Re: [Gendergap] [Foundation-l] Fundraising is for men
Given my background in wikis and fundraising for women's non-profits (YWCA and the National Organization for Women among others), I'd just like to point out a few things: 1. When I visited the first link, I saw that half the respondents are married. I know from the donations I've handled and the donating habits of other married couples (including my parents), that often a check or credit card will be in the name of the husband, but the donation often comes from both people in the couple or it could just be the wife using the husbands account. I didn't see a methodology section, but does anyone know how couples were handled in gathering this data? Were both of their genders looked at in this report? 2. When hearing a fundraising officer from Princeton University speak, I learned that women are less likely to want things named after them. For example, Meg Whitman (of eBay fame) was hesitant to name a building named after her at Princeton. That makes me think that women may be more likely to make anonymous donations. Does anyone know if anonymous donors were included in this report? 3. Organizations like Women in Development (several local chapters throughout the US) is a great organization and might have people willing to share ideas about how to target fundraising campaigns toward women. On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 5:55 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.comwrote: I actually have interest in the gender of Wikimedia fundraising donors, I think I've voiced that interest publicly a few times, in the past. Perhaps next fundraiser we'll be able to explore opportunities like that, or maybe WMF and chapters are gathering data related to gender. I was hoping to see a bigger push towards having women represented in the fundraiser, with hope perhaps it'd attract female donors, and even female contributors, (or donors and contributors in general of course) but, there has been only one woman who has been showcased, thus far. -Sarah Dear all; We have heard many times that most Wikipedians are male, but have you heard about gender and fundraising? Some data from a 2010 study[1] and a 2011 German study[2] (question 20th of 22). People have said that Wikipedia is a sexist place which excludes women to edit. Looks like women neither are interested on editing nor funding free knowledge. Is WMF working to increase female donors just like female editors? -- Sarah Stierch Consulting -- Historical, cultural, new media artistic research advising. http://www.sarahstierch.com ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap -- Only the shallow know themselves. - Oscar Wilde ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] WikiChix
Some of your probably already know this but the term chix references the LinuxChix movement. But if it's spoken and not written, it could very easily come off as 70s throwback. On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 5:56 PM, Emily Monroe emilymonro...@gmail.comwrote: I don't think I've heard/read chick for several years. From, Emily On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 8:41 AM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote: Hi everyone, I've had a few conversations, and heard/read a number of comments about the term WikiChix. Now I've never been much of a chick, and it seems other women tend to agree in the terminology as being a bit...hokey, old school and not the most contemporary. I'd like to see how we can re-develop the concept into something else. I've been using just the simple term of Women in Wikimedia etc, but I know that's not the most quirky or exciting sound term when it comes to trying to be clever at a luncheon or whatever. There's also the Women of Wikimedia but WoW...hehe... Oh is this a Warcraft meet-up? I also joined the WikiChix mailing list over a month and ago and there has been no activity. I'm starting to think perhaps we can retire the term for the sake of contemporary thinking. But, perhaps I'm just being uber and everyone thinks it's the cutest name ever and should be kept. Thoughts? If you contribute to Wikisource, you can become a wikisourcerer, which has a nice ring to it.. -- John Vandenberg ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap -- Only the shallow know themselves. - Oscar Wilde ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Weird lame body fashion whatever website of the, day
There are some medical wikis out there that might be good to collaborate with: http://askdrwiki.com/mediawiki/index.php?title=Physician_Medical_Wiki http://www.medpedia.com/ - This one looks like they also have a Quora like system that lets you ask questions. If those methods don't work, I know a gyno I could contact. On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 11:29 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.comwrote: Anyone know a medical doctor/gyno who can perhaps provide some type of documentation/review of the content? Not sure if it would ever matter...but, a solid letter and such could help maybe.. I haven't looked at the article, I admit, it's a subject I'm not comfortable examining Another example of why medical support could be beneficial to Wikipedia as a whole. Sarah (Stierch) Sent via iPhone - I apologize in advance for my shortness or errors! :) On Sep 17, 2011, at 10:51 PM, The Richardsons dons...@optonline.net wrote: On 9/17/2011 3:00 PM, Sarah Stierch wrote: The choices are really mediocre for the neckline women's section. One of the photos is titled Boobies.jpg. I saw that “boobies.jpg” was changed to “Cleavage (breasts).jpg” about four hours ago by Mattbuck. +1 for Gendergap! That was the good news The bad news is that, from earlier posts about labiaplasty, it seemed that users wanted to remove the picture from the page, but that others put it back up. What I believe is that you had no right to take the picture off without consensus. Please excuse me if I missed something that would prove that there was consensus otherwise. Again, though, what troubles me is that SlimVirgin did get talked to rudely, being mockingly (in my opinion) called an “Administratrix” and being told to “play by the rules you claim to enforce”. Also, you seem to be right in saying that the picture isn’t a “hypertrophy” (although I wouldn’t know) and I am pleased to see that a note was added early this morning UTC. But my main problem is how we get to reach a consensus on this, by, which we certainly can, by questioning its “licensed medical image” status, pointing out that it is two different people, and pointing out that the labia minora are not hypertrophies. --- RDW2210 ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap -- Only the shallow know themselves. - Oscar Wilde ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons
Comments like that don't make me run out of commons, but they do get an eye roll from me at the very least. I don't see why that kind of comment is necessary. The images or comments are not what keep me from participating in commons, it's not having a clear sense of whether or not comments like that are the norm on commons or considered acceptable, as well as not knowing the best way to respond. I spend most of my time on a smaller wiki, where I have a better sense of what the rules are and who to contact within that community for advice on how to handle that kind of thing. Since I don't have as good a sense of the issues on Commons, I usually don't comment. On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Béria Lima beria.l...@wikimedia.pt wrote: Sarah Speak for yourself. I'm also a woman and i don't see that you're not welcome in his comment, and also can't see why that particular comment would in some way made girls run out commons. _ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042 *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.* 2011/5/23 Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 16:32, Bob Sponge metzgerhandwerk.hat.tradit...@googlemail.com wrote: dear sarah i want to give you a small feedback about your entries here about a comment i did. (i found this list with a notice on my userpage in the german wikipedia) Pro i like her big tits :-) Bunnyfrosch (Diskussion) 22:59, 2 January 2011 (UTC) there were 2 contra votes before, one argued not educational and questioned: Why manga woman rhymes with big tits? the other replies the not educational accusation. both arguments are bullshit in my opinion. because all is educational or nothing, but i am to obliging to told a another users his/her meaning is bullshit. for example if i want to know how a piece of shit looks like, a picture of a piece of shit ist educational, and if i want to know something about the frontieres of texas, a picture of a map coult very helpfully/educational. if people naming something not educational, they want to say somthing diffrent. ( note this is my personal pov!) but they vote this way, but really really often simply mean: i hate this pic or i hate this user or i hate every kind of nudity in the commons in german i often give persons a longer feedback, in english i spare the longer feedback. (you can read why^^) so i choose a short pro vote, applying to the first contra. and by the way, i am not addicted to big or small boobs - i couldn't care less! if i had choose a longer explanation for my vote, it would like: wikipedia needs well draught anime pictures, with common licences, this one is a great animation of a girl or transsexual in a beautyfull landscape. so, thats the reason i vote with pro. but there was no need for a argumentaion, when the contra-side argues with not educational i hope this will help you, to understand my diction in the comment. best regards le frog du rabbit Bob, thanks for your explanation. It's appreciated. The thing is this: some of us would like to attract more women editors to Wikipedia, so that women have more of a voice, and perhaps also to change the culture of Wikipedia a little. It's arguably not in a woman's interests to hang around on a talk page where people are posting about big tits. It may be in the project's interests to have more women there, but it's hard to see how it could be in the interests of the individual women. It doesn't really matter what the intention is behind the words, because all we see are the words themselves. For some women (not all, but some), these words effectively mean, The way you see the world is not represented here, or Go away. That's one of the reasons it's a problem. Sarah ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap -- Only the shallow know themselves. - Oscar Wilde ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
[Gendergap] Gender Gap discussion at Recent Changes Camp 2011
Hello, As one of the organizers/attendees for Recent Changes Camp Boston 2011, I just wanted to share what happened during the Gender Gap session through pictures taken by wikiHow admin ttrimm. This was the most popular session, followed by a session about Wiki Politics: Gender Gap session attendeeshttp://www.flickr.com/photos/ttrimm/5527798069/in/set-72157626144598891/#/photos/ttrimm/5527798069/in/set-72157626144598891/lightbox/. (I am the woman in purple next to the easel on the right who is scratching her head.) Noteshttp://www.flickr.com/photos/ttrimm/5527798201/in/set-72157626144598891/. - If you have any questions about the notes, please feel free to ask me either here or off-list. 40% of the conference attendees were female. Most of these women were wikiHow admis, but also Anne Goldenberg (the facilitator and one of the co-organizers), a woman who created websites using Tiki as well as a woman who was just getting started editing Appropedia. I think the conclusion that we came to was that making it easier for people to become part of the community (for example, being less argumentative with newbies), would help to lower the barriers to entry and get more people involved. Basically, anything that would help the newbies like clearer documentation and being super gentle with people who are editing wikis for the first time. While newbie friendliness, may not be specific to women, we felt that it would help get more new editors on Wikipedia and the other WMF projects, including more women. ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
