Well I for one feel the category system is broken, though as I have
delved deeper into it I realize it was probably never working to begin
with. Sexism is as good as any other reason to do something about it,
and if we gain one or two more outraged female editors, then I think
we'll be the better f
Commentary in The Daily Dot.
http://www.dailydot.com/society/wikipedia-sexism-problem-sue-gardner/
---o0o---
Wikipedia found itself squirming uncomfortably last week after charges of
systemic sexism drew heat from media outlets across the world and sparked
widespread outrage on social media.
Ye
I am pleased to announce that self-nominations are now being accepted for
the 2013 Wikimedia Foundation Elections. This year, elections are being
held for the following roles:
-
Board of Trustees
The Board of Trustees is the decision-making body that is ultimately
responsible for the lon
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 8:20 PM, Sarah wrote:
>
> But I think it's important to mention it in the context of this thread. It
> does seem to me that the sexism is getting worse, more blatant.
>
It is, and the reason is that it is humoured and swept under the carpet,
rather than confronted. Why is
I just thought I'd share it with you - an infographics on women nerds
heros - maybe we could create one on women in Wikipedia?
http://blog.newrelic.com/2012/12/20/infographic-forget-wonder-woman-these-women-nerds-are-our-real-superheroes/?utm_source=TWIT&utm_medium=social_media&utm_content=gwc&u
Not sure if she was interviewed or if these quotes are sourced from else
where, but nice to see someone showing off the efforts we're making in the
community instead of all of the other...crap going on.
http://www.digitaltrends.com/web/wikipedia-has-a-gender-problem/
Sar
--
--
*Sarah Stierch*
Sarah wrote:
>Adrianne raises a good point -
>No women who edit Wikipedia have been featured in the press regarding the
>recent categorygate (As we've started calling it!).
Indeed. If this were covered accurately, reporters would have to note that one
of the most ardent defenders of the exis
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 8:39 AM, Risker wrote:
> Thanks, Sarah. I've got to ask...I've not seen some of those comments
> before on the "public" lists, and I subscribe to most of them. Did I miss
> something?
>
>
Oh, that's from the Communications list. I failed to crop out all of the
other stuf
Thanks, Sarah. I've got to ask...I've not seen some of those comments
before on the "public" lists, and I subscribe to most of them. Did I miss
something?
Risker/Anne
On 1 May 2013 11:12, Sarah Stierch wrote:
> Please see below
>
>
> via Matthew Roth at WMF.
>
>
> Sue published this blog pos
Excellent! Now if only *one* of those readers could be enticed to edit
Wikipedia because of this, if only to help categorize stuff, it would
be great...
2013/5/1, Sarah Stierch :
> With the title:
>
> "Wikipedia's separate "American Female Novelists" category is way sexist."
>
> Now all they are m
GAHH!! More fail.
/me notes, don't read Cosmo before coffee, it does read better than usual.
:)
-Sar
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 8:32 AM, Joseph Reagle wrote:
> On 05/01/2013 11:24 AM, Sarah Stierch wrote:
>
>> It's nothing new, reporting wise, but, it's there, and...it's on the
>> Cosmo website..a
On 05/01/2013 11:24 AM, Sarah Stierch wrote:
It's nothing new, reporting wise, but, it's there, and...it's on the
Cosmo website..and..GAHHH
And, again, *wrong*: "who also happened to be a New York Times reporter"
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap
With the title:
"Wikipedia's separate "American Female Novelists" category is way sexist."
Now all they are missing is the italics and valley girl voice over for *way
sexist*.
It's nothing new, reporting wise, but, it's there, and...it's on the Cosmo
website..and..GAHHH
http://www.cosmopolitan.
Please see below
via Matthew Roth at WMF.
Sue published this blog post just recently:
http://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/05/01/of-wikipedia-categories-and-sexism/
What’s missing from the media discussions of Wikipedia categories and sexism
Posted by Sue Gardner on May 1, 2013
Last week the New Y
14 matches
Mail list logo
