Just for information - Whoever starts actioning this needs to be careful. The community lashbacks over trying to limit abusive behavior in other areas (the civility arguments, etc) have been severe at times.
A lot of men will take "That was sexist and is creating a hostile environment, please stop" to be a challenge and insult rather than believe it. If an offense was marginal, they may get others to support that obstructionism. This is not a "Don't try to do this", it's a "Be careful and aware". -george On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Ryan Kaldari <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > -- -george william herbert [email protected] _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
