Re: [Gendergap] More Dangerous to be a Woman Than a Soldier

[carolmooredc]

Great. I'll take it.
And just a plain old google search yields riches;
http://www.google.com/search?q=rape+in+the+U.S.+military&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

books google even more. Of course, google news archives ain't what news 
google used to be ...sigh

Have a search saved for alternatives and I put up this  note yesterday:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_talk:News_websites
on "Category: News archive sites (or services)??"


On 10/4/2011 2:31 PM, Sarah Stierch wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> I'm gathering a large collection of resources for this subject - 
> specifically "United States Military and rape" - from the incident in 
> Okinawa to Civil War period rape, to sexual assault and attack within 
> the US military against women and men.
>
> If you wish to have access to the Dropbox I'm organizing, shoot me a 
> message off list.
>
> -Sarah


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

Re: [Gendergap] More Dangerous to be a Woman Than a Soldier

[carolmooredc]

This is something that's been on my mental list of articles to write.
Someday... "Rape in the U.S. Military"

Just searched rape U.S. military in wikipedia and just a mention of 
Okinawa, not the horrific statistics.
"Crime and U.S. military" (safer article to start with to avoid AfD) 
showed nothing  as well.

Put a note on feminist wikiproject (i'm flustered dealing with crashing 
computer, new one in mail, and occupying DC, or a day or two anyway, 
just long enough to convince them --

well, let's not talk politics... but I do have some sexist pig peace 
activists I'll probably be running into... one of whom has a vanity 
article on wikipedia... don't get me started...

Carol in dc

On 10/4/2011 12:28 PM, Sarah Stierch wrote:
> Intense (and brief) piece from Forbes about women as victims in war in 
> Africa:
>
> http://www.forbes.com/sites/shenegotiates/2011/10/04/more-dangerous-to-be-a-woman-than-a-soldier/
>
> You'll also notice that Forbe's cites Wikipedia's article about 
> micro-lending!
>
> -

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

Re: [Gendergap] vulgar jokes and sexualized environments on Wikipedia

[carolmooredc]

To beef up women's assertiveness so they protest, or to give more power 
to some authoritarian editors to delete and block reverters, that is the 
question.  Why not do both?? :-)  Or just get more assertive female admins.

A job I myself shrink at the thought of. I already have enough problems 
just trying to edit the controversial articles I so often end up 
editing.  But then I am a glutton for punishment - or is it merely 
negative attention??

On 9/30/2011 3:35 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:
> Twice recently I have been reverted for removing vulgar jokes from
> article talk pages on the English Wikipedia - most recently for removing
> a joke who's punchline was "A woman's anus after she was sodomized!".
> Although I appreciate the use of humor on Wikipedia, and support the
> inclusion of potentially offensive material within appropriate contexts,
> I think these type of jokes are not appropriate on talk pages and create
> a sexualized environment that is often unwelcoming for women (as well as
> people from other cultures/religions/backgrounds). I think this issue is
> pertinent to the gender gap (unlike my other recent posts), and would
> like to hear other people's opinions. I've also started a discussion at
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Civility#Vulgar_jokes for
> broader input.
>
> Ryan Kaldari
>
>

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

Re: [Gendergap] Gender neutrality template

[carolmooredc]

There are other more powerful groups that would use the precedent to 
create a template that would censor a number of articles that already 
are heavily patrolled and censored by organized groups of editors (many 
of them surely paid, not that they'd ever admit it).


Instead use the POV template and make editors think by explaining the 
POV template on the talk page. And mention the problem on Wikiproject 
Feminism.


On 9/30/2011 11:30 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
What do you think about creating a {{gendergap}} or {{GNPOV}} 
(gender-neutral point of view) template in en:WP? This could have a 
format similar to


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:NPOV

and could use an image like

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Igualtat_de_sexes.svg

The text could say something like:

"The gender neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the 
discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until 
the dispute is resolved."


Note that templates of this sort come with associated categories such as

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:NPOV_disputes_from_September_2011

These categories can help identify articles with active disputes.

Thoughts?

Do we already have a template like that that I am unaware of?

Best,
Andreas



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

Re: [Gendergap] Sue's new blog

[carolmooredc]

Most of us don't have time to read through long email(s) and a long 
article trying to figure out what sentence or two someone claims is a 
lie. Not very useful to the discussion, not to mention civil.


On 9/30/2011 5:49 AM, Béria Lima wrote:

http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-September/069078.html
_
/Béria Lima/
Wikimedia Portugal 
(351) 963 953 042

/Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter 
livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que 
estamos a fazer./



On 30 September 2011 00:37, Ryan Kaldari > wrote:


Would you like to elaborate?

Ryan Kaldari


On 9/29/11 4:35 PM, Béria Lima wrote:

I think it works both ways: There you might get stomped on by
people who disagree with the lies Sue told in the post, and here
I will be stomp up for even mentioned that she did lied in that
blog post.

Safe environment do not exist in this case. Is safeR for supports
to come here, and safeR for opposers to go there. That does not
make any list safe, only shows that the POV here is different
than the POV there.
_
/Béria Lima/
Wikimedia Portugal 
(351) 963 953 042

/Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade
de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É
isso o que estamos a fazer./





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

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[carolmooredc]

A bit less on nudity too which might appeal to/attract/encourage 
prurient interests under the guise of helpfulness ;-(


On 9/27/2011 6:53 PM, Emily Monroe wrote:

Hmm. Perhaps, Fred, perhaps. ;-)

From,
Emily


On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Fred Bauder > wrote:


So you think we might get more done if we have the common sense not to
discuss politics and religion?

Fred

> Hi everyone,
>
> Apologies for my bad English. English is not my mother tongue.
>
> Let us not use this mailing list to discuss religion. Let us
concentrate
> on
> strategies to improve participation of women in Wikimedia projects
> instead.
>
> Thank you
>
> --
> Netha Hussain
> User: Netha Hussain
> Student of Medicine and Surgery
> *nethahussain.blogspot.com 
> swethaambari.wordpress.com *
>
>


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

Re: [Gendergap] 13 year old joins WP Pornography?

[carolmooredc]

For legal reasons you have to have a minimum age of 18 and kick off 
anyone who admits they are under 18 or are somehow exposed as being 
under 18.  (Unless all those opposed want to put up their real names and 
addresses and personally claim full legal and financial responsibility 
for any criminal charges.)


The question is, is there a legal duty to verify age of those who do not 
reveal their age? Or who lie about it, should there be a requirement 
they reveal it?


On 9/23/2011 5:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
Whether or not the editor is indeed thirteen years old is probably 
relatively unimportant.


What matters is that voices in the RfC generally (about 3:1) oppose 
the idea of a minimum age of 18 for contributors to the WikiProject.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#RfC:_Should_underage_editors_be_topic_banned_from_articles_in_the_WikiProject_Pornography_topic_area.3F 



Andreas



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

[Gendergap] Wikiquotes

[carolmooredc]

Looking at my wikiquotes talk page for the first time in a while, I was 
reminded that is another area women's contributions may not be taken as 
seriously.


Example: the deletion in 2009 of poet Marcella Boccia's quotes from 
English wikipedia after her article had been deleted from En wikipedia.


Actually, I just checked and it's not in the Italian wikipedia version 
either.  Despite 
http://www.google.com/search?ned=us&hl=en&q=Marcella+Boccia&tbm=nws&tbs=ar:1 
notability in Italian I noted at time of deletion discussion.


So let's not forget Wikiquote!!




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

Re: [Gendergap] Resolution:Images of identifiable people

[carolmooredc]

Anyway they can italic or bold this Phrase: " in a private place or 
situation without permission." ??


On 9/12/2011 10:53 AM, Sydney Poore wrote:
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Sarah Stierch 
mailto:sarah.stie...@gmail.com>> wrote:


I have no clue how I missed this (and perhaps it's been posted
before?)
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Images_of_identifiable_people

Perhaps we can lend a hand to assist in this?

-Sarah


Yes, the WMF Board passed this resolution in May, and it helped focus 
the discussion away from the idea that people want to delete 
controversial content only because of they are prudes. 
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[carolmooredc]

Couple thoughts:
*A  few moderate Muslim editors chiming in on some of the things we 
don't like either on Wikipedia wouldn't hurt.
*It would be nice if the most obvious of  "corruption" of liberal or 
libertarian views wasn't lascivious female nudity; but even the 
Christian Conservatives have come to adapt.
* And of course it should be recognized that most of these 
liberal/libertarian individuals and groups DO recognize that having the 
US/Europe constantly attacking Muslim countries to choose their leaders 
only increases the power and influence of the radical Muslims.

On 9/7/2011 4:34 AM, Arnaud HERVE wrote:
> Some radical Muslims want the sharia immediately applied to all 
> populations, even non Muslims, because sharia is the law from God, and 
> God is far superior to any parliament or constitution. Some Muslims 
> are more tolerant for other populations, but for their own family it 
> is still the law, the law as in not a personal choice. Some other 
> Muslims would like to get rid of Islam, but they are not helped by the 
> prevailing multicultural policies, which tend to accept community 
> leaders as the true representatives of what they wish. In the past, 
> xenophobia was restricted to extreme-right political groups. However 
> recently there has been a change, and the liberal lobbies have turned 
> against Islam, which creates a new situation as it is the immigrant 
> population which is now perceived as culturally backwards and 
> threatening for civic rights. The majority of native European 
> populations now perceive immigration as civilization threatening, and 
> in this context Islam is perceived as particularly incompatible with 
> Western civilization. Gender issues have become a major landmark for 
> that in public debate. Gay groups, feminist groups, secular groups, 
> now perceive the right to show female nudity, the right to celibate 
> autonomous life, the right to gender orientation as gains of modern 
> civilization, to defend actively and specifically against Islam. In 
> the past it was against the local conservative right, now it is 
> explicitly against Islam.

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

Re: [Gendergap] Calling all neutral user names She?

[carolmooredc]

I used to use they, but with all these "she's" lately, and some editors 
calling her "he", I thought... why not.

Someone mentioned privately 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-neutral_pronoun#Modern_solutions

So options is best way to go, and let nature take its course as what 
seems most appropriate or the mood I'm in...

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

Re: [Gendergap] Calling all neutral user names She?

[carolmooredc]

Having  just now read through a long paragraph on ANI of a user saying 
he or she and him or her about an editor, I say, for less complexities 
sake, let's do it. See what happens.


On 9/8/2011 12:48 PM, Sarah Stierch wrote:
I actually would love to follow the reactions of people when you call 
them "she" and you're wrong. How would they reply?


Kaldari says he's been called "she" a number of times! :)

Sarah

On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:37 PM, > wrote:


Recently two users I thought were he's turned out to be she's.
 And then
I identified a user with a neutral sounding name as a he - though
looking again at name, probably is a she.

Then it occurred to me, why assume they are male anyway?

Why not call all neutral user names she from now on?

He is part of she.
Male is part of female.
Man is part of woman.

Hmmm... how much "trouble" will I get in if I do it??

Carol in dc



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

[Gendergap] Calling all neutral user names She?

[carolmooredc]

Recently two users I thought were he's turned out to be she's.  And then 
I identified a user with a neutral sounding name as a he - though 
looking again at name, probably is a she.

Then it occurred to me, why assume they are male anyway?

Why not call all neutral user names she from now on?

He is part of she.
Male is part of female.
Man is part of woman.

Hmmm... how much "trouble" will I get in if I do it??

Carol in dc

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

Re: [Gendergap] Pregnancy article lead-image RFC

[carolmooredc]

If someone wants to beat me to the punch, go for it.
Hmmm, I know some feminist photographers
In fact, a few of us probably do.
What better consciousness raiser than a fact (or photo) on the ground 
that they then have to deal with??

On 9/6/2011 9:51 PM, Sarah wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 19:27,  wrote:
>> Lots of us old hippie women are exhibitionists and I could advertise and
>> get a few of us to pose. Then the young guys would have to discuss
>> whether the 19 year old or 60 year old breast/nude/buttock etc. is more
>> appropriate for an article.
>>
>> Hope that also engenders a good laugh
>>
>> Carol in dc
>>
> It's actually a serious point, though. It would be great to provide
> images for those articles that don't portray women the way certain men
> want to see them portrayed. I recall the Body Shop did that a couple
> of decades ago -- started using images of women that fell outside the
> usual range that tended to be objectified (older, not thin, etc). They
> produced some very good ads as a result. The difficulty for us would
> be in finding those images, then in maintaining them on the pages.
>
> Sarah
>

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

Re: [Gendergap] Pregnancy article lead-image RFC

[carolmooredc]

On 9/6/2011 5:18 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:
> I have to say that viewing pregnancy as a "medical article" seems to be
> a rather male point of view :) I also find it telling that maternity
> clothing isn't even mentioned in the article (but I guess that makes
> sense if pregnant women don't wear clothes).
>
> Ryan Kaldari
>
So funny...

I won't even start on the naughty thoughts this sexagenarian has had 
about adding nude body part photos to all sorts of articles.  Oh, why not...

Lots of us old hippie women are exhibitionists and I could advertise and 
get a few of us to pose. Then the young guys would have to discuss 
whether the 19 year old or 60 year old breast/nude/buttock etc. is more 
appropriate for an article.

Hope that also engenders a good laugh

Carol in dc

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

Re: [Gendergap] an example of the "unwanted attention" problem

[carolmooredc]

First, note per my last message on stalkers, obviously the other editors 
on the issue in question were assumed to be or admittedly male.


I identify with below.  Some women are just more diplomatic than we may 
be; others have unconsciously gotten into the habit of always 
apologizing for opining - though theose often may be more likely to leave.


What's funny is on a current article I originally thought two aggressive 
editors, one of whom even attacked me bringing up an old block to try to 
keep me from editing, turned out to be women.  However, they are editing 
on an article where the top allows them to actualize the role of the 
female bear protecting her cubs.


Also, while it can be frustrating, I don't let my lack of tech saavy let 
me feel bad. Better to carp that the tech savvies should make it easier 
for the rest of us and get them to admit you are right! :-)


On 8/24/2011 8:09 PM, Sarah Stierch wrote:


The only power I have right now is a delete or ignore button. For me, 
I just keep on keepin on, because *I expect people to be direspectful 
and sexist to me on Wikipedia*. The only thing I can do is to them 
otherwise, speak my mind and say what I think, which I'm rather good 
at. I also rely strongly on, to be honest, fellow editors - primarily 
men - who speak up on my behalf. The few women I know who I consider 
"really good friends" on Wikipedia aren't involved in any aspect of 
the gender gap, and aren't as proactive or opinionated as me. Which, I 
guess gets me into more trouble than usual. Often these "situations" 
are  as common as the sexism I might experience in the real world, 
outside of work - but, Wikipedia...it's sort of work for me, right now.


To be honest, I have a terribly low selfesteem when it comes to my 
work in Wikimedia - whether it's thinking I should apply for a job or 
fellowship, or it's applying for an admin position, or just speaking 
up in certain topics. I feel that I'm not tech savvy enough, and it's 
really intimidating since so much of the culture is based around that. 
It's also intimidating, in general. Just like any other geek world - 
whether it's playing online RPGs (yes, I've dabbled a bit) or having 
acquaintances who do society for creative anarchonism (aka play dress 
up like dungeons and dragons characters) - they assume because of my 
name I am one thing. The only thing I can do is prove them wrong, 
including the women sometimes too.


I often channel my anger into changing things. But, when I think about 
my own experiences, I have no idea what to to do about them.


-Sarah


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

Re: [Gendergap] an example of the "unwanted attention" problem

[carolmooredc]

Hmmm. Looking at the edit summaries of talk pages of a couple of editors 
who write exclusively on the Israel-Palestine issue, as opposed to me 
who just gets sucked into a few specific articles over and over, usually 
BLP-related for individuals or organizations...I seem to have a lot more 
nasty comments on my talk page and article talk pages that had to be 
deleted by admins, especially the last six months.

And I won't even start discussing the emails I've gotten through 
wiki-email.

At least on one article I've devoted a lot of time to lately there are a 
few women engaging in the heated disputes with each other :-)

On 8/24/2011 6:55 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:
> This situation from earlier today has already been resolved, so no drama
> is necessary, but I thought I would post one of the diffs here as an
> example for discussion:
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Beria&diff=next&oldid=58432635
>
> I think this is a good example of the "unwanted attention" problem that
> I've heard about from several female editors. Generally, when people
> talk about sexist behavior on Wikipedia, they tend to think of
> misogynistic behavior, but I think the unwanted attention/stalking
> problem may be just as important. Have others on the list experienced
> this problem? How did it affect you? How did you deal with it? Any ideas
> for how it can be addressed systematically?
>
> Ryan Kaldari
>
>

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

Re: [Gendergap] Girly articles or neutral articles with female contributors ?

[carolmooredc]

The coverage reminds one also of the sexism that continues throughout 
the media...


On 8/24/2011 1:31 PM, Sarah Stierch wrote:

Arnaud,

I'm assuming you're referring to the research that expresses that 
"girly stuff" like Sex in the City and make-up has poor coverage on 
Wikipedia. It's true, these things don't have good coverage on 
Wikipedia, and, they are often topics of interest to mainstream women.


As someone who works within the world of research (when I'm not 
traveling, I'm often huddled around dusty books, handwritten letters, 
and computers researching work for museum exhibitions), I also 
surround myself with women who are scholars by default due to the 
industry I work in. I also have no desire to write about make up, 
fashion, and I think Sex in the City is stupid (I'll take Annie Hall 
and David Lynch, thanks). So I understand :)


So, when I read these reviews and articles about "girly topics" not 
being covered in Wikipedia like "guy topics" I often say "yeah, it's 
true, but..." And I often feel like researchers are stereotyping women 
by using these topics as examples.  For me, it's more disturbing 
knowing that the majority of editors to the menstrual cycle article 
are men. It's weird, actually, to me. Funny, weird, and, well...weird. 
I think the same goes for the article vagina? I don't remember.


I assure you, just because some blogs, and researchers are emphasizing 
that "girly topics" are not being covered, doesn't mean that staff and 
volunteers (like me) aren't concerned about Wikimedia content as whole 
when it comes to women contributing. For me, it's about encouraging 
people to contribute quality content about things they love, no matter 
what it is. And I assume I'm not the only genetic female who often 
goes "ugh" about Sex in the City and Kate Middleton's wedding dress. 
(They have their place, but, it's not in my repertoire). (Sorry to any 
women on this list who are fans, it's just...not my thing.)


For me, the goal is about encouraging women to contribute to Wikimedia 
projects in whatever ways they wish, about whatever topic they wish. 
And if it's about soap operas and lipgloss, so be it. And if it's 
about punk rock and nuclear fission, even better!


-Sarah

On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Arnaud HERVE > wrote:


Maybe I am too theoretical, or too closely linked with the world of
education, but it seems to me that there might be a confusion on that
list about the kind of participation to encourage.

The kind of women I know are mostly teachers, or doctors, or work in
research institutes. They are perfectly able to write about scientific
subjects, and it seems to me that kind of participation would benefit
the cause more than stating they need to see girly stuff to feel
entitled to participate. They are not teenagers.

For instance an article about the pelagic ecosystem doesn't seem to me
very gender-oriented.

And for personal preferences there are personal blogs...

Arnaud


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

Re: [Gendergap] Just a few days into have the IRC channel

[carolmooredc]

It sounds good for socializing, announcing and and brainstorming, but 
without archiving seems problematic for ongoing organizing. (I.e. task 
oriented people like me might not like it as much as social networking 
oriented people)

On 8/24/2011 1:34 PM, Brandon Harris wrote:
>
>   I think this is a mis-characterization of the medium and its usage.
> I've been using IRC since, oh, 1991 or so, however, so it's a natural
> thing for me.
>
>   One of the issues - especially with software support channels - is that
> they are actually *slow moving*.  And you're supposed to idle and wait
> for answers.  IRC is a *background* process; you throw the window at the
> bottom of the stack and wait for it to notify you that someone has said
> something to you.
>
>   I can help you get online if you like.  I'll need to know what kind of
> computer you use.
>
>
> On 8/24/11 10:01 AM, Arnaud HERVE wrote:
>> On 22/08/2011 04:58, carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote:
>>> I confess, I'm not sure what IRC is and not enough info in the #address
>>> for me to get there easily. ;-(
>> IRC is a chat system, except it is a bit more difficult to install and
>> register in than say your average msn or skype. But basically you type
>> messages with your keyboard, and they disappear as several other people
>> answer.
>>
>> It was used first by professional geeks, and it has recently spread to
>> clever teenagers.
>>
>> Since you are new to it I might as well give you my own experience,
>> warning you though that it is entirely negative.
>>
>> The first time i used irc was about a software that I used, because the
>> programmers on that website said "if you have questions please pay us a
>> visit on irc". I found it extremely inconvenient, because :
>>
>> - You did not find the right person to answer your question if that
>> person appeared to be offline.
>>
>> - The other way round, interesting answers given on irc quickly
>> disappeared and were not published for all the other interested people
>> to read.
>>
>> In other words, irc was for me insanely unproductive, especially
>> compared to the forum that the website already had, with messages that
>> could wait online for the right reply, or stayed online for readers with
>> same questions.
>>
>> Also, the discussions were not categorized on irc, or had no title like
>> here, so that with your question you were forced to meddle in other
>> conversations going on about other topics.
>>
>> I then thought that irc was a media for computer-illiterate people. You
>> may ask then why was it used by programmers ? Well it was a social need
>> for programmers to gather in a specific space not for noobs.
>>
>> The second time I used irc was in my leisure time, in connection with a
>> team for the translation of Japanese anime.
>>
>> There was a lot of pleasant chat, banter, even quizz games, but it was
>> very difficult to maintain a conversation about the translation of
>> Japanese anime amidst all that noise.
>>
>> Also, since I was already typing around 3k words a day, it proved
>> impossible for me to stay on the keyboard in the evening. I had to go
>> out, walk, watch movies... well in general turn away from the computer.
>> Or get a life is another way of putting it.
>>
>> Another element that disturbed me is the
>> conversation-between-close-friends atmosphere that irc creates. Those
>> people were more like hobby acquaintances, not the kind of friends who
>> will visit you if you are sick, who will help you moving furniture
>> between appartments, etc. Not even people you will eat with. The
>> atmosphere was too friendly for people you hardly know. I was too
>> old-school for that I guess.
>>
>> The common point between geek users and teenager users is that irc is
>> for people who :
>>
>> - do not use computers intensively in their work, or do not mind using
>> them intensivey again in their free time
>>
>> - don't mind spending their evenings typing alone in their rooms, making
>> friends with unknown people
>>
>> - don't mind if their messages disappear, don't mind if some relevant
>> readers will never read them
>>
>> - don't mind if they miss relevant messages if they happen to be away
>>
>> - don't mind sympathizing closely with people that they will never see
>> or are ready to forget immediately
>>
>> As a conclusion, irc is from my point of view totally incompatible with
>> political discussions, which would require taking time to write to write
>> articulate messages, taking time to read them, separating the topics to
>> make them reasonably readable, and a social atmosphere suited for
>> distant sympathizers for a cause.
>>
>> My two cents, anyway who am I to criticize, since I won't use it. I have
>> documents to read instead. I don't chat, I read and write.
>>
>> If you don't know how to register, have someone show you, you will make
>> your own opinion.
>>
>> Arnaud
>>
>>

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikim

Re: [Gendergap] Just a few days into have the IRC channel

[carolmooredc]

I confess, I'm not sure what IRC is and not enough info in the #address 
for me to get there easily. ;-(

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

Re: [Gendergap] Back to Wikiquette alerts? Sigh...

[carolmooredc]

I knew it was just a matter of time before I myself would have to go 
running to wikiquette alerts (assuming other editors also fed up with 
same individual(s) in article in question don't also denounce the 
incessant personal attacks by one editor on me).

And this is an issue where two evidently pro-prosecution editors against 
a woman found innocent in a trial are playing bad cop/good cop on a 
number of editors and (till I made stink about 3RR) were doing 4-6 RR 
regularly, reverting the many various editors who presented edits, 
especially ones vs. their POV. (Including with "we're legal experts" 
excuses. After much badgering on that score I felt forced to mention 
having been a professional legal secretary for many years.)

Since I'm the only obvious female, I'm in the biggest trouble, of 
course. Mostly for being uppity, mentioning pro prosecution POV and 
thereby showing some sympathy with the (wrongly acquitted in their 
minds?) female's position.

I'll soldier on.  Can't decide if it's an issue for Feminism 
wikiproject. But definitely a combination of the behavioral and  
anti-female content issues that drive women away from wikipedia...

Carol in dc


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

Re: [Gendergap] New Survey: 9% female editors

[carolmooredc]

On 7/2/2011 12:34 PM, Casey Brown wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 10:52 AM,  wrote:
>> I had a bit of trouble figuring out what the targets and strategy for
>> increasing participation are, however.
> The part you just pasted linked to
> ,
> which gives these as the 2015 targets:
>
> * Increase the total number of people served to 1 billion
> * Increase the number of Wikipedia articles we offer to 50 million
> * Ensure information is high quality by increasing the percentage of
> material reviewed to be of high or very high quality by 25 percent
> * Encourage readers to become contributors by increasing the number of
> total editors per month who made>5 edits to 200,000
> * Support healthy diversity in the editing community by doubling the
> percentage of female editors to 25 percent and increase the percentage
> of Global South editors to 37 percent
>
> Did you already see that? If you didn't see that, then I think those
> are the targets and the last seems to be related to this list.
Thanks. I must have clicked on strategy again instead of targets by 
mistake.  25% would be a good start. I dislike phrase Global South since 
needs too much explanation. But "the 2/3 (or whatever percent) of the 
human population which lives in the economically developing world" is a 
bit of a mouthful. It also helps to remind people that wikimedias exist 
in dozens of languages, but how to add that to one short phrase, I know not!
> If you already saw it, then what other targets are you looking for? We
> might have another page bout it somewhere.
>
> Casey
>

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

[Gendergap] New Survey: 9% female editors

[carolmooredc]

http://blog.wikimedia.org/2011/06/10/wikipedia-editors-do-it-for-fun-first-results-of-our-2011-editor-survey/

Also, interesting statistics on ages, with 30 plus almost as large as 
12-29 year olds.


Plus this note:

As has been discussed recently, it is an important priority for the 
Wikimedia movement to progressively add diversity to our community.  We 
have set targets 
 
in our strategy  for 
greater participation of women and for rapid growth in the Global South. 
 These actions seek to both increase the size of the community (our 
goal is to grow to 200,000 by 2015) and to bring important new knowledge 
to our projects.


I had a bit of trouble figuring out what the targets and strategy for 
increasing participation are, however.


Thoughts?

Also, let me extend a mea culpa for doing too little on the couple 
things I've felt strongly about: letters to recruit new members and 
promoting Wikiquette Alerts.  It would help if the list focused a bit 
more on tasks to motivate us to conceive and carry out whatever projects 
are of most interest to us.


But you can take the weekend off - I will... '-)

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

[Gendergap] Dispute resolution noticeboard

[carolmooredc]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard
This is a one month trial. Check it out.

I don't think it can supplant wikiquette alerts
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts_

But a possibly good option, if people keep on top of the discussion to 
prevent flame wars there!

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

Re: [Gendergap] Wikiquette alerts...As I was passing through...

[carolmooredc]

Yes, fred we must put our time where our mouths are.
By watching Wikiquette_alerts and by encouraging use of them.
Where's the best newbie forum for that?
Going through a variety of essays and putting in a plug also might help...
It would be less manageable then - but then if enough people did it and 
Wikipedia had a reputation of chiding those who go out of their way to 
be obnoxious, perhaps they would learn something. (I've seen really 
obnoxious people quit after the most gentle chiding.)

CM

On 6/24/2011 10:35 PM, Fred Bauder wrote:
>> The below is a reminder of how useful it would be to put more emphasis
>> on letting new editors know that Wikiquette Alerts exist, encouraging
>> them to complain and then encouraging admins to just go to editors who
>> attack others, even with minor snide remarks, and encourage them not to
>> do it.  That's the kind of peer pressure that works best.
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts
>>
>> Even as a very assertive person and a relatively bold editor, it took me
>> almost two years before I started going to such venues for help. Sadly,
>> I didn't often get it.  I think it would be the one single thing that
>> could keep women who start editing from stopping. The bad boys might
>> call it "snitching."  We should call it empowerment - or maybe,
>> considering the average age of the perpetrators, good parenting! ;-)
>>
>> It really has to be it's own little wikiproject, or subgroup, or
>> something.  I haven't been paying much attention to wikipedia last could
>> months myself so can't remember the various options.
>>
>> Carol in dc
> Yes, I could follow that regularly. It seems manageable.
>
> Fred
>
>
> ___
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
>
> -
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1388 / Virus Database: 1513/3724 - Release Date: 06/24/11
>
>

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

Re: [Gendergap] Wikiquette alerts...As I was passing through...

[carolmooredc]

The below is a reminder of how useful it would be to put more emphasis 
on letting new editors know that Wikiquette Alerts exist, encouraging 
them to complain and then encouraging admins to just go to editors who 
attack others, even with minor snide remarks, and encourage them not to 
do it.  That's the kind of peer pressure that works best.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts

Even as a very assertive person and a relatively bold editor, it took me 
almost two years before I started going to such venues for help. Sadly, 
I didn't often get it.  I think it would be the one single thing that 
could keep women who start editing from stopping. The bad boys might 
call it "snitching."  We should call it empowerment - or maybe, 
considering the average age of the perpetrators, good parenting! ;-)

It really has to be it's own little wikiproject, or subgroup, or 
something.  I haven't been paying much attention to wikipedia last could 
months myself so can't remember the various options.

Carol in dc

On 6/23/2011 5:22 PM, Charlotte J wrote:
>
> I appreciate the encouraging assessment, but my experiences with the
> other editors on the two article talk pages that I described to Sue
> were in some ways even more off-putting because in their cases it was
> so impersonal ("We SCORN your miserable little crumb, even if it's
> correct!").
>
> I then made the mistake of clicking through a notice of a pending
> Article for Deletion discussion (first time ever) of an article whose
> subject is within my field of expertise: it was like reading through a
> dark parody of deliberative debate. I posted to that one and nothing
> bad happened to me (I was completely ignored, I think, except in the
> totaling of votes), then followed a second one initiated by the same
> nominator concerning another article in the same field and although
> nothing bad was said to me there either, I was utterly aghast at the
> kinds of things that other editors were saying to and about each
> other, which was the point at which I finally decided to stop editing.
>
> Thank you, as well, for the kind welcome.
>
> Best,
>
> Charlotte


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

Re: [Gendergap] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons

[carolmooredc]

Guess we need lots more people on Commons, too, who do not tolerate 
bigotry towards women


On 5/26/2011 8:01 PM, Béria Lima wrote:

carol,

en.wiki aproved that, Commons didn't. You can't use a rule from one 
wiki in another. IF - and that is a BIG if, if commons community 
approve such kind of rules, you people can remove all comments you can 
find


Until there, is censure, and you people will not do it while i'm there 
to watch commons RC.

_
/Béria Lima/
Wikimedia Portugal 
(351) 963 953 042

/Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter 
livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que 
estamos a fazer./



2011/5/27 mailto:carolmoor...@verizon.net>>

Racist, homophobic and anti-semitic comments are certainly
criticized and people ask for their removal. A pattern of such
comments could get one banned. The same should be true for
obviously sexist comments. In fact, it's here
See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Civil#Identifying_incivility -
after a long debate with some editors strongly opposed to adding
such sexist comments.

* (b) personal attacks
  , 
including
  racial, ethnic, sexual, gender-related and religious slurs,
  and derogatory references to groups such as social classes
  or nationalities;



On 5/26/2011 2:53 PM, Sarah wrote:

2011/5/26 Ryan Kaldari  


Those types of comments are a lot worse than unnecessary. They create a
sexualized environment that is exclusionary to anyone who isn't a
heterosexual male. If this doesn't make sense to you, please read through
http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Sexualized_environment

These types of comments should be removed on sight. If you see them,
please delete them or email me. Thanks.

On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:34, Béria Lima  
  wrote:

If you start the censure in Commons, Ryan, your cause will be in Adm
noticeboard "on sight"
_
Béria Lima
Wikimedia Portugal
(351) 963 953 042

Béria, you've rightly asked that people not generalize their
responses, where they assume everyone feels as they do. But the same
applies to you. You're not offended by these comments. You would see
their removal as censorship. Others disagree, and their arguments are
valid too.

It would be interesting if we could try to find common ground.

I agree with you that it's important not to be over-sensitive. But a
big problem is that women have been taught for hundreds of years that
they're just over-reacting when they say they see discrimination.

So the question is: how do we create an environment that's welcoming
for as many groups as possible -- including groups who are sensitive
to perceived discrimination, and groups who are sensitive to perceived
censorship?

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


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 10.0.1375 / Virus Database: 1509/3662 - Release Date: 05/26/11



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

Re: [Gendergap] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons

[carolmooredc]

Racist, homophobic and anti-semitic comments are certainly criticized 
and people ask for their removal. A pattern of such comments could get 
one banned. The same should be true for obviously sexist comments. In 
fact, it's here
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Civil#Identifying_incivility 
- after a long debate with some editors strongly opposed to adding such 
sexist comments.


   * (b) personal attacks
 ,
 including racial, ethnic, sexual, gender-related and religious
 slurs, and derogatory references to groups such as social classes
 or nationalities;



On 5/26/2011 2:53 PM, Sarah wrote:

2011/5/26 Ryan Kaldari

Those types of comments are a lot worse than unnecessary. They create a
sexualized environment that is exclusionary to anyone who isn't a
heterosexual male. If this doesn't make sense to you, please read through
http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Sexualized_environment

These types of comments should be removed on sight. If you see them,
please delete them or email me. Thanks.

On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:34, Béria Lima  wrote:

If you start the censure in Commons, Ryan, your cause will be in Adm
noticeboard "on sight"
_
Béria Lima
Wikimedia Portugal
(351) 963 953 042

Béria, you've rightly asked that people not generalize their
responses, where they assume everyone feels as they do. But the same
applies to you. You're not offended by these comments. You would see
their removal as censorship. Others disagree, and their arguments are
valid too.

It would be interesting if we could try to find common ground.

I agree with you that it's important not to be over-sensitive. But a
big problem is that women have been taught for hundreds of years that
they're just over-reacting when they say they see discrimination.

So the question is: how do we create an environment that's welcoming
for as many groups as possible -- including groups who are sensitive
to perceived discrimination, and groups who are sensitive to perceived
censorship?

Sarah

_



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

Re: [Gendergap] Commons as an art gallery?

[carolmooredc]

*puerile* - perfect!

* A good long list makes the squeaky wheel loud and clear :-)

On 5/16/2011 11:40 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
> There is a long thread on the Commons and Gendergap lists about today's
> featured image on Commons:
>
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/commons-l/2011-May/
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/2011-May/
>
> It's an original piece of art by a Wikimedian, "in the style of" erotic
> manga:
>
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:On_the_edge_-_free_world_version.jpg
>
> The picture was removed from the main page by a WMF staff member, acting as
> an ordinary editor, and then restored a few hours later by a Commons admin.
>
> Aspects of the image that have been discussed include the fact that
>
> * it has no noteworthy artistic value
>
> * it is used to showcase a Wikimedian's artwork on the project main page
>
> * it lacks educational value, being the work of a non-notable Wikimedian
>
> * it makes the Foundation look puerile
>
> * it might turn off serious educators
>
> * it might turn off older people
>
> * it might turn off schools
>
> * it might turn off women
>
> * it might turn off institutions owning valuable content from donating to the 
> Foundation
>
> * it is the victim of cultural fascism directed against manga/anime
>
> * it is the victim of prudery
>
> * it is the victim of censorship
>
> * not showing the image on the mian page would undermine the Foundation's 
> mission
>
> etc. etc.
>
> This is really a Foundation topic though. Are projects' main pages there to
> showcase Wikimedians' fine art? If yes, then why do we not have songs by
> unsigned garage bands "in the style of ..." as featured media of the day?
>
> Should the Foundation establish guidelines on what type of content to feature
> on project main pages?
>
> Crossposted to Foundation-l, Commons-l and Gendergap.
>
> Andreas
>
>

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

Re: [Gendergap] Submissions 2 Wikimania 2011

[carolmooredc]

The interface isn't too user friendly. Here's:

   * http://wikimania2011.wikimedia.org/wiki/Schedule
   * http://wikimania2011.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikimania_2011



On 5/10/2011 10:12 AM, carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote:

Per
http://wikimania2011.wikimedia.org/wiki/Call_for_Participation#Submission
It's not too late to submit related proposals to Wikimania, for those going.

http://wikimania2011.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex/Submissions/
Is a list of current ones.


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

[Gendergap] Submissions 2 Wikimania 2011

[carolmooredc]

Per
http://wikimania2011.wikimedia.org/wiki/Call_for_Participation#Submission
It's not too late to submit related proposals to Wikimania, for those going.

http://wikimania2011.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex/Submissions/
Is a list of current ones.

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

Re: [Gendergap] Manifesto

[carolmooredc]

On 3/24/2011 4:21 PM, Pete Forsyth wrote:
 > On Mar 24, 2011, at 1:11 PM, Joseph Reagle wrote:
 >> 1. Is this supposed to be a code of conduct for this list then? 
(That's how it strikes me. Why not call it a code of conduct then?) 
Also, on some set of Wiki pages?
 >
 > Let's keep in mind that there's already been some work done on "code 
of conduce" -- http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_gap#Discuss
 >
 >

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_gap#Discuss

Should have a section on goals that would include goals oriented part of 
the manifesto and then have the current section on mailing list rules, 
adding anything new and necessary. And make it clear that violating 
specific rules, especially after warnings from moderators, is what gets 
you booted, not some vague threat about "using the list in a negative way."

Also, I don't know if adminship and bureaucratship are used a lot in 
wikipedia, but even for people who've been around a while they sound a 
little too "incrowd-y".   Spell out administrator and make clear what a 
bureaucrat is (I'm not sure).

Carol in dc


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

Re: [Gendergap] Visible female faces for Wikim/pedia

[carolmooredc]

I noticed that the article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipe-tan

just survived a second deletion attempt.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Wikipedia:Wikipe-tan_%282nd_nomination%29

The main Wikipe-tan image obviously should be the focus of *Change*.

Obviously there are lots of fans. But once there are alternatives, it 
might be easier to go for individual or mass deletion of the most 
problematic ones.

Also, I searched "create anime character" and found a bunch of places 
where you can, which might solve artistic problem, depending on if 
programs exist for creating them off line and non-copyrighted. In case 
someone wants to check it out.


On 3/20/2011 8:46 PM, Fred Bauder wrote:
>
> Just a technical note:
>
> https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Mass_deletion_request
>
> Fred


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

Re: [Gendergap] Visible female faces for Wikim/pedia

[carolmooredc]

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category_talk:Wikipe-tan
Might be more appropriate.

Ways of dealing with it: come up with much more appropriate and popular 
symbol widely disseminated.

Come up with male and female wikipe-tans and put those up.

Try to delete all the female only ones.


On 3/20/2011 4:05 PM, Juliana da Costa José wrote:
> hehe ;)
>
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikipe-tan%27s_past,_now_and_future2.png
>
>
> 2011/3/20, Carol Moore in DC:
>> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category_talk:Wikipe-tan
>> I started a debate here. Uh oh, sexual innuendo warning.
> ___
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
>
> -
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1498/3518 - Release Date: 03/20/11
>
>


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

Re: [Gendergap] Outreach..was.. Proposal: Forking gendergap

[carolmooredc]

On 3/17/2011 3:28 PM, Joseph Reagle wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 16, 2011, you wrote:
>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_gap/outreach_letters
>> My first draft of any outreach email letter - which I sent an earlier
> Good, thank you.
>
> I think it could be useful to provide some examples of efforts/projects on 
> this issue that have succeeded, active/promiment Wikipedian women as role 
> models, and a place to go or be welcomed. Presently, it feels a bit like 
> "please come and watch out for the 20-something males" which could be 
> supplemented with "please come, progress can be made, such as [here], there 
> are other women like you here such as [active/prominent Wikipedians] and come 
> visit us [at wiki/gendergap/wikichix] if you want/need to."
>
*Yup, my perspective when I wrote it way back in Mid-February. Probably 
evolved more in a more positive direction since then. (Of course I also 
dropped off of a couple of the most annoying articles where the 20 
something males were driving me craziest.)

So I should update/improve it with all info/insights that have come by 
since then, including with your suggestions...

Others please feel free to draft your own letters.

Or maybe we need a "module" letter...

In other words sections with suggested language and they can decide what 
seems most appropriate to them...

Like: my experience, why I like it, role models, how to get involved, 
how to learn more about editing,, how to connect with other women... etc...

Will see what can do this weekend...

Cm in DC

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

Re: [Gendergap] Outreach..was.. Proposal: Forking gendergap

[carolmooredc]

On 3/17/2011 6:43 AM, elisabeth bauer wrote:
> 2011/3/17 Carol Moore in DC:
>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_gap/outreach_letters
>> My first draft of any outreach email letter - which I sent an earlier
>> version of to a bunch of women with no positive feedback.
> What do you mean by this? Did you get any feedback at all?
**If I remember correctly, the response was two "Good idea, but I'm too 
busy" messages. Like all forms of advertising, it is necessary to repeat 
the message before people pay attention.

So actually there need to be a series of messages for such group lists 
over a period of a month or so. Whether they are all people you know 
personally, partially know (as in case of two different lists I sent to) 
or not know at all.  Say, one introductory and explicit one like the 
draft I put up. Two short, wow, look at this article I worked on on 
wikipedia (in their area of interest) with general encouragement to 
edit. (I.e., obviously not as canvassing to get support on a disputed 
article). Maybe mixed into some discussion on some topic. And then 
another one that again encourages them in a short friendly way. Plus 
drop in links to various articles on topics discussed from time to time 
after that.  Maybe even put it in one's tag line "I edit wikipedia! Can 
you guess my handle?" or whatever.
>> So waiting for
>> others to comment or come up with different approaches before sending out
>> such outreach emails more widely
> I don't think outreach letters, however well formulated, will motivate
> many people to try editing Wikipedia. If you know the women you sent
> your letter to, why not rather invite them to an edit wikipedia party?
Great idea!  Is there a link to show how to do that? I can imagine a few 
of us getting together and, after running through the basics, having TOO 
much fun with some article, meat puppeting away. (Especially if someone 
brings booze.) So good to have clear guidelines on how to do that as a 
party - but not party too hard! :-)
> greetings,
> elian
>
>

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

Re: [Gendergap] The problem is aggression.... was ... Proposal: Forking gendergap:

[carolmooredc]

I don't have a problem with people starting an all women list 
specifically on this topic through whatever appropriate list serve 
service seems appropriate. It can make its own rules about participants. 
The impression I got was the proposal was to make *this* the all women 
list, which I oppose. With all back and forth one gets confused.

On 3/16/2011 7:59 PM, SlimVirgin wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 17:52,  wrote:
>> I second. The problem is aggression and trying to impose one's agenda, and
>> whether you are male, female, M2F transgender or F2M transgender, you can be
>> aggressive and disruptive. (And I've been on a couple all women lists over
>> the years where M2F transgenders were very aggressive, condescending and
>> disruptive.) I don't see any agreement with Ms. Hale's proposal and I think
>> we need to drop it.
>>
> It's true, though, that there are things I would post about Wikipedia
> on a women-only list, if I could be 100 percent sure that's what it
> was. And as if to prove that point, I just typed out an example, then
> deleted it because I felt uncomfortable. :)  So even if Laura's
> proposal isn't being supported, I hope it gives food for thought. And
> there's nothing to stop her from setting up such a list herself.
>
> Sarah
>
>
> -


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

Re: [Gendergap] The problem is aggression.... was ... Proposal: Forking gendergap:

[carolmooredc]

I second. The problem is aggression and trying to impose one's agenda, 
and whether you are male, female, M2F transgender or F2M transgender, 
you can be aggressive and disruptive. (And I've been on a couple all 
women lists over the years where M2F transgenders were very aggressive, 
condescending and disruptive.) I don't see any agreement with Ms. Hale's 
proposal and I think we need to drop it.


On 3/16/2011 7:01 PM, Béria Lima wrote:

I completely agree with Fluffy.
_
/Béria Lima/
Wikimedia Portugal 
(351) 963 953 042

/Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter 
livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que 
estamos a fazer./



2011/3/16 ChaoticFluffy >


I also don't have a problem with Erik's POV in particular. My
views on this topic are basically that:

1) Yes, some of the men here are being excessively strident and
dismissive in a lot of cases
2) Yes, I feel less inclined to speak my mind because I know that
I'm going to have to defend every point I make from three or four
men telling me how it's not a problem
3) No, I don't think the solution is to fork the list. We have to
function with men onwiki, there's no reason to kick them off here
4) I'm not sure how moderation could be used effectively other
than to have moderators speak to people who are overly dismissive.
Having a moderator approve all posts seems excessive, but I would
support, say, an X-strikes-you're-out policy regarding belittling
or dismissive behavior
5) I don't think it's constructive to require the men to justify
themselves to us or the list. If they're here, they're here
because they want to work on the gender gap. That said...
6) I don't know how many more ways we women can tell you guys that
some of you are coming across as obnoxious. I'm sorry if that
offends you (mostly because I'm a woman and I've been trained to
be sorry if I offend people, hey look how that works), but YOU
ARE. Please accept that this is happening, it's making the women
unhappy, and we'd like you to think before you speak from now on.
7) Please do NOT immediately protest that you feel like the mean
feminist women are trying to oppress you by telling you all this.
Feel like we're snap-judging your statements? Feel like we're
treating you as your gender rather than yourself, and unfairly so?
Feel like we're just not listening to the points you're trying to
make? WELCOME TO OUR WORLD AS WOMEN.

-Fluff




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

Re: [Gendergap] Proposal: Forking gendergap: Main list for women and transgender, sublist for male supporters

[carolmooredc]

Just to clarify, I think the list should remain mixed sex.

But it is a problem when on a list dedicated to getting more women 
involved, men post two to four times as much as women (depending on the 
week), with some men posting a couple times a day. It can feel like the 
"same old same old" - especially if the men are disagreeing a lot with 
what women say.  Plus women often do need more encouragement to post.

George definitely could post a bit more; and some male posters should 
try to keep it down to one a day or five a week.  I've been on lists of 
Palestinians and of African-Americans where they were working on their 
issues and I was always careful to just add info of general interest and 
occasional positive suggestions -- and not to post too much or be 
critical of their views since I felt they should work it out among 
themselves.

Since most - not all - wikipedia issues are common to men and women, 
more might be expected of guys here. But not as much as seems to come 
through the list now.

On 3/16/2011 8:42 AM, Marc Riddell wrote:
> This is simply, nonsense! Don't you people realize that separating this List
> into two distinct ones would underline, reinforce and actually signify the
> very "gendergap" you are allegedly trying to resolve. This is people talking
> with people. If there is a female or male here who has a problem
> communicating with, or in the presence of, another gender - they do have a
> problem. But a website Mailing List such as this is not the place to resolve
> it.
>
> Marc Riddell
>
>
> on 3/15/11 11:53 PM, carolmoor...@verizon.net at carolmoor...@verizon.net
> wrote:
>
>> Yeah, George! A definite role model for the list; but with such a common
>> sense attitude, you should feel free to post a tiny bit more :-)
>>
>> On 3/14/2011 8:33 PM, George Herbert wrote:
>>> I realize that my replying is in a sense violating what I'm about to
>>> say below, but...
>>>
>>> I and some others who are male are here and either listening, or
>>> listening and briefly asking what the women present (and absent) feel
>>> about things and not asserting what you do or should think.
>>>
>>> I would appreciate not being locked out of part of the discussion.  I
>>> appreciate that doing so necessarily means I should be minimizing my
>>> speaking out, and maximizing my listening, and I hope I've done so
>>> successfully.
>>>
>>> That said, if the dynamics here overall have created a list which is
>>> not optimal for encouraging women to participate, which I can clearly
>>> see is possible, I understand your wanting to do something about it.
>>> Two lists as proposed might be necessary.
>>>
>>> If this has happened on the list designed to talk about and fix the
>>> problem of that happening...  *bang head on the wall*   Talk about
>>> frustrating.  We're supposed to be the "good guys", literally 8-(
>>>
>>>
>>> My two cents, and I will now go back to listening.
>>>
>>>
>

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

Re: [Gendergap] Proposal: Forking gendergap: Main list for women and transgender, sublist for male supporters

[carolmooredc]

Yeah, George! A definite role model for the list; but with such a common 
sense attitude, you should feel free to post a tiny bit more :-)

On 3/14/2011 8:33 PM, George Herbert wrote:
>
> I realize that my replying is in a sense violating what I'm about to
> say below, but...
>
> I and some others who are male are here and either listening, or
> listening and briefly asking what the women present (and absent) feel
> about things and not asserting what you do or should think.
>
> I would appreciate not being locked out of part of the discussion.  I
> appreciate that doing so necessarily means I should be minimizing my
> speaking out, and maximizing my listening, and I hope I've done so
> successfully.
>
> That said, if the dynamics here overall have created a list which is
> not optimal for encouraging women to participate, which I can clearly
> see is possible, I understand your wanting to do something about it.
> Two lists as proposed might be necessary.
>
> If this has happened on the list designed to talk about and fix the
> problem of that happening...  *bang head on the wall*   Talk about
> frustrating.  We're supposed to be the "good guys", literally 8-(
>
>
> My two cents, and I will now go back to listening.
>
>

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

Re: [Gendergap] Proposal: Forking gendergap: Main list for women and transgender, sublist for male supporters

[carolmooredc]

I never got a response from the wikichix list when tried to join.

Here, I'd rather see the males control themselves and post less and the 
women encourage each other to participate more.

:-) Smiley face added to make up for lack of interpersonal interface...

carol in dc

On 3/14/2011 11:37 PM, Angela wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Laura Hale  wrote:
>> I'd like to propose that the gendergap be forked.  The main list would be
>> for women and transgendered who want to work together to help increase
>> female participation on Wikipedia and other Wikimedia Foundation projects.
>> The fork list would be for male allies who want to work towards a similar
>> goal.
> There already is the WikiChix [1] list just for female editors. There
> were two problems with it. One was the difficulties in ensuring only
> females joined, and the other was inactivity. How would a fork of the
> gendergap list avoid those issues?
>
> Angela
>
> [1] http://lists.modernthings.org/listinfo.cgi/wikichix-l-modernthings.org


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

Re: [Gendergap] Barnstars!

[carolmooredc]

I'd collected my favorite Barnstars and was trying to motivate myself to 
give out to a bunch of editors have associated with over time. Then Ryan 
made it so EASY and I went on a spree tonight.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_awards has a  
WikiProject Gender Studies Award "For editors who make significant 
contributions to gender studies articles that expand Wikipedia’s 
knowledge about gender, gender theory, feminisms, masculinities and/or 
sexuality studies."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Barnstars could probably use a 
topical barnstar on "issues of interest to women" or something.

On 3/7/2011 9:28 PM, Sue Gardner wrote:
> Hey folks,
>
> Did Ryan Kaldari post this to this group:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kaldari/wikilove ? Forgive me if he
> or someone else already has.
>
> Ryan's just created a new widget that makes it much easier to award
> barnstars (and kittens!). I think this is FABULOUS: making it easier
> to be kind and friendly can't be wrong :-)
>
> Instructions for how to download and use the widget are on Ryan's
> userpage, at the link. I encourage everyone here to experiment with
> offering each other love&  praise :-)
>
> Thanks,
> Sue
>
> (And if the barnstar concept is new to you, you can read about its use
> on Wikipedia here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Barnstars.)
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Sue Gardner
> Executive Director
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> 415 839 6885 office
> 415 816 9967 cell
>
> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
> the sum of all knowledge.  Help us make it a reality!
>
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
>
> ___
>


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

Re: [Gendergap] What motivates women to edit? ...Gendergap Digest, Vol 2, Issue 5

[carolmooredc]

I hadn't thought of editing before until I saw an awful article on 
myself and on a group I was involved with, so I did start as activist 
promoting a cause in my first couple articles for the first year or so 
til I started to understand how wikipedia works.


Another woman wrote on the facebook page a relevant comment: "So 
(another chicken-and-egg problem) one way to get more women to 
participate is to increase coverage of topics women are more likely to 
feel they can contribute to. Whatever those are... :-)"


So increasing number of articles women in general might like helps.

Also, get people in the habit by just encouraging minor edits to start, 
even just grammar or spelling or wikilinks. Frequently when I watch a 
movie I search for background in the Wikipedia article. Sometimes I make 
minor corrections.  I'm sure others use it for similar purposes.


Maybe appeal to the "straighten this mess out" motivation many women 
feel (in fact that's how I describe part of my motivation on my user 
page).  Little habits can become big ones.


Maybe a banner every couple hours (or during high traffic times) that 
say something like: "Hello, visitor! See a spelling or grammar mistake 
in an article? Feel free to jump in and correct it.  Making editing 
wikipedia a habit!" Or something snappier.  And a certain percentage of 
those will be women who otherwise would not think of editing.


CM

On 3/7/2011 11:56 PM, Collective Action wrote:

...

I think for people who are new to Wikipedia and decide to edit due to 
an issue they feel strongly about, their fervour may be a double-edged 
sword. These people my be at most risk of their experience not living 
up to their hopes in that their strong opinion might imply that there 
are other people with equally strong opinions on the same topic on 
Wikipedia and facing this while also learning the syntax and 
everything else can result in them feeling overwhelmed.


The most common comment to me though is that women have just not 
thought to do it before. These women don't cite any concerns about 
Wikipedia- one has to be informed about Wikipedia to have heard of the 
reputation for conflict that has been doing the media rounds. With a 
bit of help and support through learning the ropes, many women I talk 
to on Twitter don't have a problem with the idea of editing Wikipedia 
and of course some have alredy done so.


Just thought I'd add my feedback to the topic.

Rosie
http://women4wikipedia.net

>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 20:15:28 -0500
> From: carolmoor...@verizon.net
> Subject: [Gendergap] What motivates women to edit??

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

[Gendergap] What motivates women to edit??

[carolmooredc]

What Motivates Women - especially to write and edit? I think finding 
motivations many women share and tapping into those to encourage women 
to start and keep editing is key to this project

I'm an atypical task oriented political organizing/writing maniac, so 
I'm not the best judge :-) I know many women are busy with home duties 
and myself have found the last 10 years that elder dog/new young dog 
care and barter-for-rent-housekeeping certainly have taken up a lot of 
my time.

So I know it must be more for women with husbands, kids, elderly 
parents, etc. If I was working more than very part time (plus collecting 
social security), I wouldn't have the time.

But for those who can squeeze in a few hours a week, what might be their 
biggest kick/motivator for writing about topics of interest? If the 
motivation is strong enough, even dealing with the male culture and/or 
dominance problem is easier psychologically for those who inadvertently 
or purposively venture into articles where lots of garrulous males hangout.

Since many women (overly?) motivated by “selfless motives,” “Women: make 
the world a better and smarter place - edit Wikipedia!” Just a thought, 
based on part of my own motivation.

Anyway, feel free to brainstorm on this topic more with your own 
personal female motivation! :-)

Carol in DC

PS: FYI, re: the long “Women’s Café” discussion at 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Feminism#Women.27s_Cafe_idea.
It did evolve into a Wikiproject Women idea, pretty much like the 
Feminism and LGBT projects. But at this point even other women-related 
projects are not getting many women contributing, so it seems premature 
to do another broader one. And there’s the chicken and egg problem - do 
we need a Wikiproject to make more women comfortable with staying or do 
need more women to support such a project??


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

Re: [Gendergap] Collaboration is the issue...A stereotype we should be careful about ...

[carolmooredc]

First, in talking about male and female attitudes/behaviors we usually 
are talking overlapping Bell Curves, not either or, so stereotyping 
isn't necessarily the issue.

The real problem is dominance-seeking behavior (mostly but not 
exclusively by males), which is the opposite of collaboration. Even if 
wikipedia was ALL males it would be trying to cool down such dominance 
behavior.

Given that Wikipedia both wants to encourage collaboration and bring 
more women in to increase the number of editors and broaden the scope 
and depth of entries, it seems like a no brainer to do what it takes to 
institute -- or more often *actually apply* -- policies that discourage 
the whole variety of dominance behaviors.

I freely admit that as a fairly dominant female, I will engage in such 
behaviors when sufficiently aggravated by males also engaging in them. 
(And that behavior sometimes carries over out of habit to articles where 
things have been collaborative, and I have to work to tone it down.)

But at 62 my blood pressure doesn't need the aggravation. Nor would that 
of the 10,000 seniors, male and female, I'd like to see join up to 
wikipedia over next few years.  (Hint to official outreach people: do 
articles and ads in AARP and other senior publications.)

Active debate is one thing.  Constantly running into, if I may speak 
freely -- p***ing contests and c*rcle j*rks -- is something entirely 
different, which a lot of people, male and female, have little stomach 
for.  Who cares if it's nature or nurture why women dislike such 
behavior more?

Less hostile and more peaceful collaboration is  good for BOTH women 
editors and Wikipedia.


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

Re: [Gendergap] Emails to friends, lists to encourage participation

[carolmooredc]

Done! :-)
Including adding  the idea of suggesting articles...

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_gap/outreach_letters

On 2/22/2011 4:46 PM, Sue Gardner wrote:
 > Carol, I think this is a great idea :-)
 >
 > I think we (anyone here) should create a page on meta (linked to from
 > here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_gap) where we put your
 > draft text, and point to good basic resources to support people
 > getting started in editing. (There are some very good resources here:
 > http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Bookshelf/Wikipedia and elsewhere
 > on the outreach wiki.)
 >
 > That would equip people to use your base text, plus any links that
 > seem useful to them, to do outreach to any group they like. I really
 > believe that individual outreach: people reaching out to their own
 > networks, is a good tactic for us. Because the people who are one
 > degree of separation from the people here are by definition good
 > candidates to become editors.
 >
 > Thanks,
 > Sue
 >
 >
 >
 > --
 >  Sue Gardner
 > Executive Director
 > Wikimedia Foundation
 >
 > 415 839 6885 office
 > 415 816 9967 cell
 >
 > Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
 > the sum of all knowledge.  Help us make it a reality!
 >
 > http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
 >


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

Re: [Gendergap] Women's issues noticeboard

[carolmooredc]

If a woman may speak... :-)

The noticeboard IS too combative and won't have much positive effect *at 
this point. *

Already I'm finding it difficult to bring up in a neutral manner ideas 
like putting Wife selling in category: sexism or creating more 
appopriate categories, like Category: Male dominance on the Feminism 
Wikiproject without a minor brouhaha ensuing from men - with no female 
input at all.  (And then there were two long and hot debates in sex 
practice articles by males offended by proposals to remove their 
favorite images.)

Just imagine a noticeboard where even more males would be watching... Oi!

I still think WIKIPROJECT:WOMEN'S CAFE would be a great education, 
social and support area, one which could have a section on articles of 
interest, in addition to wikiproject feminism. If it was too newbie or 
touchy-feely for some guys, so be it.

Unfortunately, though I've brought it up 2 or 3 times, I don't think any 
women have replied to that Idea.

if women on this list can't respond to what seems to me like *a natural* 
what hope is there?

How about all the guys control yourselves and not post your responses on 
this til Wednesday? :-)

Carol in dc







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

[Gendergap] Emails to friends, lists to encourage participation

[carolmooredc]

One thing we can all do is send letters of encouragement to women to 
join wikipedia. I don't know if there is a form letter  already used 
that we can merge ideas like the below into.  This is includes and 
expands on points I sent out to a couple of political women friends and 
womens lists - about 150 women total - as a personal encouragement. 
Underwhelming two responses so far: "good idea" and "I'm too busy." So I 
know that the letter needs work! Maybe we could have a couple versions 
linked from http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_Gap

Revised draft version:

Wikipedia has set as it's goal increasing the number of editors from 
under 15% to 25% over the next few years. See the New York Times and 
other articles and other relevant Women and Wikipedia links here. 
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_Gap

I've been editing a lot the last few years. It is fun for amateur policy 
wonks and has taught me a lot  about good referencing and how easily 
ones own biases can twist the material one is dealing with.  And it's a 
great motivator to learn more about a topic you are interest in - you go 
in and improve an article on a topic of interest with better information 
from better sources.

And it's fun to get challenged, whether you are proven wrong, proven 
right, or work with others to come up together with a collaborative 
solution. Talk page discussions and debates are a great way to learn 
about Wikipedia editing policies.

It can take a few months to get up to speed on all the policies to 
enable you to edit effectively, i.e.,  making edits that will stick 
while deleting unsourced and biased material.

Also, since Wikipedia is still mostly a 20 something man's world, it may 
be best to use a gender neutral name and not advertise on your user page 
you are a female, at least until you get the hang of editing it.  At 
least avoid using use your whole real name to avoid possible harassment 
on and off Wikipedia.*

But if you have favorite topics that you'd like to see better covered, 
have time on your hands (as some of us semi- and retired women do), and 
want to have some great fun, do try Wikipedia.



(*CM Note: this point is actually said explicitly in User name policy, 
but few people get to it before they choose a user name)





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

Re: [Gendergap] Nine Reasons Women Don't Edit Wikipedia

[carolmooredc]

On 2/20/2011 5:24 PM, Marc Riddell wrote:
> Sue, as you know, this is the area of my greatest concern regarding the
> future of the Wikipedia Project. The gender gap is a part of the larger
> problem you described above: That of a combative, hostile and defensive
> culture that presents an unchecked arena for Community Member harassment and
> abuse - that prevents the type of healthy, intelligent and productive
> collaboration that can, and will, improve and maintain the quality of the
> Project. Is there, are there, plans to mount a similar initiative to tackle
> this larger problem? To approach it as a gender-neutral problem?
>
> Marc Riddell
Frankly, I've been a bit discouraged by the lack of interest in these 
specific current efforts I mentioned 10 days ago:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Civility#Proposal
Someone else proposed language to WP:Civility to make slurs vs.
homosexuals a no -no and I pointed out it wasn't clear that slurs
against women as women are not sufficiently outlawed in the proposal (or
now).  And of course people are now saying adding one or two words to
make both clear is just too much bureaucracy.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/dispute_resolution
Main relevant proposals are relating to easier blocks for bad behavior.
(Elsewhere dealing with editors who gang up on others, whether from POV
or just enjoy trashing females, has been discussed so that may yet be a
related proposal on that page.) I was working on a proposal when the NT
TImes articles came out and got sidetracked. Anyway, we definitely need
more female input.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Username_policy#Need_more_warnings_on_using_real_names
Do we need stronger warnings to new users (esp women)*
when they register * that using real
names (or sex) can lead to harassment? Or even a check mark box for them
to check they've read about that possibility on registering ?
(Obviously, using my real name, I've had problems!)


Thanks...

Carol in dc




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