Re: [Gendergap] Topless image retention -don't give up

Pete, The other day, Daniel Case referred on Commons to Commons' failure as a community to formulate a clear policy about posting identifiable nudes in private places without any indication as to whether they have consented to publication of those images under a licensing scheme that allows for

Re: [Gendergap] Topless image retention -don't give up

I'll gladly pass your comment on, Russavia. How should the attribution read? At present it reads, Which way? Bernard Gagnon/Wikimedia Commons GNU Free Documentation License http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Backchannels/2012/1106/From-a-distance-Syria-feels-like-Iraq-in-2004 On Mon, May 13, 2013

Re: [Gendergap] Topless image retention -don't give up

On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 5:17 AM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: As I have said before, I am happy to work with you or anyone on drafting a better policy. (I realize you offered a two word edit, but in my

Re: [Gendergap] can the Commons images thread move?

I agree with Sarah: the thread should stay, tagged with [Commons] as Erik has suggested. We are actually making progress – painful progress at times, but significant progress nevertheless. Andreas On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 7:46 AM, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:21

Re: [Gendergap] Topless image retention -don't give up

On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 5:08 PM, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 2:03 AM, Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.comwrote: Hey Sarah et al On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com wrote: I think this is my first Commons deletion nom. I'm trying to

[Gendergap] What should we do about Wikipedia?

Hi all, A really good piece by Martha Nichols and Lorraine Berry appeared today in the online literary magazine, Talking Writing. http://talkingwriting.com/what-should-we-do-about-wikipedia/ It quotes the opinions of several women writers and is a follow-up to both Filipacchi's op-ed and the

[Gendergap] Blog post on brassiere article

This blog post of ours http://wikipediocracy.com/2013/10/27/everything-you-never-needed-to-know-about-bras-but-wikipedia-will-tell-you-anyway/ seems to have made a bit of an impact on the brassiere GA. Note that we welcome guest blog submissions on gender issues. Andreas

Re: [Gendergap] Why Women Have No Time For Wikipedia (WPO article)

be obtained by redoing Hill Shaw‘s analysis on the raw dataset. On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 9:14 PM, Tim Davenport shoehu...@gmail.com wrote: There is a new blog post up on Wikipedia-criticism site Wikipediocracy that should be of interest to this list. Andreas Kolbe with Nathalie Collida

Re: [Gendergap] Why Women Have No Time For Wikipedia (WPO article)

have access to the gender demographics results, and if so, could you share them? Best, Andreas On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 8:42 PM, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: I will have to look into Hill Shaw

Re: [Gendergap] Why Women Have No Time For Wikipedia (WPO article)

Hi Marielle, On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 9:18 PM, Marielle Volz marielle.v...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the response Andreas. I've updated with the 8.5% source. I have updated my text in line with your comments, and added an author's note acknowledging your input. Best regards, Andreas

Re: [Gendergap] Why Women Have No Time For Wikipedia (WPO article)

the discussion, elect to see all posts, including the downvoted ones, as otherwise you'll miss some of the more worthwhile ones. On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 1:54 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Marielle, On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 9:18 PM, Marielle Volz marielle.v...@gmail.com wrote

[Gendergap] Emotions under Discussion: Gender, Status and Communication in Online Collaboration

This is a new paper, published a couple of weeks ago. (Sorry if it's been mentioned before, I couldn't see a related thread.) http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0104880 Principal findings: We find that administrators maintain a rather neutral, impersonal tone,

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

In my opinion, women should look to organising off-wiki. Women-only site Women.com was mentioned the other day on the Gender Gap Task Force page. Activism there could certainly fulfil a useful function. Ultimately, I think there should be a separate site for the gender gap effort – combining a

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

. Risker/Anne On 11 September 2014 18:51, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: In my opinion, women should look to organising off-wiki. Women-only site Women.com was mentioned the other day on the Gender Gap Task Force page. Activism there could certainly fulfil a useful function. Ultimately

Re: [Gendergap] x% female, y% male. ???

On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Jeremy Baron jer...@tuxmachine.com wrote: See [http://mako.cc/copyrighteous/the-wikipedia-gender-gap-revisited Mako's study] which includes the initial numbers from before his changes. I thought the study results were already released by the time he did the

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

On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote: my joke about the systemic bias card (which is evidence against me in Arbitration!); Yeah, this is one of the more bizarre diffs. I am glad a couple of arbitrators opposed on the basis of that. I would be even

Re: [Gendergap] surveys of active female editors?

happy to share a link to the entire note once it’s available. I’m also happy to collaborate with others re: future research. Best, Amanda / Mssemantics From: Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com Reply-To: 'Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the participation of women

[Gendergap] FOSDEM report from Wikimedia-l

This post from Romaine on Wikimedia-l caught my eye: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2015-February/076685.html Parts of it touched on the gender gap. Those parts are copied below: ---o0o--- Hi all, The past weekend was great! Wikimedia was at FOSDEM, the Free and Open Source

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

David Auerbach in Slate on The Wikipedia Ouroboros: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2015/02/wikipedia_gamergate_scandal_how_a_bad_source_made_wikipedia_wrong_about.single.html On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 1:40 PM, WereSpielChequers werespielchequ...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Marie,

Re: [Gendergap] [Wikimedia-l] surveys of active female editors?

+1. Here are some more questions that I would be interested in having answers to: -- What do women who are presently editing find most demotivating about contributing to Wikipedia? -- Have they ever thought of throwing in the towel, and what were the reasons? -- Based on past experience, what

Re: [Gendergap] Fwd: Update on 2012 editor survey results

about age and education level, so maybe there will be some hard data for those who continue to suggest dumbing things down or making them cutesy in order to make WP palatable for women. Regards, Neotarf -- Forwarded message -- From: Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com Date: Wed

Re: [Gendergap] Fwd: Update on 2012 editor survey results

On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: Lest conspiracy theories get any more exciting, I've asked Tilman (who just moved into my department, and has been responsible for the survey results) to give an update on where things are and what the main holdup has

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Press coverage is widening: 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

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 6:03 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote: Note: most of the in trouble editor's aren't that productive at contributing feminist content to Wikipedia. I have interacted with only four of them - Black Kite, Future Perfect at Sunrise, TarainDC and Bilby - only

Re: [Gendergap] More press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

One more, by Andy Cush: http://internet.gawker.com/the-gamergate-decision-shows-exactly-whats-broken-about-1682639327 Quote: Maher's email, and the official Wikipedia statements on Gamergate, are careful to point out that the arbitration committee has the authority to govern disputes about the

[Gendergap] Update on 2012 editor survey results

Tilman Bayer has, at long last, responded to inquiries about the as yet unreleased gender split in the 2012 editor survey: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research_talk:Wikipedia_Editor_Survey_2012#Looking_for_survey_results Nearly two years ago, Tilman had said: ---o0o--- Beckie and I have

[Gendergap] Lightbreather arbitration case

The proposed decision in the Lightbreather case was posted yesterday. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Lightbreather/Proposed_decision It comments extensively on harassment. The proposed decision has already been controversially discussed on Twitter:

[Gendergap] Fwd: [Wikimedia-l] Recognition of WikiWomen's User Group

From Wikimedia-l. -- Forwarded message -- From: Carlos M. Colina ma...@wikimedia.org.ve Date: Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 12:24 PM Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Recognition of WikiWomen's User Group To: wikimedi...@lists.wikimedia.org Dear all, I am pleased and honoured to announce on behalf

Re: [Gendergap] Atlantic article..."How Wikipedia is Hostile to Women"

Good that this story has been told, at last. Overdue. (Minor quibbles: Eric is not an admin, and the New York Times piece was not written by a NYT reporter. Corrections possible?) On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 9:04 PM, Kevin Gorman wrote: > Thanks for sending this out Carol, you

Re: [Gendergap] Signpost op-ed (NSFW)

It's here, John: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-08-19/Op-ed Andreas On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 12:17 AM, John Mark Vandenberg wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Robert Fernandez > wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, Feb

<    1   2