Hi, Kath,
Thank you very much for the kind response and good wishes. I'm very pleased
to hear that your Wikipedia editing experience has been so pleasurable and
rewarding for you and, naturally, I hope it continues to be so. It's great
that you've found a congenial group of other editors to work c
[snip]
hi Charlotte, sorry to hear you had a bad experience on WP. I hope you will
decide to come back to editing at a later stage.
I am a new editor too (since the 13% women article earlier this year - I
think I did sign up years ago but didn't do anything until this year). (a
little of my histor
Hi, Rupert,
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 1:46 AM, rupert THURNER wrote:
> hahaha, charlotte, i really like your attitude and passion!
>
> let me give a completely different example where i fell into a similar
> trap. at that time, when i was young, stupid and idealistic
>
> at that time, it bothe
hahaha, charlotte, i really like your attitude and passion!
let me give a completely different example where i fell into a similar trap.
at that time, when i was young, stupid and idealistic
at that time, it bothered me a little that articles contained miles, foot
and inches. so i started to
Hi, Fred,
I'm not seeking any redress from the members of this list for what I
experienced , much less through the Wikipedia dispute resolution process,
because I've already decided to stop editing and spend that time elsewhere,
so I'd attempted to explain how and why I'd reached that conclusion w
Wikipedia is equipped to deal with particular editing issues. Every edit
is logged and can be viewed and discussed. Without specifics we assume
everyone, you and those you had trouble with, was editing in good faith
and had some more or less good reason for their edits or comments.
You do seem lik
Hi, Pete,
Thank you for your very thoughtful reply and kind welcome, which I
appreciate most sincerely. Your gloss on the anti-canvassing policy
was most illuminating for me -- thank you.
I have to admit that the anti-canvassing policy is one of the
Wikipedia policies that troubles me the most, a
;> Message: 2
>> Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 20:50:38 -0400
>> From: Charlotte J
>> Subject: [Gendergap] As I was passing through...
>> To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Message-ID:
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>> Hell
Hi, Andreas,
On 6/22/11, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
> Hi Charlotte,
> I managed to find the dispute and had a look at it. The editor concerned
> definitely was being a bit of a prat in my view, and should have discussed
> the matter with you before going on a reverting spree.
> I would not have inserte
Hi, Sue,
On 6/22/11, Sue Gardner wrote:
> Charlotte, thank you for writing this, and welcome to the list.
>
> I don't want you to stop editing Wikipedia. I have spent a lot of time
> immersed in Wikipedia culture, and for what its worth I can tell you
> that your e-mail exemplifies the best of W
Hi Charlotte,
I'd like to thank you for taking the time to provide a rundown of your
"Wikipedia career." I think it's useful for lots of us -- new and old
Wikipedians alike -- to hear stories of how people encounter Wikipedia, and
your providing the context of all your unproblematic encounters is
ge: 2
> Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 20:50:38 -0400
> From: Charlotte J
> Subject: [Gendergap] As I was passing through...
> To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> Message-ID:
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Hello, everyone,
>
> I joined t
P.S. I echo Sue's sentiments. :)
Welcome, and thanks for your articulate letter.
Andreas
--- On Thu, 23/6/11, Charlotte J wrote:
From: Charlotte J
Subject: [Gendergap] As I was passing through...
To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Thursday, 23 June, 2011, 1:50
Hello, everyone,
I j
e you were
quite correct, and they were wrong, and moreover dealt with it poorly.
Hope that helps.
I think what we see here once more is the off-putting effect of templating
good-faith contributors.
Andreas
--- On Thu, 23/6/11, Charlotte J wrote:
From: Charlotte J
Subject: [Gendergap] As I w
On 22 June 2011 17:50, Charlotte J wrote:
> This has probably been far too long already for a number of folks on the
> list, so I'll conclude for now and share my thoughts on hosting pornography
> on Wikipedia; recruiting Girl Scouts as editors; another potential
> consideration not yet raised as
Hello, everyone,
I joined this list a couple days ago after reading through its archives,
which I embarked on after having come across the June 13th article in *The
Signpost* discussing the tiny percentage of self-identified female Wikipedia
editors. I'd missed the January *New York Times* article
16 matches
Mail list logo
