On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 8:03 AM, Sarah Stierch <[email protected]>wrote:
> On 12/14/11 3:58 PM, Laura Hale wrote: > > > > From an Australian perspective based on observation, I can this list > > has the potential to be a bit of a show stopper. :( We had about > > three women who were active in trying to get women involved with > > Wikipedia. Their efforts were even mentioned on Signpost. They > > joined the list, and it killed off informal, non-Chapter female > > efforts in the country to specifically do outreach to women. Oops. :( > > I don't understand what this paragraph means. Can you explain a little > bit more? I've read it a few times and I'm rather confused on what > you're trying to explain. The women joined this list because several people in our Australian community thought it would be a good resource for them when engaging in their outreach to increase female participation on Wikipedia. It turned out not to be that. In fact, the list confirmed the worst of the worst about Wikipedia and its efforts to reach out to women from an institutional point of view ; they no longer found any value in doing the work they had otherwise been doing after joining the list. (The work the had done prior to joining the list included speaking to women's groups of different types, having had one or two editing workshops and appearing on at least one radio program, possibly two.) Sincerely, Laura Hale -- twitter: purplepopple blog: ozziesport.com
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
