from:"Sarah"

On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:



 One more, but forgot her name and too lazy to search. German females
 in discussion on German Wikipedia should be also checked.

 Up to now, all females from US (four of them) are in favor of filter
 (though, Sarah just tactically) and the only one not from US
 (Brazil/Portugal) is against.


Oh yes, I'm so tactical! (LOL) Regardless, you'll be delighted to know that
after mulling about the image filter and getting all bent out of shape about
it, I've come to this conclusion:

I don't give a shit about the image filter.

And it's an extremely freeing feeling.

-Sarah


-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia http://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Blog from Sue about censorship, editorial judgement, and image filters

I was on Commons and stumbled across a photograph of a man cumming onto a
cracker and then eating it. Turns out this is called a soggy biscuit. You
learn something new everyday.

In the heat of annoyance about WP:NOTCENSORED cries, I decided to add the
image of the guy eating his cum drenched biscuit on the [[Soggy biscuit]]
article.

Well it was quickly taken down!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Soggy_biscuit#Removing_the_article_image

But at least we have plenty of other images of people in sexually deviant
situations with their faces shown. :P

-Sarah You can't always get what you want, Stierch


On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@yahoo.com wrote:

 --- On Fri, 30/9/11, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 From: Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org
 Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Blog from Sue about censorship, editorial
 judgement, and image filters
 To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Date: Friday, 30 September, 2011, 0:28


 On 9/28/11 11:30 PM, David Gerard wrote:
  This post appears mostly to be the tone argument:
 
  http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Tone_argument
 
  - rather than address those opposed to the WMF (the body perceived to
  be abusing its power), Sue frames their arguments as badly-formed and
  that they should therefore be ignored.

 Well, when every thoughtful comment you have on a topic is met with
 nothing more than chants of WP:NOTCENSORED!, the tone argument seems
 quite valid.

 Ryan Kaldari
 Quite.
 I have had editors tell me that if there were a freely licensed video of a
 rape (perhaps a historical one, say), then we would be duty-bound to include
 it in the article on [[rape]], because Wikipedia is not censored.
 That if we have a freely licensed video showing a person defecating, it
 should be included in the article on [[defecation]], because Wikipedia is
 not censored.
 That if any of the Iraqi beheading videos are CC-licensed, NOTCENSORED
 requires us to embed them in the biographies of those who were recently
 beheaded.
 That if we have five images of naked women in a bondage article, and none
 of men having the same bondage technique applied to them, still all the
 images of naked women have to be kept, because Wikipedia is not censored.
 And so on.
 Andreas
 ___
 foundation-l mailing list
 foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l




-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia http://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Blog from Sue about censorship, editorial judgement, and image filters

On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:


 As a member of one feminist organization, I understand dominant
 position among feminists toward pornography. It's generally personal
 (thus, not an ideological position), but as the main stream
 pornography is male-centric and historically connected with women
 abuse, they generally oppose it, but without hard stance on it.
 Softening stance has happened especially after widening ideology to
 the LGBT movement and identity theory.




 Now, if we translate it into the frame of US culture, where every
 nudity is seen as pornography, general position of American
 feminists is more clear. And you showed that ambiguous position,
 including inside of your last post: In principle yes because it looks
 like one of the showings of the society dominated by men, but not sure
 what exactly; would be more happy not to think about it.


Uh, ok. I'm pansexual and I like pornography. I'm also a feminist (I believe
in equality). I'm also tired of being accused of being a prudish American
because I think it's stupid that we have to have a mediocre photograph of a
naked woman as the man shot for pregnancy. I also figure that if people want
to censor what the hell goes on in their own home, they should have the
power to do that. Smart kids learn to get around it anyway, if they really
need to see a decapitation or a pair of breasts on Wikipedia.

Being called names and being lumped into a oh all Americans are pro filter,
blahblahblah, think nudity is bad is really tiresome.

That quote also isn't mine.

In other words, my point is that your (and Bishakha's) motivation is
 not the same to the motivation of others who are in favor of the image
 filter. As mentioned in some of the previous posts, I think that it is
 much more feminist to defend right of girls to be sexually educated,
 even if it would mean secretly browsing Wikipedia articles on
 sexuality, than to insist on comfort of adult females in offices and
 questionable background of one pseudo-ideological position.


I have never said, *ever*, led on I don't think girls should not be
educated about sexuality. I also grew up in a time when I had to find
sexual content by way of a pile of Playboys in my cousins bathroom,
watching MTV, and stealing my sisters copy of Madonna's SEX. Knowing how I
was as a child (and I had a computer when I was 11, in my bedroom), I
wouldn't be looking on Wikipedia to learn about sex. I'd be looking for some
juicy image and videos and frankly you can't find that on Wikipedia (because
we all know that Commons porn is really bad quality).

And I'm sure there are plenty of other people, regardless of gender,
nationality, sexuality or other demographics that probably would feel the
same way.

It's funny that you just turned this into a think about the children
feminism thing.  I guess in your eyes I'm a failed feminist. ;)

-Sarah
Who learned more about sexuality from Madonna then she ever did from school
books or the internet.


-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia http://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Blog from Sue about censorship, editorial judgement, and image filters

On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:


 I have no idea about your personal stance, but correct me if I am wrong.
 Weren't you the one surprised to find an in your face photo
 of a vagina on an article about Vagina? You know where you said it was
 up-front and at the top unlike the article about penis where a big giant
 penis in one's face upon opening it ? just in case here it is [1]. Also,
 there is no difference between the pictures on the articles on these
 anatomical parts, the article you needed to compare it to was [[Human
 penis]] where is does have an in you face photo at the exact same place
 as
 the one about Vagina. I have a hard time understanding how you can claim to
 have either of those positions and resolve it with your earlier statements,
 but to each his own. I would even go as far as to say, that your original
 comments didn't appear very feminist at first glance.



I understand that vaginas, penises, breasts, butts, etc need to be visually
shown. I just laughed when I put vagina in the en.Wikipedia search box a
spread vagina is shown with all the much needed descriptors to the part.
When I search in en.Wikipedia penis I get a collection of penises
preserved in jars.

There is a human penis article, again with all of the bits explained and
shown. You just have to search for human penis or follow the links to it
to find it. But frankly, if I'm going to look up penis on Wikipedia, I'm
sure most people are looking for the human penis, not animal penises. I'm
also sure more than a few of them pass over the direct for the human penis
article.

I think it's entertaining. Again, I know that a vagina needs to be shown in
an article about a vagina, but, I was, for 5 seconds, taken aback.
::shrugs::

Now, please inform me, if you would want the kids today or a younger version
 of yourself to learn about sexual content from Playboys or Madonna's
 SEX
 (both are pretty antiquated today) or an Encyclopedia? you know where you


Encyclopedias are boring, is what I would have said as a kid. When I was a
kid I wanted juicy, fun, colorful, exciting content. Not a bunch of writing.
I don't have children, but, I work in museums, and I worked at the world's
largest children's museum, I have a little bit of knowledge about children's
education (but nothing compared to others).  Kids seek things out. They're
sneaky, and parents aren't idiots - you can't hide things from your kids. I
was one of those kids - I was going to to the bookshop in 1989 looking for
Dr. Ruth books, I was sneaking off to the art books to look at Nan Goldin
books.

But, again, that's just my personal experience.

And as a side note (and this goes to a number of people on this list): I
don't need anyone, of any gender, questioning my feminism. It's as insulting
as being called a censor. There are no rule books.

But if there was... ;-)  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Feminine_Mystique

-Sarah

-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia http://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[Foundation-l] Partnering with organizations - was: Re: Blog from Sue about censorship, editorial judgement, and image filters

On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:56 PM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:


 I wanted to say the same. Hm. I'll talk with others from my
 organization and see is it possible to mobilize a couple of European
 feminist organizations to work on those articles.


These are the types of discussions we frequently have on the gender gap
list. Panyd in the UK is currently developing a program to work with women's
organizations to not only bring more editors but also broaden content. If
there is anything I can do to lend a hand, even from afar, please let me
know. It's also something I hope to develop here in the US in the future.

I encourage people interested in developing these types of ideas further to
stop by gender gap-l as well!
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap  But it's great to
see these projects developing elsewhere, of course :D

-Sarah


-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia http://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Dead Sea Scrolls

2011-09-26 Thread Sarah Stierch

As the British Museum.

Hehehehe.

--Sarah (Stierch)

On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 3:27 PM, emijrp emi...@gmail.com wrote:

 If originals don't have copyright, how can The Israel Museum claim any
 copyright for scans which lack originality?[1]

 [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgeman_Art_Library_v._Corel_Corp.

 2011/9/26 Neil Babbage n...@thebabbages.com

  The digital copies of the Dead Sea Scrolls have copyright, not the
  originals...
 
  On 26/09/2011 19:58, emijrp wrote:
   Hi all;
  
   Finally, the Dead Sea Scrolls[1] have copyright[2]. Courtesy of The
  Israel
   Museum. Congratulations.
  
   By they way: Hi Wikimedia Israel.
  
   Regards,
   emijrp
  
   [1] http://dss.collections.imj.org.il/
   [2] http://dss.collections.imj.org.il/terms_pg
   ___
   foundation-l mailing list
   foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
   Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
 
 
  ___
  foundation-l mailing list
  foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
 
 ___
 foundation-l mailing list
 foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l




-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia http://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Dead Sea Scrolls

2011-09-26 Thread Sarah Stierch

ASK THE NATIONAL PORTRAIT GALLERY.

Damn. Joke fail.

-Sarah

On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.comwrote:

 As the British Museum.

 Hehehehe.

 --Sarah (Stierch)

 On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 3:27 PM, emijrp emi...@gmail.com wrote:

 If originals don't have copyright, how can The Israel Museum claim any
 copyright for scans which lack originality?[1]

 [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgeman_Art_Library_v._Corel_Corp.

 2011/9/26 Neil Babbage n...@thebabbages.com

  The digital copies of the Dead Sea Scrolls have copyright, not the
  originals...
 
  On 26/09/2011 19:58, emijrp wrote:
   Hi all;
  
   Finally, the Dead Sea Scrolls[1] have copyright[2]. Courtesy of The
  Israel
   Museum. Congratulations.
  
   By they way: Hi Wikimedia Israel.
  
   Regards,
   emijrp
  
   [1] http://dss.collections.imj.org.il/
   [2] http://dss.collections.imj.org.il/terms_pg
   ___
   foundation-l mailing list
   foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
   Unsubscribe:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
 
 
  ___
  foundation-l mailing list
  foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
 
 ___
 foundation-l mailing list
 foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l




 --
 GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia http://www.glamwiki.org
 Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American 
 Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
 and
 Sarah Stierch Consulting
 *Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
 --
 http://www.sarahstierch.com/




-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia http://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Image filter

2011-09-23 Thread Sarah Stierch

+1

You've just posted what many of us think and feel. I read the transcript for 
office hours with Sue from yesterday and it was the same thing. 45 minutes of 
image filter skepticism and more. I'm glad I couldn't attend it, seemed like a 
painful and unintellectual experience to sit through.

And if i had a dollar for the mentioning of Germans I'd be rich. And here 
people are arguing about lack of coverage about other projects and languages. 
So tired of the Us vs. Them mentality.

I'd rather talk about GMOs, JFK, Creationism and the end of the world next 
yearat this point.

Sarah Stierch
Who is never bored and is surely not mainstream, but is happy to be called so 
right now.


Sent via iPhone - I apologize in advance for my shortness or errors! :)


On Sep 23, 2011, at 8:03 AM, m...@marcusbuck.org wrote:

 After some thinking I come to the conclusion that this whole  
 discussion is a social phenomenon.
 
 You probably know how some topics when mentioned in newspaper articles  
 or blogs spur wild arguments in the comments sections. When the  
 article mentions climate change commentators contest the validity of  
 the collected data, if it mentions religions commentators argue that  
 religion is the root of all evil in the world, if it is about  
 immigration commentators start to rant how immigrants cause trouble in  
 society, if it is about renewable energies commentators tell us how  
 blind society is to believe in its ecologicalness.
 
 It's always the same pattern: the topic is perceived well in the  
 general society (most sane people think that climate change is real,  
 that renewable energies are the way to go, that religious freedom is  
 good and that most immigrants are people as everybody else who do no  
 harm), but a small or not so small minority experiences these  
 attitudes as a problem and tries to raise awareness to the problems of  
 the trend (usually exaggerating them). The scepticists give their  
 arguments and the non-scepticists answer them.
 
 The non-scepticists usually have not much motivation to present their  
 arguments (because their position is already the mainstream, so not  
 much incentive to convince more people, just trying to not let the  
 scepticists' opinions stand unwithspoken) while the scepticists have  
 much motivation to present their arguments (if they don't society will  
 presumedly face perdition). This difference in the motivation leads to  
 a situation where both groups produce a similar content output leading  
 to the semblence that both groups represent equal shares of society.
 
 I think the same is happening here. The majority of people probably  
 think that an optional opt-in filter is a thing that does no harm to  
 non-users and has advantages for those who choose to use it. (Ask your  
 gramma whether You can hide pictures if you don't want to see them  
 sounds like a threatening thing to her.) But the scepticists voice  
 their opinions loudly and point out every single imaginable problem.
 
 I just want to point out that an idea like a free community-driven  
 everybody-can-edit-it encyclopedia with no editorial or peer-review  
 process would never have been created if a long discussion would have  
 preceded its creation. The scepticists would have raised so many  
 seemingly valid concerns that they'd buried the idea deep. I'm feeling  
 that a group of worst-case scenarioists are leading the discussion to  
 a point where the image filter is buried just because everybody is  
 bored about the discussion.
 
 Marcus Buck
 User:Slomox
 
 PS: Please don't understand this as a longish version of You guys  
 opposing my opinion are trolls!. I don't think that the points raised  
 by scepticists should be neglected. But I think that many people  
 reject the image filter because of very theoretical concerns for the  
 sake of it completely removed from pragmatical reasons and that the  
 length of the discussion is in no way indicative of the real  
 problematicness of the topic.
 
 
 
 ___
 foundation-l mailing list
 foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Image filter

2011-09-23 Thread Sarah Stierch

All that I'm saying is that I THINK the majority of the people on this
mailing list are bored and tired of the conversation and it's the same 10
people who seem to be arguing it and I think that many people on this list
probably have no strong opinion, or fairly mainstream beliefs, about the
filter. Mainstream meaning that the filter can be beneficial to those who
desire it and many of us don't care how it's executed as long as we don't
have to anything technical to make it happen.

Have fun though running in circles! I trust WMF will make the decision on
what to do for the community (god forbid! trust!) and I also trust that
they're taking all of your concerns, citations, facts, arguments, ideas and
concepts into consideration.

I'll be comfortable with whatever is decided on upon by WMF, and usually I'm
not one to give up so easily. But isn't there some old saying about arguing
on the internet? Perhaps someone needs to plan an Image Filter Conference
to break it all down offline.

Also, people are extremely rude, in classic poor-manners Wikimedia style,
and *I* believe that many people on this list have no desire to participate,
because, like so much of the environment on Wikimedia, they are
uncomfortable and not-interested in being drilled drilled drilled until they
break down, give in, or can't stand up for themselves anymore. Or be called
a name, or twelve.

And all the data in the world right now is not going to change the way I
feel, and this stuff just frustrates me.  And I'm a researcher for a living
who spends the hours of her day citing sources and gathering data and
information. And all the cries of censorship isn't either. I'm also a person
who likes hardcore fetish photography that is illegal in some states, goes
by a pseudonym due to of my hobbies, and who's favorite band is Skinny
Puppy. I saw Marilyn Manson in concert when he was ripping off SPK for
chopping the heads off of chickens on stage and putting partially nude
children in cages (with permission of their parents, heh) during his shows.
The only thing that offends me more on Commons and Wikipedia and whatever is
bad quality porn and self-indulgent cockshots (aka I want better sexual
content that actually is awesome looking and worth using in articles!) And I
know I'm not the only one here.

But, I also don't have a problem with people wanting to control what they,
their kids, their grandmas, their cats, their classrooms, whatevers see. And
I'm not the only one, and again, I'M PUTTING MY TRUST, in WMF to make the
decision. That's what I make donations to the foundation every month for.
That's why I donate my time to contributing to Wikimedia projects.

I'm over commenting about this subject. I'm going to go back to thinking of
ways to have more women and men create better sexual content for Commons as
a project and go attend my Feminists, Technology and Museums conference.

-Sarah (Missvain, SarahStierch)
Who would move to Berlin in a heartbeat to be an unpaid intern for
Einstürzende Neubauten. So don't think I don't love my Germans ;-) (and
Bayern Munich is my favorite team!)

On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 8:41 AM, Tobias Oelgarte 
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:

 Please don't do the rhetorical trick that a mass of users would support
 some point of view without actual proof. (You've just posted what many
 of us think and feel.)

 The chat was of course dominated by the word German. It's the one and
 only poll that states the opposite to the view of the board. But you
 could just leave out the comments from Ottava and it would be the half
 amount of use of this word.

 The main problems/questions remain:
 * Is the filter any good?
 * Is there a big audience that would enjoy and need a filter?
 * How do we decide what will be hidden considering NPOV?
 * ...

 None of this questions where followed before the decision. Actually the
 questions where raised after the decisions in combination with the
 referendum. Thats one of things i really wonder about.



 Am 23.09.2011 14:19, schrieb Sarah Stierch:
  +1
 
  You've just posted what many of us think and feel. I read the transcript
 for office hours with Sue from yesterday and it was the same thing. 45
 minutes of image filter skepticism and more. I'm glad I couldn't attend it,
 seemed like a painful and unintellectual experience to sit through.
 
  And if i had a dollar for the mentioning of Germans I'd be rich. And
 here people are arguing about lack of coverage about other projects and
 languages. So tired of the Us vs. Them mentality.
 
  I'd rather talk about GMOs, JFK, Creationism and the end of the world
 next yearat this point.
 
  Sarah Stierch
  Who is never bored and is surely not mainstream, but is happy to be
 called so right now.
 
 
  Sent via iPhone - I apologize in advance for my shortness or errors! :)
 
 
  On Sep 23, 2011, at 8:03 AM, m...@marcusbuck.org wrote:
 
  After some thinking I come to the conclusion that this whole
  discussion is a social phenomenon

[Foundation-l] Personal Image Filter - Gender?

2011-09-17 Thread Sarah Stierch

Hi everyone,

I can't remember - was user gender a question in the survey?

I don't remember...

Thanks :)

-Sarah

-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia http://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Personal Image Filter - Gender?

2011-09-17 Thread Sarah Stierch

Thanks Beria! :)  A shame, it would have been really fascinating to see if
there was a gender gap in this matter.

-Sarah

On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 8:43 AM, Béria Lima berial...@gmail.com wrote:

 No.

 You can see all the questions here:
 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image_filter_referendum/Vote_interface/en
 _
 *Béria Lima*
 http://wikimedia.pt/(351) 925 171 484

 *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter
 livre
 acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a
 fazer http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Nossos_projetos.*


 On 17 September 2011 13:08, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote:

  Hi everyone,
 
  I can't remember - was user gender a question in the survey?
 
  I don't remember...
 
  Thanks :)
 
  -Sarah
 
  --
  GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia http://www.glamwiki.org
  Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
  Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
  and
  Sarah Stierch Consulting
  *Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
  --
  http://www.sarahstierch.com/
  ___
  foundation-l mailing list
  foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
 
 ___
 foundation-l mailing list
 foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l




-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia http://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Personal Image Filter - Gender?

2011-09-17 Thread Sarah Stierch

I'm always interested in demographics and culture specifics when it comes to
surveys, etc. Just part of the researcher in me I suppose (and four years of
studying under an anthropologist mentor). :) Especially surveys that are
inciting heavily heated discussions that reflect cultural difference and
belief systems around the world and within small communities.

-Sarah (Stierch)





On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 1:32 PM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.comwrote:

 do you propose questions like the following?

 knowledge level  o a-level o university   o...
 raceo african o cacausian  o...
 gendero female o male   o...
 main wikipediao de  o en o fr
 ...

 to see if there are other gaps as well than gender?

 rupert

 On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 14:48, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 
  Thanks Beria! :)  A shame, it would have been really fascinating to see
 if
  there was a gender gap in this matter.
 
  -Sarah
 
  On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 8:43 AM, Béria Lima berial...@gmail.com wrote:
 
   No.
  
   You can see all the questions here:
  
 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image_filter_referendum/Vote_interface/en
   _
   *Béria Lima*
   http://wikimedia.pt/(351) 925 171 484
  
   *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter
   livre
   acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos
 a
   fazer http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Nossos_projetos.*
  
  
   On 17 September 2011 13:08, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com
 wrote:
  
Hi everyone,
   
I can't remember - was user gender a question in the survey?
   
I don't remember...
   
Thanks :)
   
-Sarah
   
--
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia 
 http://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
   
   ___
   foundation-l mailing list
   foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
   Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
  
 
 
 
  --
  GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia http://www.glamwiki.org
  Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
  Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
  and
  Sarah Stierch Consulting
  *Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
  --
  http://www.sarahstierch.com/
  ___
  foundation-l mailing list
  foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

 ___
 foundation-l mailing list
 foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l




-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia http://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] On Wikinews

2011-09-14 Thread Sarah

On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 12:02, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com wrote:
 of Wikipedia principles. Wikis depend on eventualism: given an
 infinite timeline, pages eventually get better. News cannot survive on
 that. The decay of the value of breaking news and eventualism are at
 odds with each other.

 The question is, would paid staff be a healthy temporary boost for
 sustainability or be futile artificial life support? I fear it's the
 latter.

 -Andrew (above taken from an earlier, longer post)

There are current affairs issues that would continue to be of
interest. I've always felt this was an area Wikipedia and Wikinews
should pursue: video interviews by Wikipedians of interesting people.
Not necessarily celebrities or news types -- interviews with ordinary
people, oral histories of certain communities, people who've had odd
experiences, etc.

It has been discussed a few times, and I know David Shankbone did some
good ones, but for some reason it has been limited. Adding some
original videos to our articles (adding them to Wikipedia articles,
supplied by Wikinews) would be very attractive to readers, I think.

Sarah

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] On Wikinews

2011-09-14 Thread Sarah

On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 12:34, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com wrote:
 On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 12:02, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com wrote:
 of Wikipedia principles. Wikis depend on eventualism: given an
 infinite timeline, pages eventually get better. News cannot survive on
 that. The decay of the value of breaking news and eventualism are at
 odds with each other.

 The question is, would paid staff be a healthy temporary boost for
 sustainability or be futile artificial life support? I fear it's the
 latter.

 -Andrew (above taken from an earlier, longer post)

 There are current affairs issues that would continue to be of
 interest. I've always felt this was an area Wikipedia and Wikinews
 should pursue: video interviews by Wikipedians of interesting people.
 Not necessarily celebrities or news types -- interviews with ordinary
 people, oral histories of certain communities, people who've had odd
 experiences, etc.

 It has been discussed a few times, and I know David Shankbone did some
 good ones, but for some reason it has been limited. Adding some
 original videos to our articles (adding them to Wikipedia articles,
 supplied by Wikinews) would be very attractive to readers, I think.



 I agree, and to quote from my reply in another thread:

 Where Wikinews has been successful and clearly valuable is in what
 those in journalism call feature content. Interviews with political
 leaders, photography of events, and investigative pieces. These
 verifiable forms of reporting are not time critical and don't demand
 full coverage like breaking news beats. The Wikinews interview with
 Shimon Peres is a good example:
 http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel

 And, in Wikipedia's crowdsourced way, potentially a re-oriented,
 mobilized Wikinews could produce in one week what National Geographic
 normally produces in one year. This could be a multimedia endeavor
 that could kick up the Wikimedia efforts in audio and video that seem
 to have stalled lately.

 WMF's mission is about giving free access to the sum of all human knowledge.

 Wikipedia is about condensing and curating knowledge.

 Wikinews can be the force to go explore and acquire it.

 -Andrew

Yes, exactly. I'm currently working on an article about female genital
mutilation. Can you imagine how wonderful it would be if I could find
some women who had experienced this, arrange an interview, contact a
Wikinews person in London, or Kenya, and ask them to put certain
questions to those women?

That way, you can make the interview and the article interactive, in
the sense that you could ask the women to address specific points in
the article, then link to the video in that section. It would give us
a whole new depth of coverage.

This is exactly what it's like to work for an international news
organization, where someone in the Timbuktu office has an idea, and
collaborates with someone in the local area to produce it. We do have
that potential as a movement. It's just a question of how to give
people the confidence, and the space to add their material. And to
have sensible editorial policies that encourage quality without
stifling early efforts.

Sarah

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] On Wikinews

2011-09-14 Thread Sarah

On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 13:10, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com wrote:
 On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 12:34, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com wrote:
 And, in Wikipedia's crowdsourced way, potentially a re-oriented,
 mobilized Wikinews could produce in one week what National Geographic
 normally produces in one year. This could be a multimedia endeavor
 that could kick up the Wikimedia efforts in audio and video that seem
 to have stalled lately.

 WMF's mission is about giving free access to the sum of all human 
 knowledge.

 Wikipedia is about condensing and curating knowledge.

 Wikinews can be the force to go explore and acquire it.

 Yes, exactly. I'm currently working on an article about female genital
 mutilation. Can you imagine how wonderful it would be if I could find
 some women who had experienced this, arrange an interview, contact a
 Wikinews person in London, or Kenya, and ask them to put certain
 questions to those women?

 That way, you can make the interview and the article interactive, in
 the sense that you could ask the women to address specific points in
 the article, then link to the video in that section. It would give us
 a whole new depth of coverage.

 This is exactly what it's like to work for an international news
 organization, where someone in the Timbuktu office has an idea, and
 collaborates with someone in the local area to produce it. We do have
 that potential as a movement. It's just a question of how to give
 people the confidence, and the space to add their material. And to
 have sensible editorial policies that encourage quality without
 stifling early efforts.

 Yes, and if you look at Achal Prabhala's Oral Citations project, it's
 very much in line with this.

 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Oral_Citations
 http://vimeo.com/26469276

 Also, by coincidence, in the 1990s I oversaw a masters student project
 covering FGM in Africa which had original reporting with women that
 had undergone the procedure. Instead of that story just sitting on the
 shelf, wouldn't it be great to have that body of reporting and those
 interviews as part of a Wikimedia project that could be source
 material? I focus in on A/V in particular for this effort, because it
 provides a level of verifiability. Of course you can still fake/stage
 audio and video, but it's more involved to do that than synthesizing
 typed words.

 -Andrew

I think the oral citation project is a wonderful idea. I would extend
it to the whole world, including areas rich in written sources,
because there are always stories out there that give you more depth.

The student project you describe would be a great resource to add to
the Wikipedia article. Could it be done?

Sarah

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] On Wikinews

2011-09-14 Thread Sarah

On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 14:28, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
 I doubt that would be enough to satisfy the no original research
 requirement. The idea linking back to a Wikimedia project as a source is not
 a new one, it has been tried many times and doesn't work.

The no original research policy was never intended to keep out
material like this. Its purpose is to stop editors adding their own
opinions to the text of articles. But we have always had original
research in the form of images; indeed, we encourage it. We just have
to be careful that images on a contentious article don't unfairly push
the reader in a certain direction, but we normally take a very liberal
view of what that means.

Adding video-taped interviews is the next step. Imagine articles about
the Second World War containing video interviews by Wikipedians of
people who lived through certain parts of it. There is no inherent POV
issue there, so long as we observe NPOV, just as we do with text.
Primary sources are already allowed, so long as used descriptively and
not interpreted.

Sarah

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Personal Image Filter results announced

2011-09-07 Thread Sarah

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 05:35, Yann Forget yan...@gmail.com wrote:
 But we do peer review images after they have been uploaded on Commons
 or Wikipedia.

 It seems that, 10 years after Wikipedia and its sisters have been
 created, you still do not understand that there are wikis.

 Regards,

 Yann

Yann, I yesterday looked at the Veganism article, only to find a
photograph in the infobox, not of yummy tofu scramble as before, but a
close-up of a woman's genitals, with a vibrator and what looked like a
man's fingers. I clicked on it, and saw it was being hosted by the
Wikimedia Foundation, uploaded from Flickr by the Flickr upload bot.

Objecting to this isn't a question of being prudish or of censorship,
or of being anti-wiki. But if we want to attract mature editors, women
editors, editors from outside the majority cultures on Wikipedia, and
serious readers, this kind of thing is obviously very off-putting. So
we risk limiting our reach by not dealing with it.

Sarah

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] On curiosity, cats and scapegoats

2011-09-06 Thread Sarah Stierch


 Logically, we have the solution: If Board really cares what Concerned
 Women for America think, let it, please, implement that filter on
 English Wikipedia and leave the rest of the projects alone -- if they
 don't ask for the filter explicitly. As members of that organization
 probably don't know any other language except English, everybody will
 be happy. Except the core editors of English Wikipedia, of course. But
 Board doesn't care about them, anyway; which means that English
 Wikipedia is reasonable scapegoat for Wikimedia movement to please
 sexually impaired Americans and others.


I think this moves beyond just one organization. As a concerned feminist
who lives in America the idea of calling the women who support the
referendum, aren't into bad porn on Commons, and tacky use of sexualized
images on articles as educational when they really aren't, sexually
impaired - is beyond sexist.  Unless, perhaps, I'm mis-understanding your
post.

I realized that I started to participate in this madness when I asked
 for some data from the results. And now, community is asked to
 participate into the Next steps [3]! Holy Thing! That will produce
 much more sexual content than any porn photo on Commons. In Serbian
 we say for that fucking in healthy brain. If not exterminated at the
 beginning, that brainfuck (unfortunately, not programming language
 [4]) will produce much more problems than any image filter or any Fox
 News scam.


Voices are being heard who are against tacky bad sexualized images. The
group of people who support this Commons is the dump of the sum of crappy
free photos for the world way of thinking might be the loudest, but they
are the smallest in numbers, when it comes to English landscapes, from my
understanding. If people want to bombard us with more sexualized images,
we'll just keep fighting back. I can pay for my porn, I don't need it on
Commons.

The majority of the women (and men) who participate in this anti-sexualized
environment are generally liberal left-wing political individuals. Many are
pro-sex and embrace liberal sexual lifestyles or are open minded to what
other people do in their bedrooms. Some don't even live in America.  I think
you need to rethink your statements before you go around accusing
supporters, including women, of this referendum as sexually dysfunctional
conservatives.

Sarah

-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for the Wikimedia
Foundationhttp://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] On curiosity, cats and scapegoats

2011-09-06 Thread Sarah Stierch


 Does your feminism excludes necessity for sexual education?


No, but, I can send you some pictures on Commons that have been speedy
keeps of strippers with their legs spread wide because they are
educational and high quality.

My boss, who is bound to have a baby any day now, can't open the pregnancy
article at work because the intro is NSFW our workplace. I can't open the
[[vagina]] article at work either, because of the really in your face photo
of a vagina when you open it up, however, I can totally read the intro to
[[penis]] since there isn't a big giant penis in one's face upon opening it.
I work in an educational environment (a museum institution, which has
exhibits on sexuality, gender, etc) and I can't even look at these articles
at work, take that as you will.

Sarah
who is totally grossed out by that photo on the vagina article,
gahhh, surely she can't be the only one!

-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for the Wikimedia
Foundationhttp://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Personal Image Filter results announced

 Yes (maybe). It's not at all clear that this use case should not be
 ignored to avoid the possibility of compromising the encyclopedia.

 I have to ask: if there's such a demand for a censored Wikipedia,
 where are the third-party providers? Anyone? This is a serious
 question. Even workplace filtermakers don't censor Wikipedia, as far
 as I know.


Some workplace filters don't allow for certain subjects to be searched. I
work at a major museum institution, I cannot view subject matter about
certain sex topics (and I'm the Wikipedian in Residence, so I'm on WP most
of my day). (i.e. sexual differences).

I don't know why people are wigging out so badly about the image filter. If
people want to use it, great, and if you don't, DON'T. But perhaps I'm
misunderstanding something about the idea. I voted for it, and it seems the
people who dislike the idea are the only one's speaking out on the list.

The idea that there is a choice is very empowering. Just like people filter
television cable programming for their children, and internet access.
Sometimes this appear when you least expect them, and to allow our users the
choice, is great. I will probably never use it (even though I just found out
there are plenty of things that gross me out that end up on Wikipedia by way
of Commons images), but, I support the option.

And to say that a 4 year old being restricted from seeing nudity on
Wikipedia is not educating them just makes me laugh out loud. Just like I
wouldn't want my 4 year old (and no, I don't have kids, but I have nieces,
nephews, etc) watching porn, playing violent video games or watching John
Waters movies. :P (And I love John Waters!).

It's really fascinating how freely Wikipedians and Wikimedians love to throw
around the word censorship. Someone should do a study on that.

Sarah


-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for the Wikimedia
Foundationhttp://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[Foundation-l] A reminder about mission statements and vision statements.

On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Kim Bruning k...@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote:


 Why? Because our mission is to make things free (as in speech).
 You may have heard about that ;-)



Here is WMF's mission statement:

The mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to empower and engage people
around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free
license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and
globally.

In collaboration with a network of chapters, the Foundation provides the
essential infrastructure and an organizational framework for the support and
development of multilingual wiki projects and other endeavors which serve
this mission. The Foundation will make and keep useful information from its
projects available on the Internet free of charge, in perpetuity.
Here is the vision statement:

Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. 

Just thought I'd remind people of the actual Foundation mission and vision,
since technically Wikipedia itself does not have a mission statement (and
perhaps someone will correct me if I'm wrong).  Wikipedia however does have
the purpose to be the world's largest free encyclopedia.


Commons also only
 hosts actual free (as in speech) images. Because -hey- that's

their mission.


As I have always understood it Commons scope is: Wikimedia Commons is a
media file repository making available public domain and freely-licensed
educational media content to all. It acts as a common repository for the
various projects of the Wikimedia Foundation.

However, I am beginning to think that Commons might have to change it's
scope since educational media has evolved to encompass what everyone
believes is every free image on earth.

-Sarah


-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for the Wikimedia
Foundationhttp://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Personal Image Filter results announced

* There's nothing wrong with the filter program itself

 * The problem is with categorizing things to work with such a program.
 * This is called prejudicial labelling
 * AMA defines prejudicial labelling as A censoring tool
 * This definition has existed for over half a century.

 We also have huge discussions where it is explained in detail *why* and
 *how*
 such categories can be used for censorship. We also have discussed how a
 category system that starts out innocent and neutral can be subverted to
 serve in a censorship role. No one has found solutions how to prevent that
 from
 happening. AMA certainly hasn't been able to do so in the last 60 years. We
 might be smarter than AMA, but it's a hard problem.


Thanks for the clarification. This is not an area of research or interest to
me strongly, so, a better understand is always really great. I just get
frustrated, and today, has been one of those days (sorry to take it out on
you guys! =)


 I really wish people would read previous discussions.


Don't be passive aggressive ;) Some of these threads have a *ton* of
replies, eventually a lot of us just hit the delete button until something
jumps out. Myself, and others, appreciate clarifications. Wikipedia and
related sister projects are bad at explaining things, so it's always nice to
have kind folks like you explain things to some of us (again!) :).

Sarah

-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for the Wikimedia
Foundationhttp://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Personal Image Filter results announced

On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 5:23 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 4 September 2011 22:18, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote:

  I really wish people would read previous discussions.

  Don't be passive aggressive ;)


 I think it's an entirely reasonable statement, given what Kim's cited
 in his reply is stuff that came up in the last week.




I travel a lot, I work a lot, and sometimes other things take priority over
read really long Foundation-L threads. I apologize if I didn't make the time
and burdened Kim in anyway.

And again, thanks Kim for repeating everything you've already said in the
past and lazy people like me really appreciate it and I'd give you a
barnstar for repetition if they made one. =)

in #wikilove (and frustration sometimes!),

-Sarah


-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for the Wikimedia
Foundationhttp://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[Foundation-l] This Month in GLAM - August 2011

2011-09-02 Thread Sarah Stierch

The August 2011 issue of This Month in GLAM has been published.

This issue features news and happenings from:


   - *USA*: The Children's Museum of Indianapolis, Smithsonian Institution,
   National Archives and Records Administration, outreach events, collaborative
   article successes, upcoming conference appearances  scholarships, Wikipedia
   Loves Libraries, Library Lab  more.
   - *UK*: New partnership with the National Archives
   - *Canada*: The success of Wikipedia Takes Montreal and the upcoming
   Wikipedia 3 Libraries
   - *Spain*: Joan Miro exhibition at the Tate with QRpedia, new partnership
   with Mediterranean Museum.
   - *Germany*: New partnership with the Hamburg Museum
   - *Mexico*: Mexico City Wikipedia College Club participates in Children's
   Museum of Indianapolis Edit-a-Thon from afar!
   - *Israel*: New partnership with Israel Museum.

And a calendar of upcoming events!

Members of the community write this publication, so if you have
contributions to make, please participate. Translations encouraged.

GLAM on!

Sarah


-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for the Wikimedia
Foundationhttp://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[Foundation-l] Minutes after Virginia earthquake, it was on Wikipedia (Washington Post)

2011-08-26 Thread Sarah Stierch

Always nice to see fellow Wikipedians featured in major news media :)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/minutes-after-virginia-earthquake-it-was-on-wikipedia/2011/08/24/gIQAQqQMcJ_story.html


(And I'm from DC and Indianapolis, so, even better!)

-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for the Wikimedia
Foundationhttp://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[Foundation-l] WikiChix Wikimania 2011 Report

2011-08-12 Thread Sarah Stierch

Hi everyone,

Pardon the cross-posting. I just wanted to share my report from Wikimania
2011's WikiChix lunch.

http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiChix_Lunch_2011

We had over 40 women attend, including the Deputy Mayor of Haifa. Thanks to
all who attended, including Sue Gardner for mediating and Wikimania 2011
providing food and the venue.

-Sarah


-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for the Wikimedia
Foundationhttp://www.glamwiki.org
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural  artistic research  advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Oral Citations project: People are Knowledge

2011-07-29 Thread Sarah Stierch

Thanks Ray! I actually met with developers from RRN and a few First Nations
advocacy groups (regarding cultural preservation) - RRN is really amazing, and
I look forward to exploring how opportunities can open from it. We will talk
more in Haifa!

(I lived in Van for a year, give my best to Commercial Drive ;-))

-Sarah

Sent via iPhone - I apologize in advance for my shortness or errors! :)

On Jul 29, 2011, at 6:08 AM, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote:

From the perspective of Wikimedia Canada, this sounds exciting. Many
of us believe that work with the First Nations is an important element
in Wikimedia Canada's tasks. I look forward to meeting you in Haifa.
Thanks for providing the RRN link; since I am in the Greater Vancouver
District they should be more accessible to me.

Ray

On 07/27/11 6:06 AM, Sarah Stierch wrote:
Hi all -

I came across a lighter version of this conversation on another Wikimedia
list, and felt the need to share my similar thoughts and statements that I
made previously.

For the past year, I have been examining opportunities involving Indigenous
communities of North America and opportunities to utilize Wikipedia and
related websites as an affordable, unique and global form of cultural
preservation. I have my undergraduate in Native American Studies, and I am
obtaining my masters currently. My final paper (not quite a thesis) for
graduation will be a strong examination of the opportunities related to
Indigenous communities and opportunities/pros/cons related to Wikipedia. I'm
actually presenting on my preliminary observations and concerns at
Wikimania, you can learn a bit more here:

http://wikimania2011.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submissions/Wikimedia_%26_Indigenous_Peoples:_Pros,_Cons_and_Community

In the United States, as far as I am aware, I am the only person thinking
about this on a higher level. While right now I am quite busy with other
matters, come this Fall I will be diving head first into my research. I will
be serving as Wikipedian in Residence at the National Museum of the American
Indian, where I will be working with staff to examine these concerns. One
of our biggest concerns lies with *oral history*. We have had countless
conversations about the struggles with no original research however, in
oral history based societies, we will have a very hard time moving beyond
anything else. As stated previously, the majority of content created related
to Indigenous communities in North America was often written by (and still
is) Anglo anthropologists - some of that data is highly out of date and is
still being utilized on Wikipedia as a source today.

This project, Oral Citations, follows closely with the type of work I am
seeking to do. I have been planning to examine Wikipedia (English at first)
research policies and consider proposals or changes in relation to serious
research and Indigenous communities. Of course, it all comes down to
funding, and Native people of North American are often the first overlooked
group - it will take a lot of work, years of effort, and a lot of buy in
that is needed to be gathered from inside the community itself.

I'm babbling right now, but, this is a very passionate topic for me. I see
Wikipedia as providing an affordable and unique way for Indigenous
communities to not only learn valuable skills - many of the communities here
in America are among the poorest in the world, you'd think you were in a
developing country, and kids barely receive beyond an elementary school
education - but to have a broad arena to share stories (that the community
chooses to share of course), beliefs, cosmologies, and traditions so that
they are accessible and *vetted* for researchers and community members
around the world.

I do hope that some of you are attending Wikimania, I'd like to be able to
have a break out session of sorts or an unconference to discuss this topic
further. I'm hoping in the next year to have an international conference of
sorts that brings together Indigenous people, open source gurus, and
Wiki-folks to examine opportunities, processes, and belief systems in
regards to opportunities.

Feel free to email me directly, again, right now I am unable to move quickly
in any major projects due to my already big work load, but, I'm hoping that
this will be large part of my career work as an advocate for Native rights,
a scholar, and an open source-lover.

-Sarah

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Oral Citations project: People are Knowledge

Hi all -

I came across a lighter version of this conversation on another Wikimedia
list, and felt the need to share my similar thoughts and statements that I
made previously.

http://wikimania2011.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submissions/Wikimedia_%26_Indigenous_Peoples:_Pros,_Cons_and_Community

-Sarah
[[w:en:User:SarahStierch]]

On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 8:32 AM, CasteloBranco
michelcastelobra...@gmail.com wrote:

And why does the people who speaks Malayalam, Hindi and Sepedi need to
write in English in order to have those oral citations published?
English is not as universal as some people think. I guess we need to
find an answer in their own language, so the solution won't be another
barrier. Also, the escope of this project is much more important for the
projects on these languages, and for speakers of these languages, rather
than the English Wikipedia or its readers.

But that's just me.

Castelo

Em 26/07/2011 16:16, whothis escreveu:
Looks like an excellent waste of effort.

Maybe the problem of publishing non-publishable oral sources occurred to
someone on the team. Anyway the english wikipedia seems to be the
appropriate place for your original research. I can't wait to read all
about
it.

I still think a research project in emesis in the global south or
something
would have suited english wikipedia better but that's just me.

Your fan

Elizabeth

On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Achal Prabhalaaprabh...@gmail.com
wrote:

Dear friends,

At the beginning of 2011, a group of us began working on a project to
explore alternative methods of citation on Wikipedia. We were motivated
by the lack of published resources in much of the non-Anglo-European
world

Re: [Foundation-l] Oral Citations project: People are Knowledge


 I partially disagree. Certainly it is very important from the perspective
 of
 providing material about the native countries of those languages.


I don't partially, I completely disagree. While these communities might not
be English based, and many of the members don't even speak English, we wall
want to see every single Wikipedia, regardless of language, grow and
flourish with information from cultures universal.

I have often found better articles in German (where German Indianer books
are some of the best selling books of all time and entire festivals are
based around Native American Plains culture) about Indigenous North American
communities than in English. Cross-language is a necessity in this global
age. And sharing content with other language based Wikis can also help to
update resources, break stereotypes about cultures and encourage respect in
regards those communities. It also allows people to understand that there
are others out there. It takes away from the centric-aspects of some
language Wikipedias, something that people often accuse English Wikipedia of
doing.

Information is the language of Wikipedia as a whole, and we must learn how
to make the utmost use of that language in order to continue our mission to
disseminate knowledge on a worldwide scale.

-Sarah
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Oral Citations project: People are Knowledge

Maria and the rest of the list,

I deeply regret if my words or comments came off racist patronizing or
isolated. I re-read my writing multiple times before sending it, and just
intended on making a general statement about the work I'm interested in
exploring, without overwhelming the list. I am sorry if it failed.

I really appreciate hearing your thoughts and ideas about my research. I
recently presented my paper at the Indigenous Peoples and Museum conference
and had a few responses similar to yours, and a few positive responses on
the opposite side of the spectrum.

This is all an exploration, and an ongoing experience. Your words, and the
words of others similar, constantly remind me of my place and the interests
of some community members. As a Wikipedian, I am devoted to many aspects of
the community, including retention and encouraging new editors, and to know
that I have stifled that by coming off as racist and isolationist goes
against what I am fighting for.

While I am not here to post my resume, tell you what I do for a living
outside of my work and schooling, share my experiences, and give a list of
who my friends are and friends aren't - I assure you that my intentions are
not meant to be purely selfish (all research is a bit selfish) and I never
intended on judging entire communities on a whole. In regards to being
overlooked, I meant that in reference to Wikimedia Foundation being a
United States based organization focusing more so on international efforts.

To be honest, your email was a slap in the face. Thank you again for sharing
your thoughts, I take your letter very seriously.

-Sarah

On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Maria Alameda m-alamed...@hotmail.comwrote:

Hello all
I usually don't comment on mailing lists but a colleague of mine referred
me here. I wanted to comment on the issues related to Native-american
research raised earlier by Ms. Stierch. I found her outlook completely
isolated from the realities.
I would rather attribute her naivety to her limited view of the world as a
fresh graduate. Personally, it reminds me of a somewhat racist outlook
common among predominantly white-american graduates and students. While I
agree there is a need for more research related to Native american culture,
I really can't agree with the implication that Native american culture is as
overlooked as some unknown tribe in New Guinea.
I should be thankful for her enthusiasm but this is ridiculous. I'm happy
for her residency at National museum of American Indian(s) and her thesis or
even efforts to change certain policies on Wikipedia, but none of that is
connected with the much-larger cultural and race issues she's referring to.
While I wish her the best, I would hope she not use her thesis as an excuse
to comment on the realities of those cultural issues. Oral citation is just
one small aspect of a much larger culture she learnt in school.
I might be too sensitive here, but if her comments were to be applied to
african-american culture in the United States coming from a female
white-undergraduate student pursuing her masters, her comments on the plight
and the issues of an entire race would seem rather patronizing. Perhaps, its
just me.
Maria AlamedaM.A, Ph.d (Native American studies)

Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 19:26:16 +0530
From: whoth...@gmail.com
To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Oral Citations project: People are Knowledge

Hi Sarah

I just love the narcissism in this email. I really want to comment but I
don't want to be called a troll again..maybe later.

Much love

Elizabeth

On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com
wrote:

Hi all -

I came across a lighter version of this conversation on another
Wikimedia
list, and felt the need to share my similar thoughts and statements
that I
made previously.

For the past year, I have been examining opportunities involving
Indigenous
communities of North America and opportunities to utilize Wikipedia and
related websites as an affordable, unique and global form of cultural
preservation. I have my undergraduate in Native American Studies, and I
am
obtaining my masters currently. My final paper (not quite a thesis) for
graduation will be a strong examination of the opportunities related to
Indigenous communities and opportunities/pros/cons related to
Wikipedia.
I'm
actually presenting on my preliminary observations and concerns at
Wikimania, you can learn a bit more here:

http://wikimania2011.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submissions/Wikimedia_%26_Indigenous_Peoples:_Pros,_Cons_and_Community

Re: [Foundation-l] Oral Citations project: People are Knowledge