A women's project might be a nice complement to the collaborative and the teahouse. The collaborative is a great choice for women who like to use Facebook and Twitter, but some don't. The teahouse is OK (and I'd like to offer myself as a mentor for women editors there), but even there the testosterone can run high sometimes.
Lightbreather On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 9:56 AM, Sarah Stierch <sarah.stie...@gmail.com> wrote: > Some thoughts...some ok some negative about a project for women. > > Spaces that promote sisterhood and women only that are public generally > have overwhelming woman. participation and men often play the role of > observers. > > That's why I created the WikiWomens Collab. While men "like it", it's > extremely rare they interact with it. A place can be public and be focused > on women. > > But, I do think it will be a challenge on EN WP. That is why WWC was a > social media campaign. Women are there. There is a wiki women's group on > Facebook too and a few guys have joined but they don't interact on it. its > clearly for Women by women (those identifying as women). > > I am concerned about a shit storm starting a woman centric space on WP. As > long as there is research to prove to the community it might work. You have > to show it - we had to do it with the Teahouse. It was nominated for > deletion when it was created!! > > I put together an entire project page on meta with this research > someplace.. > > There is also an editor retention project already. People will ask - why > not just work in that space? > > Also, the wikiprojects for WP feminism, women art/science/writers are also > overwhelmingly female. I recruited at the beginning but now I am just burnt > out so I don't spend time doing it..and the subject gets little press > coverage anymore so cries to engaging women have lowered in the press. So > this will require more on the boots support. And how will you promote it - > especially if you don't know the gender of editors. I guess you can build > it and they will come. > > So I would think hard before creating something new and thing about what > already exists and how to leverage it. And if you cannot leverage it...try > it. > > I spent a year of my life at WMF working on all of this. We had that idea > and canned it and ended up creating the Teahouse. That was created to > welcome and help new editors with research focusing on women. It worked. It > sounds like you would just be making another Teahouse but for women. > > It's funny seeing this conversation happening again. :) it's good though > > Sarah > (Sent from my phone) > On Dec 31, 2014 8:38 AM, "LB" <lightbreath...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I've started two separate mailing list topics today - Women of GGTF and >> WP:WOMEN - but they haven't posted. You do send to >> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org, right? I think that's what I've used >> before. >> >> Lightbreather >> >> On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 9:25 AM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 31 December 2014 at 11:18, LB <lightbreath...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I can imagine the complaints and hurdles. The discussion is it >>>> possible? Could it work? >>>> >>>> To your specific questions, if there's no page-protection option, can >>>> there be? If it's absolutely impossible, then the moderators would have to >>>> keep an eye on those things. Also, I think there would be parts of the >>>> project that would be vehemently opposed, but others who wouldn't care one >>>> way or another, and some who would welcome such a space with open arms. >>>> >>>> I don't know about EEML. I will read that. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> The EEML (Eastern European Mailing List) was an invitation-only mailing >>> list populated by a group of editors who supported each other in content >>> contributions, deletion discussions, and other on-wiki activities related >>> generally to the Eastern European region of the world (including articles >>> on the history, economics, politics, notable persons, geography, etc. of >>> the region). The mailing list was non-public. Almost all participants on >>> the list were very significantly sanctioned (including some permanent bans, >>> some topic bans, and a desysop) because of the attempt to manage content in >>> a non-transparent way, in addition to the entire canvassing aspect. >>> >>> There was once a Wikichix mailing list, moderated and very similar to >>> the one described by Lightbreather. It died a slow death several years ago >>> because, essentially, nobody really had much to say there, absent the >>> ability to discuss actual content. >>> >>> Risker/Anne >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gendergap mailing list >>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please >>> visit: >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gendergap mailing list >> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please >> visit: >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >> > > _______________________________________________ > Gendergap mailing list > Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org > To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please > visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
