Re: [Gendergap] Article about super-spreader might need help (enWP)
Hi Jane, (Perhaps we should have this discussion on the grant page itself as well but) I do want to say that I disagree that this situation proves that step-wise editing might not help shy people. The student in this case chose to do their editing in a way which was comfortable for them. And the way they were comfortable editing was to do so in a sandbox. I think this is proof of concept that some shy people prefer to work in this manner and that accommodating them might help bring this population into the editor pool. I won't disagree that the *result* of this type of editing was a spectacular flame/reversion war that ultimately (probably) scared away a new editor; but was the fault 100% with *their* process (blob additions) or could some blame also be applied to the current culture of editing that disparages these kinds of additions? If we implicitly encourage this kind of editing by adding support for it, might this not change of the culture of wikipedia to make these kinds of edits (that shy people may prefer) more welcome, and potentially avert a culture clash like this in the future? While I personally do not like editing in this manner whatsoever, and I agree it carries some inherent problems, I think it's important to remember that since we personally are all editors, we're exactly NOT the kind of person we need to be recruiting- we have those kind of people already! Even if the vast majority of *current* Wikipedia editors dislike and wouldn't use these features, that doesn't mean it could potentially have a major impact on converting novice and shy editors. By the way, is there any plan to formally reach out to the teacher and student? -mvolz On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Jane Darnell jane...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the links! I find this interesting since I was having a lot of trouble understanding an IEG proposal that I was reviewing: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Stepwise_Disclosure_Edition:_Wikipedia_for_shy_people Most people on the English Wikipedia have no problem hitting the edit button, and a quick review of the talk page on Superspreader shows that all of the people posting comments there feel totally comfortable doing just that *except* for the student whose edits are under review. Thanks to this case, I am now able to imagine a situation where this IEG proposal functionality could be relevant. I believe this particular superspreader case proves that publishing in one blob like the student has done can potentially be disruptive, which is interesting and puts that proposal into a totally new perspective for me. I would in fact say that this case proves that the functionality in the IEG proposal is, in fact, undesirable. 2014-05-06 14:17 GMT+02:00, Derric Atzrott datzr...@alizeepathology.com: The discussion is located at the talk page for the article in question. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Super-spreader Just to clear up where the significant on-wiki attention took place at (my first guess was User Talk:Malke 2010). Thank you, Derric Atzrott From: gendergap-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:gendergap-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of George Herbert Sent: 06 May 2014 01:03 To: Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the participation of women within Wikimedia projects. Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Article about super-spreader might need help (enWP) This now has gotten significant on-wiki attention. List relevant but less important on-wiki (I hope) complicating factor - the editor who was felt to possibly be OWNing the article is User:Malke 2010, a female Wikipedian... On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 9:29 PM, Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hey folks, On my phone, so I haven't read the talk page in question. But it looks like a new female editor might be having a tough time on this article: maybe somebody has time to step in and take a look? Thanks, Sue http://dynamicecology.wordpress.com/2014/05/05/using-wikipedia-in-the-classroom-a-cautionary-tale/ ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap -- -george william herbert george.herb...@gmail.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
[Gendergap] Preprint on cross-cultural historical figures in Wikipedia, includes gender breakdowns
Interactions of cultures and top people of Wikipedia from ranking of 24 language editions http://arxiv.org/abs/1405.7183 ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] men on lists
If you ask a black artist to paint a picture of a man they will most likely paint a picture of a black man. A tangent- but this is not strictly true! See: http://mediadiversified.org/2013/12/07/you-cant-do-that-stories-have-to-be-about-white-people/ On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 8:11 PM, Marie Earley eir...@hotmail.com wrote: Since you've asked Derric... When you posted your message, Can we please steer it back on topic and remember why we are all here? - I was ready to steam in as I misinterpreted it. I thought that - as a response to Carol's comment that women get hassled here and quit the list - you were saying, We're not supposed to be talking about women getting hassled, we're supposed to be talking about why women leave. (I was going to say, but they left precisely BECAUSE they were being hassled.) Fortunately I read your next message in time not to steam in. Perhaps instead of: Nemo and Carol both, I really don't like the direction that this discussion is going. Can we please steer it back on topic and remember why we are all here? ...something along the lines of, I'm sure there are lots of examples people could give of poor behaviour on this list. Since the purpose of this list is ...discussing solutions and exploring opportunities that may serve as a starting point to improve gender equity, increase the participation of women and trans women, and reduce the impact of the gender gap within Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons, and the 'free knowledge movement'. then perhaps we should discuss measures that would tackle such poor behaviour. Also if you ask a white artist to paint a picture of a man they will most likely paint a picture of a white man. If you ask a black artist to paint a picture of a man they will most likely paint a picture of a black man. Neither are being racist. It's worth remembering that men - no matter how progressive or forward thinking - experience the world as men and women experience the world as women. There's a well known workplace experiment where a group of men are put in one room and given a task and a group of women are put in another room and given the same task. The women invariably put everything on the coffee table in front of them, lean forward, and work collaboratively. Meanwhile in the men are choosing someone who will lead them, Mr Alpha Male then goes and stands by the white board taking ideas from the room. Neither room is being sexist, it is just how the respective genders like to work. I also can't help but notice that solutions being put forward seem to be of the latter, male orientated 'from-the-top-down' variety. Marie From: datzr...@alizeepathology.com To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 13:05:00 -0400 Subject: Re: [Gendergap] men on lists Would anybody object to me hijacking this thread to use as a sort of meta thread for what just happened? I have further questions and things to explain and get feedback on. I can start another thread if wanted. This whole situation sort of reminds me of when I tried suggesting on Wikitech-l that people make use of NVC and people were really offended. Like there my intention was never to come off as condescending, but apparently I am just really awful at not coming off that way via email. I'd like to work on that and also find out what sort of things men on this list can do to make the environment better are and in specific myself. I think a polite discussion of what just happened would help advance all of those goals. 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 ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Visiting the Feminist library in London
Just an erratum; the lunch is on Sunday. On Aug 6, 2014 1:31 AM, Sanja Pavlović sanja.pavlo...@vikimedija.org wrote: Hi, everyone! For all of you who are in London for Wikimania - I would very like to meet you all :) I look forward the lunch we will have on Saturday! Some girls and me were thinking about visiting the Feminist library while we are here: http://feministlibrary.co.uk/ Unfortunately, they are not open during August, but fortunately, they are able to book some visit and to show us the place if we ask them by email :) So, I was wondering, if some of you are interested in going there, maybe we can all go together. Please, get in touch with me if you are interested, and I will try to contact the Library and choose the day. In the same occasion, maybe we can also visit the Women's Library at LSE: http://www.lse.ac.uk/library/collections/featuredCollections/womensLibraryLSE/Womens-Library-at-LSE-bid-brochure.pdf Happy to hear from you, Sanja Wikimedia Serbia ___ 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] Why Women Have No Time For Wikipedia (WPO article)
The math behind that little statistic was so terrible I had to write a blog post about it. http://blog.mvolz.com/2014/08/what-percentage-of-wikipedia-editors-are-mums/ First off, in their blog post, Andreas Collida multiply the percentage of contributor respondents who were women (12.64%) by the percentage of all respondents (contributor and reader, male and female) who were parents- 14.72%- while seemingly missing that the study in fact provided a breakdown of this: 13.7% of all female respondents were parents. (15.1% of the male respondents were). Secondly, Andreas Collida cherry pick a lower bound number for women contributors (8.5%) (source unkown) and presented the number from the survey (12.64%) as an upper bound. A literature search gave me an upper bound of 16.1% from Hill Shaw. Furthermore, the source Andreas Collida used contained biased statistics. The original WMF/UNU-MERIT report had no methods section and didn’t control for sampling bias. The Hill Shaw paper controls for sample bias based on a survey by Pew, which used better sampling methods. Hill Shaw tried to control for the survey’s selection bias and found that they “estimate that females, married people, and individuals with children were underrepresented in the WMF/UNU-MERIT sample while immigrants and students were overrepresented.” This means that the two statistics Andreas Collida chose to multiply together; female editors/contributors and males and females with children- were *both* underestimates in the WMF/UNU-MERIT survey. Hill Shaw provide the adjusted numbers for these accordingly; they estimate that 16.1% of contributors (as opposed to 12.64%) are female, and that 25.3% have children. We can perform a similar analysis as Andreas Collida using those adjusted numbers by multiplying them, a result of about 4.1%- more than double their highest estimate. Of course, this number is also flawed; we don’t have the actual breakdown of what percentage of female contributors have children, and instead are multiplying aggregate numbers. A better estimate could be obtained by redoing Hill Shaw‘s analysis on the raw dataset. On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 9:14 PM, Tim Davenport shoehu...@gmail.com wrote: There is a new blog post up on Wikipedia-criticism site Wikipediocracy that should be of interest to this list. Andreas Kolbe with Nathalie Collida, Why Women Have No Time For Wikipedia: Thoughts on the Online Encyclopedia's Gender Imbalance. http://wikipediocracy.com/2014/08/26/why-women-have-no-time-for-wikipedia/ One interesting assertion made by the authors in their lengthy essay is that fewer than 1 in 50 WP contributors is a mother: It is sometimes argued that women simply have less time to contribute to Wikipedia, due to family commitments. This is a fallacy. Firstly, the United Nations University survey found that only 33.29% of respondents had a partner, and only 14.72% had children. The difference between readers and contributors was negligible here, and the survey report did not indicate any difference in these percentages for male and female respondents. It is patently obvious that girls and women in the age groups that are most strongly represented in Wikipedia’s demographics typically do not yet have families of their own. Their lack of participation is unrelated to their being bogged down by family responsibilities. Of course, these figures also tell us something else: if only 14.72% of contributors have children, and the percentage of female contributors lies somewhere between 8.5% and 12.64%, then it looks like only 1.25%–1.86% of Wikipedia contributors are mothers. That is less than 1 in 50. Tim Davenport Carrite on WP /// Randy from Boise on WPO ___ 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] Re: List update
Welcome back! Just to piggyback on this post, I'd also like to let people know that we've recently lost two editors who were a significant part of working on content gaps. Flyer22, who made significant contributions to articles on women's health, died in January: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2021-01-31/Obituary And just recently, SlimVirgin (Sarah), who among her many significant contributions overall, also founded the Gender Gap Task Force in 2013 and wrote an essay on how to write about women on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deceased_Wikipedians/2021#SlimVirgin On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 9:34 PM Leigh Honeywell wrote: > Hey folks! it's been a while. > > The Gendergap mailing list just got migrated to Mailman 3, which means I > now have my admin access back (I'd lost access to the previous system and > hadn't had a chance to restore it for... several years.) > > The list had been set to new posters being moderated, which resulted in a > number of messages being caught and I wasn't able to release them. > Unfortunately those messages didn't survive the migration, but I've > adjusted the moderation settings and going forward new messages should go > through. > > I've adjusted the list description to be a bit more concise: it is now > "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase gender diversity > in Wikimedia projects." > > This part is sad, but as a heads up and for transparency's sake: > I also went ahead and removed Kevin as an Owner/Moderator of the list as I > don't know who now controls his former email accounts. For those who had > missed his passing, there is a lovely tribute to his life and work on the > Signpost: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2016-08-04/Obituary > > Hope that everyone has been keeping well through this difficult time, and > I look forward to seeing more activity on this list in the future with the > new Mailman migration. > > All the best, > > -Leigh > > > -- > Leigh Honeywell > http://hypatia.ca > @hypatiadotca > ___ > Gendergap mailing list -- gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe send an email to gendergap-le...@lists.wikimedia.org > To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please > visit: > %(web_page_url)slistinfo%(cgiext)s/%(_internal_name)s ___ Gendergap mailing list -- gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe send an email to gendergap-le...@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: %(web_page_url)slistinfo%(cgiext)s/%(_internal_name)s
