0500
> From: nawr...@gmail.com
> To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Wikimedia Conference (was - Diversity training
> for functionaries)
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Chris Keating  > wrote:
>
> Hi Anne, Kerry and Christina - and everyone else,
>
> So the Wikimedia Conference programme committee appears keen to do
> something useful in terms of creating space for gender - gap work. So I
> wondered if you had any further thoughts about what *might* work at the
> Wikimedia Conference.
>
> As Anne points out it is an audience of people from Wikimedia movement
> organisations - board members, executive directors (where they exist), and
> a smaller number of other staff. Compared to other Wikimedia events there
> is probably a greater language and geographical diversity. There is also a
> reasonable degree of awareness of the issue - better than one would find if
> you put english Wikipedia administrators in a room.
>
> The main focus for the conference is going to be on helping Wikimedia
> organisations grow, learn and improve - we are looking to give people
> practical outcomes, and are avoiding theoretical discussion as far as
> possible.
>
> Thoughts on what we can put in the programme on this issue are very
> welcome :) (I'll pass everything on to the programme committee, though I
> suspect I'm not the only member of it subscribed to this list).
>
> Thanks and happy new year!
>
> Chris
>
>
> The simplest thing to do is to describe the gender gap related efforts
> that other organizations have sponsored, urge the various movement entities
> to consider their own initiatives and - especially - push them to innovate.
> Few if any organized efforts have resulted in even small lasting change, so
> brainstorming ways in which chapters etc. can put their resources - real
> life organization and money - to use will be of greatest benefit.  This is
> an area where a chapter or affiliate has the opportunity to be a global
> leader and to have a high profile impact, and the more they understand that
> the more likely they are to participate.
>
>
> ___ 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] GGTF talk page

[LB]

I suggest that an environment made up of *mostly* men is going to behave in
a way that is *mostly* male.

The Argument Culture

by Deborah Tannen PhD

Lightbreather

On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 8:15 AM, Risker  wrote:

> Carollet's just deconstruct what you're saying here.
>
> If we were to take the words "female" and "male" and "women" and "men" out
> of it entirely, would it sum up one of the major issues in editor
> retention?  I'm going to be honest, I've read a genuinely disproportionate
> number of insulting edits made by women (as a percentage of overall edits
> by editors I know to be women), and it's something that needs to be kept in
> mind; while the overwhelming majority of editors are male, I've not seen
> any evidence that a male editor is any more or less likely to behave badly
> than a female editor.  It's just more obvious because they outnumber us 10
> to 1.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On 30 December 2014 at 09:57, Carol Moore dc 
> wrote:
>
>> As long as (mostly male) Wikipedia editors are allowed to insult and
>> harass editors whose edits they oppose for whatever reason Wikipedia cannot
>> retain women, no matter how much they follow the suggestions below.
>> (Unless of course they focus on shaming the WMF until it uses its terms of
>> service against offending editors and administrators and arbitrators and
>> that is my particular interest at this point.)
>>
>> Since few women have any interest in editing in a hostile editing
>> environment.  Many males leave quickly for the same reason.  This is
>> especially true in political, economic or current events areas which too
>> many males consider their fiefdoms where womens' input not appreciated. And
>> FYI just 2% of males is too many IF they are allowed to get away with
>> insults and harassment.
>>
>> So reigning in the worst offenders on Wikipedia - without punishing even
>> harder those who oppose - or EVEN lose their tempers about - their offenses
>> is necessary.
>>
>> On 12/30/2014 8:30 AM, Tim Davenport wrote:
>>
>>> Ms. Stierch's comments are exactly on target.
>>>
>>> Do the GGTF-type organizing off wiki, not on-wiki. That's not the place
>>> for it.
>>>
>>> Start your own message board akin to Wikipediocracy. Organize (and vent)
>>> there.
>>>
>>> Use Facebook, etc.
>>>
>>> Concentrate on developing new feminist editors, helping them through the
>>> steep learning curve, with an emphasis on content, content, content. Nobody
>>> is going to have a problem with that.
>>>
>>>
>>> Tim Davenport
>>> Carrite on WP /// Randy from Boise on WPO
>>> Corvallis, OR
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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] GGTF talk page

[LB]

I think there is very little that Carol and I would agree on when it comes
to subjects and article topics, and we definitely have different editing
styles, but I absolutely agree with her on one thing, and that is the
hostility on Wikipedia is a turn-off to a lot of women and men. I would
much rather be editing articles most of the time, and the only reason that
I got into civility policy and related issues is because of what I've
experienced and observed.

There are insulting women on WP, but I believe they're either women who are
that way by nature, or who have adopted their attitudes to be "one of the
guys." They'll throw other women under the bus in a heartbeat.

Here's the thing: Even if we attract scores of women to come and edit, if
the environment stays the same, most of them will leave (and a lot of the
men who come during the same time). If you're running an exclusionary club
and you want a more diverse membership - it's not just enough to throw the
doors open and *say* "come on in." You don't ask your new guests to change
their ways, you ask yourselves: What can we change about our club that will
help these new members to feel welcome?


Lightbreather

On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 8:15 AM, Risker  wrote:

> Carollet's just deconstruct what you're saying here.
>
> If we were to take the words "female" and "male" and "women" and "men" out
> of it entirely, would it sum up one of the major issues in editor
> retention?  I'm going to be honest, I've read a genuinely disproportionate
> number of insulting edits made by women (as a percentage of overall edits
> by editors I know to be women), and it's something that needs to be kept in
> mind; while the overwhelming majority of editors are male, I've not seen
> any evidence that a male editor is any more or less likely to behave badly
> than a female editor.  It's just more obvious because they outnumber us 10
> to 1.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On 30 December 2014 at 09:57, Carol Moore dc 
> wrote:
>
>> As long as (mostly male) Wikipedia editors are allowed to insult and
>> harass editors whose edits they oppose for whatever reason Wikipedia cannot
>> retain women, no matter how much they follow the suggestions below.
>> (Unless of course they focus on shaming the WMF until it uses its terms of
>> service against offending editors and administrators and arbitrators and
>> that is my particular interest at this point.)
>>
>> Since few women have any interest in editing in a hostile editing
>> environment.  Many males leave quickly for the same reason.  This is
>> especially true in political, economic or current events areas which too
>> many males consider their fiefdoms where womens' input not appreciated. And
>> FYI just 2% of males is too many IF they are allowed to get away with
>> insults and harassment.
>>
>> So reigning in the worst offenders on Wikipedia - without punishing even
>> harder those who oppose - or EVEN lose their tempers about - their offenses
>> is necessary.
>>
>> On 12/30/2014 8:30 AM, Tim Davenport wrote:
>>
>>> Ms. Stierch's comments are exactly on target.
>>>
>>> Do the GGTF-type organizing off wiki, not on-wiki. That's not the place
>>> for it.
>>>
>>> Start your own message board akin to Wikipediocracy. Organize (and vent)
>>> there.
>>>
>>> Use Facebook, etc.
>>>
>>> Concentrate on developing new feminist editors, helping them through the
>>> steep learning curve, with an emphasis on content, content, content. Nobody
>>> is going to have a problem with that.
>>>
>>>
>>> Tim Davenport
>>> Carrite on WP /// Randy from Boise on WPO
>>> Corvallis, OR
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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] GGTF talk page

[LB]

Honestly, I'm leery about participating on this list a lot of the time
because I don't know who everyone is - that is the name they use on this
list doesn't match their name on Wikipedia. There is one I've figured out,
and he is one of the ones who has said some very bad things about me on
talk pages. Same thing with the Facebook group. At first I was excited to
join because it's apparently for women only, but two women I reached out to
there did not help me, and I worry that there could be people there
pretending to be someone else.

I have experienced so much hostility on Wikipedia - which I never expected
before I joined, I was so naive - that my trust is shaken and every other
editor, or mailing-list or FB member, could be a spy or a "joe job."

After the recent ArbCom my faith in the WP dispute resolution system is at
an all-time low, but at least there it's all documented publicly and I've
come to know who most of my enemies (for lack of a better word) are.

I'm going out for the day soon, so I may not see replies (if there are any)
right away - but I will read them.

Lightbreather

On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Sarah Stierch 
wrote:

> +1 to that.
> My tips are:
>
> 1) No talk pages if I can avoid it
> 2) Other channels (sorry people, but not all revolutions can take place in
> front of everyone)
> 3) Social media
>
> I get more value asking for help on Twitter and Facebook than I do on any
> other medium.
>
> ANd that's why the WikiWomen's Collaborative was created - social media
> brings more females (since we use it more than males!).
>
> -Sarah
>
> On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 2:07 PM, disgruntled grognard  > wrote:
>
>> yep,
>> let's study some more, not all men, let's recruit more pipeline...
>>
>> i tend to edit in article space.
>> talk space and even project talk are dysfunctional (waste of time)
>> people seeking to disrupt, can only on wiki.
>>
>> i tend to organize on facebook, twitter, meetup etc.
>> where there is adult supervision.
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 1:45 PM, Carol Moore dc > > wrote:
>>
>>>  On 12/29/2014 12:31 PM, Marie Earley wrote:
>>>
>>> Is it possible to post some of the stuff that has been mentioned on here
>>> on the GGTF talk page
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias/Gender_gap_task_force
>>>
>>> It feels like the two have nothing in common at the moment. There's a
>>> whole load of "why don't we survey women and find out what they like to
>>> edit / give women their own noticeboard / review the scope of the project"
>>> - type rhetoric.
>>>
>>> Rather than wade in and argue (it's pointless, I got accused of 'radical
>>> feminism' POV pushing for my trouble), can some of the stuff about grants,
>>> meet ups etc. and replies be posted so we can move on, and all of the
>>> "let's rip it up and start again" stuff can make its way into the archive?
>>>
>>> Marie
>>>
>>> Everything you see is just a variation of what was happening all summer,
>>> with the pro-GGTF editors managing to keep their tempers against various
>>> attempts by anti-project editors to disrupt the project by trying to narrow
>>> and control the scope (as some women explicitly have complained):
>>>
>>> *general nitpicking of statement by a woman/supporter of project that
>>> supports the original vision of being both about increasing number of
>>> articles about women/topics of interest to women and increasing number of
>>> women, including by dealing with issues that turn women off (both software
>>> and behavior issues). (One editor summarized these past comments here:
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:The_Vintage_Feminist/GGTF%27s_re-boot
>>> The comments are being challenged.) And of course various accusations of
>>> defacto sexism for those who complain about this, as Marie alludes to above
>>>
>>> *Opposition to the idea of using the page to get other editors to help
>>> with new articles about women unless the articles are already 100% in
>>> compliance with every policy imaginable.
>>>
>>> *proposal to divide GGTF into two projects, one for articles about
>>> women, the other for getting more women and "behavior"problems; divide and
>>> conquor is the strategy here and I'm sure the second would quickly be put
>>> up for deletion, widdling the project down to nothing
>>>
>>> *proposal to invite anything and everything regarding women (including
>>> perhaps through womens noticeboard), which could be used to water GGTF down
>>> to nothing regarding a gender gap by flooding with less relevant concerns
>>>
>>> *continuing contention that there is no evidence that there's a problem
>>> despite these two existing pages:
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias/Gender_gap_task_force/research
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias/Gender_gap_task_force/media
>>> It would help if
>>>
>>> *Past edits at GGTF show that one or more of the alleged women posting
>>

Re: [Gendergap] ya'll are in slate

[LB]

Excellent!


Lightbreather

On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Sarah Stierch 
wrote:

>
> http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2014/12/wikipedia_editing_disputes_the_crowdsourced_encyclopedia_has_become_a_rancorous.html
>
> GENDER GAP TASK FORCE FTW
>
>
> --
>
> Sarah Stierch
>
> -
>
> Diverse and engaging consulting for your organization.
>
> 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] Rosiestep in Huffington Post (yay good news)

[LB]

Makes me smile.

Lightbreather

On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Sarah Stierch 
wrote:

> yay rays of sunshine :)
>
>
> http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/netha-hussain/rosie-stephenson-the-woma_b_6302636.html
>
> --
>
> Sarah Stierch
>
> -
>
> Diverse and engaging consulting for your organization.
>
> 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 gender gap meet-up?

[LB]

Is there a term (like "joe job") for when someone pretends to be you to get
you into trouble? In my case, after I'd already been blocked for a week, an
IP address deleted some info

that I'd asked to have revdeled. It's *possible* it was someone who thought
they were helping me, but it's also possible - maybe probable - that
someone did it maliciously so an admin would think I was dodging my block.


Lightbreather

On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 8:57 AM, Fæ  wrote:

> See . This was a targeted attack
> on Russavia by someone deliberately pretending to be them.
>
> It's a malicious form of attack intended to have Wikimedians take
> action on each other in error in order to cause disruption. With more
> sophisticated spoofing going on it is something we all need to stay
> aware of.
>
> Fae
>
> On 10 December 2014 at 15:32, Sarah Stierch 
> wrote:
> > Russavia claims he did not start it.
> > On Dec 10, 2014 6:09 AM, "regu...@gmail.com"  wrote:
> ...
> >> Also in re gards to the google group that russavia started. I think that
> >> was done in good faith to allow a more interactive venue where people
> could
> >> chat more real time rather than in a moderated email list. So i wouldnt
> get
> >> too upset about the invitations to it even though some folks dont like
> him.
> >> I think hes just trying to be helpful.
>
> ___
> 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 election

[LB]

Well, I believe I have on a community member hat, too, although I may be
sitting in a corner with it right now. Are you familiar with the details of
my block extension for "evasion"? First, it was made by an admin who
possibly should *not* have
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#When_blocking_may_not_be_used>
because of his involvement
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators#Involved_admins>.
Second, I explained that it was not me (the last/best yesterday
<https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lightbreather&diff=637210976&oldid=637195908>.)
And third, and most convincingly, an (often) opponent of mine explained
that he didn't believe it was me. Still, the involved, blocking admin
decided to apply Occam's razor over the benefit of the doubt - or good
faith, in WP terms.

On a separate note, this makes me wonder about something: Is an editor
allowed to request an RFC/U on themselves?


Lightbreather

On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Risker  wrote:

> Wearing my community member hat, I'm going to put my hand up and say I'd
> really hate to see *any* blocked user unblocked specifically so they could
> vote in *any* process, whether RFA, AFD, Arbcom or Board of Trustees.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
>
> On 9 December 2014 at 14:33, LB  wrote:
>
>> Here's a thing re the voting.
>>
>> *I wanted to vote*, but couldn't because my original, 1-week "sock"
>> block was extended by a week, for "evading" my block. Setting aside whether
>> the original block was fair - my reason for editing anonymously was for
>> privacy, but others called it avoiding scrutiny - the extension of my block
>> was not fair because the IP that caused it was not me, which I think I
>> argued well.
>>
>> My last effort, on the last day of voting, to get the "evasion" block
>> lifted was going to the unblock IRC (that was quite an experience) and
>> proposing that I only vote and not do anything else until the block
>> extension expired. Admins there would not agree to that proposal, plus they
>> gave me some snark because of my ignorance of how the unblock process works.
>>
>> In fact, added to my list now of not-content issues (and I really would
>> prefer to work on content) to address is the SPI/block process. It was
>> aggravating as hell to want to discuss my situation privately, but be
>> ignored, thereby not being able to defend myself without outing/confirming
>> personal information. My choices were 1. Argue my position publicly and
>> confirm outed, personal information (my IP address), or 2. Stay quiet and
>> look guilty by not denying the charge. I'm still trying to wrap my brain
>> around it.
>>
>> Lightbreather
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 11:33 AM, GorillaWarfare <
>> gorillawarfarewikipe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 8:45 AM, Fæ  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Perhaps one meaningful conclusion is that the fact that in this vote
>>>> there was a lack of process to ensure that systemic bias was avoided
>>>> or measured. It would be better if votes such as Arbcom's or trustee
>>>> elections took active steps to ensure diversity in the voting
>>>> community, and the candidates standing (I believe this is already an
>>>> active process for inviting WMF trustee candidates or appointed
>>>> posts).
>>>>
>>>
>>> How would you suggest we ensure diversity in the Arbitration Committee
>>> candidates and voting community? It's one thing to *encourage*
>>> diversity among the Committee and voters, and another to *ensure* it.
>>> For one it would require women (and members of other groups that are in the
>>> minority on the Committee and on Wikipedia more widely) to be willing to
>>> run, which I think is asking a lot with the current state of affairs with
>>> respect to the Committee.
>>>
>>> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Arbcom election

[LB]

Here's a thing re the voting.

*I wanted to vote*, but couldn't because my original, 1-week "sock" block
was extended by a week, for "evading" my block. Setting aside whether the
original block was fair - my reason for editing anonymously was for
privacy, but others called it avoiding scrutiny - the extension of my block
was not fair because the IP that caused it was not me, which I think I
argued well.

My last effort, on the last day of voting, to get the "evasion" block
lifted was going to the unblock IRC (that was quite an experience) and
proposing that I only vote and not do anything else until the block
extension expired. Admins there would not agree to that proposal, plus they
gave me some snark because of my ignorance of how the unblock process works.

In fact, added to my list now of not-content issues (and I really would
prefer to work on content) to address is the SPI/block process. It was
aggravating as hell to want to discuss my situation privately, but be
ignored, thereby not being able to defend myself without outing/confirming
personal information. My choices were 1. Argue my position publicly and
confirm outed, personal information (my IP address), or 2. Stay quiet and
look guilty by not denying the charge. I'm still trying to wrap my brain
around it.

Lightbreather

On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 11:33 AM, GorillaWarfare <
gorillawarfarewikipe...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 8:45 AM, Fæ  wrote:
>
>> Perhaps one meaningful conclusion is that the fact that in this vote
>> there was a lack of process to ensure that systemic bias was avoided
>> or measured. It would be better if votes such as Arbcom's or trustee
>> elections took active steps to ensure diversity in the voting
>> community, and the candidates standing (I believe this is already an
>> active process for inviting WMF trustee candidates or appointed
>> posts).
>>
>
> How would you suggest we ensure diversity in the Arbitration Committee
> candidates and voting community? It's one thing to *encourage* diversity
> among the Committee and voters, and another to *ensure* it. For one it
> would require women (and members of other groups that are in the minority
> on the Committee and on Wikipedia more widely) to be willing to run, which
> I think is asking a lot with the current state of affairs with respect to
> the Committee.
>
> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
>
> ___
> 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] How to vote today?

[LB]

I have been trying to get a block lifted for a week now, but my request is
at a critical point today - as I'd like to vote at WP:ACE.

I have tried the unblock and Admin help templates on my talk page, the UTRS
ticket system, and direct appeals to involved admins. Any suggestions?

For details, see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Lightbreather#Request_to_remove_1-week_unblock_extension

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Lightbreather#Question_for_administrator

Lightbreather
___
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

[LB]

Don't let RO close that before I can vote... which will December 7, unless
the editors who are baiting me many to get my block extended.

Lightbreather

On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 1:39 AM, Ryan Kaldari  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 
> 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_Wales&oldid=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
>
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

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

[LB]

I cannot believe the crap going on on that talk page now! Having watched
this case develop over the past few weeks, I finally ventured to share my
disgust with the way things ended up, and now I'm being accused of basing
my opinion *completely* on gender. Another guy chimed in to say: "Some
people aren't happy unless they are 'the victim', as odd as this sounds.
The perpetual contrarian underdog. And no, I don't say this to be mean, it
is simply a fact in human behavior that some people are like that."

Both of these remarks were made by (male) admins.

This is the link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gender_Gap_Task_Force/Proposed_decision#A_strong_signal_to_the_GGTF

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

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

[LB]

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

Re: [Gendergap] Survey re: gender gap

[LB]

Your survey came at the right time. I just quit Wikipedia.
On Oct 14, 2014 10:32 AM, "Amanda Menking"  wrote:

>  Hi,
>
>  I’ve just activated a survey re: the gender gap, primarily on the EN
> Wiki: https://jfe.qualtrics.com/form/SV_cILwYSqJB58SgFn
>
>  This survey is a part of ongoing research related to an IEG:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Women_and_Wikipedia
>
>  If you have 10-20 minutes, I would greatly appreciate your
> participation. Also, please feel free to share the link to the survey to
> editors of all sexes and genders who are not on this mailing list.
>
>  This survey is open to ALL editors who contribute to the English
> language Wikipedia. It does not require or record your user name or real
> name.
>
>  If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to email me via
> amend...@uw.edu or reach out to User:Mssemantics.
>
>  Thanks!
> Amanda Menking
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Update: Re: Polish Wikipedia Monument shows only men

[LB]

If it be so... hallelujah!


Lightbreather

On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 10:45 AM, Natalia  wrote:

> I'm not sure if it is really going to show only men. According to these
> pictures (illustrating an article about the factory where the monument is
> being prepared so it seems quite reliable) there are going to be 2 female
> figures.
>
> http://www.strefabiznesu.gazetalubuska.pl/artykul/w-nowosolskim-malpolu-powstaje-pierwszy-na-swiecie-pomnik-wikipedii
> The original project also included two women. So there is hope :)
>
> I'm going to attend the unveiling as an official representative of
> Wikimedia Poland so I will do an on-site inspection and I will let you know
> ;)
>
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Notice of a discussion the involves the GG Task Force

[LB]

There is a discussion at ANI that involves (partially) the Gender Gap Task
Force:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Request_administrator_to_evaluate_conduct_of_user

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

Re: [Gendergap] Wikipedia and the war on women’s dignity

[LB]

I hear you, but I would very much like to see some good newsrooms (real
journalists) do regular reporting on Wikipedia. I think it would be hard on
the community at first, but ultimately would help. WP is a hostile work
environment and I for one am tired of it.

Lightbreather

On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Risker  wrote:

> Frankly, I see little value in creating a site whose goal includes
> attracting journalists - particularly given the poor quality,
> sensationalistic journalism that we've all seen "reporting" on anything
> Wikimedia.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Shining light on the gender gap by Twitter

[LB]

And of course, that is the nub of the problem. Women shouldn't have to keep
their heads down and write about acceptable and uncontroversial things to
avoid getting harassed. (Also, I'm not sure even editing women scientists
would be safe.)

Lightbreather

On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 9:15 AM, Sarah Stierch 
wrote:

> Thanks Nathan. I do concur that harassment to the level myself, Carol and
> other very active outspoken women have experienced on/off wiki is not the
> standard experience for every woman who lines up to click edit.
>
> It sucks that it happens. But I also always remind people - unless you are
> editing controversial subjects or pose a direct threat to the patriarchy
> you won't get messed with. Or at least not much.
>
> Just keep your head down and write about knitting and women scientists.
> You will be "just fine..."
>
> (With slight sarcasm :)
>
> Sarah
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Shining light on the gender gap by Twitter

[LB]

I'm going to keep at it, for now. Honestly, I'm tired of it being a mostly
internally discussed problem... Perhaps I'll change my mind at some point,
but that's my thinking on it at this time.

Lightbreather

On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:21 PM, Carol Moore dc 
wrote:

>  Frankly, given the hostility to the Gender Gap project, I have to wonder
> about this Hashtag effort.
>
> Lightbreather quoted some obnoxious guy statements a month  ago out of her
> own account and was roundly criticized. Forum shopping and canvassing
> issues were raised while others applauded it. See
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales/Archive_170#Fed_up_with_the_status_quo
> ...
>
> I personally wouldn't do it because the wrong Admin who was friends with
> people you quoted (or people who don't like you) probably would get you
> blocked for weeks or months at a time. So it could be a way to trap editors
> whose twitter accounts are somehow linked to their user names.
>
> I know at least one guy at an ANI got away with criticizing a woman editor
> on her editing at a number of off wiki-sites.  But that doesn't mean any of
> us would get away with it.
>
>  And this also can be turned about the Gender Gap Project
> "#GenderGapStupidity" or whatever.
>
> So unless there was some community consensus on an appropriate way to do
> this, I would tread carefully...
>
> CM
>
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] The Insane Double Standard for Women Working in Tech

[LB]

Thanks!

Lightbreather

On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Sydney Poore 
wrote:

> This article is interesting and relevant to the gender gap issue on
> Wikipedia.
> Sydney
>
> The Insane Double Standard for Women Working in Tech
>
> http://www.inc.com/kimberly-weisul/insane-double-standard-for-tech-women.html
>
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Feedback appreciated

[LB]

I would appreciate some feedback on this discussion, please, especially
from others who have been stalked in real life, harassed online, or
Wikihounded.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias/Gender_gap_task_force#Departed_member_explains.2C_in_her_own_words.2C_with_DIFFS

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

Re: [Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons

[LB]

Twice during my short discussion about how to start a civility board, which
turned into a long discussion about the word c*nt, an Admin gave the link
to the Commons search results for that word, saying that showed that the
"text" of the word isn't very offensive. WTF?!

On Jul 30, 2014 7:55 PM, "Sarah Stierch"  wrote:
>
> Nope and I get consistent messages on and off wiki from women saying
cheat sheets are poorly designed or people are too busy... But I don't
think surveys are being done about workshops and the guides they pass out
(I believe in throwing people into the pool to learn how to swim).
>
> I Still stand by hand holding...personal out weighs what we attempt...
>
> But perhaps I am old school in the world of wiki. I also lost a job to
trolls who coincidentally also disagreed with my beliefs on commons...so I
am particularly sensitive. Commons is a terrible and demoralizing place.
>
> The women's Commons revolution won't happen anytime soon.
>
> Sarah
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Rebirthing PAIN or something like it - and c*nt talk

[LB]

One of my hurdles as an editor is incivility: a deficiency of it in others
and, according to some of them, too much of it in me - or too much
sensitivity. I started a discussion "Where and how to request a Civility
board"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Where_and_how_to_request_a_Civility_board
and there seems to be some strong resistance to the idea.

Disappointingly, but perhaps not surprisingly, the third person to reply
dragged gender into it, with this comment:

"Besides, the easiest way to avoid being called a cunt is not to act
like one."

I would surely like some feedback - here and there - about this.

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