[Gendergap] more women's voices

[Ryan Kaldari]

It would be nice to have some women weighing on this debate:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Abortion#RfC_regarding_video
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] article for first women's political party in Pakistan is about to be deleted

[Ryan Kaldari]

The article for the first women's political party in Pakistan is about to
be deleted, unless someone can find some sources for it.[1][2]
Urdu-language speakers would be especially useful for this effort.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_Women_Muslim_League
2.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Pakistan_Women_Muslim_League
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] the poem gap

[Ryan Kaldari]

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 7:12 PM, J Hayes  wrote:

> maybe we should do an literature editathon?
>

Perhaps it's time for a Literature+Feminism editathon (to spin off from the
Art+Feminism theme).



> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Ryan Kaldari 
> wrote:
>
>> You're right Lennart! It looks like I was limiting the query to only
>> poems which had the inception date set. I re-ran the queries and got:
>>
>> Poems by women: 1542
>> Poems by men: 20072
>> Ratio: 1:13
>>
>> Poems by women with articles on English Wikipedia: 162
>> Poems by men with articles on English Wikipedia: 992
>> Ratio: 1:6
>>
>> Those numbers look a bit more reasonable :) But still plenty of room for
>> improvement! Thanks for double-checking my work.
>>
>> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 12:32 AM, Lennart Guldbrandsson <
>> l_guldbrands...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Interesting. Thanks!
>>>
>>>
>>> I am not saying the results are skewed, but there are lots of poems that
>>> are in Wikisource that lack Wikidata entries. For instance, this list of
>>> Emily Dickinson poems: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
>>> List_of_Emily_Dickinson_poems
>>>
>>> The first poem in her template is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
>>> Success_is_Counted_Sweetes
>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Success_is_Counted_Sweetest>which has
>>> its own Wikidata entry: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q7632593 This
>>> poem was not listed on the Wikidata query
>>> poems by women: http://tinyurl.com/kq4bq8x nor on the query poems by
>>> women on English Wikipedia, so all poems are not counted as they should be.
>>>
>>> This is not to say that there is not probably a poem gap (wonderful
>>> term). Just that we should check the numbers before we go public with them.
>>>
>>> Best wishes,
>>>
>>> Lennart Guldbrandsson
>>>
>>> 070 - 207 80 05
>>> http://www.*elementx*.se <http://www.elementx.se>
>>> *Skriv som ett proffs <http://www.elementx.se/skriv-som-ett-proffs/>* -
>>> min senaste bok
>>>
>>> Kommande böcker <http://www.elementx.se/om-lennart/kommande-bocker/> | 
>>> Tidigare
>>> böcker <http://www.elementx.se/tidigare-bocker/>
>>> Få regelbundna skrivtips direkt till din inkorg
>>> <http://elementx.us7.list-manage1.com/subscribe?u=ab2080465c6cd11b5b253f940&id=8a2b974a62>
>>>
>>> @aliasHannibal <http://twitter.com/AliasHannibal> - på Twitter
>>>
>>> "*Tänk dig en värld där varje människa på den här planeten får fri
>>> tillgång till **världens samlade kunskap*
>>> <http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Huvudsida>*. Det är vårt mål.*"
>>> Jimmy Wales
>>> --
>>> *Från:* Gendergap  för Ryan
>>> Kaldari 
>>> *Skickat:* den 11 maj 2017 07:16:26
>>> *Till:* Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
>>> *Ämne:* [Gendergap] the poem gap
>>>
>>> Just out of curiosity, I used the Wikidata Query Service to see how many
>>> poems by women are in Wikidata. The answer is 5. If you do the same query
>>> for men, you get 255. If you restrict the queries to poems that have
>>> articles on English Wikipedia you get 1 and 57, i.e. according to Wikidata
>>> there is only one article about a poem by a woman on English Wikipedia.
>>> This probably isn't accurate, but it's still a surprising result. While I
>>> understand that poetry (and writing in general) has historically been the
>>> domain of men, does a 50 to 1 ratio really reflect the historical reality?
>>> Anyway, just something to chew on.
>>>
>>> If you want to run the queries yourself (or modify them) here they are:
>>>
>>> Poems by women: http://tinyurl.com/kq4bq8x
>>> Poems by men: http://tinyurl.com/m7mqynq
>>>
>>> Poems by women with articles on English Wikipedia:
>>> http://tinyurl.com/mzj6wak
>>> Poems by men with articles on English Wikipedia:
>>> http://tinyurl.com/mnmsnkl
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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

Re: [Gendergap] the poem gap

[Ryan Kaldari]

You're right Lennart! It looks like I was limiting the query to only poems
which had the inception date set. I re-ran the queries and got:

Poems by women: 1542
Poems by men: 20072
Ratio: 1:13

Poems by women with articles on English Wikipedia: 162
Poems by men with articles on English Wikipedia: 992
Ratio: 1:6

Those numbers look a bit more reasonable :) But still plenty of room for
improvement! Thanks for double-checking my work.

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 12:32 AM, Lennart Guldbrandsson <
l_guldbrands...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Interesting. Thanks!
>
>
> I am not saying the results are skewed, but there are lots of poems that
> are in Wikisource that lack Wikidata entries. For instance, this list of
> Emily Dickinson poems: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> List_of_Emily_Dickinson_poems
>
> The first poem in her template is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> Success_is_Counted_Sweetes
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Success_is_Counted_Sweetest>which has its
> own Wikidata entry: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q7632593 This poem was
> not listed on the Wikidata query
> poems by women: http://tinyurl.com/kq4bq8x nor on the query poems by
> women on English Wikipedia, so all poems are not counted as they should be.
>
> This is not to say that there is not probably a poem gap (wonderful term).
> Just that we should check the numbers before we go public with them.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Lennart Guldbrandsson
>
> 070 - 207 80 05
> http://www.*elementx*.se <http://www.elementx.se>
> *Skriv som ett proffs <http://www.elementx.se/skriv-som-ett-proffs/>* -
> min senaste bok
>
> Kommande böcker <http://www.elementx.se/om-lennart/kommande-bocker/> | 
> Tidigare
> böcker <http://www.elementx.se/tidigare-bocker/>
> Få regelbundna skrivtips direkt till din inkorg
> <http://elementx.us7.list-manage1.com/subscribe?u=ab2080465c6cd11b5b253f940&id=8a2b974a62>
>
> @aliasHannibal <http://twitter.com/AliasHannibal> - på Twitter
>
> "*Tänk dig en värld där varje människa på den här planeten får fri
> tillgång till **världens samlade kunskap*
> <http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Huvudsida>*. Det är vårt mål.*"
> Jimmy Wales
> --
> *Från:* Gendergap  för Ryan
> Kaldari 
> *Skickat:* den 11 maj 2017 07:16:26
> *Till:* Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
> *Ämne:* [Gendergap] the poem gap
>
> Just out of curiosity, I used the Wikidata Query Service to see how many
> poems by women are in Wikidata. The answer is 5. If you do the same query
> for men, you get 255. If you restrict the queries to poems that have
> articles on English Wikipedia you get 1 and 57, i.e. according to Wikidata
> there is only one article about a poem by a woman on English Wikipedia.
> This probably isn't accurate, but it's still a surprising result. While I
> understand that poetry (and writing in general) has historically been the
> domain of men, does a 50 to 1 ratio really reflect the historical reality?
> Anyway, just something to chew on.
>
> If you want to run the queries yourself (or modify them) here they are:
>
> Poems by women: http://tinyurl.com/kq4bq8x
> Poems by men: http://tinyurl.com/m7mqynq
>
> Poems by women with articles on English Wikipedia:
> http://tinyurl.com/mzj6wak
> Poems by men with articles on English Wikipedia:
> http://tinyurl.com/mnmsnkl
>
>
> ___
> 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] the poem gap

[Ryan Kaldari]

Just out of curiosity, I used the Wikidata Query Service to see how many
poems by women are in Wikidata. The answer is 5. If you do the same query
for men, you get 255. If you restrict the queries to poems that have
articles on English Wikipedia you get 1 and 57, i.e. according to Wikidata
there is only one article about a poem by a woman on English Wikipedia.
This probably isn't accurate, but it's still a surprising result. While I
understand that poetry (and writing in general) has historically been the
domain of men, does a 50 to 1 ratio really reflect the historical reality?
Anyway, just something to chew on.

If you want to run the queries yourself (or modify them) here they are:

Poems by women: http://tinyurl.com/kq4bq8x
Poems by men: http://tinyurl.com/m7mqynq

Poems by women with articles on English Wikipedia:
http://tinyurl.com/mzj6wak
Poems by men with articles on English Wikipedia: http://tinyurl.com/mnmsnkl
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Craigslist founder donates $500K to curb Wikipedia trolls - Email filters?

[Ryan Kaldari]

On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 3:44 PM, WereSpielChequers <
werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:

> ...
>
> The first would be to allow editors to set their email to only receive
> from confirmed or even extended confirmed accounts. This would be invisible
> to new editors, they'd just not see the *email this user *option for
> people they weren't entitled to email.
>

This is a great idea. I wish I had this now.


> The second would be an opt in Email moderation service. Similarly to only
> receiving email from confirmed or extended confirmed accounts, this would
> enable editors to opt all or parts of their email via the "email this user"
> function into a moderated stream. Much as with moderated posts to lists
> like this, a list admin would see the email and either approve it or take
> other action. You'd presumably need to having something on the send email
> screen to say that "this editor has opted into email moderation and your
> email will be delayed slightly before being screened and forwarded" You'd
> also need a group of volunteers to do the moderation, spot abusive emails
> and block abusers.
>

Also a good idea, but I doubt it would be scalable. We have a hard enough
time finding volunteers to moderate this mailing list, much less, hundreds
of people's incoming email streams. Plus there would be serious privacy
issues to worry about.


> The third would be an AI driven filter that people could opt into and
> which would screen emails going through this system and put high risk ones
> into a moderation queue.
>

This might be a more workable implementation of the previous idea.

Another idea I've heard would be to let people use email aliases similar to
Craigslist. That way you could respond to wiki-related emails without
giving away your actual email address.
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] U.S. government website for International Women of Courage Award is down

[Ryan Kaldari]

It looks like the main page for the International Women of Courage Award
has been moved to https://www.state.gov/s/gwi/iwoc/index.htm.
Unfortunately, it seems to no longer have any actual information.

I've never heard of a requirement for the U.S. government to archive all of
its web pages, nor have I ever seen any official archives of federal
government sites other than whitehouse.gov (which is archived by the
National Archives as part of the official Presidential Record). This seems
like a dubious claim to me, but I would be very happy to be wrong (as such
archives would be incredibly useful to Wikipedia).

On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 10:07 PM, Risker  wrote:

> Please bear in mind that many US government websites are routinely rebuilt
> at the time of a transition of the presidency and/or cabinet level change.
> This is not new or unusual, although the last time there was a transition
> was 8 years ago and the websites weren't nearly as built-up.  They are,
> however, required, to archive all pages, so they should be somewhere - not
> necessarily easy to find, but somewhere within the US government sites.
>
>
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> (Who lives in Canada, which does not have the same applicable legislation
> as exists in the US to require the federal government to retain
> information)
>
>
>
> On 1 February 2017 at 12:31, J Hayes  wrote:
>
>> here is the archive .is page
>> https://archive.is/1XJm
>> internet archive not working
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Neotarf  wrote:
>>
>>> The U.S. government website for the International Women of Courage Award
>>> is down. There are probably quite a few articles that link to this page, as
>>> it helps establish notability for many women in the Global South.
>>>
>>> The award was started by Condoleezza Rice in 2007 when she served as
>>> U.S. Secretary of State under Republican president George W. Bush.
>>>
>>> https://www.state.gov/s/gwi/programs/iwoc/
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Gendergap Digest, Vol 70, Issue 9

[Ryan Kaldari]

Any articles or topic areas in particular?

> On Nov 26, 2016, at 8:53 AM, clar...@yahoo.com wrote:
> 
> I have encountered a definite upswing in hostile aggressive POV-pushing by 
> alt-right editors.
> 
> 
>> On 11/25/2016 7:00 AM, gendergap-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
>> Send Gendergap mailing list submissions to
>>gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>> 
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>gendergap-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
>> 
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>gendergap-ow...@lists.wikimedia.org
>> 
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Gendergap digest..."
>> 
>> 
>> Today's Topics:
>> 
>>1. How may Trump win effect the WP working environment (LB)
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> 
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2016 08:42:46 -0700
>> From: LB 
>> To: Gender gap mailing list 
>> Subject: [Gendergap] How may Trump win effect the WP working
>>environment
>> Message-ID:
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>> 
>> In light of Trump boasting of grabbing women "by the pussy" and of him
>> calling Clinton a "nasty woman" on national TV during a formal presidential
>> debate, I wonder what effect, if any, his election may have on the WP
>> working environment.
>> 
>> Since the election there have been numerous reports of women and minorities
>> being openly attacked by emboldened men and women and who supported Trump
>> and his... values. Apparently this was the case in Englad post-Brexit, too?
>> 
>> Has anyone else thought about this?
>> 
>> Lightbreather
>> -- next part --
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> 
>> Subject: Digest Footer
>> 
>> ___
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please 
>> visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>> 
>> --
>> 
>> End of Gendergap Digest, Vol 70, Issue 9
>> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Need "Toxic masculinity" article

[Ryan Kaldari]

The term came from the men's movement, not the men's rights movement. Agree it 
could use an article, as it's been around for a while and should easily pass 
WP:NEO. Someone may want to suggest it at WikiProject Gender Studies or 
WikiProject Feminism as well.


> On Nov 1, 2016, at 9:16 AM, Carol Moore dc  wrote:
> 
> It's turned into a real thing with lots of good refs.
> 
> There are lots of RS articles.  And search Duke Universities program and 
> you'll find lots more.  In between all the men's rights articles denouncing 
> such a program.
> 
> Obviously it will take a brave soul to do it. And lots of research to track 
> the etymology and use. (This non-RS article asserts it came from mens right 
> movement which should be checked out. 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/FeMRADebates/comments/1voxgf/toxic_masculinity_came_from_mens_activists_not/
>  
> 
> 
> And make sure you do the full version right off with lots of refs or you know 
> it will be AfD ASAP.
> 
> It is possible it should be a subset of: 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegemonic_masculinity - o investigate that
> 
> Have fun if anyone decides to do it.
> 
> A few mostly RS links below:
> 
> http://www.salon.com/topic/toxic_masculinity/ - including
> * 
> http://www.salon.com/2015/06/12/toxic_masculinity_is_killing_men_the_roots_of_male_trauma_partner/
> * 
> http://www.salon.com/2016/06/13/overcompensation_nation_its_time_to_admit_that_toxic_masculinity_drives_gun_violence/
> 
> http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2016/06/toxic-masculinity-and-mass-murder/486983/
> 
> https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/the-difference-between-toxic-masculinity-and-being-a-man-dg/
> 
> http://yaleherald.com/op-eds/toxic-masculinity/
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/13/opinion/donald-trumps-toxic-masculinity.html
> 
> http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/2016/10/talking-toxic-masculinity
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/01/us-university-offers-course-for-men-to-deconstruct-toxic-masculi/
> 
> https://www.bustle.com/articles/188966-the-duke-university-mens-project-dismantles-toxic-masculinity-its-just-one-of-a-growing-number
> 
> http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/10/02/duke-offers-men-safe-space-to-contemplate-their-toxic-masculinity.html
> 
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Marfan syndrome image

[Ryan Kaldari]

There is a consent template on Commons with lots of options, BTW.

> On Aug 5, 2016, at 5:38 AM, Lane Rasberry  wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I know this issue. It does look like a mistake that the academic paper has a 
> 2.0 license and Wikipedia tags it as 2.5. Other than that issue, the 
> copyright seems in order.
> 
> Wikimedia Commons does not have a clear policy on consent for images, other 
> than images should comply with local law. I would like to establish a policy 
> on consent because even though there is no policy, people document consent in 
> OTRS and petition to remove content based on lack of consent.
> 
> More information about this image is in these places.
> 
> 
> The issue of consent for photographs is not easy to resolve.
> 
> yours,
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 7:57 AM, Neotarf  wrote:
>> Would someone look at the copyright issues surrounding the image in Marfan 
>> syndrome?  This article was mentioned in the Signpost as being worked on in 
>> honor of Kevin Gorman.  The image shows a pubescent child, partially 
>> clothed, apparently during a medical exam. The image was uploaded with a 
>> CC-by-2.5 license.  But if you go to the copyright information in the case 
>> study, it says the article was published under 2.0 license. There is 
>> separate copyright statement for the image: "Written informed consent was 
>> obtained from the patient's parents for the publication of this case report 
>> and accompanying images. A copy of the consent form is available for review 
>> by the Editor-in-Chief of this journal."  It says the child is 13 years old 
>> and has a "global intellectual impairment".
>> 
>> Is the consent needed for a medical study in Brazil the same type of consent 
>> needed to host an image on Commons?   Does the license for the article also 
>> apply to the image of the child?  Can someone sort through these issues?
>> 
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marfan_syndrome
>> 
>> ___
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please 
>> visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Lane Rasberry
> user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
> 206.801.0814
> l...@bluerasberry.com
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Cross-dressing and masculinity

[Ryan Kaldari]

I added a few sentences on female masculinity to get things started:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculinity#Masculinity_in_women

Feel free to add more!

On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Ryan Kaldari 
wrote:

> On the subject of masculinity, the English Wikipedia article on
> masculinity mentions absolutely nothing about female masculinity. There is
> no mention of butches, tomboys, drag kings, etc. This seems to be a pretty
> huge hole in the article and a good example of Wikipedia's systemic bias.
> There's an entire section on "Femininity in men" in the Femininity article,
> but no equivalent for women in the masculinity article. Jack Halberstam's
> book "Female Masculinity" would be a good source to use for such a section.
>
> On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Fæ  wrote:
>
>> I do not often listen to BBC Radio 4's Start the Week, but today's
>> edition had a nice exploration of gender in performance art, with
>> Grayson Perry being an inciteful participant.
>>
>> The programme is 43 minutes long and you can download the mp3 and
>> listen offline. The BBC page below includes some of the works
>> mentioned.
>>
>> It may spark some ideas for better Wikipedia articles around the
>> history of people performing as different genders without the focus
>> being on conventional drag or transvestites. There is also a
>> discussion of nude modelling for art, which could be interesting to
>> think about in the context of how fraught images of nudity hosted on
>> Wikimedia projects tends to be.
>>
>> Links
>> * http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b078xf12
>>
>> Fae
>> --
>> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>>
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Cross-dressing and masculinity

[Ryan Kaldari]

On the subject of masculinity, the English Wikipedia article on masculinity
mentions absolutely nothing about female masculinity. There is no mention
of butches, tomboys, drag kings, etc. This seems to be a pretty huge hole
in the article and a good example of Wikipedia's systemic bias. There's an
entire section on "Femininity in men" in the Femininity article, but no
equivalent for women in the masculinity article. Jack Halberstam's book
"Female Masculinity" would be a good source to use for such a section.

On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Fæ  wrote:

> I do not often listen to BBC Radio 4's Start the Week, but today's
> edition had a nice exploration of gender in performance art, with
> Grayson Perry being an inciteful participant.
>
> The programme is 43 minutes long and you can download the mp3 and
> listen offline. The BBC page below includes some of the works
> mentioned.
>
> It may spark some ideas for better Wikipedia articles around the
> history of people performing as different genders without the focus
> being on conventional drag or transvestites. There is also a
> discussion of nude modelling for art, which could be interesting to
> think about in the context of how fraught images of nudity hosted on
> Wikimedia projects tends to be.
>
> Links
> * http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b078xf12
>
> Fae
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Systematic tagging for deletion of articles created at Art And Feminism editathon

[Ryan Kaldari]

I find it disappointing that so many of the Art and Feminism editathons end
up focusing almost exclusively on creating new articles for artists at the
hosting institution. Not only does this lead to a high percentage of the
articles being deleted, but it's a waste of a huge opportunity to create
and expand articles about artists and artworks with unquestionable
notability and high encyclopedic value.

I have no doubt that many of the Art and Feminism articles that are
nominated for deletion are nominated due to gender bias (as some of them
seem rather trivial to find sources for and improve), but many of them are
also legitimately on the notability borderline. At all of the Art and
Feminism editathons that I've volunteered at, I've discouraged people from
creating articles about people they knew personally, and encouraged them to
use the lists at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/ArtAndFeminism/Tasks
instead. If you are helping to run an Art and Feminism editathon, I would
also suggest doing this, as it provides more value for Wikipedia and leads
to fewer deletions. I would also like to encourage everyone to edit the
lists at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/ArtAndFeminism/Tasks
and help keep them full of good suggestions. Editathons are a great tool
for addressing the gendergap, and I would hate for them to get a reputation
for just being self-promotional events.

On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Carol Moore dc 
wrote:

> Someone should write a letter to the editor of the those 5 or 6
> publications that came in my google alerts on the topic of the edit a thon.
> (Search news google to find them.)  And of course deal with the few
> legtimate complaints and the trolls with nonsense complaints.
>
>
> On 3/12/2016 10:17 AM, Neotarf wrote:
>
>> All the articles created at Regina ArtAndFeminism event have been
>> tagged.   Ten of them have been submitted for deletion.
>>
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Regina/ArtAndFeminism_2016/University_of_Regina
>>
>> For example, see comments here:
>>
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Risa_Horowitz
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
>> visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>
>>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Signpost op-ed (NSFW)

[Ryan Kaldari]

What I don't understand is if administrators like Risker and Mike Peel are
so concerned about civility on Wikipedia that they object to Keliana's
swearing, why aren't they the people that are making hard blocks against
vested contributors who are unambiguously violating civility with personal
attacks? Instead, Keliana is the one doing that. She's the one actually
putting herself on the line to try to change the civility climate on
Wikipedia. Banning swear words from the Signpost isn't going to do that.
Consistently blocking users who attack other editors as "worthless" or
"low-lifes" or "idiots" (or a million other non-swearing insults) will.

Risker: I will be happy to support a ban on swearing if you will support a
ban on personal attacks and be willing to act on it. What do you say?


On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Pete Forsyth  wrote:

> Regarding "swearing is not in itself uncivil" --
>
> I agree strongly with that sentiment. However, in group communication it
> can be valuable to have clear lines that must not be crossed, in order to
> keep everybody on the same page. As an analogy, it seems to me that a clear
> expectation of avoiding ALL CAPS in various Internet forums has been
> positive. It's not that anybody thinks all caps is in itself uncivil or
> disrespectful; but very often, they are used in ways that accompany
> disrespectful communication. Establishing, and adhering to, a clear
> expectation of avoiding that format tends to keep people cognizant of the
> idea that their mode of expression matters.
>
> I am not suggesting that the Signpost should rigidly adhere to a "no
> swearing" rule. But I do think it would be good (as you have already
> acknowledged) for varying expectations around swearing to be incorporated
> more carefully into future decisions.
>
> Also, Daniel raises a good point. I had forgotten that Emily had joined
> ArbCom. I agree, that probably colors many people's reactions, whether or
> not it's consciously acknowledged. Another analogy...a good friend of mine
> is a judge, and also a big fan of rock music. I have always been impressed
> with her courage in resisting the unwritten expectation that she would
> steer clear of dive bars and house parties. But as I got to know her, I
> realized that she put a great deal of thought into how she conducted
> herself in such venues. You might find her at a table of people
> pontificating about a local news story, but you wouldn't find her weighing
> in. You might see her with a drink in her hand, but you wouldn't see her
> drunk. And you might hear her expressing strong opinions (unrelated to what
> she would hear in court), but you wouldn't hear her swearing. It's not that
> she felt that strong opinions, getting drunk, or swearing were awful things
> -- but given her position, they were things that could compromise her
> relationship with the people she served. My takeaway -- I think there are
> many good reasons for people (and perhaps publications) in a position of
> trust observing rules of decorum that *exceed* expectations of civility
> that they might apply to others, in order to earn and retain the respect of
> their peers.
>
> Rob, I very much appreciate your perspective on this as an experiment that
> yields worthwhile lessons. I am glad that a diverse set of opinions have
> emerged, and that you are engaging with them. I believe that in the long
> run, the heightened emotions around this one will seem unnecessary...but of
> course, the emotional responses are real, and I don't want to discount what
> drives them. At any rate, I appreciate the candor everybody is bringing to
> this conversation, and continue to read with interest.
> Pete
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Robert Fernandez 
> wrote:
>
>> A number of us who are concerned about civility on Wikipedia do not see
>> swearing in and of itself as uncivil.  Many people may include
>> professionalism and decorum under the umbrella of civility, but others do
>> not, and they are not hypocritical because they do not.   The problem is
>> not the words themselves, but when those words are used by editors to
>> attack other editors.
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 7:08 PM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case <
>> danc...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>>
>>> >In any case, it seems like it has long been settled that the general
>>> use of profanity on Wikipedia is accepted but not celebrated. Only in
>>> >extreme cases is it considered actionable when *actually directed at
>>> an individual*. So it's hard to understand why many editors of
>>> long->tenure have reacted in such a strongly negative manner to this op-ed;
>>> it may be the unique nature of the Signpost, but like Gamaliel I >would be
>>> surprised to learn that many users regard the Signpost in the same way
>>> devotees do the New York Times. The most likely >conclusion is that
>>> profanity and vulgar language are almost exclusively deployed by men on
>>> Wikipedia, and the difference here is that 

Re: [Gendergap] Signpost op-ed (NSFW)

[Ryan Kaldari]

Compare the reaction that Keilana's Op-ed got with the reaction that the
Signpost article "Wikipedia's cute ass" got:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2012-12-17/Featured_content

Notice any differences?

On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 6:38 PM, Pete Forsyth  wrote:

> Risker, I want to be clear:
>
> It's not that I don't see a problem. I'm actually pretty sympathetic to
> your view; but I think your point has been made very strongly already, and
> the important audience is the Signpost editorial staff. I am confident they
> have heard the message, and I don't see how further discussion moves us in
> a better direction. The past can't be changed. I suppose the Signpost could
> retract the op-ed, but I rather doubt you're seeking something so
> extreme...or am I wrong?
>
> -Pete
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 2:39 PM, Risker  wrote:
>
>> I feel very sad that you fellows don't see the problem in using this kind
>> of language to describe women. "Badass" isn't a compliment. After the first
>> two descriptions, I was fully expecting to see "brilliant motherf***er" to
>> describe the third one.  I'm surprised it wasn't used, in fact.
>>
>> The subjects of our articles deserve to be treated much better than
>> this.
>>
>> Further, I'm incredibly disappointed that this got published in The
>> Signpost.  On Emily's own page...well, okay.  But instead of drawing
>> attention to the women who are the subjects of the articles, almost all of
>> the discussion is about the language used to describe themand pointing
>> out that several of them already had articles about them that were
>> improved, rather than that they'd not been written about at all.
>>
>> All in all, it impressed me as an island of lovely flowers in a garden
>> with a winter's worth of St. Bernard droppings.
>>
>> Risker
>>
>> On 21 February 2016 at 17:13, Pete Forsyth  wrote:
>>
>>> +1 Ryan.
>>>
>>> This was one article, and no Wikipedians, readers, or article subjects
>>> were injured as a result of its publication. I don't really have a strong
>>> opinion one way or the other about whether using language in this way is
>>> OK. But the main lesson to me is how much the English Wikipedia community
>>> has come to value the Signpost as an institution. It's hard to imagine such
>>> any Signpost column inspiring so much passion, say, five years ago. Above
>>> all, I think this constitutes a strong endorsement of the general value of
>>> the Signpost.
>>>
>>> -Pete
>>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Ryan Kaldari 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The depressing thing to me is that the English Wikipedia community
>>>> takes all of 10 minutes to work itself into a frenzy about the use of
>>>> profanity in a positive, non-personal way, but if an editor on Wikipedia
>>>> calls a female editor a cunt, no one dares to bat an eye.
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Risker  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Is it a double standard?  If that page hadn't been written by Keilana,
>>>>> would it have been published as is?
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps you're right, it *is* a double standard.  Just not quite the
>>>>> one some think it would be.
>>>>>
>>>>> Risker/Anne
>>>>>
>>>>> On 21 February 2016 at 08:31, Neotarf  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Op-ed about systemic bias and articles created.  Interesting double
>>>>>> standard about profanity in the comment section.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2016-02-17/Op-ed
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ___
>>>>>> 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 unsubs

Re: [Gendergap] Signpost op-ed (NSFW)

[Ryan Kaldari]

On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Risker  wrote:

> Unless my vision has completely eroded, I do not see the word "cunt"
> anywhere in that article, Ryan.  Nobody on this list has ever said that
> calling someone a cunt is a good thing.
>

I was referring to the common defense of that term on English Wikipedia
(which I imagine you are familiar with). It's hard to notice the outcry
against Keilana's Op-ed and the acceptance of other editors' use of the
C-word (sorry, Fae)[1] without feeling like there is some kind of
double-standard.

What I do not understand is why anyone on this list would think that
> calling someone a "badass" is a good thing.
>

According to Wiktionary it means "Having extreme appearance, attitude, or
behavior that is considered admirable." Synonyms are listed as "cool" and
"awesome".[2] It's obviously slang, but still sounds like a compliment to
me.

1.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Communicating_on_Wikipedia_while_female
2. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/badass#Adjective
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Signpost op-ed (NSFW)

[Ryan Kaldari]

>"Badass" isn't a compliment.

And "cunt" is a friendly term of camaraderie in British English. Apparently
I just don't have a good command of the English language.

On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Risker  wrote:

> I feel very sad that you fellows don't see the problem in using this kind
> of language to describe women. "Badass" isn't a compliment. After the first
> two descriptions, I was fully expecting to see "brilliant motherf***er" to
> describe the third one.  I'm surprised it wasn't used, in fact.
>
> The subjects of our articles deserve to be treated much better than this.
>
> Further, I'm incredibly disappointed that this got published in The
> Signpost.  On Emily's own page...well, okay.  But instead of drawing
> attention to the women who are the subjects of the articles, almost all of
> the discussion is about the language used to describe themand pointing
> out that several of them already had articles about them that were
> improved, rather than that they'd not been written about at all.
>
> All in all, it impressed me as an island of lovely flowers in a garden
> with a winter's worth of St. Bernard droppings.
>
> Risker
>
> On 21 February 2016 at 17:13, Pete Forsyth  wrote:
>
>> +1 Ryan.
>>
>> This was one article, and no Wikipedians, readers, or article subjects
>> were injured as a result of its publication. I don't really have a strong
>> opinion one way or the other about whether using language in this way is
>> OK. But the main lesson to me is how much the English Wikipedia community
>> has come to value the Signpost as an institution. It's hard to imagine such
>> any Signpost column inspiring so much passion, say, five years ago. Above
>> all, I think this constitutes a strong endorsement of the general value of
>> the Signpost.
>>
>> -Pete
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Ryan Kaldari 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The depressing thing to me is that the English Wikipedia community takes
>>> all of 10 minutes to work itself into a frenzy about the use of profanity
>>> in a positive, non-personal way, but if an editor on Wikipedia calls a
>>> female editor a cunt, no one dares to bat an eye.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Risker  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is it a double standard?  If that page hadn't been written by Keilana,
>>>> would it have been published as is?
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps you're right, it *is* a double standard.  Just not quite the
>>>> one some think it would be.
>>>>
>>>> Risker/Anne
>>>>
>>>> On 21 February 2016 at 08:31, Neotarf  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Op-ed about systemic bias and articles created.  Interesting double
>>>>> standard about profanity in the comment section.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2016-02-17/Op-ed
>>>>>
>>>>> ___
>>>>> 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
>>
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Signpost op-ed (NSFW)

[Ryan Kaldari]

The depressing thing to me is that the English Wikipedia community takes
all of 10 minutes to work itself into a frenzy about the use of profanity
in a positive, non-personal way, but if an editor on Wikipedia calls a
female editor a cunt, no one dares to bat an eye.

On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Risker  wrote:

> Is it a double standard?  If that page hadn't been written by Keilana,
> would it have been published as is?
>
> Perhaps you're right, it *is* a double standard.  Just not quite the one
> some think it would be.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On 21 February 2016 at 08:31, Neotarf  wrote:
>
>> Op-ed about systemic bias and articles created.  Interesting double
>> standard about profanity in the comment section.
>>
>>
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2016-02-17/Op-ed
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Arbcom election

[Ryan Kaldari]

Just a head's up that the ArbCom election has started and you can now
officially go vote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:SecurePoll/vote/398

Members of this list may be interested in Smallbones' voter guide for the
election:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Smallbones/ACE2015
It focuses mainly on candidate's positions regarding harassment and
bullying, especially towards women editors, although it also considers
other qualifications such as experience and consistency.
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Call for Participation: 2016 Art+Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-thon

[Ryan Kaldari]

Also, WikiProject Feminism on the English Wikipedia has lots of ongoing
projects, although they are generally asynchronous on-wiki efforts rather
than in-person edit-a-thons. For example:
*
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Feminism/Projects/NWHP_biographies
(only 7 left)
*
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Feminism/Projects/AWHT_biographies
*
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Dictionary_of_National_Biography/Missing_women
(only Louisa Henrietta de Rivarol is lacking)
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Feminism/Open_tasks

Most of these aren't actually specific to feminism, but are just efforts to
fill in missing biographies on women (similar to a lot of the Art+Feminism
work). If anyone wants to propose new ideas for women-related topics to
tackle, feel free to post them on the project talk page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Feminism

On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight <
rosiestep.w...@gmail.com> wrote:

> In addition to the Women in Science, WikiProject Women in Red (WiR) has
> hosted 3 other virtual edit-a-thons since its founding in July:
>
>1. APA Women -
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Women_in_Red/1
>2. Women in Leadership -
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Women_in_Red/2
>3. Women in Architecture and Design -
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Women_in_Red/3
>
> Some of WiR's events are sponsored by an organization (Smithsonian,
> Guggenheim, Art+Feministm), while others aren't. WiR is an Art+Feminism
> collaborator... we're hosting the online/virtual event during the entire
> month of March.  And we're planning for other events, such as Women in
> Religion (December), at our Ideas Cafe:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Women_in_Red/Events
>
> Specifically regarding women in politics, we covered quite a few of them
> at the Women in Leadership virtual event, but if there's interest in
> addressing this subtopic, WiR would gladly do a virtual edit-a-thon for
> Women in Politics (perhaps around the 2016 US elections).
>
> WiR events typically run for 10 days, crossing over two weekends. But the
> current event (Scientists) is running for 21 days, and the first one (APA
> women) ran for 3 days. But what's become typical of our events is that
> editors jump in before and/or after the "official" dates and create new
> articles whenever they please.
>
> Metrics?  The outcomes, listed on each event's page, give you an idea of
> the good stuff we're doing.
>
> Jump in!
>
> Rosie
>
> Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight
> User:Rosiestep
> Twitter @rosiestep
> Skype rosiestep
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Atlantic article..."How Wikipedia is Hostile to Women"

[Ryan Kaldari]

Personally I'm skeptical of our (this mailing list's) ability to reform
ArbCom. The candidates who are the most tolerant of harassment and misogyny
seem to always be the most popular candidates. Thus the outcome of the
ArbCom cases are hardly surprising. Do we even have a slate of candidates
that are worth supporting?

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Sarah (SV)  wrote:

> Jonathan and Fae, I see the disagreement about details as part of the
> systemic bias. The evidence in question was widely available; one did not
> have to be a functionary to see it. I looked at it with a view to searching
> for the holes, because of course it was possible that someone was making
> mischief. (And I don't mean Lightbreather; I mean simply that someone may
> have taken the opportunity to troll.) So I examined it extremely carefully,
> but I found no holes.
>
> It's important to bear in mind that the porn images were just the last
> straw. The person suspected of posting them had been harassing
> Lightbreather onwiki for about a year. The ArbCom either looked at that
> evidence and didn't see harassment, or didn't look at it. We don't know
> which.
>
> The LB and GGTF cases are mirrors of the O. J. Simpson verdict, in that
> two groups of Wikipedians appear to have examined the same evidence, but
> ideology inclined them to radically different conclusions.
>
> What can we do to bridge that gap? I would say that one of the things we
> should do is question whether we need an Arbitration Committee. But if we
> do, we urgently need to fill the committee with people who can demonstrate
> insight into sexism, racism, homophobia and harassment, and who are deeply
> committed to ending it on Wikipedia. As things stand too many people feel
> excluded by the committee and fearful of becoming involved with it, either
> as a committee member or party to a case.
>
> Sarah
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Fæ  wrote:
>
>> Jonathan, I think there's a bit of talking past each other going on.
>> Rehashing details of one of the many dramafest Arbcom cases is not
>> worthwhile.
>>
>> From my viewpoint Sarah hit the nail on the head with "Something
>> systemic is happening here. As a result of those cases and many other
>> examples Wikipedia now has a terrible reputation for being sexist."
>>
>> Improving reputation and recognizing that there is a systemic problem
>> is a far more useful direction to take. Think about a bit of
>> "reframing".
>>
>> P.S. I was approached by the Atlantic due to my work in the area of
>> revert-wars and the potential relationship to bias. I did a little
>> digging around it, but my thoughts are too slow to satisfy
>> journalists' deadlines. ;-)
>>
>> Fae
>>
>>
>> On 22 October 2015 at 18:12, WereSpielChequers
>>  wrote:
>> > Hi Sarah,
>> >
>> > I'm not a "functionary" so I haven't seen the evidence - clearly it
>> > convinces you, but it did not quite convince the functionaries.
>> Reading the
>> > result and for example Yunshui's comment I would simply prefer that the
>> > record shows we were not fully convinced by the evidence, rather than
>> that
>> > we were convinced, but chose not to act. I think what we have here is
>> more
>> > than a detail difference. If the decision had been, as reported in the
>> > Atlantic, that Arbcom had decided this "on the grounds that it may
>> “out” the
>> > editor that had posted the pictures, or link his username to his real
>> name."
>> > Then I would have supported a change in policy, or Arbcom membership, so
>> > that future Arbcoms in similar situations would be willing to risk
>> outing
>> > someone, or just ban them without public reason, rather than leave a
>> > harasser unpunished. But if the issue is not that, but instead that the
>> > evidence was inconclusive, then I think we have a very different
>> problem to
>> > work on. As for the broader picture I don't dispute that Wikipedia has
>> > several problems around gender, and some terrible publicity, but if one
>> took
>> > that article at face value the obvious next step would be to get a
>> change in
>> > policy so that if Arbcom were convinced of the evidence they could and
>> would
>> > have acted.
>> >
>> >
>> > Jonathan
>> >
>> > On 22 October 2015 at 17:37, Sarah (SV)  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> WSC, the evidence as to who posted the porn images was, I would say,
>> >> conclusive. We nevertheless ended up with a situation in which a man
>> who had
>> >> been engaged in harassment (much of which was onwiki and had been
>> going on
>> >> for about a year) was let off the hook, and the harassed woman was
>> banned.
>> >>
>> >> There was a similar situation in the GGTF case, so the Lightbreather
>> case
>> >> was not an unfortunate one-off. For example, the man who was blocked
>> for
>> >> harassment during the Lightbreather case should have been blocked for
>> it
>> >> during the GGTF case, but wasn't. He only ended up being blocked
>> during the
>> >> Lightbreather case because he admitted that he had done i

Re: [Gendergap] Linux's culture problem

[Ryan Kaldari]

On the topic of social contracts and communities, I'd like to invite anyone
who's interested to take a look at the draft version of the Code of Conduct
for Wikimedia Technical Spaces -
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_conduct_for_technical_spaces/Draft.
Any feedback is welcome on the talk page.

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Moriel Schottlender 
wrote:

> moriel, i do not agree to the abstraction you introduce here. a
>> community consists of persons afaik. it is a person which feels, not a
>> community. if there is a rule for the community its purpose is to
>> apply to a person part of the community. sarah sharp tried to make a
>> rule "do not curse or go away". as linus torvalds curses from time to
>> time it is not rocket science to understand that rule as: (1) linus
>> please change and do not curse, or (2) linus please leave the
>> community if you cannot stop cursing.
>>
>
> I am simplifying the bottom line, because the bottom line is fairly simple.
>
> When a group of individuals form a community, they are no longer
> completely individuals; they have set for themselves a social contract that
> binds them. We can discuss the minutia of the social contract forever, of
> course, as these arguments went for ages, from John Locke's extensive
> individual liberties, to Hobbes' absolute authoritative rule, to Jean Jack
> Rousseau's general will -- but that still leaves the conclusion the same:
> What type of community do we *want* to have?
>
> I find it somewhat ironic that we are arguing for respecting an almost
> absolute individual rights and liberties of people in the community who are
> (sometimes self-professed) assholes and bully others, but we neglect the
> individual rights and liberties of the people who are being bullied. The
> entire point of having a *community* (rather than a disconnected grouping
> of individuals) is to find the balance to give the liberties to its members
> not on the expense of other members' liberties.
>
> And yet, it seems that in the arguments that are raised, the "sides" keep
> being presented as the extreme choices, as if no other middle ground is
> available. That is false, and we don't have to read historical
> philosophical treatises to see that.
>
> The option is not to either "have liberty" or "be oppressed". That is a
> strawman representation of our options. There are many more options, which
> many governments and societies around the world adapt -- some more
> successfully than others -- without crushing the individual rights of
> people who don't seem to care about the individual rights of others.
>
> Sarah Sharp's leaving Linux' community is not about Linus Torvalds'
> individual rights to be an asshole. He can continue being an asshole all he
> wants, and he, I assume, knows the pros and cons of being an asshole in his
> personal life. It's his right, and he deserves to make that personal choice.
>
> The community of people who gathered for a shared purpose, however, needs
> to make a conscious, collective decision about the type of community they
> care to have. That is the point of having a community in the first place.
>
> It is a very simple give and take, a simple mathematical consideration:
> You get one thing on the expense of another, such is life.
> *Which is why in life, most often, we look for middle ground rather than
> extremes.*
>
> If the social contract the community agrees on implicitly or explicitly
> results in making certain sub-groups marginalized, bullied and feel
> unwelcome, then these groups will not stay as part of that community.
>
> If the community thinks this is a correct price to pay for absolute
> liberties, then all the John Locke for it.
>
> If, however, we recognize that this price is too steep -- and that the
> "corrective step" of "don't be a jerk to others" is acceptable -- then the
> community should demonstrate it in its social contract and find the balance
> between oppressing the bullies and supporting the bullied.
>
> I don't see what's so complicated in this concept, really. We're just
> making it complicated by concentrating on the small details.
>
> So I will repeat my paragraph from my first email, the one that makes
> everything really really simple:
>
> "If people don't think that having an abusive community is a problem,
> then they should understand they are *losing* the people they are abusing,
> and keeping the people who are abusing others. That means that we are not
> keeping the good contributors and weeding out the lazy/bad contributors --
> it means we're keeping the jerks, whether they're effective contributors or
> not, and weeding out the ones who give up and don't want to be abused,
> whether they're awesome or not."
>
>
>
>
>>
>> >>> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 12:44 PM, rupert THURNER
>> >>>  wrote:
>>  to let wikipedia NPOV also have a word, here what linus torvalds
>>  thought about it two years ago:
>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=137392506516022&w=2
>>  in a s

Re: [Gendergap] Linux's culture problem

[Ryan Kaldari]

True, people are different. Some people I would like to work with, and some
people I wouldn't (like Linus Torvalds). His argument that social norms are
irreverent to creating software (or should be) rings pretty hollow, in my
opinion. Collaborating on software (or encyclopedias) is a social process,
and basic civility goes a long way towards lubricating social processes. I
also don't buy Linus's argument that being professional is being fake. No
one is asking Linus to wear a suit and tie and use marketing buzzwords.
They're just asking him to chill out and not be an asshole. Of course he's
welcome to act out his "normal urges", as he puts it, but I don't think
he's doing any favors for the cultural health of the free software movement.

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Leigh Honeywell  wrote:

> Sarah did actually have some great suggestions on how to do things better:
> http://sarah.thesharps.us/2015/10/06/what-makes-a-good-community/
>
> -Leigh
>
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Pine W  wrote:
>
>> I wish that we had a proven solution for that kind of issue in online
>> communities in general. It's quite disappointing. Thanks for forwarding
>> that post.
>>
>> Pine
>> On Oct 7, 2015 6:44 AM, "Jason Radford"  wrote:
>>
>>> 
>>>
>>> I think folks here will understand this story.
>>> 
>>>
>>> http://sarah.thesharps.us/2015/10/05/closing-a-door/
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Leigh Honeywell
> http://hypatia.ca
> @hypatiadotca
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] "Harvard students edit Wikipedia in effort to ‘dismantle the patriarchy’ "

[Ryan Kaldari]

On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 12:56 PM, Neotarf  wrote:

> 2) "WikiProject page on feminism ... suggests that users delete a comic
> strip stereotyping lesbian women."
>
> Um, no, it doesn't. And a quick check of the page history shows the page
> has not been changed recently. It's not on the talk page either.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Feminism
>

There is a deletion discussion about a lesbian comic strip, but it concerns
the applicability of fair use, not "stereotyping lesbian women":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2015_August_27#File:Dykes_to_Watch_Out_For_.28Bechdel_test_origin.29.jpg
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] sexual harassment policy for English Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

An RfC has been created proposing a sexual harassment policy for English
Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Harassment#Sexual_harassment_policy
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Women's health articles

[Ryan Kaldari]

Since the WikiProject proposal got a lot of positive feedback, I've gone
ahead and created the page for the WikiProject here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women's_health

It's extremely basic right now, but I'll try to flesh it out some more this
weekend. If you're interested, please sign-up as a member on the project
page and help tag articles using the project template: {{WikiProject
Women's health|class=|importance=}}

On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 2:33 PM, Neotarf  wrote:

> Has anyone given any thought to Simple English Wikipedia?  I started
> "Fistula" https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fistula which has so far
> escaped the deletionists, and have FGM,
> https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_mutilation which is very
> incomplete, on my list, since SV updated the enwiki article. BTW, I took
> the fistula illustration from another language wikipedia, as it seemed more
> appropriate to a younger and possibly more conservative readership.
>
> As a side note, since I don't know of any women who use Visual Editor, VE
> has done something with its image search function.  If you have ever tried
> to find an image about some subject on Commons, you know it can be almost
> impossible.  But if you enable VE, go to the "insert" function, and tell it
> to upload an image, it will suggest images to you that you would never be
> able to find otherwise.
>
> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 5:07 PM, keilanawiki 
> wrote:
>
>> Awesome!!!
>>
>>
>> Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
>>
>>
>>  Original message 
>> From: Ryan Kaldari 
>> Date:05/14/2015 3:22 PM (GMT-06:00)
>> To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the
>> participation of women within Wikimedia projects." <
>> gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>
>> Cc:
>> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Women's health articles
>>
>> I created a proposal here:
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals/Women%27s_health
>>
>> Feel free to add yourself as a supporter or discuss the proposal in the
>> discussion section.
>>
>> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Sydney Poore 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Set it up and sign me up, too.
>>>
>>> Sydney
>>> On May 14, 2015 8:39 PM, "keilanawiki"  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Let's do it - I'm happy to help set it up! :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  Original message 
>>>> From: Ryan Kaldari 
>>>> Date:05/14/2015 1:23 PM (GMT-06:00)
>>>> To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the
>>>> participation of women within Wikimedia projects." <
>>>> gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>
>>>> Cc:
>>>> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Women's health articles
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Netha Hussain >>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Ryan,
>>>>>
>>>>>  Thank you for bringing this to my notice! Could I get the link to the
>>>>> article?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's a little hard to find (which is actually the subject of the
>>>> discussion): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candidal_vulvovaginitis
>>>>
>>>> Wikiproject: Women's Health has been my personal dream for a long time,
>>>>> but I couldn't yet get myself working on it because of commitments
>>>>> elsewhere. :-(
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would be happy to officially propose such a project (and help set it
>>>> up) if there is interest from people.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ___
>>>> 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
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Women's health articles

[Ryan Kaldari]

I created a proposal here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals/Women%27s_health

Feel free to add yourself as a supporter or discuss the proposal in the
discussion section.

On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Sydney Poore 
wrote:

> Set it up and sign me up, too.
>
> Sydney
> On May 14, 2015 8:39 PM, "keilanawiki"  wrote:
>
>> Let's do it - I'm happy to help set it up! :)
>>
>>
>> Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
>>
>>
>>  Original message 
>> From: Ryan Kaldari 
>> Date:05/14/2015 1:23 PM (GMT-06:00)
>> To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the
>> participation of women within Wikimedia projects." <
>> gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>
>> Cc:
>> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Women's health articles
>>
>> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Netha Hussain 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Ryan,
>>>
>>>  Thank you for bringing this to my notice! Could I get the link to the
>>> article?
>>>
>>
>> It's a little hard to find (which is actually the subject of the
>> discussion): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candidal_vulvovaginitis
>>
>> Wikiproject: Women's Health has been my personal dream for a long time,
>>> but I couldn't yet get myself working on it because of commitments
>>> elsewhere. :-(
>>>
>>
>> I would be happy to officially propose such a project (and help set it
>> up) if there is interest from people.
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Women's health articles

[Ryan Kaldari]

On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Netha Hussain 
wrote:

> Hi Ryan,
>
>  Thank you for bringing this to my notice! Could I get the link to the
> article?
>

It's a little hard to find (which is actually the subject of the
discussion): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candidal_vulvovaginitis

Wikiproject: Women's Health has been my personal dream for a long time, but
> I couldn't yet get myself working on it because of commitments elsewhere.
> :-(
>

I would be happy to officially propose such a project (and help set it up)
if there is interest from people.
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Women's health articles

[Ryan Kaldari]

Should I be surprised that only one of the six participants in the current
discussion at the vaginal yeast infection article is a woman? Maybe it's
time to create a 'Women's health' WikiProject!

Kaldari
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] "Tomboy" on Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

Adding a criticism section sounds like a good idea (assuming some sources
can be found). I added a criticism section to the article "Feminazi", lest
someone think that everyone is fine with the use of that term :)

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Carol Moore dc 
wrote:

>  Found this blog item of interest. Perhaps the article needs some RS
> objections to the use of the term.
>
>
> http://www.adviceformydaughter.com/2015/04/18/girls-are-not-tomboys-they-are-girls/
> Starts with...
>
> According to Wikipedia:
>
> A *tomboy* is a girl who exhibits characteristics or behaviors considered
> typical of a boy,  including wearing masculine clothing and engaging in
> games and activities that are physical in nature and are considered in many
> cultures to be “unfeminine” or the domain of boys.
>
> Just because there is a wikipedia entry, doesn’t mean we have to subscribe
> to it.
>
> Some girls climb trees.
>
> Some girls wear dresses.
>
> Some girls climb trees while wearing dresses
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Wikipedia and Feminism.

[Ryan Kaldari]

I find the entire premise of this essay to be a bit misguided. Do we really
need to worry about tamping down the trickle of feminists editing art
articles on Wikipedia? There are easily ten times more men's rights
activists editing Wikipedia than feminists, and they actively organize
off-wiki to subvert NPOV. Why does no one care about that? Why not write a
blog post about men's rights activists running meat-puppet campaigns and
trying to white-wash articles about rape and domestic violence? If
anything, having a handful of feminists on Wikipedia might serve to keep
them in check.

"Also, don't revise existing articles because you feel there is a male bias
in them."
This is terrible advice. For example, I significantly revised the "dating"
article a few years ago because it had an obvious male bias and seemed to
be intended only for a male audience. Why should people leave articles with
a male bias? NPOV doesn't mean leave articles with whatever bias they
started with.

Also, I find it strange that your article implies that feminists can't
write from a neutral point of view. Feminism is about equality of the sexes
and opposing stereotypes and biases. It isn't about making women look
better than men or excluding the male point of view. I think feminists make
great Wikipedia editors. Look at Adrianne Wadewitz: 37 featured articles! I
would gladly take 1000 more Adrianne Wadewitzs as Wikipedia editors!

Kaldari

On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 8:23 AM, J Hayes  wrote:

> nice wiki-splaining - the problem with your thesis:
> "
>
> *What we don't need, however, is more feminists."*
> is labeling and the double standard of "civility enforcement"
>
> as Djembayz said at Signpost:
> "the rules on Wikipedia are not clear, the enforcement on disruptive
> behavior is arbitrary or non-existent. Online game players, vulgarians, and
> sea-lioning  randos who
> congregate here can be as disruptive and outrageous as they wish, with
> impunity. They don't care, because they don't have to."
>
> until the systemic bias in "civility enforcement" is dealt with, your
> thesis will be a dead letter with me.
>
> On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Sydney Poore 
> wrote:
>
>> This part of the "we" of Wikipedians...me..wants feminist to edit
>> Wikipedia, as well as people who want to solely add articles about women.
>>
>> What I ask of you is to stand back so that those of us who are interested
>> in creating an inclusive editing community can do so without being
>> hindered. Because there is simply no way that Wikipedia's content can be
>> neutral without a large and inclusive body of people creating it.
>>
>> Warm regards,
>> Sydney Poore
>> User:FloNight
>> On Apr 9, 2015 10:27 AM, "Lukas Mezger (Wikipedia)" <
>> lukas.mez...@wikipedia.de> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear readers of the gender gap mailing list,
>>>
>>> My name is Lukas and I am a German Wikipedian (User:Gnom).
>>>
>>> I recently wrote a blog post on Wikipedia and feminism
>>> 
>>> and was encouraged to share it with this list.
>>>
>>> As I am very new to the gender gap debate, I would appreciate your
>>> comments.
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Lukas Mezger
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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

Re: [Gendergap] The (non-existent) Farkhunda Wikipedia article--victim or rallying point

[Ryan Kaldari]

Is there an article on "vaginal fistula"? I would look it up myself, but
I'm at work :)

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Nathan  wrote:

> It could just as easily be argued the other way, I think. It's
> presumptuous and perhaps insulting to purport to create a biography on a
> person, under her own name, while merely recounting a single tragic
> occurrence in her life. Since there is often not enough verifiable
> information to create a biography, it makes some sense to not assert that
> Wikipedia is doing so. Moreover... It's generally bad practice to apply
> principles of search engine optimization to editing an encyclopedia.
>
> And as for fistula... That article isn't great, I agree. However, vaginal
> fistulas are not the only or even the most common use of that term. Even in
> medicine, they are a subset of the broader phenomena.
>
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Neotarf  wrote:
>
>> Articles about women are getting lost.  Lost that is, to Google searches.
>>
>> For the last two days, Afghanistan has been exploding in demonstrations
>> over Farkhunda, a Kabul woman who was beaten to death and torched by a mob.
>> Even though every major news source has done a piece on her, I can't find
>> an article for her yet in Wikipedia.  When it does get written, and finally
>> starts showing up in the search engines, what will it say? "Farkhunda", the
>> logical search term?  Or more likely, the more common format: "the
>> murder/lynching/battering/victimization/humiliation of [insert woman's name
>> here]".
>>
>>
>> For quite some time, the article for Ozgecan Aslan was hidden from
>> Google searches as well, because due to the English Wikipedia's unique
>> naming conventions, the article was called "Murder of Özgecan Aslan".
>>
>>
>> Maybe it's time to reconsider naming articles about women for the
>> horrible things that were done to them, and give them the simple dignity of
>> their own names.  I'm not sure the victimization narrative is the right one
>> anyhow.  The Farkhunda story seems to be about her death becoming a
>> rallying point for the way women are treated in Afghanistan, much as Aslan
>> was in Turkey.
>>
>>
>> What else?  Iraqi lawyer Samira Salih al-Nuaimi still comes up 6th in a
>> Google search, *after* the entry for the Daily Mail, because of the
>> idiosyncratic spelling of her name in the article title. But at least you
>> can find her (very, very short) article now.
>>
>>
>> And since I've already written this much, the article on fistula
>> , a problem for a huge number of
>> girls in parts of the Global South, is not very well explained.  Compare 
>> Female
>> genital mutilation or even Women's rights in 2014
>> .
>> (thx, SV).   Also reference the short article on Fatimata Touré
>> , whose group in Mali
>> works against fistula.
>>
>>
>> Note: for Farkhunda, see Twitter photos
>> https://twitter.com/hashtag/Farkhunda?src=hash and WaPo http://
>> www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/03/23/afghan-woman-beaten-to-death-for-a-crime-she-didnt-commit-becomes-a-rallying-point-for-activists/
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

[Ryan Kaldari]

I'm sure it's hard to remain calm and thoughtful when 8chan is running 24/7
discussion threads to:
1. Strategize on how to subvert the consensus process to take over the
article
2. Target Wikipedia editors for doxxing and harassment so that they will
stop defending the article

The assault was literally relentless. I think Ryulong nearly had a nervous
breakdown and the other editors didn't fair much better. They all deserve a
barnstar and some kittens, IMO...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ryulong
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TaraInDC
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TheRedPenOfDoom
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tarc
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:NorthBySouthBaranof

On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 3:17 PM, Nathan  wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Sarah  wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Sarah Stierch 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> After reviewing the Arbcom case, I don't even know who got the idea that
>>> any of the contributing editors are feminist, per se. No one even mentions
>>> the word, except once, when describing a subject that was "slandered" in
>>> the gamer gate article(s).
>>>
>>
>> ​Hi Sarah, I think the point is that editors who were defending the
>> rights and privacy of the women involved in Gamergate are being sanctioned
>> because (I assume) they did it in some sense inappropriately, perhaps too
>> aggressively, I don't know. (I don't know the details.)
>>
>> In that sense it looks like a repeat of the gender gap task force
>> decision. In the latter, those trying to stop disruption were sanctioned
>> even harder than those causing it.
>>
>> The message those cases send is that, if you're trying to protect women's
>> interests, you have to creep around and not stick your neck out. The
>> Chelsea Manning case had similar problems, and Sceptre recently expressed
>> the same concern about the Sexology case.
>>
>> Another aspect of this is that we've been undermining admins for years so
>> that they (we) are reluctant to act at an early stage to nip things in the
>> bud. As Tony Sidaway wrote: "The administrator corps must be coaxed out
>> of their inappropriate and destructive timidity." I was glad to see the
>> ArbCom's proposed decision thank the admins who have worked on this.
>>
>> Sarah
>>
>>
>
> I think the lesson it sends is that a righteous cause is not a defense
> against accusations of disruption, nor a license to violate other policies.
> I'm sure that among the restricted people are those with positions I'd
> support along with many others, but that doesn't put their behavior above
> reproach. Tony Sidaway was hardly the paragon of a calm and thoughtful
> administrator - insightful as he often was, there was a reason he was fired
> as a clerk and barred from simply requesting his bit back.
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

[Ryan Kaldari]

The rediculous thing is that none of the people defending that article were 
'feminists'. They were just defending the mainstream point of view from an 
endless onslaught of 8channers. The feminist point view isn't even represented 
in the article.

On Jan 23, 2015, at 7:14 PM, J Hayes  wrote:

> http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/23/wikipedia-bans-editors-from-gender-related-articles-amid-gamergate-controversy
> 
> http://internet.gawker.com/wikipedia-purged-a-group-of-feminist-editors-because-of-1681463331/+cushac
> 
> 
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] WikiProject Women

[Ryan Kaldari]

Cool idea. I added some questions on the talk page.

Kaldari

On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 3:35 PM, LB  wrote:

> Well, I don't know if I did it right, but per Sarah's and Siko's
> suggestion, I started this:
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Women
>
> Just bare bones for now. I will work on it some more tomorrow.
>
> Lightbreather
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] [Gendergap-I] GGTF interactions arbcom case has now closed

[Ryan Kaldari]

The URL I just posted goes to the wrong survey (since there are two
sections with the same header on that page). Here is a better URL:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Civility#Arbcom.27s_position_on_expletives

Kaldari

On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 12:39 AM, Ryan Kaldari 
wrote:

> Rationalobserver has posted a survey related to the Gender Gap Task Force
> Arbitration decision on the Civility talk page:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Civility#Survey
>
> Seems pretty relevant to the recent discussions here.
>
> Kaldari
>
> On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 1:16 AM, Russia Aviation 
> wrote:
>
>> The answer to a hypothetical query by TDA
>> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=367632.10;wap2
>> "Simon Tushingham [Sitush]"
>>
>> "I was an active user in Wikipedia for the past many many years. I had
>> more than 30,000 edits to my name. From 2011, most of the sections in
>> Wikipedia were under the control of organized cabals. I wrote to Jimmy
>> Wales many times warning against this. But many of the users who
>> voiced against this were later banned. In the section I was following,
>> the leader of the Cabal was from Manchester, known by his alibi "Simon
>> Tushingham". Despite this guy committing all sorts of one-sided edits,
>> Wales supported him. Tushingham frequently bragged in Wikipedia that
>> he regularly talked to Wales in his cell phone and were good friends
>> in real life. I had enough and quit Wikipedia in 2011. I know many
>> more who did the same.
>> Wikipedia is similar to a ponzi scheme. They publicized themselves as
>> a "free" and "unbiased" online encyclopedia. Once they had enough
>> following, they kicked out the old users and showed their true
>> colors."
>>
>> In reply to :
>>
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&oldid=636276109#GGTF_interactions_arbcom_case_has_now_closed
>>
>> "So you won't comment on the case, but how about a hypothetical? Let's
>> say there is a male editor who, after the conclusion of an arbitration
>> case, begins following a female editor from the same case all over the
>> site for months. When that editor is reported for this behavior and
>> there is a proposal to bar the male editor from interacting with the
>> female editor, another male editor comes to his defense and suggests
>> if the male editor is barred from interacting with the female editor
>> that maybe he will start "following her around" instead. After the
>> proposal is passed the other male editor announces he is going to be
>> doing work on Wikipedia regarding a link, which just happens to be the
>> personal website of the female editor. The female editor objects and
>> questions his intentions. This male editor then begins taunting her
>> with personal details researched online and plainly expresses his
>> intentions to write a bio about her here. Despite several other
>> objections and the female editor's own protests, this male editor
>> creates a draft that he explains is fully intended to be made into a
>> live article all about the female editor. It is apparent that certain
>> details have been cherry-picked from primary sources and articles
>> about the female editor and presented in a way that is clearly aimed
>> at being unflattering towards her. Despite numerous editors suggesting
>> his actions are woefully inappropriate he insists that he is a
>> perfectly good editor who is being neutral towards this person he
>> detests. Would you consider it acceptable for the Arbitration
>> Committee to ban the female editor for commenting about this male
>> editor's behavior, while giving the male editor essentially nothing
>> more than a warning after praising his efforts on this site?--The
>> Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 21:23, 1 December 2014 (UTC)"
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Gender Gap" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to gender-gap+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] [Gendergap-I] GGTF interactions arbcom case has now closed

[Ryan Kaldari]

Rationalobserver has posted a survey related to the Gender Gap Task Force
Arbitration decision on the Civility talk page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Civility#Survey

Seems pretty relevant to the recent discussions here.

Kaldari

On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 1:16 AM, Russia Aviation 
wrote:

> The answer to a hypothetical query by TDA
> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=367632.10;wap2
> "Simon Tushingham [Sitush]"
>
> "I was an active user in Wikipedia for the past many many years. I had
> more than 30,000 edits to my name. From 2011, most of the sections in
> Wikipedia were under the control of organized cabals. I wrote to Jimmy
> Wales many times warning against this. But many of the users who
> voiced against this were later banned. In the section I was following,
> the leader of the Cabal was from Manchester, known by his alibi "Simon
> Tushingham". Despite this guy committing all sorts of one-sided edits,
> Wales supported him. Tushingham frequently bragged in Wikipedia that
> he regularly talked to Wales in his cell phone and were good friends
> in real life. I had enough and quit Wikipedia in 2011. I know many
> more who did the same.
> Wikipedia is similar to a ponzi scheme. They publicized themselves as
> a "free" and "unbiased" online encyclopedia. Once they had enough
> following, they kicked out the old users and showed their true
> colors."
>
> In reply to :
>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&oldid=636276109#GGTF_interactions_arbcom_case_has_now_closed
>
> "So you won't comment on the case, but how about a hypothetical? Let's
> say there is a male editor who, after the conclusion of an arbitration
> case, begins following a female editor from the same case all over the
> site for months. When that editor is reported for this behavior and
> there is a proposal to bar the male editor from interacting with the
> female editor, another male editor comes to his defense and suggests
> if the male editor is barred from interacting with the female editor
> that maybe he will start "following her around" instead. After the
> proposal is passed the other male editor announces he is going to be
> doing work on Wikipedia regarding a link, which just happens to be the
> personal website of the female editor. The female editor objects and
> questions his intentions. This male editor then begins taunting her
> with personal details researched online and plainly expresses his
> intentions to write a bio about her here. Despite several other
> objections and the female editor's own protests, this male editor
> creates a draft that he explains is fully intended to be made into a
> live article all about the female editor. It is apparent that certain
> details have been cherry-picked from primary sources and articles
> about the female editor and presented in a way that is clearly aimed
> at being unflattering towards her. Despite numerous editors suggesting
> his actions are woefully inappropriate he insists that he is a
> perfectly good editor who is being neutral towards this person he
> detests. Would you consider it acceptable for the Arbitration
> Committee to ban the female editor for commenting about this male
> editor's behavior, while giving the male editor essentially nothing
> more than a warning after praising his efforts on this site?--The
> Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 21:23, 1 December 2014 (UTC)"
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Gender Gap" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to gender-gap+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] a gender gap meet-up?

[Ryan Kaldari]

Does anyone else feel like it might be time for a gender gap meet-up? I
love the mailing list, but it's such a limited (and formal) means of
communication. I'm curious what kind of ideas and discussion would come
from an in-person get together. I know several of the people on this list
are in the Bay Area, so maybe we could put something together in San
Francisco or Oakland. Does this sound like an interesting idea to anyone?

Kaldari
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] What's happening at ArbCom re WP:GGTF

[Ryan Kaldari]

If Carol Moore is banned from Wikipedia and Eric Corbett is not, I will be
retiring from Wikipedia, as it will prove that the project is completely
dysfunctional.

Kaldari

On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 11:09 AM, LB  wrote:

> This is what is about to happen at the English Wikipedia ArbCom re
> disruption at the Gender Gap Task Force:
> *Five men and two women were involved parties in the case.
> *One women is about to be site banned.
> *The other woman is about to be topic banned from the GGTF.
> *All five men are going to be free to edit.
>
> It is noteworthy, IMO, that only 1 of the 12 arbitrators is a woman
> (GorillaWarfare, bless her, who is not for giving WP's #1 trouble-maker,
> Eric Corbet, yet *another* chance). Here is a link to the Proposed
> decision page:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gender_Gap_Task_Force/Proposed_decision
>
> And to the talk page:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gender_Gap_Task_Force/Proposed_decision
>
> Lightbreather
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] [Research] Communicating on Wikipedia while female

[Ryan Kaldari]

A very interesting study, and rather depressing. I love that I'm cited as a
"radical feminist" though :)

On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Netha Hussain 
wrote:

> Dear all,
>
>  I found an interesting research done by Laura Hale about "Communicating
> on Wikipedia while female : A discursive analysis of the use of the word
> cunt on English Wikipedia user talk pages" on meta wiki. The link to the
> research page is here:
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Communicating_on_Wikipedia_while_female
>
> Regards
> Netha
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Laura Hale 
> Date: Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 9:57 PM
> Subject: [Wiki-research-l] Communicating on Wikipedia while female
> To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities <
> wiki-researc...@lists.wikimedia.org>
>
>
> Hey,
>
> I posted some new research to meta at
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Communicating_on_Wikipedia_while_female
> .  It is titled: Communicating on Wikipedia while female A discursive
> analysis of the use of the word cunt on English Wikipedia user talk pages.
> Thought it might be of some interest to people on this list.
>
> Sincerely,
> Laura Hale
>
> --
> twitter: purplepopple
>
> ___
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> wiki-researc...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
>
>
>
> --
> Netha Hussain
> Student of Medicine and Surgery
> Govt. Medical College, Kozhikode
> Blogs :
> *nethahussain.blogspot.com
> swethaambari.wordpress.com
> *
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] [arbcom-appeals-en] [Child Protection Policy]Gender Gap issues

[Ryan Kaldari]

Yeah, I don't see how this is at all relevant to the gender gap. Please
moderate the sender.

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 1:27 PM, George Herbert 
wrote:

>
> I was going back and forth on speaking up myself, but I concur.
>
> George William Herbert
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 18, 2014, at 1:21 PM, Nathan  wrote:
>
> Hello the moderators, I think the legal threats implied in this e-mail
> (and the other) are sufficient to warrant moderating the sender.
>
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Romana Busse 
> wrote:
>
>> Dear Mr. Davies
>>
>> From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee#Members
>> I observe you are an "inactive" Member of this alleged committee. I
>> hence suspect that your email is bogus.
>>
>> Accordingly I would appreciate receiving a signed email, or even a
>> scanned signed email clearly given on behalf of the Arbitration
>> Committee listing its physical address for service of legal process.
>>
>> I am shocked by the casual and secretive approach adopted to such
>> concerns of child pornography, especially when it was previously made
>> on another website http://wikipediocracy.com, naming 2 of your users
>> "Sitush" and "Bishonen" using sexually colored language and referring
>> to child pornography on your website. This Sitush is a serial stalker
>> and harasser of female Wikipedia editors as your Arbcom knows well..
>>
>> It is certainly strange that I was blocked as a sock puppet at the
>> instance of these same 2 users (1 of whom is your Admin) when I
>> brought that message to their attention.  It seems Wikipedia actively
>> discourages reporting such sexual harassment to Admins and wipes out
>> all trace of it from public gaze, to the extent of terminating the
>> account of the person who reported me for being an alleged
>> sockpuppet..
>>
>> It is even stranger that you will not disclose / specify the multiple
>> accounts and IPs I am accused of using as an alleged sock puppet or
>> why I am accused of being an India Against Corruption sockpuppet when
>> I have never edited any page concerned with that body. It is very
>> strange that Arbcom will not comply with its own policies for this. .
>>
>> It is clear that the Arbcom is covering up the actions of its
>> anonymous users implicated in child pornography by another website.
>>
>> I urge you to reconsider as I firmly intend to pursue this matter and
>> investigate all your own antecedents on your inactions..
>>
>> On 11/19/14, Roger Davies  wrote:
>> >
>> > Romana Busse:
>> >
>> > This is to acknowledge receipt of your emails of yesterday and today.
>> >
>> > The Arbitration Committee is unable to assist you further in this
>> > matter. Any further communications should be sent to:
>> >
>> > le...@wikimedia.org
>> >
>> > Roger Davies
>> > Arbitration Committee
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 18/11/2014 15:41, Romana Busse wrote:
>> >> Dear Anthony (AGK)
>> >>
>> >> I'm very sorry to bother you, but could I have a timeline with respect
>> >> to deletion, or not, of those images ?
>> >>
>> >> With the welfare of the children in mind, I feel that the school, the
>> >> children's parents and the local child welfare committees, magistrates
>> >> and police should be properly sensitized  to the incidents of that
>> >> day, and to ensure it cannot reoccur
>> >>
>> >> I'm sure the police and the Indian Govt Cyber Advisory Committee would
>> >> be interested in learning from you or NYBrad  the finer points of law
>> >> whereby Citizendium encyclopedia decides to completely wipes out the
>> >> images within 12 hours but Wikipedia has not done anything till now on
>> >> identical complaint.
>> >>
>> >> I would also like to know by when you will publish across all
>> >> Wikipedia projects the complete list of accounts and IPs I have
>> >> allegedly used, and also if I am a sockpuppet of User:MehulWB as
>> >> alleged or not. This is required by your same policy WP:SOCK under
>> >> which was blocked.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks
>> >>
>> >> On 11/18/14, Romana Busse  wrote:
>> >>> This is about a potential threat to clearly identifiable Indian minor
>> >>> school children whose images are retained on WMF servers in USA and
>> >>> India despite legal notice to remove them.
>> >>> Taken within their school (where their parents expected the same
>> >>> degree of privacy as they enjoy at home) and uploaded without their
>> >>> permission, consent or knowledge, at a location where they allegedly
>> >>> viewed grossly obscene pornography accessed on a Wikimedia Foundation
>> >>> service which has now been disabled on complaint by a body called
>> >>> [[India Against Corruption]].
>> >>
>> >> ___
>> >> ArbCom-appeals-en mailing list
>> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BASC
>> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-appeals-en
>> >>
>> >
>>
>> ___
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/m

Re: [Gendergap] Polish Wikipedia momument has two women

[Ryan Kaldari]

Nice! Can we get one for the WMF office? ;)

Kaldari

On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 4:53 PM, Carol Moore dc 
wrote:

>  The final momument was unveiled and it looks like, and I was told, it
> has two, women in it. Yeah!
> https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomnik_Wikipedii_w_S%C5%82ubicach
> Article on Polish Wikipedia with photo
>
> Images.google search of "Polish monument Wikipedia" gets a couple more
> good photo returns.
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Huge list of Gender Gap resources

[Ryan Kaldari]

Wow, nice work Carol!


On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 9:09 AM, Carol Moore dc 
wrote:

>  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1
> It took me a month to put together, including by rereading 2/3 of threads
> here and grabbing links.
>
> The big objection to working to end the gender gap has been that there's
> no proof it exists/its important/we can change it/etc.  I do expect there
> to be fierce objection to listing 80% of this material from the Gender Gap
> task force naysayers. But the entries are wikiproject relevant, if not
> always useable as reliable sources in articles.
>
> Additions and constructive suggestions welcome.
>
>   Contents
>
>- 1 Books
>
>- 2 Mainstream and tech publication articles
>
> 
>- 3 Research studies
>
> 
>   - 3.1 Wikimedia Foundation sponsored studies
>   
> 
>   - 3.2 Outside studies
>   
> 
>   - 3.3 Studies on similar topics and/or communities
>   
> 
> - 4 Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia
>
> 
>   - 4.1 Gender gap projects
>   
> 
>   - 4.2 Diversity projects
>   
> 
>   - 4.3 Outreach project
>   
> 
>   - 4.4 Wikimedia blog entries
>   
> 
>   - 4.5 Wikimania
>   
>   - 4.6 Essays
>   
>   - 4.7 Civility issue
>   
> 
> - 5 En.Wikipedia
>
>   - 5.1 Gender gap-related projects
>   
> 
>   - 5.2 Workshops and Edit-a-thons
>   
> 
>   - 5.3 *Sign Post* articles
>   
> 
>   - 5.4 Wikipedia articles
>   
> 
>   - 5.5 Women-related article lists
>   
> 
>   - 5.6 Relevant essays
>   
> 
> - 6 Help pages
>
>- 7 Audio and video
>
> 
>- 8 Civility issue
>
> 
>- 9 Images
>
>- 10 Related sites and projects
>
> 
>- 11 Interesting blog and other articles
>
> 
>
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Noiva do Cordeiro

[Ryan Kaldari]

Well, it is the Daily Mirror, so I wouldn't take it too seriously:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mirror#mediaviewer/File:The_Daily_Mirror_-_Sorry_We_Were_Hoaxed.jpg


On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Krystle  wrote:

> Is this for real?
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/town-entire-population-made-up-4113722
>
> And if so, should there be a Wikipedia entry about it? I started to draft
> one but am a little worried because there seems to be only one article
> about this mysterious town. Hoax, maybe.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Noiva_do_Cordeiro
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons

[Ryan Kaldari]

Personally, I don't think it's worth having a discussion here about the
merits of deleting these images. There's no chance in hell they are going
to be deleted from Commons. What I'm more interested in is the locker-room
nature of the discussions and how/if this can be addressed, as I think that
is actually more likely to dissuade female contributors than the images
themselves.

Ryan Kaldari


On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Pete Forsyth  wrote:

> Ryan, thanks for bringing this up for discussion. I've put a lot of
> thought into the series of photos this comes from over the years, and it's
> well worth some discussion. I'd like to hear what others think about this.
> Here is a link to the category for the larger collection; warning, there's
> lots of nudity and sexual objectification here, so don't click if you don't
> want to see that:
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Nude_portrayals_of_computer_technology
>
> First, I agree with Ryan that in the (various) deletion discussions I've
> seen around this and similar topics, there is often a toxic level of
> childish and offensive comments. I think that's a significant problem, and
> I don't know what can be done to improve it. Scolding people in those
> discussions often a backfires, and serves only to amplify the offensive
> commentary. But silence can imply tacit consent. How should one participate
> in the discussion, promoting an outcome one believes in, without
> contributing to or enabling the toxic nature of the discourse? I think I've
> done a decent job of walking that line in similar discussions, but I'm sure
> there's a lot of room for better approaches. I would love to hear what has
> worked for others, here and/or privately.
>
> Also, my initial reaction to these images is that they are inherently
> offensive; my gut reaction is to keep them off Commons.
>
> But after thinking it through and reading through a number of deletion
> discussions, the conclusion I've come to (at least so far) is that the
> decision to keep them (in spite of the childish and offensive commentary
> along the way) is the right decision. These strike me as the important
> points:
> * We have a collection of more than 20 million images, intended to support
> a wide diversity of educational projects. Among those 20 million files are
> a great many that would be offensive to some audience. (For instance, if I
> understand correctly, *all images portraying people* are offensive to at
> least some devout Muslims.)
> * Were these images originally intended to promote objectification of
> women? To support insightful commentary on objectification of women?
> Something else? I can't see into the minds of their creators, but I *can*
> imagine them being put to all kinds of uses, some of which would be
> worthwhile. The intent of the photographer and models, I've come to
> believe, is not relevant to the decision. (apart from the basic issue of
> consent in the next bullet point:)
> * Unlike many images on Commons, I see no reason to doubt that these were
> produced by consenting adults, and intended for public distribution.
>
> If they are to be deleted, what is the principle under which we would
> delete them? To me, that's the key question. If it's simply the fact that
> we as individuals find them offensive, I don't think that's sufficient. If
> it's out of a belief that they inherently cause more harm than good, I
> think the reasons for that would need to be fleshed out before they could
> be persuasive.
>
> Art is often meant to be provocative, to challenge our assumptions and
> sensibilities, to prompt discussion. We host a lot of art on Commons. On
> what basis would we delete these, but keep other controversial works of
> art? Of course it would be terrible to use these in, for instance, a
> Wikipedia article about HTML syntax. But overall, does it cause harm to
> simply have them exist in an image repository? My own conclusion with
> regard to this photo series is that the net value of maintaining a large
> and diverse collection of media, without endorsing its contents per se.,
> outweighs other considerations.
>
> (For anybody interested in the deletion process on Commons, the kinds of
> things that are deliberated, and the way the discussions go, you might be
> interested in my related blog post from a couple months ago:
> http://wikistrategies.net/wikimedia-commons-is-far-from-ethically-broken/
> )
>
> -Pete
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Ryan Kaldari 
> wrote:
>
>> If anyone ever needs a good example of the locker-room environment on
>> Wikimedia Commons

[Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons

[Ryan Kaldari]

If anyone ever needs a good example of the locker-room environment on
Wikimedia Commons, I just came across this old deletion discussion:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Radio_button_and_female_nude.jpg

The last two keep votes are especially interesting. One need look no
farther than the current Main Page talk page for more of the same (search
for "premature ejaculation").

Kaldari
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Addressing incivility (was: men on lists)

[Ryan Kaldari]

What if...

Wikiquette assistance were resurrected as a list of volunteer admins that
you could privately email about problems rather than a public noticeboard?

Ryan Kaldari


On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 4:05 AM, Jane Darnell  wrote:

> I would assume that WMF has an ombudsman who would do just that, but I see
> that there is only this:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman_commission
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 7:50 AM, Sarah  wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 9:55 PM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case <
>> danc...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>   ​>A major problem with our dispute-resolution processes is that the
>>> person being harassed has >to endure more harassment to draw attention to
>>> the problem.
>>>
>>>  This is, of course, hardly unique to Wikipedia or even online
>>> communities in general, I think.
>>>
>>
>> ​Hi Daniel, the very public nature of it on Wikipedia makes it unusual
>> and very stressful.​
>>
>>
>>>  ​
>>>
>>> >I have long thought the Foundation ought to employ a team of
>>> specialists who can take up >those cases when they see them, so that the
>>> pursuit of sanctions is not laid at the victim's >door. This is perhaps
>>> similar to Sumana's suggestion that communities need dedicated >helpers who
>>> will do the emotional labour in conflict situations.
>>>
>>> Would there be a good existing example of such a program we could take a
>>> look at?
>>>
>>>  Daniel Case
>>>
>>
>> ​Sumana talked
>> <https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Hospitality,_Jerks,_and_What_I_Learned>
>> about the situation at Hacker School: "​
>> If you don’t understand why something you did broke the rules, you don't
>> ask the person who corrected you. You ask a facilitator. You ask someone
>> who’s paid to do that emotional labor, and you don't bring everyone else's
>> work to a screeching halt. This might sound a little bit foreign to some of
>> us right now. Being able to ask someone to stop doing the thing that’s
>> harming everyone else’s work and knowing that it will actually stop and
>> that there’s someone else who’s paid to do that emotional labor who will
>> take care of any conversation that needs to happen.
>> ​"
>>
>> The idea of having people paid to do this is very attractive for
>> Wikipedia. I think they would have to be professionals with appropriate
>> training, otherwise there's a big risk of making things worse. The
>> Foundation probably has enough of an income to consider this, given the
>> potential impact on the atmosphere and editor retention.
>>
>> 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
>
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Addressing incivility (was: men on lists)

[Ryan Kaldari]

On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Risker  wrote:

>
> You know, I sat on Arbcom for five years, and there were several occasions
> when I practically begged those complaining about the behaviour of certain
> individuals to initiate a casebut nobody wanted to do that...
>

Well, you know I did actually take one of the worst misogynists on en.wiki
to ArbCom,[1] and it was such a horrible experience that I decided to never
do it again. After giving up a month of my life to the case and enduring
constant harassment during the process, all of the evidence that I
painstakingly assembled, presented, and defended was completely ignored by
ArbCom, and instead he was banned for a year for making a legal threat. He
is now free to return on the condition that he simply agrees not to make
any more legal threats. You were actually on that ArbCom panel, Risker, so
I don't really understand your argument that taking incivil editors to
ArbCom is a good idea. To me it is worse than a waste of effort, it is
actually counterproductive and an invitation to be relentlessly harassed.

1.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Alastair_Haines_2&oldid=360884518

Ryan Kaldari
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Addressing incivility (was: men on lists)

[Ryan Kaldari]

On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 1:50 AM, Pine W  wrote:

> Hi Moriel and others,
>
> Do you have a list of "realistic changes" in mind for the community?
>

> I hear almost no one say that the typical state of (in)civility on wiki or
> on Wikimedia-l is good enough or that people are being hypersensitive, so I
> get the sense that there's a lot of agreement that we have a cultural
> problem. Ideas for solutions seem to be in short supply, so any "realistic
> changes" that you can suggest would be good to hear, either on this list or
> in IdeaLab.
>

The problem on en.wiki at least is that a vocal minority effectively
prevent any enforcement of the civility policy. This includes a significant
group of admins that are willing to overturn blocks for all but the most
blatant violations of the policy. And because of the wheel warring loophole
(undoing a block is allowed, but reinstating a block is wheel warring,
which is prohibited), there is nothing that anyone can do about it. ArbCom
(or the community) could close this loophole, but so far have not shown
interest in doing so. The single action that I think would be most useful
on en.wiki would be for someone to shepherd an RfC to create a policy
statement that "unilaterally overturning a block is wheel-warring". I know
this sounds very far removed from the issue of making en.wiki more civil,
but I actually think such a change is realistically possible and would go a
long way towards shifting the balance of power away from the trolls and
misogynists.

Alternately, the board or ArbCom could step up and declare that civility is
not to be treated as a second-class policy, but I doubt that would ever
happen.

Ryan Kaldari
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Wikiproject? ...Threads on various issues

[Ryan Kaldari]

On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 7:33 PM, Marie Earley  wrote:

> A subpage in an existing project would be one idea but please not the
> Feminism project. I was invited to it very early on by well meaning editors
> as a place for such discussions but found sex-positive feminists who think
> female porn stars are the definition of female empowerment.
>

Hi Marie,
I believe you're referring to a particular editor who hasn't participated
there since about a year ago. I totally understand if you felt put off by
your interactions with them. You might want to consider checking out the
project again though since we could always use more informed, thoughtful
voices such as yours.

Cheers,
Ryan
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] A cautionary tale

[Ryan Kaldari]

On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Derric Atzrott <
datzr...@alizeepathology.com> wrote:

> * bring back Wikipedia:Wikiquette_assistance since women may not want to
> got to WP:ANI for low grade constant nonsense
>
> Would support wholeheartedly.
>
The problem with Wikipedia:Wikiquette_assistance was the same as the
problem with AN/I. As soon as someone took a complaint to
Wikiquette_assistance people like Baseball Bugs would make fun of them for
being too sensitive and it would basically turn into forum for criticizing
the person who complained. No one at Wikiquette_assistance took complaints
seriously, so it just ended up making things more frustrating for the
person who was being harassed.

If we want a forum that is more effective, I think we should adopt some of
the ideas from the Teahouse. Primarily, by having the responders be vetted
volunteers that are expected to provide a minimum level of helpfulness. All
the peanut gallery responders who are just there for the lulz should be
banned.

Ryan Kaldari


On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Derric Atzrott <
datzr...@alizeepathology.com> wrote:

> * bring back Wikipedia:Wikiquette_assistance since women may not want to
> got to WP:ANI for low grade constant nonsense
>
> Would support wholeheartedly.
>
> * take complaints about harassment in general more seriously
>
> Also would support wholeheartedly.
>
> * Have a "class action" Arbitration on Sexism/Double standards so that
> discretionary sanctions could be imposed on obvious incidents
>
> Strong support.
>
> * (new one) quota of 1/3 women admins and 1/3 women arbitrators (and other
> positions?)
>
> I’m not sure this would be enforceable, but I would highly support
> encouraging more women to take up these positions.  The process for
> becoming an admin or arbitrator really needs some work as well.  From what
> I understand becoming an admin is hellish.  People dig through everything
> you’ve ever done and call you out on anything going all the way back to the
> beginning of time.  It might not actually be that way, I’ve not really
> participated in them, but if it is, that is a problem and probably a big
> deterrent to a great deal of folks.
>
> * (new one) A GenderGap wikiproject on every wiki, since it can be
> troublesome having to go all the way to
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_gap to contact women about what to
> do with specific issues; (wikiprojects like feminism and gender and womens
> studies more article and policy related than recruitment and problem
> solving related)
>
> Would support.  Given that many people don’t ever leave their homewiki,
> and a lot of new people probably don’t even know Meta exists, this could be
> highly beneficial.
>
> The archives probably have other early suggestions by women I've
> forgotten.  Now a days the only alternatives seem to be doing studies,
> counting numbers, posting mainstream media articles about what Wikipedia is
> allegedly doing and links to problematic articles.
>
> Not enough to solve the problem.
>
> Studies are useful.  This particular study shows promise I think:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Women_and_Wikipedia For allies
> these sorts of things help us understand what we are actually trying to
> accomplish and metrics are useful for determining if we’ve actually made
> any progress.  It is hard to quantitatively measure a culture though.  This
> sort of research also publicises the problem, which is something that there
> can never be enough of I think.
>
> Maybe it would be worth making threads for some of these ideas.  If no one
> else does, I’d be happy to.
>
> Thank you,
> Derric Atzrott
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Oh man, I feel like a woman ...

[Ryan Kaldari]

Awesome article. Sorry to hear about your troubles with the peanut gallery.

Ryan


On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 6:45 PM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case <
danc...@frontiernet.net> wrote:

>   It’s one thing to read about the sort of harsh reactions women get
> while editing that discourages them from continuing.
>
> It’s a second thing to experience it yourself.
>
>
> Late last week I was browsing *Slate* when I read their reprint (
> http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2014/06/11/lolly_wolly_doodle_brandi_temple_s_north_carolina_children_s_clothing_startup.html)
> of this month’s *Inc.* magazine cover story, about a company called Lolly
> Wolly Doodle, a children’s clothing company started by Brandi Temple a
> woman in North Carolina with no real prior business experience, who had by
> her own admission never wanted to be anything more than a trophy wife when
> she was younger. She apparently figured out how to sell on Facebook,
> something major retailers have failed to do, and she’s now the CEO of a
> rapidly-growing company that’s gotten some serious venture-capital funding,
> doing over half of its $10 million+ annual business on FB and by their own
> lights the largest retailer on that site.
>
> I checked to see if we had an article on this company. We didn’t, so I
> started one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lolly_Wolly_Doodle, complete
> with an infobox with the company logo and a free image of one of its
> dresses I found on Flickr. I reflected as I did so that the reason that
> this company had gotten all the media coverage it had in the tech and
> business press yet remained off our radar said entirely too much about our
> gender gap ... if we had just a few more probably regular editors who also
> are avid Pinterest users, I bet, we’d have had at least a stub a long time
> ago.
>
> But, that was all water under the bridge. Or so I thought.
>
> I nominated it for DYK on Friday. Late today, I get these responses:
>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Lolly_Wolly_Doodle&diff=613195333&oldid=612812989
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Lolly_Wolly_Doodle&diff=613195754&oldid=613195333
>
> They were enough to ruin the good mood I was in following the USA’s World
> Cup win over Ghana and our neighbor coming over to invite my wife and I to
> her daughter’s graduation party. I have real trouble believing that
> Eppstein even read it (“whole paragraphs” are sourced to the company’s own
> history on its webpage? Huh? That it’s not neutral and too promotional?
> Everything it is sourced and attributed. And that dismissive conclusion
> about “story-telling mode about the struggles of the founders to find
> their way in the world” Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t think a
> similarly-written story about a business set up by men would get this level
> of criticism.
>
> Sorry if anyone was bothered by this, but I had to vent. I will be going
> into greater detail about why this review was so off base when I request
> that someone else review it instead (something I have very rarely done with
> all the DYKs I’ve nominated).
>
> Daniel Case
>
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Follow-on from the model FP image discussion

[Ryan Kaldari]

Personally, I doubt the image you're referring to would meet much resistance 
from gender-gappers. It clearly isn't cheesecake like the Michelle Merkin 
photo. In other words, its purpose isn't just to be sexually arousing to men.

That said, I think the image has little chance of being featured on Wikipedia 
anyway due to it being over-processed, but you're welcome to nominate it.

Ryan Kaldari

On Jun 11, 2014, at 3:47 AM, Russavia  wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I read with interest recent discussions on the "issue" of having a
> photograph of a glamour model on the front page of English Wikipedia.
> I don't agree with most of the reasoning against having such photos on
> the front page, but respect those opinions.
> 
> I came across an image on Commons of Patricia de Leon which I have to
> say is AMAZING.[1] I have nominated it for FP on Commons, and it is in
> use on en.wp[2] and similarly could be nommed on that project for FP
> too.[3]
> 
> I'd be interested hear from gendergappers what opinions on images such
> as this appearing on the front page of Wikipedia would be.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Russavia
> 
> 
> [1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Patricia_De_Le%C3%B3n.jpg
> [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patricia_de_Leon_(actress)
> [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates
> 
> ___
> 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

[Gendergap] Wikimania Project Leaflets

[Ryan Kaldari]

Wikimedia UK has offered to print up WikiProject leaflets for distribution
at Wikimania in August. Any WikiProject that is interested just has to
supply a logo graphic and fill out a template at
https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Project_Leaflets

Wikipedia Art and Feminism and Wikiwomen's Collaborative have already
applied. Other projects that may be interested include:
WikiProject Women's History
WikiProject Feminism
WikiProject Women's sport
WikiProject Women scientists
WikiProject Countering systemic bias

If you are involved in any of these projects and will be attending
Wikimania, I would encourage you to take advantage of this offer to promote
your project. Also if anyone can create a logo for WikiProject Feminism,
please let me know!

Ryan Kaldari
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] topless cheesecake on the en.wiki Main Page

[Ryan Kaldari]

I believe it's a subject of much debate (even among feminists), but some of
the basic ideas are covered at
http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Sexualized_environment

Ryan


On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Nathan  wrote:

>
>
>
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 1:23 PM, Valerie Aurora  > wrote:
>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> I'm going to point out that posting sexually objectifying photos of
>> people of any gender or sexuality in a venue that is intended to be
>> equally accessible to all is still inherently discriminatory towards
>> women specifically. This is because the sexualized imagery occurs in
>> the context of widespread misogyny and sexism which includes the
>> sexual double standard for women, the objectification (in a very
>> literal sense) of women in sexual situations, and a much higher
>> prevalence of sexual violence against women than men (I don't know the
>> stats for people who don't identify as either but I'm sure they aren't
>> good either).
>>
>> In other words, because the vast majority of humans alive today live
>> in cultures where sexual attitudes about women are so negative,
>> bringing up sex in a venue like this immediately creates a hostile
>> environment for women. I am repeating some of what Sumana already
>> wrote, just being very clear that pictures of male cheesecake or
>> sexualized photos of homosexual men also create a hostile environment
>> for women.
>>
>> Other venues are a different matter. It is indeed possible to create a
>> safer and more welcoming environment in which sex can be discussed or
>> displayed with less or no harm to women, but Picture of the Day is not
>> it.
>>
>> This is something I have to explain constantly to tech startups here
>> in the Bay Area, comprised often of mostly men who think there's
>> nothing wrong with literally covering the office walls with penis
>> jokes because "we're making fun of male genitalia, so that can't be
>> sexist towards women." These attitudes have real and lasting harm,
>> both for Wikimedia project participation and content, and for many
>> other areas of society.
>>
>> -VAL
>>
>>
> This is something that I don't really understand, but I'd like to. However
> I won't ask you to explain, since it's probably not a great use of your
> time, but could you point me to some concise discussion of why sexual or
> sexualized imagery of any kind is inherently discriminatory against women?
> Is this a commonly accepted viewpoint in academic feminism? Is there an
> easy way to draw a line between discriminatory and non-discriminatory
> imagery? (i.e. is a beach selfie of a woman in a bikini posted to Instagram
> discriminatory, regardless of intent?).
>
> Thanks for any references someone can provide where I might find answers
> to those questions.
>
> ~Nathan
>
>
> ___
> 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

[Gendergap] topless cheesecake on the en.wiki Main Page

[Ryan Kaldari]

Considering the complaints that we got from female editors when this photo
was run on the Commons main page,[1] I imagine there may be some people on
this list who would be interested in the following discussion:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Picture_of_the_day#Discussion_regarding_possible_picture_of_the_day:_Michele_Merkin

1.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Picture_of_the_day/Archive_1#POTD_for_October_5

Ryan Kaldari
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Seeking advice on how to talk to other lists about sex-issue.

[Ryan Kaldari]

The attribute that is being assigned by property 21 on Wikidata (as it is
actually being used) is not sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity. It
is simply gender, and should be labeled as such. For the majority of
people, we don't actually know for sure what their sex, sexual orientation,
or gender identity is (especially for historical figures), but we do know
their gender, i.e. the role they assume within society. I really don't see
why this is even controversial.

Ryan Kaldari


On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Risker  wrote:

> I remember seeing something about this on Wikidata and just not having
> enough hours in the day to comment at the time.
>
> There are three issues being intermingled here:
>
> *Sex, which is a biological marker determined by primary and secondary
> sexual characteristics such as breasts, penises, uteruses, etc.  As such,
> the "sex" category is mostly correct, but should add 'unknown'.
>
> *Sexual orientation, which identifies the manner in which the subject
> expresses their sexuality.  This would include heterosexual,
> homosexual/lesbian/gay, transsexual, bisexual, asexual, pansexual, and a
> host of other variables.
>
> *Gender identity, which is almost always male or female, but is not
> directly related to sex as identified in the first definition. Thus gender
> identity includes males who identify as females, intersex who identify as
> male or female, females who identify as male, females who identify as
> female, males who identify as male.  Elements of sexual orientation may
> also play a role, as in bisexuals who identify as both male and female, or
> as neither male nor female.
>
> It is important that assumptions not be made, particularly for sexual
> orientation or gender identity.  Most notable people do not discuss their
> orientation or gender identity.  I also would suggest that it be considered
> perfectly acceptable to leave those categories blank for the vast majority
> of subjects and include the response only where the subject has personally
> confirmed their sexual orientation or gender identity.  Frankly, this is
> pretty much none of our business and is only notable where the subject says
> it is.
>
> Risker/Anne
> On 25 October 2013 13:30, Ryan Kaldari  wrote:
>
>>  By the way, I started a proposal to change 'sex' to 'gender' back in
>> May:
>>
>> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property_talk:P21#Rename_.28en.29_label_.27sex.27-.3E.27gender.27
>> But so far virtually no one has commented on it.
>>
>> Ryan Kaldari
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:
>>
>>>  Hey Max,
>>> The sex property at Wikidata definitely needs to be changed. This has
>>> nothing to do with the gender gap. The terminology is simply wrong. Let's
>>> continue this conversation at
>>> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property_talk:P21.
>>>
>>> Ryan Kaldari
>>>
>>>
>>>  On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Klein,Max  wrote:
>>>
>>>>   Hello Gendergappians,
>>>>
>>>> I was recently chatting on Wikidata-l about the model that exists on
>>>> Wikidata for classifying sex [1].
>>>>
>>>> If you didn't know of Wikidata, people are supposed to be classified as
>>>> Male, Female, or Intersex. I once did some research on the composition
>>>> Wikidtata given that classification [2] then Markus Kroetzscher
>>>> investigated linking personal names to sex using this data [3].
>>>>
>>>> Well when Markus released his research on-list, I applauded his
>>>> innovative methods and techniques. I also wanted to remind that forcing
>>>> this binary or trinary classification onto people is not something that the
>>>> software is making us do, but rather the us inflicting our bias onto the
>>>> database. At that point I received a dismissive answer that if I wanted to
>>>> talk about the gendergap that I should this mailing list, and that my
>>>> comments were off topic. Then another user responded saying that my
>>>> comments were very much on topic, and that's where the conversation
>>>> stopped.
>>>>
>>>> I haven't wanted to continue the thread because of the emotional
>>>> investment in what seems to be a fruitless debate. Although recently I was
>>>> chatting to a friend of mine about my dissatisfaction who said something I
>>>> really liked:
>>>>
>>>> "basically since the categories are male, female, intersex, that means
>>>>

Re: [Gendergap] Seeking advice on how to talk to other lists about sex-issue.

[Ryan Kaldari]

By the way, I started a proposal to change 'sex' to 'gender' back in May:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property_talk:P21#Rename_.28en.29_label_.27sex.27-.3E.27gender.27
But so far virtually no one has commented on it.

Ryan Kaldari


On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:

> Hey Max,
> The sex property at Wikidata definitely needs to be changed. This has
> nothing to do with the gender gap. The terminology is simply wrong. Let's
> continue this conversation at
> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property_talk:P21.
>
> Ryan Kaldari
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Klein,Max  wrote:
>
>>  Hello Gendergappians,
>>
>> I was recently chatting on Wikidata-l about the model that exists on
>> Wikidata for classifying sex [1].
>>
>> If you didn't know of Wikidata, people are supposed to be classified as
>> Male, Female, or Intersex. I once did some research on the composition
>> Wikidtata given that classification [2] then Markus Kroetzscher
>> investigated linking personal names to sex using this data [3].
>>
>> Well when Markus released his research on-list, I applauded his
>> innovative methods and techniques. I also wanted to remind that forcing
>> this binary or trinary classification onto people is not something that the
>> software is making us do, but rather the us inflicting our bias onto the
>> database. At that point I received a dismissive answer that if I wanted to
>> talk about the gendergap that I should this mailing list, and that my
>> comments were off topic. Then another user responded saying that my
>> comments were very much on topic, and that's where the conversation
>> stopped.
>>
>> I haven't wanted to continue the thread because of the emotional
>> investment in what seems to be a fruitless debate. Although recently I was
>> chatting to a friend of mine about my dissatisfaction who said something I
>> really liked:
>>
>> "basically since the categories are male, female, intersex, that means
>> 1) you are talking about a person's gonads, not their gender identity,
>> which means 2) applying that category to most historical figures should
>> count as "original research" it's not like anybody's done a major
>> interdisciplinary study to confirm the chromosomes of every historical
>> figure we aren't even sure shakespeare was a real person. how in the world
>> should we guess what medical conditions he had in conclusion, "sex: male
>> female intersex" is utter nonsense"
>>
>>  I would like to send the point to the list, but am fearful that it will
>> be muddied again in that this is "gendergap issue not a wikidata one" when
>> I am really just trying to talk about classification schemes.
>>
>> Do you have any advice on whether a) I should re-engage the debate, and
>> if so b) how to best deliver my sentiments?
>>
>> [1] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P21
>> [2] http://hangingtogether.org/?p=2877
>> [3] http://korrekt.org/page/Note:Sex_Distributions_in_Research
>>
>> Best,
>>
>>  Maximilian Klein
>> Wikipedian in Residence, OCLC
>> +17074787023
>>
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Seeking advice on how to talk to other lists about sex-issue.

[Ryan Kaldari]

Hey Max,
The sex property at Wikidata definitely needs to be changed. This has
nothing to do with the gender gap. The terminology is simply wrong. Let's
continue this conversation at
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property_talk:P21.

Ryan Kaldari


On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Klein,Max  wrote:

>  Hello Gendergappians,
>
> I was recently chatting on Wikidata-l about the model that exists on
> Wikidata for classifying sex [1].
>
> If you didn't know of Wikidata, people are supposed to be classified as
> Male, Female, or Intersex. I once did some research on the composition
> Wikidtata given that classification [2] then Markus Kroetzscher
> investigated linking personal names to sex using this data [3].
>
> Well when Markus released his research on-list, I applauded his innovative
> methods and techniques. I also wanted to remind that forcing this binary or
> trinary classification onto people is not something that the software is
> making us do, but rather the us inflicting our bias onto the database. At
> that point I received a dismissive answer that if I wanted to talk about
> the gendergap that I should this mailing list, and that my comments were
> off topic. Then another user responded saying that my comments were very
> much on topic, and that's where the conversation stopped.
>
> I haven't wanted to continue the thread because of the emotional
> investment in what seems to be a fruitless debate. Although recently I was
> chatting to a friend of mine about my dissatisfaction who said something I
> really liked:
>
> "basically since the categories are male, female, intersex, that means 1)
> you are talking about a person's gonads, not their gender identity, which
> means 2) applying that category to most historical figures should count as
> "original research" it's not like anybody's done a major interdisciplinary
> study to confirm the chromosomes of every historical figure we aren't even
> sure shakespeare was a real person. how in the world should we guess what
> medical conditions he had in conclusion, "sex: male female intersex" is
> utter nonsense"
>
>  I would like to send the point to the list, but am fearful that it will
> be muddied again in that this is "gendergap issue not a wikidata one" when
> I am really just trying to talk about classification schemes.
>
> Do you have any advice on whether a) I should re-engage the debate, and if
> so b) how to best deliver my sentiments?
>
> [1] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P21
> [2] http://hangingtogether.org/?p=2877
> [3] http://korrekt.org/page/Note:Sex_Distributions_in_Research
>
> Best,
>
>  Maximilian Klein
> Wikipedian in Residence, OCLC
> +17074787023
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Gendergap] Minor explosion on dawiki

[Ryan Kaldari]

While I personally don't mind the color pink, I have to say that the hot
pink globe logo makes me cry a little inside.

Ryan Kaldari


On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 5:04 AM, Russavia wrote:

> From: https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_for_kvinder in
> the info on WikiWednesday, part of what is done is:
>
> "Sladre om de andre brugere"
>
> Bwahahahahaha, if that's not reinforcing stereotypes, what is? :)
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 7:28 PM, Ole Palnatoke Andersen
>  wrote:
> > You never know with allergies - it could be a recent development :-)
> >
> > More seriously: I guess pink is given the connotations of cutesy,
> > little-girl-donesn't-know-a-thing and such.
> >
> > -Ole
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Russavia 
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> And here is Sanne wearing pink badges --
> >>
> >>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/7405752@N06/2513156755/in/photolist-4Q5zWT-4Q9PEs
> >>
> >> And here is Sanne standing directly next to some big arsed pink
> >> balloons --
> >> http://www.flickr.com/photos/7405752@N06/2513983346/in/photolist-4Q9PEs
> >>
> >> I am guessing that she isn't the one with the problem with pink?
> >>
> >> If so, *facepalm*
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 7:17 PM, Ole Palnatoke Andersen
> >>  wrote:
> >> > Yesterday, stand up comedienne Sanne Søndergaard* ** noticed
> "Wikipedia
> >> > for
> >> > kvinder"***, dawiki's portal for women, and her reaction was
> "WTF?"
> >> >
> >> > The discussion on Facebook has had its ups and downs. One particular
> >> > down is
> >> > a lot of name-calling amongst the women in the discussion. It appears,
> >> > however, that some people are allergic to pink, and that some people
> >> > find
> >> > the text condescending and patronising.
> >> >
> >> > The kerfluffle has caused quite a lot of views on the portal - on
> >> > ordinary
> >> > days, it has ~20-30 hits; yesterday 5159. *
> >> >
> >> > Oh, and at WikiWednesday the day after tomorrow, we'll probably talk
> >> > about
> >> > pinkness and stuff.**
> >> >
> >> > Regards,
> >> > Ole
> >> >
> >> > *) http://solosanne.dk/
> >> > **) https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanne_S%C3%B8ndergaard
> >> > ***) https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_for_kvinder
> >> > ) https://www.facebook.com/SanneSonder/posts/609718455741119
> >> > *)
> >> > http://stats.grok.se/da/latest90/Wikipedia:Wikipedia%20for%20kvinder
> >> > **)
> >> > https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiWednesday/2013#Oktober
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > http://palnatoke.org * @palnatoke * +4522934588
> >> >
> >> > ___
> >> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://palnatoke.org * @palnatoke * +4522934588
> >
> > ___
> > 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
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Changing the Chelsea Manning article (and how women were shouted down)

[Ryan Kaldari]

Looks like the Chelsea Manning article has been changed back to Bradley
Manning:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Chelsea_Manning/August_2013_move_request

There is still a discussion ongoing about which name to lead the article
text with, however:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bradley_Manning#First_sentence

Ryan Kaldari


On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 6:18 AM, Carol Moore dc wrote:

> There have been similar problems at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**
> Chelsea_Manning <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelsea_Manning>
> Obviously there have been a number of comments that are obviously
> transphobic. However, there also have been repeated false charges of
> transphobia against those who cite good policy reasons for not changing the
> name.  I personally oppose the change to Chelsea as premature for a number
> of reasons, FYI.
>
> And there are good reasons to question what happened at that article
> process wise (the policy reasons for and against the change are discussed
> ad nauseam at the talk page where editors are just trying to get it changed
> back to Bradley Manning, though I think that's morphed into a final
> discussion - hard to tell!! ):
> * an admin changed the title to Chelsea Manning with no discussion on the
> talk page, given it's a controversial move in such a high publicity figure
> *the admin then spoke to the press about it, wrote a blog entry with their
> opinion, tweeted about it, and got even more media publicity for their blog
> entry and/or tweets
> *I would not be surprised if a number of editors also alerted the media to
> her writings and actions in order to try to influence the outcome of a
> Wikipedia policy decision
> *I don't know how much off wiki canvassing there was, but I did start a
> list of wikiprojects alerted, so at least that aspect of WP:Canvass would
> be covered
> *an editor threatened anyone moving the title back would become a minor
> celebrity for a few days, a threat only to those whose actual names were
> used, which implied outing (there's a subsection of the larger ANI thread
> on that threat and related insults)
>
> Wonder if I'll get shouted down *here* yet again for expressing my
> opinions... sigh...
>
> CM
>
>
>
>
> On 8/24/2013 7:34 AM, Helga Hansen wrote:
>
>> In the German Wikipedia a huge discussion has erupted over the question
>> how to change the Wikipedia page for Chelsea Manning and it's another
>> textbook example over how to drive women of Wikipedia. You can see the gory
>> details here (in German of course): http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/**
>> Diskussion:Bradley_Manning<http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diskussion:Bradley_Manning>
>>
>> I don't want to discuss this because it has already exhausted me to no
>> end but it's another example of “How not to deal with women” and especially
>> “How not to deal with transwomen” and it's important to understand the
>> dynamics.
>>
>> After her statement on Today, one user went over the article, changing it
>> from Bradley to Chelsea. When discussions about this started, two other
>> users set up a section "Namensänderung" that addressed some of the
>> criticism (confusion over names, before „Breanna“ was mentioned, how the
>> support network has handled the name question) and provided sources. They
>> did this on an etherpad and then moved the complete section into Wikipedia.
>> By the way a modus operandi that I have heard from several women, to
>> minimize chances of their work being deleted again.
>> One admin locked the article title to Chelsea Manning. Some friends told
>> me how happy they were to see the page presenting her in this way.
>>
>> Over the night, though, the discussion exploded. Changes were made by the
>> minute, or rather, the article was reverted. Every try, to change something
>> back or to reason with people was made impossible. To keep up, you would
>> have had to be there, writing and fighting not only during the day but also
>> the night. That is just not possible for anybody except students.
>>
>> Somebody mentioned that “commonly referred to names” were ok to use, so I
>> tried to get people to acknowledge that the final article will influence
>> how Manning is referred to in German speaking countries. No avail. Instead,
>> the amount of transphobic statements was disgusting. People wanting to
>> check her therapy progress, ID documents or in her pants. I cannot blame
>> anybody who doesn't want to deal with this sort of violence.
>>
>> Every try to get people consider US laws and customs, which differ from
>> much stricter German transgender laws and guidelines, was t

Re: [Gendergap] Sex Ratios in Wikidata, Wikipedias, and VIAF

[Ryan Kaldari]

Ack, they were also defining 'transgender' as a synonym of intersex! 
I've removed it for now.


Ryan Kaldari

On 5/24/13 8:31 AM, Jodi Schneider wrote:

There are lots of related discussions on the talk page:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property_talk:P21

Translation seems like one of the major issues!

So far, sex and gender are not distinguished as far as I can tell.

-Jodi

On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Powers 
<mailto:ltpowers_w...@rochester.rr.com>> wrote:


I wonder if that's a translation issue.  English Wikipedia is mostly
concerned with gender, but other languages might only consider
sex, or use
the same word for both concepts.


Powers  &8^]



> -----Original Message-
> From: Ryan Kaldari [mailto:rkald...@wikimedia.org
<mailto:rkald...@wikimedia.org>]
> Sent: Tuesday 21 May 2013 19:07
> To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
> Subject: [Gendergap] Sex Ratios in Wikidata, Wikipedias, and VIAF
>
> An interesting blog post about sex ratio data from Wikipedia and
Wikidata:
> http://hangingtogether.org/?p=2877
>
> Interestingly, Wikidata only allows assigning a 'sex' to a
person, not a
> 'gender'.
>
> Ryan Kaldari
>



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto: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


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Sex Ratios in Wikidata, Wikipedias, and VIAF

[Ryan Kaldari]

An interesting blog post about sex ratio data from Wikipedia and Wikidata:
http://hangingtogether.org/?p=2877

Interestingly, Wikidata only allows assigning a 'sex' to a person, not a 
'gender'.


Ryan Kaldari

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Women on the list: what have you been editing lately?

[Ryan Kaldari]

Wow, that's an amazing list! I wish all artists had lists like that.

Ryan Kaldari

On 5/18/13 9:35 AM, Jane Darnell wrote:

Good luck with the AfC backlog Sarah - it depresses me to just think
about that.

Here in Haarlem we are celebrating the 100 year anniversary of the
Frans Hals Museum. There are copies of Frans Hals paintings placed
strategically around town to show what the museum has to offer. One of
the men who is featured in 3 paintings in the museum was plastered all
over town in the bus stops on a poster. His portrait as an individual
is not here though, it's in Cincinnati. Haarlem basically only has the
group portraits left, the rest have all left town. There are still
over 70 people featured in those group portraits though, and I thought
it would be cool to reunite them on wiki with their individual
portraits.

After talking about it for 2 years, I have finally created the list of
Frans Hals paintings, and though I promised myself I would be done by
the museum's "birthday" of May 14th, of course people keep reminding
me now about other paintings to include.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_paintings_by_Frans_Hals

2013/5/18, Sarah Stierch :

I figure it's high time to start a positive (or call to action oriented)
focus thread again that is focused on empowering women on this list to
share.

Women - and those who identify as - what have you been editing lately?

---

I've been working hard at building my "to do" lists for the crowdsourcing
aspect of my World Digital Library project. I miss having time to edit and
write larger articles, but, that isn't in the cards yet.

On the flipside, I've been helping out at Articles for Creation again. We
have a backlog of over 1000!!!
  :)

Sarah

--
--
*Sarah Stierch*
*Museumist, open culture advocate, and Wikimedian*
*www.sarahstierch.com*


___
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

Re: [Gendergap] Don't let the man get you down

[Ryan Kaldari]

Awesome! I mean... Radical!

Ryan Kaldari

On 5/13/13 8:03 PM, Sarah Stierch wrote:

All the more reason why I love free knowledge and open sharing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Angela_Davis_enters_Royce_Hall_for_first_lecture_October_7_1969.jpg

An image of Angela Davis, never published until recently, now 
available under an open license.


"Radical simply means 'grasping things at the root." - Angela Davis

-Sarah

--
--
*Sarah Stierch*
*/Museumist, open culture advocate, and Wikimedian/*
*/www.sarahstierch.com <http://www.sarahstierch.com>/*


___
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

Re: [Gendergap] Topless image retention -don't give up

[Ryan Kaldari]

On 5/13/13 5:03 PM, Pete Forsyth wrote:



So images like this one would have to be deleted:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Michelle_and_Barack_Obama_paint_at_a_Habitat_for_Humanity_site.jpg


That image should be tagged with {{consent|published}}, which
states the following:
" This media was copied from the source indicated, which adheres
to professional editorial standards, allowing the status of
consent to be reasonably inferred."
Thus there is no reason it should be deleted. There are several
such options available with the consent template.


This certainly seems like an improvement to me (in terms of due 
diligence and providing the reader with useful information) -- but how 
does it address the image's compatibility with the board resolution? 
It remains true that all 5 people were in a private setting, and did 
not (to our knowledge) express their consent to be published on 
Wikimedia Commons. (Or perhaps mere "consent to be published" is what 
the board meant - ?)


That's a good point. I wonder if it would be useful to circle back 
around with the Board and see if they would be interested in a more 
realistic "baby-steps" approach to the issue of consent.


Ryan Kaldari
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Topless image retention -don't give up

[Ryan Kaldari]

On 5/13/13 2:58 PM, Pete Forsyth wrote:
there is no broadly agreed model of what that consent form might look 
like.

Actually there is: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Consent


So images like this one would have to be deleted:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Michelle_and_Barack_Obama_paint_at_a_Habitat_for_Humanity_site.jpg


That image should be tagged with {{consent|published}}, which states the 
following:
" This media was copied from the source indicated, which adheres to 
professional editorial standards, allowing the status of consent to be 
reasonably inferred."
Thus there is no reason it should be deleted. There are several such 
options available with the consent template.


Ryan Kaldari
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] avoiding another categorygate

[Ryan Kaldari]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Feminism#Help_cleaning_up_Category:Prostitutes

Ryan Kaldari

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Topless image retention -don't give up

[Ryan Kaldari]

On 5/7/13 9:57 AM, Russavia wrote:

Frankly, I don't know why this is a "feminist" issue; rather than an
issue of common sense.


Agreed. I often find it is counter-productive to frame these sort of 
debates in terms of feminism/sexism/etc. This immediately triggers the 
censorship-defense mechanism in those who believe that feminists want to 
ban nudity from the internet (or something like that). You're not going 
to convince these editors that it is important to examine the biased 
representation of women on Wikipedia. What you might convince them of is 
that Gandhi is a more notable vegetarian than Serenity, the exotic 
dancer. Or that a photograph of a 3rd trimester pregnancy is a better 
illustration of 'pregnancy' than a photograph of a 1st trimester 
pregnancy. In other words, if you don't have to debate the nudity, 
don't. It will only steer the discussion into a culture war in which you 
will be hopelessly outnumbered.


Ryan 'Mansplainer' Kaldari


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Joseph Reagle on Wikipedia's category taxonomy

[Ryan Kaldari]

On the issue of using tags instead of categories (which is mentioned in 
Joseph Reagle's article), I've been involved in some discussions on this 
issue. The two major hurdles for this are how do you make tagging work 
across languages (for projects like Commons and Meta), and figuring out 
whether tags should augment or replace the categorization system. The 
first problem may be solved by Wikidata; the 2nd problem is probably 
solved by using both for a while and then eventually abandoning 
categories. There's a possibility that the multimedia development team 
that is being spun up over the next few months may try to tackle this, 
but there's nothing concrete on the agenda yet.


Ryan Kaldari

On 4/29/13 11:15 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 5:43 AM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case 
mailto:danc...@frontiernet.net>> wrote:


>This system keeps the categories more straightforward, and pretty
well avoids the sort of subtle bias Wikipedia >has >been caught
with here. Defining the precise intersection of interest is up to
the user.

But the corresponding weakness is that it depends on the editors
hitting all the right categories to work properly (as well as the
tool itself, which as heavy toolserver users know is not always
the case). Someone may categorize in two of three but not the
third (guess which one might get forgotten?)



Compare it to the weaknesses of the current category system. 98% of 
editors don't know what they are doing. Categories and subcategories 
are applied inconsistently all the time. Nobody has an overview of the 
entire tree structure, or even a major branch of it. Something that is 
a subcategory of American novelists today may stop being one tomorrow, 
just by dint of a single edit, and no one would be the wiser (unless 
they keep hundreds of categories on their watchlist). The category 
tree (or weave, as categories can have several parents) changes daily, 
with categories created, renamed, recategorised, and deleted. There 
are incessant arguments about how to name, categorise and diffuse 
categories, and about perceived iniquities. Wiki-gnomes spend days 
working and undoing each other's work. It's insane.


Using a defined set of basic tags in combination with something like 
CatScan – ported across to the Foundation server if you like, and 
given a friendly front-end with shortcuts to the most common searches 
– would do away with that.



___
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

Re: [Gendergap] Categories hit NPR

[Ryan Kaldari]

Sigh. Of course they only took my two quotes about how there's sexism on 
Wikipedia, and not a word of my explanation about how categorization on 
Wikipedia works and how half of what Ms. Filipacchi wrote was 
misleading. I also talked extensively about the "real" sexist problems 
on Wikipedia (whitewashing of rape and domestic violence articles by 
men's rights groups, over-representation of female porn stars, 
under-representation of female academics, etc.) and how these issues 
have been largely ignored by the media. Of course they were still 
ignored, so I guess it was wasted effort :P


Ryan Kaldari

On 4/29/13 6:09 PM, Sarah Stierch wrote:

Gender gap's & WikiProject Feminism's own Kaldari is interviewed here:

http://www.npr.org/2013/04/29/179850435/what-s-in-a-category-women-novelists-spark-wiki-controversy

and User:Qworty in a not so pleasant light here:

http://www.salon.com/2013/04/29/wikipedias_shame/

O_o


--
*Sarah Stierch*
*/Museumist and open culture advocate/*
>>Visit sarahstierch.com <http://sarahstierch.com><<


___
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

Re: [Gendergap] Liz Henry on women novelists, English Wikipedia, and labelling

[Ryan Kaldari]

If people are concerned about sexism in Wikipedia categories they should 
be drawing attention to edits like this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elizabeth_Gillies&curid=19682193&diff=536982107&oldid=536980531

While the rest of the world is moving away from gender-specific job 
names (like policeman and actress), Wikipedia is moving in the opposite 
direction. That seems like a much worse problem than categorizing women 
as women.


Ryan Kaldari

On 4/25/13 11:34 PM, Shlomi Fish wrote:

Hi all,

On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 13:56:39 -0400
Sumana Harihareswara  wrote:


Wikimedia community member Liz Henry blogs here:
http://bookmaniac.org/journalists-dont-understand-wikipedia-sometimes/
and does a little bit of digging into edit histories.

"Just from these three samples, it does not seem that there is any
particular movement among a group of Wikipedia editors to remove women
from the “novelists” category and put them in a special women category
instead. I would say that the general leaning, rather, is to stop people
who would like to label women writers as women writers *in addition* to
labeling them as writers, claiming there is no need for Category:
American women writers at all and that it is evidence of bias to
identify them by gender. ... The sexist thing we
should be up in arms about isn’t labelling women as women! It’s the
efforts to delete entire categories (like Haitian women writers, for
example) because someone has decided that that meta-information is
unnecessary “ghettoization”..."

Seems like good write-up and I tend to agree. It's too bad there was so much
misunderstanding in the media about it.

Regards,

Shlomi Fish




___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Relevant Post “About Female Action Heroes” + Thoughts about empowering women and youth

[Ryan Kaldari]

On 3/24/13 6:32 AM, Shlomi Fish wrote:

And all that while not depriving themselves of sexuality and sexiness among
members of the appropriate sexes (MOTAS), in part because being sexually
attractive (and naturally - not only physically) is indicative of
competence and values, rather than the opposite as was sometimes implied
recently.


You had me up until this point. How is being sexually attractive 
indicative of competence and values? By this logic, only Miss/Mr. 
Universe winners should run for President.


Ryan Kaldari

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Do the April Fool's Day jokes on English Wikipedia's front page deter women editors?

[Ryan Kaldari]

The April Fools DYKs are pretty tame compared to the ones we used to get 
from Bedford (which eventually led to a wheel war). I just wish the 
April Fools ones were actually funny.


Ryan Kaldari

On 1/15/13 11:23 PM, Risker wrote:
On 15 January 2013 21:09, Sarah Stierch <mailto:sarah.stie...@gmail.com>> wrote:


http://thewikipedian.net/2013/01/15/wikifoolery/

" April Fools' Day
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_Fools%27_Day>is still about 2
1/2 months off, butWikipedians are already planning

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Today%27s_featured_article/requests#Icelandic_Phallological_Museum_on_April_Fools.27_Day.3F>for
the big day. Every year, editors who maintain the front page
arrange for silly, sometimes misleading, and even mildly offensive
articles to run during the 24-hour period covering April 1st. But
aswe noted in April 2011
<http://thewikipedian.net/2011/04/01/wiki-fools/>, not everyone is
happy that such a serious project as Wikipedia, one focused on
curating the world's knowledge, spends one day per year kind of,
sort of, doing the opposite. And as of today, there's athread on
Jimbo Wales' Talk page

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#April_Fool.27s_Day_-_an_opportunity_about_to_be_squandered_again>hosting
a debate on the practice. This time in the mix: whether the
juvenile pranks contribute to Wikipedia'snoted gender imbalance

<http://thewikipedian.net/2012/11/08/all-the-women-who-edit-wiki-throw-your-hands-up-at-me/>.
Best comments so far: from female editors defending standing up
for "women's ability to both use and appreciate dirty or
giggle-inducing language"."


I don't know that they contribute to the gender imbalance - although 
in fairness the women who make it as far as adminship and discussions 
on Jimbo's page tend to be unusually thick-skinned (I mean it as a 
compliment!).  I think that the puerile proposals being bandied about 
are likely to make Wikipedia look like it's run by, well...juvenile 
geeks who haven't got past giggling every time they hear someone say a 
"bad word".  It would be different if these things were actually 
funny, but they aren't.


Although I think it probably says something about the general 
mentality of a significant portion of our editorship what was being 
proposed for April Fool's day - sex, body parts, and swearing.  Hmmm.



Risker/Anne


___
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

Re: [Gendergap] Excellent Women's Portal on French & Portuguese Wikis, missing in the English Wiki

[Ryan Kaldari]

English Wikipedia tends to have more specific portals than many of the 
other Wikipedias. For example, Women's sport, Feminism, Jane Austen, and 
even Celine Dion have their own portals. Typically, portals are created 
by corresponding WikiProjects. Although English Wikipedia has several 
women-related WikiProjects (Women's history, Women's sport, Women 
scientists, Feminism, etc.), there is currently no "Women" WikiProject. 
There are arguments for and against creating such a project...

For:
* Would facilitate communication between the more specific women-related 
WikiProjects

* Would facilitate the creation and maintenance of a Women Portal
* Could potentially spin-off other women-specific WikiProjects
Against:
* The scope of the project would be enormous and potentially difficult 
to organize
* Parent or "meta" WikiProjects tend to have lower levels of 
participation than more specific WikiProjects
* Considering the small number of active female editors on Wikipedia, it 
might cannibalize energy from the other women-specific WikiProjects.

I would love to hear other people's thoughts on this.

Ryan Kaldari

On 1/15/13 2:43 PM, Sylvia Ventura wrote:

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

Disclaimer: I'm a newbie (please be gentle)

I'll be brief. I've made my first (minor) edit on Wikipedia in 
December and have since then try to learn as much as possible about 
the movement and the various projects. I'm still a long way to go.


I'm particularly interested in the work done around Women's 
Participation (contributors) and Women's Voices (the actual content 
covering women topics/work). I believe the teaHouse and WikiWomen 
Collaborative are a huge step in helping onboard women contributors. 
While perusing other language Wikis to see how the "Women 
participation/content" is handled, I found the French Portal Femmes 
<https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portail:Femmes> and the Portuguese 
Portal Mulheres <https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Mulheres> to be 
well designed and a useful gateway for content, it clearly catalogues 
and consolidates women related knowledge in one space. I didn't find 
an equivalent portal in the English version, is there a reason not to 
have something like this on the english Wikipedia?


I see a couple of valid reasons to having a Women Portal in English 
(particularly while the topic is being built and major gaps are being 
identified/filled). One is to offer a quick inventory of content, 
where one can see what's already covered and what's missing (without 
having to actively search for it). The other is that 'forcing' some 
level of content structure will help rally the community around 
specific topics to focus on (gaps), and possibly identify new ones. A 
successful example is Sarah Stierch WikiProject Women Scientists 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_scientists>, 
it's a great project and it should sit in a larger portal with other 
master headers to Women in History, Women in Art, Women in Politics, 
Women in Academia, Women in Technology  all of which features the 
names, photos, bios, subgroups, and links to their work. This 
structure applies to any group/topic that is underrepresented - it 
makes it easier for newcomers (intimidated) and experts (busy) to 
identify areas they can contribute to right the way. How do I go about 
doing this?


So much for being brief :)

Sylvia



___
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

Re: [Gendergap] Civility enforcement RfC Questionnaire

[Ryan Kaldari]

After you finish your questionnaire, don't forget to add...
[[Category:Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Civility enforcement/Questions]]
to the bottom. Otherwise, it will never be seen.

Ryan Kaldari

On 10/30/12 10:50 AM, Carol Moore DC wrote:
It did take a while, but there really IS a lot of opposition to 
civility and the more we fill it out to the end - where they ask for 
suggestions - the better!


Mine was that they have a chart or much clearer examples of what is 
uncivil and proper sanctions for it to guide editors, complainers and 
admins.


On 10/30/2012 2:32 AM, Sarah Stierch wrote:
Only does Wikipedia create such a complex system to exploring 
this "You have to create your own subpage.." oy vey...!


Thanks Kaldari for letting us know this exists..! (regardless)

-Sarah

On 10/29/12 10:37 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:
The 2nd phase of the Civility Request for Comment is now live at 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Civility_enforcement/Questionnaire


I believe this issue is relevant to gendergap since how we treat 
each other on Wikipedia affects our ability to retain new editors, 
and if we don't retain significant numbers of new editors, we don't 
have much hope of improving the gender gap.


The organizers of the RfC are hoping to attract wide participation, 
so please fill out the questionnaire and post your responses if you 
have the time.


Ryan Kaldari




___
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

[Gendergap] Civility enforcement RfC Questionnaire

[Ryan Kaldari]

The 2nd phase of the Civility Request for Comment is now live at 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Civility_enforcement/Questionnaire


I believe this issue is relevant to gendergap since how we treat each 
other on Wikipedia affects our ability to retain new editors, and if we 
don't retain significant numbers of new editors, we don't have much hope 
of improving the gender gap.


The organizers of the RfC are hoping to attract wide participation, so 
please fill out the questionnaire and post your responses if you have 
the time.


Ryan Kaldari
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Ada Lovelace Day organised by Wikimedia UK - 19 October 2012, London

[Ryan Kaldari]

Just uploaded a new file that might be useful :)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Engraved_portrait_of_Ada_Lovelace.jpg

Ryan Kaldari

On 9/17/12 8:49 AM, Daria Cybulska wrote:

Dear all,

It's Ada Lovelace Day on 16 October and it's most suitable for 
Wikimedia UK to get involved. The day exists to celebrate the 
contributions of women in the fields of science, technology, 
engineering and mathematics. As you may know, Ada Lovelace is 
considered the first programmer, due to her work on Charles Babbage's 
analytical engine. As such, she's someone we can very much hold up as 
a role model. Wikimedia UK is organising a Women in Science themed 
editing event for Ada Lovelace Day on*Friday 19 October* 2012 and 
would like to invite you to attend!


We have organised a group 'Edit-a-thon' to improve Wikipedia articles 
about women in science, held at the Royal Society's library, London, 
2:30-6pm. We had a very high response from the academic community, and 
we filled many more spaces than expected! However, there are still a 
couple of places free for people who would like to help train new 
contributors - please get in touch if you are interested. There will 
also be opportunities to get involved online, which we will publish at 
our Wikimedia UK event's page 
<http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ada_Lovelace_Day_2012> (see below).


Following the Edit-a-thon there will be an panel discussion with Uta 
Frith from the Royal Society and other female scientists on women in 
science (the focus will be much broader than just the representation 
of the topic on Wikipedia). The panel discussion will take place 
from* 6:30pm - 8:00pm, *and you are most welcome to attend - there are 
still free places available, so please feel free to register here

*http://royalsociety.org/events/2012/wikipedia-workshop/*

Wikimedia UK also has a page for the event, which you can see here 
http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ada_Lovelace_Day_2012


Hope to see many of you there.

Best,
Daria


--
Daria Cybulska - Events Organiser, Wikimedia UK
+44 (0) 207 065 0994 
+44 7803 505 170 
--

Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England 
and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. 
Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, 
London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a 
global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the 
Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).


*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal 
control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*





___
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

Re: [Gendergap] Awareness of gender gap at Olympics

[Ryan Kaldari]

On 7/30/12 2:14 PM, Laura Hale wrote:
Did you hear any stories about how Patrick Mills left the NBA early in 
order to spend more time training with the national team in order to 
try to get gold?  No.  Of course not. The men are not expected to win 
gold.  They don't want to hold early training camps.  No one expects 
them to win even medal.  The Australian question should be: Why are we 
even bothering to send the men?   They should sit home.  The 
Australian media largely does not care about them.


Of course they have to send the men! They're the ones that 
really count. And why aren't the women wearing skirts like they're 
supposed to!


The bigger Australian gender stories are actually Michelle Jenneke's 
butt jiggle, (which ironically, the USA paid more attention to then 
Australia) and Leisel Jones fat story, which was a very deliberate 
story on the part of the Australian media. Media watch shows how this 
story was crafted: 
http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s3556770.htm/


Reminds me of the U.S. obsession with the appearance of female 
politicians, e.g. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Michelle_Obama%27s_arms


That said, Wikipedia's main page has generally been dominated by 
female Olympians instead of male Olympians on Did You Know.  If you 
want to submit for DYK about women, I highly urge you to.  It is one 
of the best ways to highlight topics that might otherwise get 
overlooked because of systematic bias.


Thanks for the tip. I did a couple of female athlete articles recently, 
but forgot to DYK them :(


Ryan Kaldari

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] recognition of gender gap*s* (in the plural) Re: LGBT mailing list

[Ryan Kaldari]

Just to clarify, Phillipe expressed concern that there were only 4 
people listed as potential participants. The main objection was from 
MZMcBride (who is not associated with the WMF), who expressed concern 
that the list would be used for POV-pushing. Subsequently, Sébastien 
Santoro and two WMF staff members offered to help moderate the list to 
insure it would be neutral, and Varnent clarified that there were 
several other people interested in the list. Phillipe withdrew his 
objection and the list was created forthwith. Of course since this all 
transpired over Bugzilla, it took a week to play out, which is longer 
than normal, but I'm not sure it's fair to say that it was "difficult to 
bring WF to allow the list to be created".


Ryan Kaldari

On 7/1/12 10:24 PM, koltzenb...@w4w.net wrote:

Hi Tom, hi @all


Wikimedia have decided to allow the list to be created

since we are addressing not only one gender gap but, seemingly quite a few, 
including those that come alonf
the lines of what has come to be called sexual orientarion, I have a question 
about the creation process of
the new list. I recently heard elsewhere that

it was difficult to bring WF to "allow" the list to be created in the frame of 
lists.wikimedia.org?
how come?

thanks
Claudia

On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 00:09:19 +0100, Tom Morris wrote

On Sunday, 1 July 2012 at 22:30, Tom Morris wrote:

I'm happy to announce that a new Wikimedia LGBT mailing list has been setup. 
For the time being, it is

being hosted on lists.wikiqueer.org (http://lists.wikiqueer.org).

http://lists.wikiqueer.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-lgbt

The list is for discussion of possible future LGBT outreach and partnership 
work, increasing the coverage

of LGBT history, issues and culture, and any other issues that specifically 
affect LGBT editors.

You don't have to be lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender to join.

A barely discernible amount of time after Gregory launched it on the
WikiQueer servers, Wikimedia have decided to allow the list to be created
on lists.wikimedia.org instead.

Please feel free to join here instead:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/lgbt

Sorry about the confusion.

--
Tom Morris
<http://tommorris.org/>

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


thanks & cheers,
Claudia
koltzenb...@w4w.net


___
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

Re: [Gendergap] Surplus women and World War I

[Ryan Kaldari]

This is probably getting off topic, but the main articles on this 
subject on en.wiki would probably be "sex-selective abortion" and 
"gendercide".


Ryan Kaldari

On 6/20/12 2:37 PM, Carol Moore DC wrote:
One comment on your draft, is that the langugage makes it a bit 
unclear for the average reader if/that the imbalance in England was 
because the males left the country and/or were killed in overseas 
wars.  It's implied but not sufficiently explicit so some people might 
get confused.


Also, the topic of surplus males is probably more timely today and 
I've thought about writing an article about it, so this certainly is 
relevant.


More males are born in general since they aren't as hearty as females. 
Today with modern medicine more survive accident and disease, there 
are more males that females in the post 1960s generations and more 
single angry males mean more violence. It's worse in countries like 
China and India where they abort so many female fetuses.


A number of things have been written on this topic, which I have filed 
someplace. The one that jumps out at me without much research is:
Bare Branches: The Security Implications of Asia's Surplus Male 
Population


Studies show married or co-habitating males have generally lower 
testosterone levels.  I'm sure some of my research notes that times of 
surplus females tend to be times of peace and peace activism. 1920s 
saw great peace activity led by women.  1960s when there was a slight 
surplus of women ready to make love, peace was a big issue among all 
those happy males who didn't want to trade making love for making war.


Today all those young guys worldwide want to do to deal with their 
frustrations is fight in sports riots or join the Black Bloc and break 
windows or overthrow their tyrants - or edit wikipedia?   India and 
China may need a big land war to deal with their excess male 
problems.  Iraq and Iran didn't have that problem after they sent 
millions of young men to die in 1980s Iraq-Iran land war.


In fact, I'm sure if I researched I'd find that I'm not the only one 
to speculate that older males don't like all that poltiical and sexual 
competition from younger males so regularly they have to decrease the 
population by sending them off to foreign wars or colonies.  So 
there's a method to the old warmonger male's madness


So this is quite a big topic - though I'm not sure if it calls for one 
article called "Surplus males or females" or "Surplus gender 
demographics" or whatever the experts call the broader topic.


Busy on a writing deadline so just don't have time to do the research 
right now. But I think I've thrown enough hints out there to help 
anyone go frolicking through the internet for lots of good WP:RS :-)



CM



___
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

Re: [Gendergap] Surplus women and World War I

[Ryan Kaldari]

Nice work! Looking forward to seeing it on the Main Page.

Ryan Kaldari

On 6/20/12 12:48 PM, Thomas Morton wrote:
(just to note; it's in my userspace - I got the "singled out" book the 
other day, and hopefully we can finish the article in the next day or so)


Tom

On 20 June 2012 20:22, Chris Keating <mailto:chriskeatingw...@gmail.com>> wrote:


Dear all,

Just wanted to let you know about some interesting contributions
to the Wikimedia article gender balance from a slightly unexpected
source.

On Saturday, Wikimedia UK had a World War I-themed Editathon[1],
where we essentially put a lot of Wikimedians and a group of
academics in a room and asked them to help improve coverage of
World War I.

The gender balance was markedly better amongst the academics we'd
invited (4 men, 3 women) than among the Wikimedians (20 men, no
women at all) - which prompted quite a lot of debate about gender
balance among Wikimedia volunteers (not very good) and also about
the gender balance of Wikipedia's coverage of  the topic (also,
not very good!). It might also be that we'd taken a lot of steps
to promote the event amongst the English Wikipedia's large and
active military history community (which probably has worse than
average gender balance, at a guess).

I'm pleased to say that one of the outcomes from the event is an
article, currently in sandbox but well worthy of a DYK nom when in
due course, on the topic of "Surplus women" - a demographic
imbalance that existed (or was perceived) in Western Europe in the
industrial era, accentuated by the mass slaughter of World War I,
and hitherto completely absent from Wikipedia. You can have a look
at it here :-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ErrantX/Sandbox/Surplus_women

Many thanks,

Chris
Wikimedia UK


[1] http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/World_War_I/World_War_I_Editathon



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto: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
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Holly Graf

[Ryan Kaldari]

WP:BLP: "Given their potential impact on biography subjects' lives, 
biographies must be balanced and fair to their subjects..." regardless 
of what the media chooses to focus on. Clearly the article should 
mention the relief of command and the circumstances around it 
(apparently she had a tendency to swear at people), but it shouldn't 
constitute the major focus of her biography.


Ryan Kaldari

On 6/18/12 1:50 PM, Russavia wrote:

Is that an edit of the article, or a whitewashing of the article?

It turns out that she is most notable for the relief of command, and
the blanket removal of material from the article is not adhering to
WP:UNDUE, but seems more to be a whitewashing of the article.

What you have done is removed any context of the dismissal from the
article, and that is not a good thing.

Russavia


On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 4:40 AM, Nathan  wrote:


On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Laura Hale  wrote:



On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:29 PM, Nathan  wrote:

Seems like another 1E candidate. The over-emphasis on the controversy at
the end of her career can be addressed by wiping out most of the detail, or
by removing the article entirely (since the notability argument is somewhat
fragile, and all the references about the subject relate to her dismissal).


Coincidentally, others thought that too! :) It was taken to AfD and the
MilHist project determined she was notable based on her being the first
woman to command the ship type. :)  If you want to try that Nathan, you can
but your efforts and the efforts of other men like Andreas are probably
better spent improving the article about her to remove this material.  I
eagerly anticipate y'all working together  on this  article as you've both
identified it needs work. :)

--
twitter: purplepopple
blog: ozziesport.com


I've already edited it, but thanks as always for your confidence.

~Nathan

___
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
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] New WikiProject Feminism Articles from WSG students

[Ryan Kaldari]

Just a quick word of warning... you should expect interference at the " 
Women's shelter" article from the highly active "men's rights" activists 
on Wikipedia. They have been pushing the point of view that women's 
shelters are discriminatory against men, that the women's shelter 
movement is part of a conspiracy to hide the "true statistics" about 
male victims of domestic violence, and that women's shelters are just 
scams to get government money, etc. If the students run into problems, 
just have them drop a message on the WikiProject Feminism talk page.


Ryan Kaldari


On 6/4/12 6:29 AM, Kissling, Elizabeth wrote:

Now that there's room in the discussion for a new topic :-), I'd like to ask 
for help from some of you experienced Wikipedians in bringing a new group of 
women to the project.

I'm a professor of Women's&  Gender Studies, and for their senior capstone 
project, I've had a group of WSG majors students working on WP articles for the 
WikiProject Feminism. They've selected articles from the list of requested articles 
and stubs from WP:Feminism 
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Feminism), and have been 
researching, writing, and revising in their sandbox pages for the last few weeks. 
We're planning to post the articles in class today (a few make take a little 
longer, but this week for sure -- it's the last week of the term).

It's been a wonderful experience for them, learning about how to present 
research for the Wikipedia audience compared to an academic audience, and to 
make feminist ideas accessible to larger audience, and more. It's given them a 
new appreciation of Wikipedia -- most of their professors tell them not to use 
it, so it was a big shock the first day of class when I announced we'd spend 
the quarter working on it. It's also been very challenging for many, especially 
the technical aspects of working with wiki markup and Wikipedia.

Will those of you who volunteer in this area help shepherd them into the fold? 
I'm not expecting my students to be treated with kid gloves, but we've watched 
a few edit wars, and they're nervous. As with any group of students, some are 
stronger writers than others, and some of these pieces will need more help than 
others. Here's the list of articles that will soon be added/updated:


American women's firsts
Feminism in Thailand
Feminism&  BDSM
Metaformic theory
Women's shelters
Genderfuck
Feminist pedagogy

Thank you for the work that you, and for any help you can provide to my 
students.
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] gendergap research

[Ryan Kaldari]

On 5/30/12 7:19 PM, Béria Lima wrote:
I think that better than ask why people don't contribute, is better 
tell them why SHOULD they? For us is easier to pass by the fact that 
not everyone knows why they should contribute. We should give they as 
much info as possible to make them a contributor, not asking why they 
don't do it.


Contribution is almost always a question of motivation, if you don't 
motivate people to do it, they simply won't.


I think this is a good point. One of the most surprising results from 
our editor surveys was large disparity between the importance that men 
assign to editing Wikipedia and the importance that women assign to it. 
(A significantly higher percentage of men said they edit Wikipedia 
because it is important.) How is it possible that men and women view the 
importance of the exact same activity in dramatically different ways? I 
have a lot of theories, but I'd love to see more research into this.


Ryan Kaldari
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Larry Sanger's blog post: Should there be a Wikipedia boycott over the lack of an image filter?

[Ryan Kaldari]

The best way to make sure an image filter is never implemented on 
Wikipedia is to have Larry Sanger endorse it :P


Ryan Kaldari

On 5/30/12 9:01 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:

From Larry Sanger's blog:

---o0o---

I want to start a conversation. [...Larry says, in his blog]

I. Problem? What problem?

So, you didn't know that Wikipedia has a porn problem?

Let me say what I do not mean by "Wikipedia's porn problem." I do not 
mean simply that Wikipedia has a lot of porn. That's part of the 
problem, but it's not even the main problem. I'm 100% OK with porn 
sites. I defend the right of people to host and view porn online. I 
don't even especially mind that Wikipedia has porn. There could be 
legitimate reasons why an encyclopedia might want to have some "adult 
content."


No, the real problem begins when Wikipedia features some of the most 
disgusting sorts of porn you can imagine, while being heavily used by 
children. But it's even more complicated than that, as I'll explain.


(Note, the following was co-written by me and several other people. I 
particularly needed their help finding the links.)


Here is the short version:

Wikipedia and other websites of the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) host a 
great deal of pornographic content, as well as other content not 
appropriate for children. Yet, the Wikimedia Foundation encourages 
children to use these resources. Google, Facebook, YouTube, Flickr, 
and many other high-profile sites have installed optional filters to 
block adult content from view. I believe the WMF sites should at a 
minimum install an optional, opt-in filter, as the WMF Board agreed to 
do in 2011. I understand that the WMF has recently stopped work on the 
filter and, after a period of community reaction, some Board members 
have made it clear that they do not expect this filter to be finished 
and installed. Wikipedians, both managers and rank-and-file, 
apparently do not have enough internal motivation to do the 
responsible thing for their broad readership.


But even that is too brief. If you really want to appreciate 
Wikipedia's porn problem, I'm afraid you're going to have to read the 
following.


http://larrysanger.org/2012/05/what-should-we-do-about-wikipedias-porn-problem/ 



Feel free to repost!

---o0o---

There is further discussion of this, with Larry in attendance, on 
Wikipediocracy.com:


http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=429 
<http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=429>


Note that the related thread is in the "Sexualisation" subforum, which 
is only accessible to registered Wikipediocracy members. Registration 
is free though, and anyone wishing to have a look is welcome to join 
up and participate!


http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/

Best,
Andreas


___
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

Re: [Gendergap] Article for deletion Fanny Imlay

[Ryan Kaldari]

Too bad she wasn't nominated for any porn awards, then she would be 
clearly notable.[1] As it stands, she only has 1 biography and a couple 
hundred years of scholarly commentary, so it seems like a borderline 
case to me.


1. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28people%29#Pornographic_actors_and_models


Ryan Kaldari


On 5/15/12 8:50 AM, Christine Meyer wrote:

I thought that I'd bring an AfD discussion to the attention of this
list: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Fanny_Imlay#Fanny_Imlay

It really is ridiculous that this discussion is even happening, and is
yet another example of the gender bias on en:Wikipedia.  I've followed
the discussion on the article's talk page, and it goes into absurdity.
  I wouldn't say it there, but how in the world is Imlay not notable
but one of the articles I've been working on lately, [[Anthony
Field]], is?  (I think that Field is notable, but it proves my point,
I think.)  I bring it to your attention because the article needs our
support.

Christine
User:Figureskatingfan

___
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

Re: [Gendergap] Asking Reddit's /r/asktransgender about Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

I've found that Wikipedia handles transgender issues fairly well. A good 
example is the Chaz Bono article. This article is an example of what 
should be the most problematic case on Wikipedia: A BLP of a transgender 
person mostly known for being the child of a celebrity. You would expect 
the article to be a horrible embarrassment, but it's actually well done 
and uses the correct pronoun throughout. The article has been frequently 
attacked over the years as you can see from the talk page, but it's 
always been dealt with promptly and thoughtfully. In general, I find 
that Wikipedia does a good job of covering gay and transgender issues 
and seems to have a healthy community of editors in those demographics. 
In fact I wouldn't be surprised if the percentage of such editors on 
Wikipedia is higher than in the population in general, but this is just 
a guess based on anecdotal evidence. I would love to hear other people's 
impressions.


Ryan Kaldari

On 5/9/12 12:57 PM, Tom Morris wrote:

Earlier today, I posted a thread on Reddit's AskTransgender group asking for 
feedback on how Wikipedia handles transgender issues, specifically BLP and 
pronoun issues.

http://www.reddit.com/r/asktransgender/comments/tejwl/is_wikipedia_handling_transgender_identity_well/

Feel free to respond here or there.

This followed discussions relating to the widely-reported announcement by Tom 
Gabel, the lead vocalist and guitarist for the punk band Against Me!, of their 
intention to transition, and also previous discussions I've had by email with a 
UK-based transgender non-profit.

It almost feels like how we handle gender identity and transgender issues 
on-wiki is a nice little litmus test for the community's wider attitudes to 
inclusion (as well as handling of sensitive BLPs).



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] civility/behavioral standards

[Ryan Kaldari]

Hey Laura,
I'm very sorry if I made you feel like your opinion was being 
discounted. That was not my intention. I was merely trying to express my 
own opinion and share some of my thoughts on the issue since I was 
previously involved in moderation of the list. I certainly don't want to 
turn this into a male-dominated discussion, so I'll let the rest of you 
hash it out.


Ryan Kaldari

On 5/6/12 3:37 PM, Laura Hale wrote:
Thanks. It really makes me as a women expressing concerns about 
feeling unsafe and unable to talk about issues in terms men on the 
list feel unimportant and resolved because a man has said they do not 
care who moderates. Clearly the fact that a man has stepped up to 
enforce civility on women and other men do not care about the 
moderator's gender means my concerns are over blown.  Thank you. As a 
woman interested in the gendergap, as one who feels like her voice is 
silenced by men, I am ecstatic that you have spoken up on my behalf. I 
will now go silently sit in my corner, because my voice and the voices 
of other women are clearly being tended to by men.


On Monday, May 7, 2012, Ryan Kaldari wrote:

I don't care who is moderating, but it would be nice to have more
civility on this list. When I resigned as moderator, I invited
several people to take my place (all women). They all declined
citing the contentious nature of the list, except for SlimVirgin.
SlimVirgin, unfortunately, was not able to moderate for very long
due to health issues. That leaves us with Sue, SarahS, and Kevin.
Sue is far too busy to actually moderate the list and SarahS often
has a COI in moderating since she is frequently the target of
attacks. So that leaves Kevin. Now that SlimVirgin has rejoined
the list, perhaps she would be interested in helping to moderate
    again?

Ryan Kaldari

On 5/6/12 2:16 PM, Laura Hale wrote:



On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 7:03 AM, Kevin Gorman > wrote:

Hi all -

Given this, I'm going to change how the moderation of this
list is
handled a little bit moving forward.  Previously, there has
been no
hands-on moderation of this list.  From now on, there will
potentially
be some.  It won't be draconian - and really, I hope it'll
never be
used at all - but I think it's important to guarantee that the
atmosphere of this list remains friendly, and I wanted to
announce how
I will be approaching it.



This really makes this place safe.  Thank you very much.  We've
done an excellent job resolving the leadership gendergap on WMF
with male +1, female +0.

Honestly though, I can tell you that while I am glad for a
moderator, having a male come in and tell me they will be making
this a safe place, given the historical problems of men making
this feel UNSAFE on this list and the increase in male
participation, this makes me uncomfortable and more like this
will be an even more unsafe space. :( The first thing you, as a
male who knows there are issues with women who feel unsafe
participating in this list because of those problems, is make a
declaration of firm male leadership and less tolerance of this
type of behavior.  It feels like a major disconnect, where the
end result is women will feel MORE silenced lest they offend you.

-- 
twitter: purplepopple

blog: ozziesport.com <http://ozziesport.com>



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org  
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap




--
mobile: 0412183663
twitter: purplepopple
blog: ozziesport.com <http://ozziesport.com>



___
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

Re: [Gendergap] civility/behavioral standards

[Ryan Kaldari]

I don't care who is moderating, but it would be nice to have more 
civility on this list. When I resigned as moderator, I invited several 
people to take my place (all women). They all declined citing the 
contentious nature of the list, except for SlimVirgin. SlimVirgin, 
unfortunately, was not able to moderate for very long due to health 
issues. That leaves us with Sue, SarahS, and Kevin. Sue is far too busy 
to actually moderate the list and SarahS often has a COI in moderating 
since she is frequently the target of attacks. So that leaves Kevin. Now 
that SlimVirgin has rejoined the list, perhaps she would be interested 
in helping to moderate again?


Ryan Kaldari

On 5/6/12 2:16 PM, Laura Hale wrote:



On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 7:03 AM, Kevin Gorman <mailto:kgor...@gmail.com>> wrote:


Hi all -

Given this, I'm going to change how the moderation of this list is
handled a little bit moving forward.  Previously, there has been no
hands-on moderation of this list.  From now on, there will potentially
be some.  It won't be draconian - and really, I hope it'll never be
used at all - but I think it's important to guarantee that the
atmosphere of this list remains friendly, and I wanted to announce how
I will be approaching it.



This really makes this place safe.  Thank you very much.  We've done 
an excellent job resolving the leadership gendergap on WMF with male 
+1, female +0.


Honestly though, I can tell you that while I am glad for a moderator, 
having a male come in and tell me they will be making this a safe 
place, given the historical problems of men making this feel UNSAFE on 
this list and the increase in male participation, this makes me 
uncomfortable and more like this will be an even more unsafe space. :( 
The first thing you, as a male who knows there are issues with women 
who feel unsafe participating in this list because of those problems, 
is make a declaration of firm male leadership and less tolerance of 
this type of behavior.  It feels like a major disconnect, where the 
end result is women will feel MORE silenced lest they offend you.


--
twitter: purplepopple
blog: ozziesport.com <http://ozziesport.com>



___
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

Re: [Gendergap] Magazine sexism (was: Article "Cumshot" in English and German Wikipedia)

[Ryan Kaldari]

Well, I did have more of an outdoor magazine stand in mind (which tend 
to carry more tabloids and 'trashier' fare), but a deal's a deal :) I 
have to admit though that I don't know your username for the wiki-beer 
delivery.


Ryan Kaldari

On 5/3/12 9:52 AM, Thomas Morton wrote:
Ok, as promised I went into a local store and did this research: 
http://instagr.am/p/KK-RXOwWyt/ I have to say I genuinely expected 
that I might have to admit to being wrong. I'm 
pleasantly surprised the say I don't think I was!


But first, just to say, I felt like a bit of an idiot taking a photo 
and then jotting down notes in the shop. Which turned into feeling 
like a right prat when one of the shop assisstants asked what I was 
doing ;)


Anyway.

It's immediately obvious from the photo (which cuts off a portion 
either side of the stand, sorry) that there are a LOT of women on 
these covers. However things break down in an interesting way. The 
vast majority of covers featuring a woman, clustered to the right hand 
side halfway up, are female interest magazine (fashion, gossip, etc.). 
Targetted at women they almost exclusively feature a photo of a woman 
- but they are fully clothed, it is often a headshot and the focus is 
fashion/style (or a celebrity). I don't think these are sexist.


Below them are another set of female interest mags - home and hearth. 
None of these feature a woman on the cover (though some have a person 
as a wider part of the image).


Opposite these are two male-targetted types of magazine. On the middle 
shelf cars etc. and on the lower shelf computers. These almost 
entirely feature no people at all - with the exception of one PC mag 
which features a tasteful headshot of a computer generated woman (I'm 
willing for this to be included in the next set of figures, if you 
like) and a few with men on the covers.


Which leaves us the top shelf - a total of 10 magazines, 5 each 
targetted at men and women. Of the 5 targetted at men you can see that 
4 are obviously feature an amount of nudity sexualisation (although 
there is no actual bits on show). The fifth male targetted mag 
features a woman as well, dressed, but with a bared shoulder and a 
sexualised pose.


Of the female-oriented magazines three of them feature a man with his 
top off. One doesn't feature a person on the cover. And one 
(ironically going back to the blog post linked last night) features a 
man with his top button undone... and water spilling down his chin and 
onto his chest.


I make that 5:4, or 6:4 if you want to include the other image.

My conclusions?

Sex sells to men and women, somewhat equally. Tasteful pictures of 
women sell to women. Cars and digital imagery sell to men.


Tom





On 2 May 2012 22:52, Ryan Kaldari <mailto:rkald...@wikimedia.org>> wrote:


On 5/2/12 2:38 PM, Thomas Morton wrote:

On 2 May 2012 22:36, Ryan Kaldari mailto:rkald...@wikimedia.org>> wrote:

Perfect opportunity to share one of my favorite blog memes:
http://thehairpin.com/2011/11/women-struggling-to-drink-water

Seriously though, it doesn't seem that controversial to say
that mainstream advertising heavily skews to female nudity.
Next time you pass a magazine stand, count the number of
covers with female nudity and male nudity. I'll bet you a
wiki-beer it's greater than 2 to 1. Judging by the last time
I was in Paris, I would guess 10 to 1.

Ryan Kaldari


On the principle of genuine interest I will take you up on that
challenge :) and will report back tomorrow.

Tom


I'll be very happy to be proven wrong. I'm certainly subject to
perception bias, but perception isn't always wrong. Don't forget
to take a cell-phone photo if you want to collect your wiki-beer :)

Ryan Kaldari

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto: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
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Article "Cumshot" in English and German Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

On 5/2/12 2:38 PM, Thomas Morton wrote:
On 2 May 2012 22:36, Ryan Kaldari <mailto:rkald...@wikimedia.org>> wrote:


Perfect opportunity to share one of my favorite blog memes:
http://thehairpin.com/2011/11/women-struggling-to-drink-water

Seriously though, it doesn't seem that controversial to say that
mainstream advertising heavily skews to female nudity. Next time
you pass a magazine stand, count the number of covers with female
nudity and male nudity. I'll bet you a wiki-beer it's greater than
2 to 1. Judging by the last time I was in Paris, I would guess 10
    to 1.

Ryan Kaldari


On the principle of genuine interest I will take you up on that 
challenge :) and will report back tomorrow.


Tom


I'll be very happy to be proven wrong. I'm certainly subject to 
perception bias, but perception isn't always wrong. Don't forget to take 
a cell-phone photo if you want to collect your wiki-beer :)


Ryan Kaldari
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Article "Cumshot" in English and German Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

Perfect opportunity to share one of my favorite blog memes:
http://thehairpin.com/2011/11/women-struggling-to-drink-water

Seriously though, it doesn't seem that controversial to say that 
mainstream advertising heavily skews to female nudity. Next time you 
pass a magazine stand, count the number of covers with female nudity and 
male nudity. I'll bet you a wiki-beer it's greater than 2 to 1. Judging 
by the last time I was in Paris, I would guess 10 to 1.


Ryan Kaldari

On 5/2/12 2:28 PM, Thomas Morton wrote:
On 2 May 2012 22:22, Pete Forsyth <mailto:petefors...@gmail.com>> wrote:


On May 2, 2012, at 2:20 PM, Thomas Morton wrote:

> I've always found advertising to be highly sexualised, but
refreshingly free of sexism.

I tend to agree with Heather...this strains credibility. It's hard
to know whether to take this statement seriously.


Seriously? I mean, I don't want to derail this discussion further, but 
as someone who responds fairly equally to nudey boys and girls both 
are very visibly in use in advertising.


Although; Alison raises a point about stereotypes that I didn't really 
think about :) as the discussion was about the relative numbers of 
nudey genders... in terms of playing on /stereotypes/, sure, it can be 
sexist to men and women.


Tom


___
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

Re: [Gendergap] Article "Cumshot" in English and German Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

Perfect opportunity to share one of my favorite blog memes:
http://thehairpin.com/2011/11/women-struggling-to-drink-water

Ryan Kaldari

On 5/2/12 2:20 PM, Thomas Morton wrote:


Advertising not sexist. Really.


Well I'd be interested to hear rational arguments that it is...

I've always found advertising to be highly sexualised, but 
refreshingly free of sexism.


Tom


___
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

Re: [Gendergap] Article "Cumshot" in English and German Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

That's a good point. Even here in San Francisco it's much easier to find 
female nudity in art and advertising than male nudity. I just wish 
people would stick to commenting on the art instead of the woman's body.


Ryan Kaldari


On 5/2/12 12:40 AM, Caroline Becker wrote:
The problem is, we live in a biased world where you can find much, 
much more female nudity in fine art musem than male nudity. I'm 
currently post-treating and uploading pictures from the Museum of Fine 
Arts of Rennes (France) and the only naked male body is a sculpture of 
a boy/young teenager playing, while they are lot of naked women, both 
in sculpture and paintings. Half-naked men are more often corpses than 
sexy budies.  (If you want I can create a gallery with all artworks 
showing naked or half-naked women).


What can I do with that ? Not uploaded pictures of artworks with naked 
women ? Working harder to have awesome pictures of artworks with naked 
men ?


Caroline


2012/5/2 Pete Forsyth <mailto:petefors...@gmail.com>>


It seems strange to talk about "Featured Pictured Candidates" as
though it is a process, or talk about "bias" -- from what I could
discern when I looked into it last time around, it's basically a
system that lets anybody promote their own work, as long as they
know how to jump through a couple pretty straightforward hoops and
wait a few months.

I still think that simply, clearly, *documenting* the process in a
practical sense would be a useful first step toward thinking up
and building interest in a more refined system. Until somebody
puts in the effort to do something like that, we're going to
continue to see weird entries on the front page of Commons (and
many other projects that use Commons' front page image on their
own front page) simply because one person took the initiative to
make it happen.

Not because the "community" at Commons made a bad decision. The
"community" didn't make a decision at all.

-Pete


On May 1, 2012, at 10:23 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:

> Speaking of gender and nudity, it seems the bias towards female
nudity at en.wiki's Featured Picture Candidates is still as strong
as ever. And check out the quality comments at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/The_Pearl_and_the_Wave
>
> After you guys are finished photographing your all-male
cumshots, maybe you could find some nice nude male art to nominate
    at Featured Picture Candidates. Too bad Robert Mapplethorpe is
still copyrighted.
>
> Ryan Kaldari
>
> On 4/28/12 12:17 AM, Paolo Massa wrote:
>> If you are curious about the images used in the same article on
other
>> language editions of Wikipedia you can use Manypedia.
>> For the page "Cumshot", it seems currently the same image is
used on
>> all language editions, while the Spanish one uses one more image
>> http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Cumshot|es
<http://www.manypedia.com/#%7Cen%7CCumshot%7Ces>
>> and the Japanese a different additional one.
>> http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Cumshot|ja
<http://www.manypedia.com/#%7Cen%7CCumshot%7Cja>
>>
>> Of course this is not to say that if all language editions of
>> Wikipedia represent the same concept using the same images, this is
>> the best way of representing it. But at least you can appreciate
>> differences in representations of different language communities.
>> For example see the page Underwear on English and Arabic Wikipedia,
>> http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Underwear|ar
<http://www.manypedia.com/#%7Cen%7CUnderwear%7Car>
>>
>> Hope it helps.
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Emily
Monroemailto:emilymonro...@gmail.com>>
 wrote:
>>> I'm not sure the technical term for it either, but the
laymen's term is
>>> female ejactulation. *shrugs*
>>>
>>> From,
>>> Emily
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 8:39 PM, Carol Moore
DCmailto:carolmoor...@verizon.net>>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On 4/27/2012 3:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I could have a go again, Carol.>:)
>>>>
>>>> Gay porn is underrepresented in these articles.
>>>>
>>>> Andreas
>>>>
>>>> So if I was too implicit in my statement. As Andreas
surmised, I meant
>>>> re-do that photo to make it male on male. Or do a second one
that&#

Re: [Gendergap] Article "Cumshot" in English and German Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

Speaking of gender and nudity, it seems the bias towards female nudity 
at en.wiki's Featured Picture Candidates is still as strong as ever. And 
check out the quality comments at 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/The_Pearl_and_the_Wave


After you guys are finished photographing your all-male cumshots, maybe 
you could find some nice nude male art to nominate at Featured Picture 
Candidates. Too bad Robert Mapplethorpe is still copyrighted.


Ryan Kaldari

On 4/28/12 12:17 AM, Paolo Massa wrote:

If you are curious about the images used in the same article on other
language editions of Wikipedia you can use Manypedia.
For the page "Cumshot", it seems currently the same image is used on
all language editions, while the Spanish one uses one more image
http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Cumshot|es
and the Japanese a different additional one.
http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Cumshot|ja

Of course this is not to say that if all language editions of
Wikipedia represent the same concept using the same images, this is
the best way of representing it. But at least you can appreciate
differences in representations of different language communities.
For example see the page Underwear on English and Arabic Wikipedia,
http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Underwear|ar

Hope it helps.

On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Emily Monroe  wrote:

I'm not sure the technical term for it either, but the laymen's term is
female ejactulation. *shrugs*

From,
Emily


On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 8:39 PM, Carol Moore DC
wrote:

On 4/27/2012 3:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:

I could have a go again, Carol.>:)

Gay porn is underrepresented in these articles.

Andreas

So if I was too implicit in my statement. As Andreas surmised, I meant
re-do that photo to make it male on male. Or do a second one that's male on
male.  Go for it!

As for female "ejaculation" since ejaculation is putting out sperm, I
don't think women do it.

Women obviously -- geez, I don't what you call it besides "get wet." And
maybe orgasms squeeze some of it out an orifice. But I don't think that's
ejaculation.  But I do now know I don't what the technical terms are or if
there are any!!

CM


___
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






___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Article "Cumshot" in English and German Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

Fun fact: Female ejaculation is the most viewed Wikipedia article 
related in any way to feminism (at least since WikiProject Feminism 
started keeping stats). It's 3 times as popular as the next article on 
the list, Abortion.


Ryan Kaldari

On 4/27/12 2:52 PM, Laura Hale wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_ejaculate would be an equivalent.

--
twitter: purplepopple
blog: ozziesport.com <http://ozziesport.com>


___
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

Re: [Gendergap] Giving Women the Access Code

[Ryan Kaldari]

As someone who has worked as a computer programmer for 20 years and took 
several Calculus classes, I would like to vouch for the fact that in 
order to have a successful career in computer programming, it is 
necessary to have at least 4 years of math education - in elementary school.


I find it strange that biology, which is actually a fairly math 
intensive field, requires virtually no mathematics in college, while 
computer science requires absurd levels of math that have no relevance 
to the field. And yet classes that are extremely relevant, like How to 
Use UNIX, are optional. I think it has far more to do with the academic 
computer science culture than what is actually useful to teach people.


On a related note, I noticed recently that the English Wikipedia only 
has 2 paragraphs about women in mathematics: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematician#Women_in_mathematics. Compare 
with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_science or 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_engineering (which was recently 
expanded).


Ryan Kaldari


On 4/3/12 7:31 AM, Sarah Stierch wrote:

Nice article, thanks for sharing Lennart!

"She was consistently told by teachers in adolescence 
<http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides/specialtopic/puberty-and-adolescence/overview.html?inline=nyt-classifier>, 
then later by colleagues, that the things she was interested in were 
things women didn't do, and that there were no good female 
mathematicians," Dr. Pippenger said.


It's reasoning like this, and the one that you quoted below about 
stereotypes, kept me from pursuing a degree in computer science. I 
remember looking into the school when I was a young undergrad and I 
felt so intimidated, and then was told that I'd have to take certain 
math classes. Which frustrated me, as I could do basic language coding 
and write html off the top of my head. I flunked the math classes I 
had to take, and 10 years later found out I had a math disability. 
(And it wasn't my parents who were telling me not to do it, it was 
professors, etc. Regardless of my poor math skills, almost every 
single person I know who codes jokes that "you don't /need/ to know 
math."  Someday I'll take some classes in something (just for fun, I 
suppose)..or perhaps there will be a "N00bs super simple MediaWiki fun 
day that even your grandma could learn to code at!" event.


I'm not disappointed with how my path curved and turned thus far, but, 
after reading /Unlocking the Clubhouse/[1] and every time I read an 
article like this, it just reminds me more and more of the experiences 
I had as a young person that kept me out of the lab. The odd thing, is 
that I ended up entering into a field that is upwards of 80% dominated 
by women. I wonder of computer science can take any cues from museum 
studies.


On that note, I'm sure I'm not the only person on this mailing list 
that took a different path than the one they wanted due to popular and 
personal pressure.


Sarah

[1]http://www.amazon.com/Unlocking-Clubhouse-Computing-Jane-Margolis/dp/0262133989


On 4/3/12 3:36 AM, Lennart Guldbrandsson wrote:

Hello,

Via Mike Godwin:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/science/giving-women-the-access-code.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1



"Most of the female students were unwilling to go on in computer 
science because of the stereotypes they had grown up with," said 
Zachary Dodds, a computer scientist at Mudd. "We realized we were 
helping perpetuate that by teaching such a standard course."


To reduce the intimidation factor, the course was divided into two 
sections --- "gold," for those with no prior experience, and "black" 
for everyone else. Java, a notoriously opaque programming language, 
was replaced by a more accessible language called Python. And the 
focus of the course changed to computational approaches to solving 
problems across science.


"We realized that we needed to show students computer science is not 
all about programming," said Ran Libeskind-Hadas, chairman of the 
department. "It has intellectual depth and connections to other 
disciplines."





Most of the article is about Dr Maria Klawe, who seems to be a very 
inspiring person.



Best wishes,

Lennart


Lennart Guldbrandsson,
Tfn: 031 - 12 50 48 Mobil: 070 - 207 80 05
Epost: l_guldbrands...@hotmail.com / lenn...@wikimedia.se
Användarsida: http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anv%C3%A4ndare:Hannibal
Blogg: http://mrchapel.wordpress.com/
Wikimedia Sverige http://wikimedia.se
http://www.1av3.se


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



--
*Sarah Stierch*
*/Wikimedia Foundation Community Fellow/*
>>Support the sharing of free knowledge around the world: donate today 
<https://donate.wikimedia.org/><

Re: [Gendergap] Facebook Group re pornography on Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

Yeah, I'm a little dense sometimes :) I promise if you put a ;) at the 
end of your post, though, I won't reply to your sarcasm with shocked 
indignation.


Ryan Kaldari

On 2/3/12 11:52 AM, emijrp wrote:
2012/2/2 Caroline Becker <mailto:carobecke...@gmail.com>>


That was irony, sorry :) I'm against image filtering and I think
image filtering has nothing to do with gender gap, so I answered
with my guts instead of my brain :(

Caroline


I got your sarcasm Caroline. Is Ryan the new Sheldon? Attention: sarcasm.



    2012/2/2 Ryan Kaldari mailto:rkald...@wikimedia.org>>

I'm not familiar with the discussion you are referring to, but
I'm 100% sure Jimmy would never say that as it is completely
antithetical to his position on Wikipedia editing. Do you
happen to remember where you read that?

Ryan Kaldari


On 2/1/12 11:53 PM, Caroline Becker wrote:

Yeah, and yesterday yet another "intellectual" said that
Wikipedia cannot be trust because it is written by everyone,
so Jimmy mentioned that only scholars will edit Wikipedia in
the futur ?

Caroline


2012/2/2 Andreas K. mailto:jayen...@gmail.com>>

A Wikimedian has just started a Facebook page "Stop
pornography on Wikipedia"


http://www.facebook.com/pages/Stop-pornography-on-Wikipedia/307245972661745


following an earlier post by her to [[User talk:Jimbo
Wales]] in Wikipedia:


http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&oldid=474195137#The_animated_gif_file_of_a_man_mastrubating_is_in_a_public_domain._Do_we_need_it_in_public_domain.3F

<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&oldid=474195137#The_animated_gif_file_of_a_man_mastrubating_is_in_a_public_domain._Do_we_need_it_in_public_domain.3F>


Jimmy mentioned that the image filter is on the agenda of
this week's board meeting again.

Andreas



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
<mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org  <mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
<mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto: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
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Facebook Group re pornography on Wikipedia

[Ryan Kaldari]

I'm not familiar with the discussion you are referring to, but I'm 100% 
sure Jimmy would never say that as it is completely antithetical to his 
position on Wikipedia editing. Do you happen to remember where you read 
that?


Ryan Kaldari

On 2/1/12 11:53 PM, Caroline Becker wrote:
Yeah, and yesterday yet another "intellectual" said that Wikipedia 
cannot be trust because it is written by everyone, so Jimmy mentioned 
that only scholars will edit Wikipedia in the futur ?


Caroline


2012/2/2 Andreas K. mailto:jayen...@gmail.com>>

A Wikimedian has just started a Facebook page "Stop pornography on
Wikipedia"

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Stop-pornography-on-Wikipedia/307245972661745


following an earlier post by her to [[User talk:Jimbo Wales]] in
Wikipedia:


http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&oldid=474195137#The_animated_gif_file_of_a_man_mastrubating_is_in_a_public_domain._Do_we_need_it_in_public_domain.3F

<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&oldid=474195137#The_animated_gif_file_of_a_man_mastrubating_is_in_a_public_domain._Do_we_need_it_in_public_domain.3F>


Jimmy mentioned that the image filter is on the agenda of this
week's board meeting again.

Andreas



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto: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
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap