Nice find Fred. I hadn't read those before. It sounds like revision deletion might be an option in more extreme cases.
There was discussion recently about setting up a "Gender issues noticeboard" on English Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Feminism#Gender_issues_noticeboard.3F), but no consensus was reached. Also, although it is not an official forum for such matters, some editors bring problematic cases to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Feminism At least it's better than getting laughed at by going to Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts. Kaldari On 3/17/11 6:04 PM, Fred Bauder wrote: >> I saw an incident recently on WP that's fairly common, but it's not >> clear to me what we should do about it, if anything. >> >> A woman editor did something that a few male editors didn't like, and >> she was taken to task for it. In the course of the discussion, the >> Wikipedia biography of a woman was mentioned and linked to, and her >> photograph showed her as attractive. One of the men taking part in the >> discussion said something positive about the image -- then he added >> that policy prevented him from going into detail about his feelings >> about it. (I won't quote him so as not to identify him, but it was >> words to that effect.) >> >> It's a remark typical of young men, and he almost certainly intended >> no harm. But the effect on me as a reader was that it undermined the >> woman taking part in the discussion. She also felt that way, and said >> so. The response was that her objection was laughable. >> >> What should we do when we witness this kind of thing? I've never said >> anything in these situations, because I see them so often, and there's >> a risk of turning it into a dramafest. I also know that some people, >> men and women both, would say it's too minor a thing to comment on. >> >> So -- should we be saying something, and if so what and how, or is it >> best to ignore? >> >> Sarah > Please look at Wikipedia:Revision_deletion#Criteria_for_redaction > > particularly: > > 2. Grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive material that has little/no > encyclopedic or project value and/or violates our Biographies of living > people policy. This includes slurs, smears, and grossly offensive > material of little or no encyclopedic value, but not mere factual > statements, and not "ordinary" incivility, personal attacks or conduct > accusations. When attack pages or pages with grossly improper titles are > deleted, the page names may also be removed from the delete and page move > logs. > > 3. Purely disruptive material that is of little or no relevance or merit > to the project. This includes allegations, grossly inappropriate threats > or attacks, browser-crashing or malicious HTML, shock pages, phishing > pages, known virus proliferating pages, and links to web pages that > disparage or threaten some person or entity and serve no other valid > purpose, but not mere spam links. > > but keep in mind: > > "A certain low degree of inappropriate or disruptive posting is normal > within a large community. In general, only material that meets the > criteria below should be deleted. Users should consider whether simply > reverting or ignoring would be sufficient in the circumstances. If > deletion is needed, only redact what is necessary (i.e. leave non-harmful > fields visible), and give a clear reason for the removal. > > The community's decision was that RevisionDelete should not be used > without prior clear consensus for "ordinary" incivility, attacks, or for > claims of editorial misconduct. The wider community may need to fully > review these at the time and in future, even if offensive." > > If whatever it is poses a risk of turning it into a dramafest it is not > within the normal range of inappropriate or disruptive posting, as in > this case there may be a need to not single out the offender, therefore > it may be useful to use Wikipedia mail to bring the matter to the > attention of OTRS, which is the people with the oversight tool. Even if > suppression is not appropriate deletion can still be done and a quiet and > private warning given. So, if it is serious, in your opinion, (tell them > why if you think it is) email User:Oversight > > https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Special:EmailUser/Oversight > > Fred > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gendergap mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
