Re: [Gendergap] Question for the Foundation about photographs of women
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote: Several women, including on WikiProject Feminism on the English Wikipedia, have recently expressed concern about the number of photographs of women's body parts that Wikimedia hosts, particularly regarding the issue of permission. It's far from clear in many cases that the women have given consent. It's also sometimes unclear that the subjects are above the age of consent. Another concern is what a woman is meant to do if someone uploads an image of her without her knowledge. Is she supposed to write to an anonymous person at OTRS? Does she have to give her real name? How does it work? Any information from the Foundation about the legal situation, and what Foundation policy is, would be very helpful. Sarah The matter is discussed at Commons:Photographs of identifiable people https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/wiki/Commons:Photographs_of_identifiable_people Fred In addition the Board passed a resolution dealing with an aspect of this last spring: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Images_of_identifiable_people But that resolution focuses on images of identifiable living people, since it seemed to us that's where the most immediate potential for harm lay. However, one important aspect of that resolution was the notion of the right to privacy, and the fact that people in private situations in particular (such as non-professional bedroom situations) where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy should have the right to consent to having photos of themselves freely licensed on Commons, and we should obtain consent before using this kind of photo. US law is actually quite permissive on this point, unlike some national laws, but we see it as an ethical issue as well. So that's the board's position on that part of the issue. The point in that resolution that all projects should have similar policies still needs to be addressed. Practically speaking there have been a few deletion debates on Commons where the issue came up and real names were not mentioned; deletion debates for images are much like for articles on Wikipedia. Or you could write OTRS. Verification gets tricky if it isn't identifiable and wasn't uploaded by you, but as John writes often that's just a reasonable-person test, and as Sarah writes often these photos add little value or are poor quality anyway. (I am particularly concerned with bulk uploads from other services that don't have such policies in place, such as Flickr, because provenance and consent becomes very difficult to trace in that case.) Positives: I'm with John -- sexuality and related are important topics, and we should have the best possible illustrations etc. we can get; I would personally love to see us partner with a responsible education project or the like for this kind of content. -- phoebe ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Resolution:Images of identifiable people
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Sydney Poore sydney.po...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Sarah Stierch 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. Model consent for anyone who is identifiable and has a reason to expect privacy is a minimum standard that needs to be enforced on all wikis now. For all the reasons that we've discussed recently on this mailing list, images of women who are being sexualized benefit greatly from good enforcement of this policy. IMO, the Commons policy needs to be tweaked to to ensure that the person giving consent for the image to be taken understands that it will be uploaded with a free license, and what that means. Most of the the medical groups policies about medical images of people assumes that the person in the image has less knowledge about where the image might be used, and says that information needs to be provided to the person so that they understand how widely that it might be disseminated. Right now we don't have a procedures in place that help us gather informed consent from models. This is an area that needs more work. Also, we need to tweak the policy so that people who appear in a semi-public places are protected. Many times people will go into a semi-public place with the expectation that only the people in that location will see them. IMO, sunbathing on a beach outside your rented beach house does not mean that you intended your image to be taken and uploaded for anyone in the world to see and be re-used in publications without your consent. The same is true for many people going about their normal routine. I don't think that someone walking from their car (or bus) into work intended to give consent for their photograph to be taken, uploaded with a free license, and their body parts and fashion apparel be categorized, especially in a sexualized way. Since the people in many images do not have contact information provided, someone re-using the image can not contact them to get permission. This problem makes many of our images on Commons useless for people that want to use best practices. Sydney Poore User:FloNight Sydney -- all good ideas, for sure! The resolution was intended as a (re)focusing device, as you note; and there is still lots of work to be done. One of the areas is making sure that all wikis have a similar policy. Would it help to put together a page on meta to coordinate this? cheers, phoebe ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Resolution:Images of identifiable people
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 3:58 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote: Sydney -- all good ideas, for sure! The resolution was intended as a (re)focusing device, as you note; and there is still lots of work to be done. One of the areas is making sure that all wikis have a similar policy. Would it help to put together a page on meta to coordinate this? I'm not sure if we're ready to move it to meta yet, I do wish we had a more private place to develop this. It's a rather sensitive topic for folks. Perhaps a google doc or...? Sarah This is totally anecdotal, but I have been pretty pleasantly surprised with the reaction to the identifiable people resolution. It has induced some grumbling because of extra workloads, and there are images in debatable circumstances (beach: public or not?) that have gotten argued over, but I haven't seen any real opposition to the principle of model consent. I think public discussion is good for a few reasons: * it helps highlight the issue, which can bring more people in; we shouldn't assume that everyone interested already knows about this resolution/issue (obviously you didn't ;) * it helps alleviate concerns about cabalism or cliquishness, which is the perpetual bane of online communities; * it helps provide documentation in a way that we know is backed up, and will be so for the foreseeable future * and it provides a place that people on other wikis can link and refer to * finally, I don't think documenting project policy and similar is a particularly sensitive issue. Other things (individual requests etc.) might be; but that wasn't really what I was thinking of here. Digression: Like Brandon I have mixed feelings about g-docs, and I wish we had a better solution for what they are good at. I do think that they tend to sequester information in a way that is often unhelpful over the long term. I was a pretty early adopter of google docs, and I look at my folder sometimes and wonder how much knowledge about Wikimania planning is hidden away in there, inaccessible and therefore useless to anyone else -- too much, that's for sure. cheers, Phoebe ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
[Gendergap] WikiSym best papers
Dear all, You may know about WikiSym -- the international symposium on wikis and open collaboration -- which is an annual research conference about wikis. It is being held week after next in Mountain View, CA this year. There is always a good deal of Wikipedia research presented at WikiSym. This year I am very pleased that the best paper award (for both short and long papers) went to two papers about gender and Wikipedia: http://www.wikisym.org/2011/09/21/best-paper-winners-for-wikisym-2011/ The conference proceedings full papers are not yet available, but when they are I will be sure to send them along. it's so exciting to see great research in this area! congratulations to the authors. -- phoebe -- * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers at gmail.com * ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] WikiSym best papers
well, volunteer you can get in free ;) http://www.wikisym.org/2011/09/09/wikisym2011-volunteers/ (but yes, I know there's still travel and it's very short notice). I'll do my best to report back any interesting discussion from these sessions! -- phoebe On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote: That's really great! I wish I could attend WikiSym this year (but the perils of being a poor student prevail..) Thanks for sharing this Phoebe! -Sarah On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 12:32 PM, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote: Dear all, You may know about WikiSym -- the international symposium on wikis and open collaboration -- which is an annual research conference about wikis. It is being held week after next in Mountain View, CA this year. There is always a good deal of Wikipedia research presented at WikiSym. This year I am very pleased that the best paper award (for both short and long papers) went to two papers about gender and Wikipedia: http://www.wikisym.org/2011/09/21/best-paper-winners-for-wikisym-2011/ The conference proceedings full papers are not yet available, but when they are I will be sure to send them along. it's so exciting to see great research in this area! congratulations to the authors. -- phoebe -- * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers at gmail.com * ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap -- GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Art and Sarah Stierch Consulting Historical, cultural artistic research advising. -- http://www.sarahstierch.com/ ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap -- * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers at gmail.com * ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Research into causes of the gender gap?
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Johannes Rohr johannes.r...@wikimedia.de wrote: Dear all, I recently joined this list as I am one of the persons in charge of the community-oriented goals which Wikimedia Deutschland has set for itself for the coming year, one of which is to increase female participation in Wikimedia activities projects by 50% until the end of 2012, I am well aware that this is a very ambitious target, and I feel that in order to maximise the chances of meeting it, we will have to be as clear as we can about what are the main deterrents, preventing Wikimedia from developing the same way as the rest of the Internet in terms of narrowing the Gender gap. What is it that makes Wikipedia so different, that the seemingly natural disappearance of the gender gap which we have seen in the Blogosphere and in social media, seems to completely pass by the Wikiverse? I have seen a number of quantitative studies, which unambiguously confirm the existence of the gender gap as such, but I have seen very little on what causes it to be so persistent in the Wikiverse. There is a number of commonly proposed explanations such as the discussion culture and the poor usability. However I have at least not come across any studies which have tested their veracity. If anything of that kind exists, I would be extremely happy for a pointer. I would also be extremely curious whether any attempts have been undertaken to weight the importance of each individual cause. Is there any particular factors which can be clearly identified as the one or two main showstoppers, which should thus be treated as the top priorities or is there a whole array of causes which have more or less equal weight? Looking forward to any feedback, Johannes Hi Johannes, There's been a few research studies on possible causes; some of them were presented at this year's WikiSym conference, and were reviewed in the Wikimedia research newsletter; see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Newsletter/2011-09-26#What_the_most_active_female_editors_contribute, etc. You might ask this question on the research-l list as well, for links to other studies. I'm not sure that there is consensus on what priorities are most important out of research that has been done to date, however. best, phoebe ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] So what have you been working on lately article wise as a woman or about women?
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Christine Meyer christinewme...@gmail.com wrote: I like this thread but have hesitated contributing to it because I'm a little worried that you'll all laugh at me... ;) Actually, that's a little true. These days, I've been working on [[The Wiggles]]. You may be asking, if you've even heard of them, What in the world does a children's music group made up of four male Aussies have to do with the gender gap? Well, I think a lot. This article, I believe, represents a major gap on English Wikipedia: children's music and television programming, which has become one of my niches on WP. (I also edit [[Sesame Street]], [[Blue's Clues]], and its ancillaries). I also have a soft spot for this article, and not just because The Wiggles have had a huge influence on my household. The article happens to be my very first featured article, passed back in 2008. This is great! It's not just children's music and television -- articles about children's books are also under represented. I haven't looked into other child and family related topics but I bet it's similar there too. Anyway, I'm so glad you're working on these topics! And thanks for starting this thread, Sarah! It is super great to read about what everyone is doing. For my part, as usual I have been occupied the last few months with board- and organizational related stuff -- lots of meetings and discussions this spring about finances, fundraising, WMF projects, etc. I've been both participating in and working on documenting all of this, as well as writing documentation about various board processes, especially as I will transition off this summer! And as a part of that I do try to keep up with what's happening in general, so lots of time reading mailing lists and reports. I also spend a surprising amount of time answering random questions about Wikipedia/Wikimedia, both from people in our movement now and curious members of the public. I just this morning answered a question from a librarian in the Philippines about evaluating articles :) I also worked last month with a couple other librarians who were involved in the education project to put together a workshop proposal for a conference next spring, and will probably give at least a couple other talks this year to library groups. I've also been attending various local events. I also had great fun back in February helping establish http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Biophysics with user:dcrjsr, aka Jane Richardson, who is such an inspiration to be around. So, lots of outreach stuff! Article wise I haven't edited much lately (or the last two years!) but I did go on a small kick recently working on biographies of women who are Fellows of the Royal Society. E.g.: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgina_Mace -- still a very stubby and not-very-good article, but much cleaner than it was! cheers, phoebe ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Accidental Troll Policy - beyond gender gap
(changing the topic back) On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Sylvia Ventura slvent...@gmail.com wrote: Anne, you're absolutely right on the 'high profile'. The broader the reach, impact, exposure, the more likely you are to become the target of good and bad 'attention'. The question is, much like in real-life, the higher up you are in an organization the more 'support' and/or protection you will likely need/get, as a community should we be able to insure a similar mechanism. This community resilience won't be built on a MadMax fighting-your-way-through model (I know it's rather dramatic :) From all the stories I've heard over the years, admins and arbitrators get the worst of it -- being in a position where you delete articles or mediate disputes on the project (and let's face it, the folks who get into arbitration-type situations on wikipedia are often not the most stable or reasonable people on earth) seems to be the most direct way to potentially exposing yourself to lots of harassment. And if you're identified as female, it's way worse. Conversely from my experiences being pretty visible on the *organizational* side of things (and talking to colleagues), there is a low level of harassment that comes with that gig, but *nothing* like the horror stories I've heard from some admins. This is clearly untenable; the projects need to grow experienced contributors who can serve in positions of leadership and as mentors on the projects, and we can't expect everyone to just suck it up (so sorry, you will have to work with crazy people). I worry that folks often just find themselves unsupported. I don't know what the answer is. -- phoebe -- * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers at gmail.com * ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] can the Commons images thread move?
Well, I haven't read ANY of the emails in the thread, for the petty reason that the subject line makes me cringe every time I see it. And according to my gmail count there's something like 100 mails on the topic, so I'm probably not going to start now. So if indeed there is actual progress being made, if someone could post a 1-para summary of the discussion and what the conclusions are, that would be awesome! (seriously. Refactoring is almost always a helpful exercise when it comes to long discussions on complicated issues -- for both the participants those who haven't been following the discussion). -- phoebe On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 6:24 AM, Katherine Casey fluffernutter.w...@gmail.com wrote: I'm not sure I see the pressing reason why this thread needs to go on-wiki. Commons doesn't have a venue for discussing problems this fundamental with it as far as I know, and people have spoken in this thread who either do not or will not participate on-wiki on Commons. Moving the thread on-wiki would mean scattering it to some random page, losing the voices of the people who aren't on Commons for whatever reasons, and subjecting everyone else to the defensiveness that's the reason this thread grew traction here instead of the dozens of times it's been brought up on various wikis. This mailing list was never intended to be a ooh happy!-only venue where we only post announcements about courses and case studies - one-liners about positive steps are good, but so are tough discussions like this one, and given that this is one of the very, very few safe venues for that type of discussion, I'm saddened to see people trying to shove this off the list. -Fluff On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: I agree with Sarah: the thread should stay, tagged with [Commons] as Erik has suggested. We are actually making progress – painful progress at times, but significant progress nevertheless. Andreas On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 7:46 AM, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:21 PM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.comwrote: Sumana, Yes, gladly. I feel that thread has served a good purpose, but it's true, it's been at the expense of flooding the list with a lot of noise, and I've contributed some of it. I do think that after a prolonged long dip into less productive discussion, in the last exchange we have arrived at a point where there is some consensus about what the problems are and how to attack them, and hopefully we can leverage that into some policy reform that moves the project forward. But you're right, it would be better at this point to move that activity onto a wiki. Hi Sumana and Pete, I would object to closing any thread down. If people don't want to read the thread, that's fine, but if others are discussing it, please allow that. The presence of this kind of material on Commons is directly related to the whole issue of sexism on Wikipedia and the lack of women editors, and that makes it a very valid topic for the gender-gap list. I can't imagine a more valid topic than women being represented sexually without their consent on Wikimedia projects. If discussing it on this list brings people together and edges us closer to a solution that would surely be a really good outcome for the list. Sarah ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap -- * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers at gmail.com * ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] can the Commons images thread move?
Thanks. That helps a lot, really, and I will skim the emails now. I really didn't know what the topic of this extensive discussion *was* before, and didn't have the stomach for another protracted censorship discussion. thanks again, -- phoebe On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 9:24 AM, Katherine Casey fluffernutter.w...@gmail.com wrote: Phoebe, I would really suggest reading the emails if you're interested in the discussion (or, conversely, not asking for a summary if you're not), but here's a quick-and-dirty condensation off the top of my head: I started the thread to discuss how disposition of topless photo of a woman on Commons (being used on enwp), and that woman's right to consent or not consent to the photo being used, was being discussed entirely by men. The conversation then veered to how sexual images on Commons are a nearly-intractable problem and how Commons can be unwelcoming to people who try to discuss them, then to discussion of the Board's resolution that we must be sensitive to people's identity rights when photos are from private places, then to how Commons does or doesn't adhere to that resolution, then to how to *make *Commons adhere (better) to that resolution. There is no final result; there is only a general feeling that Commons's common practice is in dispute with how some people interpret the Board's resolution, that other people feel Commons is already making huge concessions to the ideas in the resolution, and that some individual images and categories of images are rather blatant violations of Commons's and/or the Board's policies/resolutions. Hope this helps. -Fluff On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 11:51 AM, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.comwrote: Well, I haven't read ANY of the emails in the thread, for the petty reason that the subject line makes me cringe every time I see it. And according to my gmail count there's something like 100 mails on the topic, so I'm probably not going to start now. So if indeed there is actual progress being made, if someone could post a 1-para summary of the discussion and what the conclusions are, that would be awesome! (seriously. Refactoring is almost always a helpful exercise when it comes to long discussions on complicated issues -- for both the participants those who haven't been following the discussion). -- phoebe ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap -- * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers at gmail.com * ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Women on the list: what have you been editing lately?
On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Jane Darnell jane...@gmail.com wrote: Good luck with the AfC backlog Sarah - it depresses me to just think about that. ... After talking about it for 2 years, I have finally created the list of Frans Hals paintings, and though I promised myself I would be done by the museum's birthday of May 14th, of course people keep reminding me now about other paintings to include. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_paintings_by_Frans_Hals That's very cool! Lately I've been mostly spending my time planning events in the San Francisco region: our Maker Faire booth was this past weekend, and we're having an edit-a-thon on Sat 25 (you should come if you're in the area!) And I'm giving a talk to a big group of librarians on Wednesday. Editing-wise I've mainly been doing routine cleanup (and work on Wikidata!)... I've been slowly working on longtime projects to reference biographies of National Medal of Science winners and biographies of scientists that are listed in the Dictionary of Scientific Biography, focusing on the women. And I recently went on an article rating kick for the engineering wikiproject (which needs some love!). One neat thing: I recently stumbled across and did a little work on the article about the amazing Dorothy Garrod: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorothy_Garrod I love it when I come across a biography of someone that I knew nothing about before and am just totally blown away by their work and career. cheers, -- phoebe -- * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers at gmail.com * ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Help: Research on whether we have made any difference?
Hi Lennart! Not addressing the question of whether we've made any difference... but if you're quoting numbers AFAIK the best research on the gender gap numbers is Mako Hill and Aaron Shaw, from last year: http://mako.cc/copyrighteous/the-wikipedia-gender-gap-revisited which tries to correct for the issues with opt-in surveys. Of course the overall point is, as Mako says, Overall, these results reinforce the basic substantive finding that women are vastly under-represented among Wikipedia editors. -- phoebe On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 2:37 AM, Lennart Guldbrandsson l_guldbrands...@hotmail.com wrote: Hello, I am writing a short (1500 word) text for the journal of current cultural research, Culture Unbound (http://www.cultureunbound.ep.liu.se/index.html), to be published in April. The topic touches quite heavily on the gendergap issue. I have tried to find any numbers on whether the initiatives - editathons, Teahouse, etc - have made any dent in the numbers. Are there any such numbers or have I simply fantasized about it? Since they want the text soon, please respond soon. Any assistance is greatly appreciated. Best wishes, Lennart Guldbrandsson 070 - 207 80 05 http://www.elementx.se - arbete http://www.mrchapel.wordpress.com - personlig blogg Presentation http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anv%c3%83%c2%a4ndare:Hannibal @aliasHannibal http://twitter.com/AliasHannibal - på Twitter *Tänk dig en värld där varje människa på den här planeten får fri tillgång till **världens samlade kunskap*http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Huvudsida*. Det är vårt mål.* Jimmy Wales ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap -- * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers at gmail.com * ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Fwd: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Cynthia Ashley-Nelson (Cindamuse)
Dear friends, We are all heartbroken here in Berlin where the Wikimedia Conference is going on, and where Cynthia was participating. It has been a very rough week for our community. Let's support and be kind to each other, and continue the work that Adrianne and Cynthia believed in and loved. -- Phoebe On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 1:18 PM, Jane Darnell jane...@gmail.com wrote: Forwarding from the Wikimedia list, Cynthia was a contributor to this list and very active in Gendergap issues on Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects. -- Forwarded message -- From: Bence Damokos bdamo...@gmail.com Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2014 11:07:43 +0200 Subject: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Cynthia Ashley-Nelson (Cindamuse)https://www.goodreads.com/user/sign_in?rd=true To: wikimediaannounce-l wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org It is with great regret that we need to confirm that Cynthia Ashley-Nelson (User:Cindamuse, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cindamuse ) passed away on Friday, April 11. Our thoughts are with Cindy’s family, friends and the Wikimedia community. Her next of kin have been informed prior to releasing this announcement. Cindy was elected vice-chair of the Wikimedia Affiliations Committee on April 10, 2014. She had traveled to Berlin in order to attend the Affiliations Committee’s annual meeting during the international Wikimedia Conference. Both a long-time Wikipedia editor and an expert in organizational development with a professional background of 25 years, she devoted her time, passion and vast expertise to contribute in numerous ways to the free knowledge movement. Cindy was deeply committed to supporting the Wikimedia Foundation’s Global Education Program and to tackling the gender gap issue on Wikipedia. In the short time since January that Cindy has been with us in the Affiliations Committee, we have come to value her thoughts, passion and refreshing ideas. She was working very enthusiastically with us, and we are all saddened that we won’t have the chance to learn from all of her ideas, insights and experiences. The months we shared proved her to be a very valuable and engaged member of the committee, which led to her election as AffCom vice-chair. We are sad beyond words and so is everyone who came to Berlin to participate in the Wikimedia Conference. Her passing is a great loss for everyone in the Wikimedia movement. This morning all the conference attendees gathered together to grieve and talk about the loss of Cindy. We decided that all of us at the Wikimedia Conference could choose to continue the conversations about the future of the movement Cindy cared so much about, as well as spending our time here to remember and celebrate her. She will be greatly missed. You can share your condolences and memories of Cynthia on her user talk page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Cindamuse ). On behalf of the whole Affiliations Committee, and the other community members gathered here in Berlin: Carlos Colina, Chair, Wikimedia Affiliations Committee Bence Damokos, Outgoing chair, Wikimedia Affiliations Committee ___ Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more information about Wikimedia-l: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list wikimedi...@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap -- * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers at gmail.com * ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Wadewitz Tribute Edit-a-thons - May 2014
Taranet, that's fantastic :) Let us know if you need any help, and let us know how the event goes! Sarah, thanks so much for putting together the page. Adrianne would be honored. best, Phoebe On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 8:56 AM, taranet tara...@gmail.com wrote: Hi everyone, I'm a new member of this mailing list. I set an Edit-a-thon event in my home city, Tehran, Iran. I had in mind arranging a wikipedia workshop for women and found this event a suitable starting point. Taranet ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap -- * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers at gmail.com * ___ 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)
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: I will have to look into Hill Shaw, but would note that the Wikimedia Foundation itself reported the figures from the UNU survey as they stood (see e.g. p. 8 of the February 2011 Strategic Plan: According to the study, over 86% of contributors were male). NB., that was before the Hill Shaw paper was published, which was 2013 :) Hill Shaw is *probably* the best estimate of the gendergap we have so far, but everyone -- including the WMF and the researchers involved -- knows that the data can be improved. And hopefully it will be, with future editor surveys and more research! -- phoebe ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
