Re: [Wikimedia-l] [GLAM] Rapid Grants Closure May 14 - June 30, 2018

[Woubzena Jifar]

Hello Fae,

Thank you for sharing your experience with micro-grants and offering an
experimental and responsive procedure. It's definitely a good model to
consider. As we enter our planning year for the strategic direction our
team will be soliciting ideas from the community and looking at different
approaches. I will be sure to keep your suggestion in this consideration as
we move forward.

Best regards,
Woubzena

Woubzena Jifar
Program Officer
Rapid Grants
Wikimedia Foundation 
User: WJifar (WMF)

On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Fæ  wrote:

> On 2 May 2018 at 17:53, Strainu  wrote:
> > 2018-05-02 1:51 GMT+03:00 Woubzena Jifar :
> >> 3. On your third point of having the 1st - 15th of the month be an open
> >> application time, this is also an experiment. We hope that this focused,
> >> clear timeline will allow us to respond more quickly and help community
> >> members understand the state of their application more easily.
> >
> > Woubzena, there used to be a time when the promise of the Rapid grants
> > was that they would be reviewed weekly. I understand this is no longer
> > possible, even if the wording is still present on meta. Does the new
> > rule imply a promise from the WMF that the grants will be granted or
> > refused withing the same calendar month?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Strainu
>
> On being experimental and responsive, it would be cool to bring back
> some of the trust in grass roots volunteers, and consider funding a
> system of very light-weight global microgrants using an open request
> process on meta. Microgrants under $250, perhaps with a network of
> long term identified local volunteers taking responsibility for
> assessing that the money got spent on the right stuff, would be jolly
> nice. Enough to pay for bits and bobs of travel expenses, software,
> minor bits of hardware like accessibility or experimental kit.
>
> The community has discussed this before, in fact the UK used to have a
> productive micro-grant procedure, which I think has been abandoned for
> staff managed grants. In terms of trust, I recall going to Amsterdam
> to coordinate a GLAM related event with a cash wad of a dozen people's
> expenses in my pocket. It felt very informal, but a great
> demonstration of trust that volunteers could sort out their own checks
> and balances. My main headache was ensuring that everyone got the
> money as quickly as possible, so it was out of my wallet!
>
> Any thoughts on lobbying for a tiny global budget to spend on a 100%
> volunteer social and open simpleminded process, outside of any
> Affiliates structure, with zero employee time needed to run it?
>
> Fae
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [GLAM] Rapid Grants Closure May 14 - June 30, 2018

[Woubzena Jifar]

Hello Strainu,

Thank you for bringing the wording on our meta page to my attention. I will
be updating the page with the new changes effective July 1st. Yes, we are
instituting the application window of 1st - 15th of the month to facilitate
a quicker response time. As I mentioned in my previous email we're hopeful
that this timeline will help with workflow and better communication with
community members.

Best regards,
Woubzena

Woubzena Jifar
Program Officer
Rapid Grants
Wikimedia Foundation 
User: WJifar (WMF)

On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 9:53 AM, Strainu  wrote:

> 2018-05-02 1:51 GMT+03:00 Woubzena Jifar :
> > 3. On your third point of having the 1st - 15th of the month be an open
> > application time, this is also an experiment. We hope that this focused,
> > clear timeline will allow us to respond more quickly and help community
> > members understand the state of their application more easily.
>
> Woubzena, there used to be a time when the promise of the Rapid grants
> was that they would be reviewed weekly. I understand this is no longer
> possible, even if the wording is still present on meta. Does the new
> rule imply a promise from the WMF that the grants will be granted or
> refused withing the same calendar month?
>
> Regards,
> Strainu
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

[Robert Fernandez]

The whole framing of this question is misguided.   There are lots of
people whose work is undervalued on Wikipedia for a lot of reasons.
If there is an effort to reach out to a particular group of volunteers
that is underrepresented then that should be celebrated as a positive
contribution to our projects and movement.   What we should not do is
say "how can I make this about my own personal situation?"   This is
about the movement and the mission, but too many volunteers think it
should be about catering to their own personal whims and needs.  If
there are legitimate grievances then we should address those problems
and not try to tear down efforts to address different problems.

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 10:08 AM, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
 wrote:
> Hi,
> I usually push diversity in any situation but only after I got a core quality 
> group of volunteer. the first degree of diversity is the diversity based on 
> wiki activity, IMHO.. I care about the rest and I try to be honest if I go in 
> that direction and why I do that. If anyone is offended for something, that 
> happens even if you do your best, in my experience being clear helps on the 
> long term.
> This a real documented example, if you want to read: 
> http://www.wikisciencecompetition.org/people/ . For WSC2017 it was mostly my 
> job to find these profiles, 90% of them. I did my best to find motivated jury 
> members and, as a first step, I searched for expert wikimedians based on 
> their CV on the profiles and their activities. My goal was to be balanced per 
> topic, than per geographical area (language mostly, some description in 
> English are poor), than maybe per gender, in that order. The evaluation of 
> scientific images require expertise, that's the core business. I shared my 
> experience here: 
> http://www.wikisciencecompetition.org/2017/11/16/how-was-the-jury-for-wiki-science-competition-2017-formed/
> In any case, I couldn't know who these people really were sometimes, I didn't 
> care at the first step. You know where they work, but they could be 
> foreigners. You know their enwikipedia activity (I need people with some 
> decent English fluency, so I started there and in any case I found what I 
> needed) but sometimes that does not reveal a lot, and English descriptions 
> are gender-neutral. So even if it wasn't planned I got some unbalance, and I 
> only discovered during the set up of the page that a certain nickname was a 
> blond guy and not a Arab or Chinese girl. I did my best to "fix it" at that 
> point but mostly because when you miss some positions and you look for 
> additional 3-4 names it's no big difference to look here or there. But still, 
> the first search was based on their expertise. And they all kew that.
>
> I think it was quite balanced in the end, taking care of the issue but not 
> ranking it more critical than the scientific quality of the profiles. Plus. I 
> told some of the female jurors that they could be "promoted" to the main jury 
> for next edition but that's because they deserve it.
> So, in the end  I look also for "girls" and "exotic profiles", I admit that, 
> but this was not my main goal, and it was never more important that the 
> quality. So at least these people knew that they were part of a team, that 
> they were there to share their expertise, not being displayed as a "token".
> I think it's more easy and relaxed if you always stick to the content and the 
> quality as a first step, IMHO. if you want the movement to grow roots you 
> need real people, motivated people, and real sharing. I really hope they will 
> set up real national challenges next time, thanks to the expertise we shared.
> Alessandro
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Il Lunedì 7 Maggio 2018 14:33, Andy Mabbett  
> ha scritto:
>
>
>  On 7 May 2018 at 05:10, Romaine Wiki  wrote:
>
>> I recently received an e-mail
>> from a user in the Wikimedia movement who has (temporarily?) stopped
>> contributing as she is not happy with a specific aspect of the atmosphere
>> in Wikimedia.
>
>> She was invited to participate in a Wikimedia activity, because:
>> 1. she is a woman
>> 2. she is from a minority
>> 3. she is from an area in the world with much less editors (compared to
>> Europe/US)
>>
>> and perhaps also because her colour of her skin is a bit different then
>> mine (Caucasian).
>
> I'm sorry to hear that a contributor feels unable to continue because of this.
>
> In order to examine what improvements we can make, can you tell us -
> without breeching confidentiality - how this approach was made, and
> what exactly was said?
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Anti-viruses [was Re: Information on "Multiple failed attempts to log in" emails]

[Gabriel Thullen]

The main reason we have virus outbreaks is the way a lot of users click on
email attachments and on programs they have just downloaded from the net.
Users are warned time and time again, but they do it anyway. Once we get a
large enough base of desktop linux users, we will have the same problems.

We are safe for now...

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Thyge  wrote:

> "Imagine a world, where all windows installations have turned off their
> antivirus protection"!
>
> Regards,
> Thyge
>
> Den man. 7. maj 2018 kl. 17.09 skrev Shlomi Fish :
>
> > Hi Gabriel,
> >
> > On Mon, 7 May 2018 14:02:44 +0100
> > Gabriel Thullen  wrote:
> >
> > > I am also a Linux advocate, and have been so for years (decades?). That
> > > been said, I imagine that there are still more people using Windows XP
> > than
> > > there are people using Linux. Last time I checked (october 2017) it was
> > > something like 5% using XP and less than 1% using linux, all distros
> > > included. We can safely predict that virus outvreaks will be a problem
> > for
> > > linux once it reaches 5% or 10% market share...
> > >
> >
> > Most linux viruses have never outbroke and never caused much harm. Linux
> > can be
> > susceptible to other forms of malware such as worms or rootkits, but it
> > hasyet
> > to exhibit a large scale virus epidemic and it isnt because it wasn't
> > tried.
> > Linux is an attractive target because many servers run on it. See also
> > https://duckduckgo.com/?q=linux+viruses=web
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Shlomi
> >
> > > Gabe
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 1:51 PM, Shabab Mustafa <
> shabab.must...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I have been a Linux advocate for almost a decade now and from 'my
> past
> > > > experience', I can tell you have opened a topic of a huge discussion
> > about
> > > > people should switch to Linux Desktops (which is off-topic here).
> But I
> > > > respectfully disagree with your statement, "anti-virus programs
> > usually do
> > > > more harm than good".
> > > >
> > > > From a conservative viewpoint, some protection is still better to
> have
> > than
> > > > no protection at all. And the example you gave here, an anti-virus
> > > > mistakenly classified your domain as a potential threat, makes a
> weaker
> > > > point. By a few mistakes, we cannot cancel out a million of other
> > > > successes. A false alarm is yet favourable than no alarm at all.
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > > Shabab Mustafa
> > > > President
> > > > Wikimedia Bangladesh
> > > >
> > > > ​
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:56 PM Shlomi Fish 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 3 May 2018 19:27:16 -0500
> > > > > John Bennett  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Many of you may have been receiving emails in the last 24 hours
> > > > > > warning
> > > > > you
> > > > > > of "Multiple failed attempts to log in" with your account. I
> > wanted to
> > > > > let
> > > > > > you know that the Wikimedia Foundation's Security team is aware
> of
> > the
> > > > > > situation, and working with others in the organization on steps
> > to
> > > > > decrease
> > > > > > the success of attacks like these.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The exact source is not yet known, but it is not originating from
> > our
> > > > > > systems. That means it is an external effort to gain unauthorized
> > > > access
> > > > > to
> > > > > > random accounts. These types of efforts are increasingly common
> for
> > > > > > websites of our reach. A vast majority of these attempts have
> been
> > > > > > unsuccessful, and we are reaching out personally to the small
> > number of
> > > > > > accounts which we believe have been compromised.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > While we are constantly looking at improvements to our security
> > > > > > systems
> > > > > and
> > > > > > processes to offset the impact of malicious efforts such as
> these,
> > the
> > > > > best
> > > > > > method of prevention continues to be the steps each of you take
> to
> > > > > > safeguard your accounts. Because of this, we have taken steps in
> > the
> > > > past
> > > > > > to support things like stronger password requirements,[1] and we
> > > > continue
> > > > > > to encourage everyone to take some routine steps to maintain a
> > secure
> > > > > > computer and account. That includes regularly changing your
> > > > passwords,[2]
> > > > > > actively running antivirus software on your systems, and keeping
> > your
> > > > > > system software up to date.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > From my experience, anti-virus programs usually do more harm than
> > good.
> > > > For
> > > > > example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton_AntiVirus recently
> > blocked
> > > > > my
> > > > > entire shlomifish.org domain because it apparently misclassified
> an
> > > > > executable
> > > > > download as problematic (and it was built from source using
> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Anti-viruses [was Re: Information on "Multiple failed attempts to log in" emails]

[Thyge]

"Imagine a world, where all windows installations have turned off their
antivirus protection"!

Regards,
Thyge

Den man. 7. maj 2018 kl. 17.09 skrev Shlomi Fish :

> Hi Gabriel,
>
> On Mon, 7 May 2018 14:02:44 +0100
> Gabriel Thullen  wrote:
>
> > I am also a Linux advocate, and have been so for years (decades?). That
> > been said, I imagine that there are still more people using Windows XP
> than
> > there are people using Linux. Last time I checked (october 2017) it was
> > something like 5% using XP and less than 1% using linux, all distros
> > included. We can safely predict that virus outvreaks will be a problem
> for
> > linux once it reaches 5% or 10% market share...
> >
>
> Most linux viruses have never outbroke and never caused much harm. Linux
> can be
> susceptible to other forms of malware such as worms or rootkits, but it
> hasyet
> to exhibit a large scale virus epidemic and it isnt because it wasn't
> tried.
> Linux is an attractive target because many servers run on it. See also
> https://duckduckgo.com/?q=linux+viruses=web
>
> Regards,
>
> Shlomi
>
> > Gabe
> >
> > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 1:51 PM, Shabab Mustafa  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I have been a Linux advocate for almost a decade now and from 'my past
> > > experience', I can tell you have opened a topic of a huge discussion
> about
> > > people should switch to Linux Desktops (which is off-topic here). But I
> > > respectfully disagree with your statement, "anti-virus programs
> usually do
> > > more harm than good".
> > >
> > > From a conservative viewpoint, some protection is still better to have
> than
> > > no protection at all. And the example you gave here, an anti-virus
> > > mistakenly classified your domain as a potential threat, makes a weaker
> > > point. By a few mistakes, we cannot cancel out a million of other
> > > successes. A false alarm is yet favourable than no alarm at all.
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Shabab Mustafa
> > > President
> > > Wikimedia Bangladesh
> > >
> > > ​
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:56 PM Shlomi Fish 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, 3 May 2018 19:27:16 -0500
> > > > John Bennett  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > Many of you may have been receiving emails in the last 24 hours
> > > > > warning
> > > > you
> > > > > of "Multiple failed attempts to log in" with your account. I
> wanted to
> > > > let
> > > > > you know that the Wikimedia Foundation's Security team is aware of
> the
> > > > > situation, and working with others in the organization on steps
> to
> > > > decrease
> > > > > the success of attacks like these.
> > > > >
> > > > > The exact source is not yet known, but it is not originating from
> our
> > > > > systems. That means it is an external effort to gain unauthorized
> > > access
> > > > to
> > > > > random accounts. These types of efforts are increasingly common for
> > > > > websites of our reach. A vast majority of these attempts have been
> > > > > unsuccessful, and we are reaching out personally to the small
> number of
> > > > > accounts which we believe have been compromised.
> > > > >
> > > > > While we are constantly looking at improvements to our security
> > > > > systems
> > > > and
> > > > > processes to offset the impact of malicious efforts such as these,
> the
> > > > best
> > > > > method of prevention continues to be the steps each of you take to
> > > > > safeguard your accounts. Because of this, we have taken steps in
> the
> > > past
> > > > > to support things like stronger password requirements,[1] and we
> > > continue
> > > > > to encourage everyone to take some routine steps to maintain a
> secure
> > > > > computer and account. That includes regularly changing your
> > > passwords,[2]
> > > > > actively running antivirus software on your systems, and keeping
> your
> > > > > system software up to date.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > From my experience, anti-virus programs usually do more harm than
> good.
> > > For
> > > > example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton_AntiVirus recently
> blocked
> > > > my
> > > > entire shlomifish.org domain because it apparently misclassified an
> > > > executable
> > > > download as problematic (and it was built from source using
> > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMake and
> > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AppVeyor
> > > > so it is unlikely that that is the case.). MS Windows' poor
> resistance to
> > > > malware and the fact that Windows Update is so dysfunctional (see
> > > > http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/bits/facts/Windows-Update/ ) are
> the
> > > > reasons
> > > > why I cannot recommend running it as a desktop, and instead one
> should
> > > use
> > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux#Desktop - desktop linux or
> similar.
> > > >
> > > > A little off topic perhaps, but needs to be said.
> > > >
> > > > > My team will continue to investigate this incident, and report

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Anti-viruses [was Re: Information on "Multiple failed attempts to log in" emails]

[Shlomi Fish]

Hi Gabriel,

On Mon, 7 May 2018 14:02:44 +0100
Gabriel Thullen  wrote:

> I am also a Linux advocate, and have been so for years (decades?). That
> been said, I imagine that there are still more people using Windows XP than
> there are people using Linux. Last time I checked (october 2017) it was
> something like 5% using XP and less than 1% using linux, all distros
> included. We can safely predict that virus outvreaks will be a problem for
> linux once it reaches 5% or 10% market share...
> 

Most linux viruses have never outbroke and never caused much harm. Linux can be
susceptible to other forms of malware such as worms or rootkits, but it hasyet
to exhibit a large scale virus epidemic and it isnt because it wasn't tried.
Linux is an attractive target because many servers run on it. See also
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=linux+viruses=web

Regards,

Shlomi

> Gabe
> 
> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 1:51 PM, Shabab Mustafa 
> wrote:
> 
> > I have been a Linux advocate for almost a decade now and from 'my past
> > experience', I can tell you have opened a topic of a huge discussion about
> > people should switch to Linux Desktops (which is off-topic here). But I
> > respectfully disagree with your statement, "anti-virus programs usually do
> > more harm than good".
> >
> > From a conservative viewpoint, some protection is still better to have than
> > no protection at all. And the example you gave here, an anti-virus
> > mistakenly classified your domain as a potential threat, makes a weaker
> > point. By a few mistakes, we cannot cancel out a million of other
> > successes. A false alarm is yet favourable than no alarm at all.
> >
> > ---
> > Shabab Mustafa
> > President
> > Wikimedia Bangladesh
> >
> > ​
> >
> > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:56 PM Shlomi Fish  wrote:
> >  
> > > On Thu, 3 May 2018 19:27:16 -0500
> > > John Bennett  wrote:
> > >  
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > Many of you may have been receiving emails in the last 24 hours
> > > > warning  
> > > you  
> > > > of "Multiple failed attempts to log in" with your account. I wanted to  
> > > let  
> > > > you know that the Wikimedia Foundation's Security team is aware of the
> > > > situation, and working with others in the organization on steps to  
> > > decrease  
> > > > the success of attacks like these.
> > > >
> > > > The exact source is not yet known, but it is not originating from our
> > > > systems. That means it is an external effort to gain unauthorized  
> > access  
> > > to  
> > > > random accounts. These types of efforts are increasingly common for
> > > > websites of our reach. A vast majority of these attempts have been
> > > > unsuccessful, and we are reaching out personally to the small number of
> > > > accounts which we believe have been compromised.
> > > >
> > > > While we are constantly looking at improvements to our security
> > > > systems  
> > > and  
> > > > processes to offset the impact of malicious efforts such as these, the  
> > > best  
> > > > method of prevention continues to be the steps each of you take to
> > > > safeguard your accounts. Because of this, we have taken steps in the  
> > past  
> > > > to support things like stronger password requirements,[1] and we  
> > continue  
> > > > to encourage everyone to take some routine steps to maintain a secure
> > > > computer and account. That includes regularly changing your  
> > passwords,[2]  
> > > > actively running antivirus software on your systems, and keeping your
> > > > system software up to date.
> > > >  
> > >
> > > From my experience, anti-virus programs usually do more harm than good.  
> > For  
> > > example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton_AntiVirus recently blocked
> > > my
> > > entire shlomifish.org domain because it apparently misclassified an
> > > executable
> > > download as problematic (and it was built from source using
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMake and
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AppVeyor
> > > so it is unlikely that that is the case.). MS Windows' poor resistance to
> > > malware and the fact that Windows Update is so dysfunctional (see
> > > http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/bits/facts/Windows-Update/ ) are the
> > > reasons
> > > why I cannot recommend running it as a desktop, and instead one should  
> > use  
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux#Desktop - desktop linux or similar.
> > >
> > > A little off topic perhaps, but needs to be said.
> > >  
> > > > My team will continue to investigate this incident, and report back if  
> > we  
> > > > notice any concerning changes. If you have any questions, please  
> > contact  
> > > > the Support and Safety team (susa{{@}}wikimedia.org).
> > > >
> > > > John Bennett
> > > > Director of Security, Wikimedia Foundation
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Password_strength_requirements
> > > > [2] 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Anti-viruses [was Re: Information on "Multiple failed attempts to log in" emails]

[Shlomi Fish]

Hi,

On Mon, 07 May 2018 13:20:22 +
Eduardo Testart  wrote:

> Shlomi,
> 
> I believe that the problem is with your particular brand of antivirus,
> eventhough they all block a bit more or less to prevent certain risks.
> 
> Nevertheless, making an extrapolation to every antivirus from the
> experience with only one brand, and concluding "they do more harm than
> good" based on that, seems a bit off.
> 

this was just one example. I have heard of many similar problems with others.
Just try subscribing to gimp-user ( https://www.gimp.org/mail_lists.html ) or
chatting on freenode for a while and you will see.


> 
> Cheers!
> 
> El lun., may. 7, 2018 10:02, Gabriel Thullen  escribió:
> 
> > I am also a Linux advocate, and have been so for years (decades?). That
> > been said, I imagine that there are still more people using Windows XP than
> > there are people using Linux. Last time I checked (october 2017) it was
> > something like 5% using XP and less than 1% using linux, all distros
> > included. We can safely predict that virus outvreaks will be a problem for
> > linux once it reaches 5% or 10% market share...
> >
> > Gabe
> >
> > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 1:51 PM, Shabab Mustafa 
> > wrote:
> >  
> > > I have been a Linux advocate for almost a decade now and from 'my past
> > > experience', I can tell you have opened a topic of a huge discussion  
> > about  
> > > people should switch to Linux Desktops (which is off-topic here). But I
> > > respectfully disagree with your statement, "anti-virus programs usually  
> > do  
> > > more harm than good".
> > >
> > > From a conservative viewpoint, some protection is still better to have  
> > than  
> > > no protection at all. And the example you gave here, an anti-virus
> > > mistakenly classified your domain as a potential threat, makes a weaker
> > > point. By a few mistakes, we cannot cancel out a million of other
> > > successes. A false alarm is yet favourable than no alarm at all.
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Shabab Mustafa
> > > President
> > > Wikimedia Bangladesh
> > >
> > > ​
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:56 PM Shlomi Fish   
> > wrote:  
> > >  
> > > > On Thu, 3 May 2018 19:27:16 -0500
> > > > John Bennett  wrote:
> > > >  
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > Many of you may have been receiving emails in the last 24 hours  
> > warning  
> > > > you  
> > > > > of "Multiple failed attempts to log in" with your account. I wanted  
> > to  
> > > > let  
> > > > > you know that the Wikimedia Foundation's Security team is aware of  
> > the  
> > > > > situation, and working with others in the organization on steps to  
> > > > decrease  
> > > > > the success of attacks like these.
> > > > >
> > > > > The exact source is not yet known, but it is not originating from our
> > > > > systems. That means it is an external effort to gain unauthorized  
> > > access  
> > > > to  
> > > > > random accounts. These types of efforts are increasingly common for
> > > > > websites of our reach. A vast majority of these attempts have been
> > > > > unsuccessful, and we are reaching out personally to the small number  
> > of  
> > > > > accounts which we believe have been compromised.
> > > > >
> > > > > While we are constantly looking at improvements to our security  
> > systems  
> > > > and  
> > > > > processes to offset the impact of malicious efforts such as these,  
> > the  
> > > > best  
> > > > > method of prevention continues to be the steps each of you take to
> > > > > safeguard your accounts. Because of this, we have taken steps in the  
> > > past  
> > > > > to support things like stronger password requirements,[1] and we  
> > > continue  
> > > > > to encourage everyone to take some routine steps to maintain a secure
> > > > > computer and account. That includes regularly changing your  
> > > passwords,[2]  
> > > > > actively running antivirus software on your systems, and keeping your
> > > > > system software up to date.
> > > > >  
> > > >
> > > > From my experience, anti-virus programs usually do more harm than
> > > > good.  
> > > For  
> > > > example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton_AntiVirus recently  
> > blocked  
> > > > my
> > > > entire shlomifish.org domain because it apparently misclassified an
> > > > executable
> > > > download as problematic (and it was built from source using
> > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMake and
> > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AppVeyor
> > > > so it is unlikely that that is the case.). MS Windows' poor resistance  
> > to  
> > > > malware and the fact that Windows Update is so dysfunctional (see
> > > > http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/bits/facts/Windows-Update/ ) are the
> > > > reasons
> > > > why I cannot recommend running it as a desktop, and instead one should  
> > > use  
> > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux#Desktop - desktop linux or  
> > similar.  

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

[Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l]

Hi,
I usually push diversity in any situation but only after I got a core quality 
group of volunteer. the first degree of diversity is the diversity based on 
wiki activity, IMHO.. I care about the rest and I try to be honest if I go in 
that direction and why I do that. If anyone is offended for something, that 
happens even if you do your best, in my experience being clear helps on the 
long term.
This a real documented example, if you want to read: 
http://www.wikisciencecompetition.org/people/ . For WSC2017 it was mostly my 
job to find these profiles, 90% of them. I did my best to find motivated jury 
members and, as a first step, I searched for expert wikimedians based on their 
CV on the profiles and their activities. My goal was to be balanced per topic, 
than per geographical area (language mostly, some description in English are 
poor), than maybe per gender, in that order. The evaluation of scientific 
images require expertise, that's the core business. I shared my experience 
here: 
http://www.wikisciencecompetition.org/2017/11/16/how-was-the-jury-for-wiki-science-competition-2017-formed/
In any case, I couldn't know who these people really were sometimes, I didn't 
care at the first step. You know where they work, but they could be foreigners. 
You know their enwikipedia activity (I need people with some decent English 
fluency, so I started there and in any case I found what I needed) but 
sometimes that does not reveal a lot, and English descriptions are 
gender-neutral. So even if it wasn't planned I got some unbalance, and I only 
discovered during the set up of the page that a certain nickname was a blond 
guy and not a Arab or Chinese girl. I did my best to "fix it" at that point but 
mostly because when you miss some positions and you look for additional 3-4 
names it's no big difference to look here or there. But still, the first search 
was based on their expertise. And they all kew that. 

I think it was quite balanced in the end, taking care of the issue but not 
ranking it more critical than the scientific quality of the profiles. Plus. I 
told some of the female jurors that they could be "promoted" to the main jury 
for next edition but that's because they deserve it.
So, in the end  I look also for "girls" and "exotic profiles", I admit that, 
but this was not my main goal, and it was never more important that the 
quality. So at least these people knew that they were part of a team, that they 
were there to share their expertise, not being displayed as a "token".
I think it's more easy and relaxed if you always stick to the content and the 
quality as a first step, IMHO. if you want the movement to grow roots you need 
real people, motivated people, and real sharing. I really hope they will set up 
real national challenges next time, thanks to the expertise we shared.
Alessandro







Il Lunedì 7 Maggio 2018 14:33, Andy Mabbett  ha 
scritto:
 

 On 7 May 2018 at 05:10, Romaine Wiki  wrote:

> I recently received an e-mail
> from a user in the Wikimedia movement who has (temporarily?) stopped
> contributing as she is not happy with a specific aspect of the atmosphere
> in Wikimedia.

> She was invited to participate in a Wikimedia activity, because:
> 1. she is a woman
> 2. she is from a minority
> 3. she is from an area in the world with much less editors (compared to
> Europe/US)
>
> and perhaps also because her colour of her skin is a bit different then
> mine (Caucasian).

I'm sorry to hear that a contributor feels unable to continue because of this.

In order to examine what improvements we can make, can you tell us -
without breeching confidentiality - how this approach was made, and
what exactly was said?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


   
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Anti-viruses [was Re: Information on "Multiple failed attempts to log in" emails]

[Eduardo Testart]

Shlomi,

I believe that the problem is with your particular brand of antivirus,
eventhough they all block a bit more or less to prevent certain risks.

Nevertheless, making an extrapolation to every antivirus from the
experience with only one brand, and concluding "they do more harm than
good" based on that, seems a bit off.


Cheers!

El lun., may. 7, 2018 10:02, Gabriel Thullen  escribió:

> I am also a Linux advocate, and have been so for years (decades?). That
> been said, I imagine that there are still more people using Windows XP than
> there are people using Linux. Last time I checked (october 2017) it was
> something like 5% using XP and less than 1% using linux, all distros
> included. We can safely predict that virus outvreaks will be a problem for
> linux once it reaches 5% or 10% market share...
>
> Gabe
>
> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 1:51 PM, Shabab Mustafa 
> wrote:
>
> > I have been a Linux advocate for almost a decade now and from 'my past
> > experience', I can tell you have opened a topic of a huge discussion
> about
> > people should switch to Linux Desktops (which is off-topic here). But I
> > respectfully disagree with your statement, "anti-virus programs usually
> do
> > more harm than good".
> >
> > From a conservative viewpoint, some protection is still better to have
> than
> > no protection at all. And the example you gave here, an anti-virus
> > mistakenly classified your domain as a potential threat, makes a weaker
> > point. By a few mistakes, we cannot cancel out a million of other
> > successes. A false alarm is yet favourable than no alarm at all.
> >
> > ---
> > Shabab Mustafa
> > President
> > Wikimedia Bangladesh
> >
> > ​
> >
> > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:56 PM Shlomi Fish 
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 3 May 2018 19:27:16 -0500
> > > John Bennett  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > Many of you may have been receiving emails in the last 24 hours
> warning
> > > you
> > > > of "Multiple failed attempts to log in" with your account. I wanted
> to
> > > let
> > > > you know that the Wikimedia Foundation's Security team is aware of
> the
> > > > situation, and working with others in the organization on steps to
> > > decrease
> > > > the success of attacks like these.
> > > >
> > > > The exact source is not yet known, but it is not originating from our
> > > > systems. That means it is an external effort to gain unauthorized
> > access
> > > to
> > > > random accounts. These types of efforts are increasingly common for
> > > > websites of our reach. A vast majority of these attempts have been
> > > > unsuccessful, and we are reaching out personally to the small number
> of
> > > > accounts which we believe have been compromised.
> > > >
> > > > While we are constantly looking at improvements to our security
> systems
> > > and
> > > > processes to offset the impact of malicious efforts such as these,
> the
> > > best
> > > > method of prevention continues to be the steps each of you take to
> > > > safeguard your accounts. Because of this, we have taken steps in the
> > past
> > > > to support things like stronger password requirements,[1] and we
> > continue
> > > > to encourage everyone to take some routine steps to maintain a secure
> > > > computer and account. That includes regularly changing your
> > passwords,[2]
> > > > actively running antivirus software on your systems, and keeping your
> > > > system software up to date.
> > > >
> > >
> > > From my experience, anti-virus programs usually do more harm than good.
> > For
> > > example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton_AntiVirus recently
> blocked
> > > my
> > > entire shlomifish.org domain because it apparently misclassified an
> > > executable
> > > download as problematic (and it was built from source using
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMake and
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AppVeyor
> > > so it is unlikely that that is the case.). MS Windows' poor resistance
> to
> > > malware and the fact that Windows Update is so dysfunctional (see
> > > http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/bits/facts/Windows-Update/ ) are the
> > > reasons
> > > why I cannot recommend running it as a desktop, and instead one should
> > use
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux#Desktop - desktop linux or
> similar.
> > >
> > > A little off topic perhaps, but needs to be said.
> > >
> > > > My team will continue to investigate this incident, and report back
> if
> > we
> > > > notice any concerning changes. If you have any questions, please
> > contact
> > > > the Support and Safety team (susa{{@}}wikimedia.org).
> > > >
> > > > John Bennett
> > > > Director of Security, Wikimedia Foundation
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Password_strength_requirements
> > > > [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ChangePassword
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, 

[Wikimedia-l] Research Showcase May 8, 2018 (11:30 AM PDT| 18:30 UTC)

[Sarah R]

Hi Everyone,

The next Research Showcase will be live-streamed this Tuesday, May 8,
2018 at 11:30 AM (PDT), 18:30 (UTC). (Please note this meeting is on
Tuesday this month).

YouTube stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7cHxlGgEt4

As usual, you can join the conversation on IRC at #wikimedia-research. And,
you can watch our past research showcases here.


Case studies in the appropriation of ORESBy *Aaron Halfaker*ORES is an
open, transparent, and auditable machine prediction platform for
Wikipedians to help them do their work. It's currently used in 33 different
Wikimedia projects to measure the quality of content, detect vandalism,
recommend changes to articles, and to identify good faith newcomers. The
primary way that Wikipedians use ORES' predictions is through the tools
developed by volunteers. These javascript gadgets, MediaWiki extensions,
and web-based tools make up a complex ecosystem of Wikipedian processes --
encoded into software. In this presentation, Aaron will walk through a
three key tools that Wikipedians have developed that make use of ORES, and
he'll discuss how these novel process support technologies and the
discussions around them have prompted Wikipedians to reflect on their work
processes.


Exploring Wikimedia Donation PatternsBy *Gary Hsieh*Every year, Wikimedia
Foundation relies on fundraising campaigns to help maintain the services it
provides to millions of people worldwide. However, despite a large number
of individuals who donate through these campaigns, these donors represent
only a small percentage of Wikimedia users. In this work, we seek to
advance our understanding of donors and their donation behaviors. Our
findings offer insights to improve fundraising campaigns and to limit the
burden of these campaigns on Wikipedia visitors.

Kindly,

Sarah R. Rodlund
Senior Project Coordinator-Product & Technology, Wikimedia Foundation
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Anti-viruses [was Re: Information on "Multiple failed attempts to log in" emails]

[Gabriel Thullen]

I am also a Linux advocate, and have been so for years (decades?). That
been said, I imagine that there are still more people using Windows XP than
there are people using Linux. Last time I checked (october 2017) it was
something like 5% using XP and less than 1% using linux, all distros
included. We can safely predict that virus outvreaks will be a problem for
linux once it reaches 5% or 10% market share...

Gabe

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 1:51 PM, Shabab Mustafa 
wrote:

> I have been a Linux advocate for almost a decade now and from 'my past
> experience', I can tell you have opened a topic of a huge discussion about
> people should switch to Linux Desktops (which is off-topic here). But I
> respectfully disagree with your statement, "anti-virus programs usually do
> more harm than good".
>
> From a conservative viewpoint, some protection is still better to have than
> no protection at all. And the example you gave here, an anti-virus
> mistakenly classified your domain as a potential threat, makes a weaker
> point. By a few mistakes, we cannot cancel out a million of other
> successes. A false alarm is yet favourable than no alarm at all.
>
> ---
> Shabab Mustafa
> President
> Wikimedia Bangladesh
>
> ​
>
> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:56 PM Shlomi Fish  wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 3 May 2018 19:27:16 -0500
> > John Bennett  wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Many of you may have been receiving emails in the last 24 hours warning
> > you
> > > of "Multiple failed attempts to log in" with your account. I wanted to
> > let
> > > you know that the Wikimedia Foundation's Security team is aware of the
> > > situation, and working with others in the organization on steps to
> > decrease
> > > the success of attacks like these.
> > >
> > > The exact source is not yet known, but it is not originating from our
> > > systems. That means it is an external effort to gain unauthorized
> access
> > to
> > > random accounts. These types of efforts are increasingly common for
> > > websites of our reach. A vast majority of these attempts have been
> > > unsuccessful, and we are reaching out personally to the small number of
> > > accounts which we believe have been compromised.
> > >
> > > While we are constantly looking at improvements to our security systems
> > and
> > > processes to offset the impact of malicious efforts such as these, the
> > best
> > > method of prevention continues to be the steps each of you take to
> > > safeguard your accounts. Because of this, we have taken steps in the
> past
> > > to support things like stronger password requirements,[1] and we
> continue
> > > to encourage everyone to take some routine steps to maintain a secure
> > > computer and account. That includes regularly changing your
> passwords,[2]
> > > actively running antivirus software on your systems, and keeping your
> > > system software up to date.
> > >
> >
> > From my experience, anti-virus programs usually do more harm than good.
> For
> > example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton_AntiVirus recently blocked
> > my
> > entire shlomifish.org domain because it apparently misclassified an
> > executable
> > download as problematic (and it was built from source using
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMake and
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AppVeyor
> > so it is unlikely that that is the case.). MS Windows' poor resistance to
> > malware and the fact that Windows Update is so dysfunctional (see
> > http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/bits/facts/Windows-Update/ ) are the
> > reasons
> > why I cannot recommend running it as a desktop, and instead one should
> use
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux#Desktop - desktop linux or similar.
> >
> > A little off topic perhaps, but needs to be said.
> >
> > > My team will continue to investigate this incident, and report back if
> we
> > > notice any concerning changes. If you have any questions, please
> contact
> > > the Support and Safety team (susa{{@}}wikimedia.org).
> > >
> > > John Bennett
> > > Director of Security, Wikimedia Foundation
> > >
> > > [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Password_strength_requirements
> > > [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ChangePassword
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to:
> > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> >
> >
> > --
> > -
> > Shlomi Fish   http://www.shlomifish.org/
> > http://www.shlomifish.org/open-source/projects/fortune-mod/
> >
> > If a tree falls down in the middle of the forest, and there’s no one
> there
> > to
> > hear it… what colour 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Anti-viruses [was Re: Information on "Multiple failed attempts to log in" emails]

[Shabab Mustafa]

I have been a Linux advocate for almost a decade now and from 'my past
experience', I can tell you have opened a topic of a huge discussion about
people should switch to Linux Desktops (which is off-topic here). But I
respectfully disagree with your statement, "anti-virus programs usually do
more harm than good".

From a conservative viewpoint, some protection is still better to have than
no protection at all. And the example you gave here, an anti-virus
mistakenly classified your domain as a potential threat, makes a weaker
point. By a few mistakes, we cannot cancel out a million of other
successes. A false alarm is yet favourable than no alarm at all.

---
Shabab Mustafa
President
Wikimedia Bangladesh

​

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:56 PM Shlomi Fish  wrote:

> On Thu, 3 May 2018 19:27:16 -0500
> John Bennett  wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > Many of you may have been receiving emails in the last 24 hours warning
> you
> > of "Multiple failed attempts to log in" with your account. I wanted to
> let
> > you know that the Wikimedia Foundation's Security team is aware of the
> > situation, and working with others in the organization on steps to
> decrease
> > the success of attacks like these.
> >
> > The exact source is not yet known, but it is not originating from our
> > systems. That means it is an external effort to gain unauthorized access
> to
> > random accounts. These types of efforts are increasingly common for
> > websites of our reach. A vast majority of these attempts have been
> > unsuccessful, and we are reaching out personally to the small number of
> > accounts which we believe have been compromised.
> >
> > While we are constantly looking at improvements to our security systems
> and
> > processes to offset the impact of malicious efforts such as these, the
> best
> > method of prevention continues to be the steps each of you take to
> > safeguard your accounts. Because of this, we have taken steps in the past
> > to support things like stronger password requirements,[1] and we continue
> > to encourage everyone to take some routine steps to maintain a secure
> > computer and account. That includes regularly changing your passwords,[2]
> > actively running antivirus software on your systems, and keeping your
> > system software up to date.
> >
>
> From my experience, anti-virus programs usually do more harm than good. For
> example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton_AntiVirus recently blocked
> my
> entire shlomifish.org domain because it apparently misclassified an
> executable
> download as problematic (and it was built from source using
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMake and
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AppVeyor
> so it is unlikely that that is the case.). MS Windows' poor resistance to
> malware and the fact that Windows Update is so dysfunctional (see
> http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/bits/facts/Windows-Update/ ) are the
> reasons
> why I cannot recommend running it as a desktop, and instead one should use
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux#Desktop - desktop linux or similar.
>
> A little off topic perhaps, but needs to be said.
>
> > My team will continue to investigate this incident, and report back if we
> > notice any concerning changes. If you have any questions, please contact
> > the Support and Safety team (susa{{@}}wikimedia.org).
> >
> > John Bennett
> > Director of Security, Wikimedia Foundation
> >
> > [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Password_strength_requirements
> > [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ChangePassword
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to:
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
>
>
> --
> -
> Shlomi Fish   http://www.shlomifish.org/
> http://www.shlomifish.org/open-source/projects/fortune-mod/
>
> If a tree falls down in the middle of the forest, and there’s no one there
> to
> hear it… what colour is the tree?
> — Monkey Island 2: LeChuck’s Revenge
>
> Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply .
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

[Andy Mabbett]

On 7 May 2018 at 05:10, Romaine Wiki  wrote:

> I recently received an e-mail
> from a user in the Wikimedia movement who has (temporarily?) stopped
> contributing as she is not happy with a specific aspect of the atmosphere
> in Wikimedia.

> She was invited to participate in a Wikimedia activity, because:
> 1. she is a woman
> 2. she is from a minority
> 3. she is from an area in the world with much less editors (compared to
> Europe/US)
>
> and perhaps also because her colour of her skin is a bit different then
> mine (Caucasian).

I'm sorry to hear that a contributor feels unable to continue because of this.

In order to examine what improvements we can make, can you tell us -
without breeching confidentiality - how this approach was made, and
what exactly was said?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Anti-viruses [was Re: Information on "Multiple failed attempts to log in" emails]

[Shlomi Fish]

On Thu, 3 May 2018 19:27:16 -0500
John Bennett  wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> Many of you may have been receiving emails in the last 24 hours warning you
> of "Multiple failed attempts to log in" with your account. I wanted to let
> you know that the Wikimedia Foundation's Security team is aware of the
> situation, and working with others in the organization on steps to decrease
> the success of attacks like these.
> 
> The exact source is not yet known, but it is not originating from our
> systems. That means it is an external effort to gain unauthorized access to
> random accounts. These types of efforts are increasingly common for
> websites of our reach. A vast majority of these attempts have been
> unsuccessful, and we are reaching out personally to the small number of
> accounts which we believe have been compromised.
> 
> While we are constantly looking at improvements to our security systems and
> processes to offset the impact of malicious efforts such as these, the best
> method of prevention continues to be the steps each of you take to
> safeguard your accounts. Because of this, we have taken steps in the past
> to support things like stronger password requirements,[1] and we continue
> to encourage everyone to take some routine steps to maintain a secure
> computer and account. That includes regularly changing your passwords,[2]
> actively running antivirus software on your systems, and keeping your
> system software up to date.
> 

From my experience, anti-virus programs usually do more harm than good. For
example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton_AntiVirus recently blocked my
entire shlomifish.org domain because it apparently misclassified an executable
download as problematic (and it was built from source using
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMake and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AppVeyor
so it is unlikely that that is the case.). MS Windows' poor resistance to
malware and the fact that Windows Update is so dysfunctional (see
http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/bits/facts/Windows-Update/ ) are the reasons
why I cannot recommend running it as a desktop, and instead one should use
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux#Desktop - desktop linux or similar.

A little off topic perhaps, but needs to be said.

> My team will continue to investigate this incident, and report back if we
> notice any concerning changes. If you have any questions, please contact
> the Support and Safety team (susa{{@}}wikimedia.org).
> 
> John Bennett
> Director of Security, Wikimedia Foundation
> 
> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Password_strength_requirements
> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ChangePassword
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to:
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 


-- 
-
Shlomi Fish   http://www.shlomifish.org/
http://www.shlomifish.org/open-source/projects/fortune-mod/

If a tree falls down in the middle of the forest, and there’s no one there to
hear it… what colour is the tree?
— Monkey Island 2: LeChuck’s Revenge

Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply .

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

[Jane Darnell]

Yes I totally agree with this. The problem is actually two-fold; we lack
the women contributors, and the current notability rules cause us to talk
in circles about how to protect new female contributors from being put off
by the systemic bias inherent in our internal processes. You don't have to
go back that far in time to find women listed as property and not people,
even in Western society. "Fauna" is a new one for me though! Writing as a
woman is of course different than writing about women. Everyone is welcome
to write about whatever they like. We miss the "female gaze" however - it
really doesn't matter what the women want to write about, as long as they
write. Massively as a large international group they choose to write
elsewhere and not on Wikipedia or any of the Wikimedia projects. The
question of why not may be simply technical or it could be the off-putting
challenge of learning to navigate our notability standards for things that
have historically only been academically documented by young white men.
Diving into things like the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica shows huge gaps in
knowledge as well as amazing detail for things that don't interest us so
much today, such as geological survey data. Back when people grew their own
vegetables or made their own asphalt that may have been very useful to
know, but increasingly the stuff we eat and build with comes from places
very far away from us. Sadly, the information we use to build articles
about local stuff also comes from farther and farther away.

I was originally coaxed into my first local WLM meetup by a direct
invitation on my user talk page. Whether this direct approach that has
proven so successful with WLM helps for the gendergap specifically is an
unknown, because our group of female contributors to invite is so
small.  The trick is to make the invitation as informal as possible and as
easy as possible to accept. I guess it is easier to think about the concept
of local heritage than it is to think about "female living", whatever that
may be. The point about diversity is you need to get people's attention so
they just add that extra little bit of focus when they are doing their
thing. In my case, I like to work on paintings and it takes me much more
time, sometimes years, to track down paintings by women, or portraits of
women, or paintings that have been in collections located in Africa and
other places not in the usual museum or art world circuit. I used to just
ignore the hard cases, but now I know I should pay extra attention and make
that extra bit of effort. In my small corner of the wikiverse I am slowly
tilting the scales from "paintings of women always show nudity" to
"paintings of women are mostly portraits". The point is to apply an extra
filter to the gaze we all have, to alert us to the female angle or the
non-Western angle.

The women who do contribute to our projects tend to have other interests
than just biographies or anything else gender-related. I think that's
normal.

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Gnangarra  wrote:

> I think the problems not in trying to fix the imbalance in knowledge,
> something for which history has big role in what and how information was
> even still is recorded.  I think the presumption that when we ask women to
> edit about women we predispose the assumption that women are only
> interested in women and only women can or want to write about them.  We
> have had a lot of concepts that have improved content about women and they
> have focused on getting women to do the contributions.
>
> sorry Fred to quote as an example
>
> ​ Women editors might have something to add about nursing and the history
> > of nursing that adds gender-specific value, increasing our coverage of
> the
> > subject. So a workshop at a nursing convention might be valuable. ​
> >
>
>
> What we need to do is shift our train of thought from women can contribute
> to subjects about women to providing environments that let and encourage
> women to contribute to topics that interest them​ not us.  The same applies
> to other "minorities" where the subject being written is less important
> than enabling participation. For that we need to consider in broader terms
> what is notable, what defines notability, how do we draw in those
> intangible knowledge sources to broaden the base for both contributors and
> contributions.
>
> We have the ridiculous case of Indigenous people in Australia being
> considered as fauna until the 1960's, so that when an Indigenous person was
> written about historically(even now its still applies) that in itself is
> significant but we measure the notability of a person based not on the
> uniqueness of such  but on whether there is sufficient volume of other
> works about the person.  We have created an inherently bias system that
> favours those of colonial heritage with colonial records over those who
> dont have that historical privilege, we encourage this as Romaine put its
> with 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

[Gnangarra]

I think the problems not in trying to fix the imbalance in knowledge,
something for which history has big role in what and how information was
even still is recorded.  I think the presumption that when we ask women to
edit about women we predispose the assumption that women are only
interested in women and only women can or want to write about them.  We
have had a lot of concepts that have improved content about women and they
have focused on getting women to do the contributions.

sorry Fred to quote as an example

​ Women editors might have something to add about nursing and the history
> of nursing that adds gender-specific value, increasing our coverage of the
> subject. So a workshop at a nursing convention might be valuable. ​
>


What we need to do is shift our train of thought from women can contribute
to subjects about women to providing environments that let and encourage
women to contribute to topics that interest them​ not us.  The same applies
to other "minorities" where the subject being written is less important
than enabling participation. For that we need to consider in broader terms
what is notable, what defines notability, how do we draw in those
intangible knowledge sources to broaden the base for both contributors and
contributions.

We have the ridiculous case of Indigenous people in Australia being
considered as fauna until the 1960's, so that when an Indigenous person was
written about historically(even now its still applies) that in itself is
significant but we measure the notability of a person based not on the
uniqueness of such  but on whether there is sufficient volume of other
works about the person.  We have created an inherently bias system that
favours those of colonial heritage with colonial records over those who
dont have that historical privilege, we encourage this as Romaine put its
with a tokenism of participation and expectation of contributions
conforming to maintain that bias.  While we do that we dont actually value
the contributor or the contributions nor what else can be brought to the
community.


On 7 May 2018 at 17:31, Fæ  wrote:

> On 7 May 2018 at 10:01, FRED BAUDER  wrote:
> > Women editors might have something to add about nursing and the history
> of nursing that adds gender-specific value, increasing our coverage of the
> subject. So a workshop at a nursing convention might be valuable.
> >
> > Fred
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: Amir E. Aharoni 
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
> > Sent: Mon, 07 May 2018 04:52:31 -0400 (EDT)
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> >
> > 2018-05-07 9:55 GMT+03:00 Jane Darnell :
> >
> >> Amir,
> >> It's funny - after reading your mail I wondered if I had read Romaine's
> >> mail correctly.
> >
> >
> > You had probably read it correctly.
> >
> > Generally, I'm wondering whether direct invitations to women or people of
> > color (or women of color, etc.) work as they should. Many people say that
> > they work. They may be right, at least in part. If I understand
> correctly,
> > Romaine says that he has doubts about it, and he's probably right, too,
> at
> > least for some people.
> >
> > I'm just trying to say that diversity is important. How do we reach it? I
> > don't have very good answers. Probably not "one size fits all".
> >
> > I mean, I want that woman about whom Romaine was speaking to contribute
> her
> > knowledge. I want everybody to contribute their knowledge. Unless I
> missed
> > it, Romaine didn't write what is her expertise, but just for the sake of
> > the example, let's make something up and say that it's Astronomy.
> >
> > Do I want her to contribute her knowledge about Astronomy? Of course I
> do.
> > Should I tell her that I hope that she contributes her knowledge about
> > Astronomy? I probably should. (Do correct me if I'm wrong.)
> >
> > Do I think that she has something to say about Astronomy that men don't?
> > Yes, it's quite possible. Should I tell her that? Hmm, I don't know.
> Maybe,
> > maybe not. I think that this is the question that Romaine is trying to
> > raise. And again, please correct me if I'm wrong.
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

[Fæ]

On 7 May 2018 at 10:01, FRED BAUDER  wrote:
> Women editors might have something to add about nursing and the history of 
> nursing that adds gender-specific value, increasing our coverage of the 
> subject. So a workshop at a nursing convention might be valuable.
>
> Fred
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Amir E. Aharoni 
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
> Sent: Mon, 07 May 2018 04:52:31 -0400 (EDT)
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
>
> 2018-05-07 9:55 GMT+03:00 Jane Darnell :
>
>> Amir,
>> It's funny - after reading your mail I wondered if I had read Romaine's
>> mail correctly.
>
>
> You had probably read it correctly.
>
> Generally, I'm wondering whether direct invitations to women or people of
> color (or women of color, etc.) work as they should. Many people say that
> they work. They may be right, at least in part. If I understand correctly,
> Romaine says that he has doubts about it, and he's probably right, too, at
> least for some people.
>
> I'm just trying to say that diversity is important. How do we reach it? I
> don't have very good answers. Probably not "one size fits all".
>
> I mean, I want that woman about whom Romaine was speaking to contribute her
> knowledge. I want everybody to contribute their knowledge. Unless I missed
> it, Romaine didn't write what is her expertise, but just for the sake of
> the example, let's make something up and say that it's Astronomy.
>
> Do I want her to contribute her knowledge about Astronomy? Of course I do.
> Should I tell her that I hope that she contributes her knowledge about
> Astronomy? I probably should. (Do correct me if I'm wrong.)
>
> Do I think that she has something to say about Astronomy that men don't?
> Yes, it's quite possible. Should I tell her that? Hmm, I don't know. Maybe,
> maybe not. I think that this is the question that Romaine is trying to
> raise. And again, please correct me if I'm wrong.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

Thanks for reminding everyone that we live in the 21st Century, where
there are plenty of women role models at the top of previously male
dominated professions, not just nursing.

The Wikipedia community has the most success at correcting gender bias
by encouraging interested volunteers of any gender to create articles
which help correct that bias, in all subjects.

Fae
-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

[FRED BAUDER]

Women editors might have something to add about nursing and the history of 
nursing that adds gender-specific value, increasing our coverage of the 
subject. So a workshop at a nursing convention might be valuable.

Fred

- Original Message -
From: Amir E. Aharoni 
To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
Sent: Mon, 07 May 2018 04:52:31 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-07 9:55 GMT+03:00 Jane Darnell :

> Amir,
> It's funny - after reading your mail I wondered if I had read Romaine's
> mail correctly.


You had probably read it correctly.

Generally, I'm wondering whether direct invitations to women or people of
color (or women of color, etc.) work as they should. Many people say that
they work. They may be right, at least in part. If I understand correctly,
Romaine says that he has doubts about it, and he's probably right, too, at
least for some people.

I'm just trying to say that diversity is important. How do we reach it? I
don't have very good answers. Probably not "one size fits all".

I mean, I want that woman about whom Romaine was speaking to contribute her
knowledge. I want everybody to contribute their knowledge. Unless I missed
it, Romaine didn't write what is her expertise, but just for the sake of
the example, let's make something up and say that it's Astronomy.

Do I want her to contribute her knowledge about Astronomy? Of course I do.
Should I tell her that I hope that she contributes her knowledge about
Astronomy? I probably should. (Do correct me if I'm wrong.)

Do I think that she has something to say about Astronomy that men don't?
Yes, it's quite possible. Should I tell her that? Hmm, I don't know. Maybe,
maybe not. I think that this is the question that Romaine is trying to
raise. And again, please correct me if I'm wrong.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

[Amir E. Aharoni]

2018-05-07 9:55 GMT+03:00 Jane Darnell :

> Amir,
> It's funny - after reading your mail I wondered if I had read Romaine's
> mail correctly.


You had probably read it correctly.

Generally, I'm wondering whether direct invitations to women or people of
color (or women of color, etc.) work as they should. Many people say that
they work. They may be right, at least in part. If I understand correctly,
Romaine says that he has doubts about it, and he's probably right, too, at
least for some people.

I'm just trying to say that diversity is important. How do we reach it? I
don't have very good answers. Probably not "one size fits all".

I mean, I want that woman about whom Romaine was speaking to contribute her
knowledge. I want everybody to contribute their knowledge. Unless I missed
it, Romaine didn't write what is her expertise, but just for the sake of
the example, let's make something up and say that it's Astronomy.

Do I want her to contribute her knowledge about Astronomy? Of course I do.
Should I tell her that I hope that she contributes her knowledge about
Astronomy? I probably should. (Do correct me if I'm wrong.)

Do I think that she has something to say about Astronomy that men don't?
Yes, it's quite possible. Should I tell her that? Hmm, I don't know. Maybe,
maybe not. I think that this is the question that Romaine is trying to
raise. And again, please correct me if I'm wrong.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

[FRED BAUDER]

Women and other unrepresented people are invited to edit, to become skilled in 
editing (lots of practice and experience needed), and get well-deserved credit 
for excellence, but it is a process. Everyone stumbles at first, the point is 
not run anyone off or blame the difficulties associated with getting up to 
speed on gender or whatever.

Fred Bauder

- Original Message -
From: Romaine Wiki 
To: Wikimedia 
Cc: Wikimedia Gendergap mailing list 
Sent: Mon, 07 May 2018 00:10:25 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

Hi all,

On Wikipedia and in our movement we are aware of the gendergap that exists
and all kinds of activities are organised to make the gap smaller. I think
this is great as no single gap should exist in collecting all the knowledge
in the world, as well as our movement should be diverse as the world's
population is diverse.

The statistics are clear on this matter, this is something to take care of.
However, a part of the approach is causing problems, because general
statistics should not be applied on individuals as that reduces humans to
numbers only.

The reason why I bring this up is because I recently received an e-mail
from a user in the Wikimedia movement who has (temporarily?) stopped
contributing as she is not happy with a specific aspect of the atmosphere
in Wikimedia.

She does not speak out at loud, but I think we must be aware as movement of
the silent cry, therefore this e-mail to bring awareness (but with respect
for the privacy of this individual).


What has happened?

She was invited to participate in a Wikimedia activity, because:
1. she is a woman
2. she is from a minority
3. she is from an area in the world with much less editors (compared to
Europe/US)

and perhaps also because her colour of her skin is a bit different then
mine (Caucasian).

At the same time she has the impression that the work she does on the
Wikimedia wiki('s) is not valued, nor taken into account.

She does not want to be invited because she is a woman, nor because she is
from a minority, nor ... etc. This is offensive.
She only wants to be invited because of the work she contributes on
Wikipedia/etc.



Besides the many good initiatives and intentions, this kind of approaches
to our contributors is demotivating them, please be aware of this. I
believe demotivation/frustration is the largest problem we face as movement.


I heard from people that the problem described is called tokenism
.


I believe the only way to close the gaps related to gender, minorities,
etc, is to create an atmosphere in what everyone is appreciated for what
she/he is doing, completely unrelated to the gender someone appears to
have, the ethnicity, race, area of the world, etc etc etc etc.

Thank you!

Romaine
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Apa yang membuat anda gembira minggu ini? / What's making you happy this week? (Week of 6 May 2018)

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
I am adding a page with national politicians from Africa.. When people add
any of them, add their nationality or their terms, it will update in a
Listeria page. Currently there are some twenty countries I follow. The good
news:  an interest from people from Nigeria :)
Thanks,
  GerardM

PS Africa has more people than 1% of the world population, I would like to
know the number of people from Africa we cover, doubt that it is more than
1%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:GerardM/Africa
https://twitter.com/hashtag/AfricaGap?src=hash

On 6 May 2018 at 19:57, Pine W  wrote:

> I was happy to read about the new features in the latest release of the
> Wikimedia Commons app for Android. My understanding is the app is developed
> and maintained by community members with funding from WMF and GSoC in
> addition to volunteer time.
>
>
> Also, I was happy to see GSoC participants introducing themselves and
> their projects on Wikitech-l.
>
>
> I am grateful to the WMF staff who are listening and responding civilly to
> the questions and comments on MediaWiki regarding the page previews
> feature. The project plan appears to have been designed thoughtfully.
>
> Finally, I liked reading portions of English Wikipedia's article about
> CubeSats.
>
>
> What's making you happy this week? You are welcome to comment in any
> language.
>
>
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

[Jane Darnell]

Amir,
It's funny - after reading your mail I wondered if I had read Romaine's
mail correctly. Rereading both it seems that is exactly what you were
trying to say - we all carry our own little bundle of biases with us
whereever we go and whatever we read. When I read Romaine's mail I stopped
cold at "tokenism" - for me tokenism is when you count the paintings by
women in any museum and you find none of the women have more than one
painting in the collection, though they have lots and lots of male artists
with more than 20 works in the collection.

When it comes to Wiki meetups, everyone has their own reasons for wanting
to come or not. I have a feeling at edit-a-thons open to the general public
that it's a bit like being in a cage or aquarium where you yourself are the
attraction. Instead of meeting people who want to contribute I tend to get
questioned about my own motivations. I agree that as a member of this list
I am already a hard-core insider of this movement and can no longer think
about these things in a "normal" way (i.e. as a reader). What I do know
from talking to lots of family and friends is that most people have
absolutely no clue about our gaps in knowledge or have even heard of the
gendergap at all. When I say gendergap, they think gender pay gap and I
have to start explaining that no one is paid for their edits (which always
leads the conversation into a whole new tangent).

When it comes to the women, thankfully the word "nonbinary" is relatively
new and we can easily measure the binary gender with Wikidata queries to
see how we are doing. This is still sketchy and problematic, because lots
of historical women and men still do not have their gender assigned at all
on Wikidata - binary or not. We still can't measure gendergap per
occupation, language, or citizenship however, because those statements are
also still mostly lacking for most historical people. Citizenship is
actually quite comical when you start drilling into the data on Wikidata.
Some people want to be extremely specific about borders, which makes some
towns flip all around in terms of citizenship for people who don't have
precise birthdates - did I mention that women don't like to disclose their
birthdates? I would LOVE to be able to count brown and black women, but
this is of course completely off limits to us due to ethical concerns.

Here in the Netherlands we are going to hold a hackathon for women. I will
talk about Wikidata and hope to recruit a few women to help out with the
maintenance lists on women, such as this one:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Women/Wiki_monitor/lawiki

My hopes based on previous events, are not high.
Best,
Jane

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 8:03 AM, Amir E. Aharoni <
amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il> wrote:

> This is a sensitive topic, and I'm a white man myself, so please slap me if
> I say something dumb.
>
> 2018-05-07 7:10 GMT+03:00 Romaine Wiki :
>
> >
> > What has happened?
> >
> > She was invited to participate in a Wikimedia activity, because:
> > 1. she is a woman
> > 2. she is from a minority
> > 3. she is from an area in the world with much less editors (compared to
> > Europe/US)
> >
> > and perhaps also because her colour of her skin is a bit different then
> > mine (Caucasian).
> >
> > At the same time she has the impression that the work she does on the
> > Wikimedia wiki('s) is not valued, nor taken into account.
> >
>
> By whom?
>
> By the people who invited her?
>
> By other participants in the event?
>
> By other editors in the same wiki site?
>
> By the readers?
>
>
>
> > She does not want to be invited because she is a woman, nor because she
> is
> > from a minority, nor ... etc. This is offensive.
> > She only wants to be invited because of the work she contributes on
> > Wikipedia/etc.
> >
>
> This makes a lot of sense to me, but that's just me and attitudes are
> different for each person.
>
>
> > Besides the many good initiatives and intentions, this kind of approaches
> > to our contributors is demotivating them, please be aware of this.
>
>
> Again, it's probably demotivating to some. Maybe to 98%, maybe to 30%,
> maybe to 5%. I honestly don't know.
>
> I believe demotivation/frustration is the largest problem we face as
> > movement.
> >
>
> I don't know if its the biggest problem. On this mailing list we are a
> small group of meta-active Wikimedians, and we are the minority among
> editors. We don't actually represent all the editors. And of course the
> editors are a tiny minority compared to the readers.
>
> I'd argue that the hard time that some editors are giving newcomers is a
> bigger problem. Gender is certainly a part of that, and there are many
> other parts.
>
> We meta-wikimedians can find a better way to invite people to events, and
> we can change ourselves. That doesn't sound too hard. Changing the wider
> editor culture is harder.
>
> I heard from people that the problem described is called tokenism
> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

[Peter Southwood]

I think you ask good questions, but some answers are not easy to find.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Amir E. Aharoni
Sent: Monday, May 7, 2018 8:03 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

This is a sensitive topic, and I'm a white man myself, so please slap me if
I say something dumb.

2018-05-07 7:10 GMT+03:00 Romaine Wiki :

>
> What has happened?
>
> She was invited to participate in a Wikimedia activity, because:
> 1. she is a woman
> 2. she is from a minority
> 3. she is from an area in the world with much less editors (compared to
> Europe/US)
>
> and perhaps also because her colour of her skin is a bit different then
> mine (Caucasian).
>
> At the same time she has the impression that the work she does on the
> Wikimedia wiki('s) is not valued, nor taken into account.
>

By whom?

By the people who invited her?

By other participants in the event?

By other editors in the same wiki site?

By the readers?



> She does not want to be invited because she is a woman, nor because she is
> from a minority, nor ... etc. This is offensive.
> She only wants to be invited because of the work she contributes on
> Wikipedia/etc.
>

This makes a lot of sense to me, but that's just me and attitudes are
different for each person.


> Besides the many good initiatives and intentions, this kind of approaches
> to our contributors is demotivating them, please be aware of this.


Again, it's probably demotivating to some. Maybe to 98%, maybe to 30%,
maybe to 5%. I honestly don't know.

I believe demotivation/frustration is the largest problem we face as
> movement.
>

I don't know if its the biggest problem. On this mailing list we are a
small group of meta-active Wikimedians, and we are the minority among
editors. We don't actually represent all the editors. And of course the
editors are a tiny minority compared to the readers.

I'd argue that the hard time that some editors are giving newcomers is a
bigger problem. Gender is certainly a part of that, and there are many
other parts.

We meta-wikimedians can find a better way to invite people to events, and
we can change ourselves. That doesn't sound too hard. Changing the wider
editor culture is harder.

I heard from people that the problem described is called tokenism
> .
>

Yes, that's when representation is given to a weakened group, but that
representation is too weak to be meaningful, and may do more harm than good.


> I believe the only way to close the gaps related to gender, minorities,
> etc, is to create an atmosphere in what everyone is appreciated for what
> she/he is doing, completely unrelated to the gender someone appears to
> have, the ethnicity, race, area of the world, etc etc etc etc.
>

So that's where it gets really complicated, because it's always related, in
ways that are sometimes visible and sometimes invisible.

Let's take school education as a hopefully easy example. People from
different areas of the world will have very different things to write about
it. In some areas of the world everybody gets school education—boys and
girls, rich and poor, rural and urban. In other areas it may be only boys;
or only people in cities; or only people who know a certain language; or
only people who belong to a certain religion; or only people who have a
certain amount of money; or only people who have a certain skin color. I
want articles about education to have contributions from as many people as
possible, from different genders, from different skin colors, and from
different areas, and so on.

An American white woman has different things to say about education from an
American black man. These differences are important and frequently
discussed in American media. But the American white woman and the American
black man *don't even imagine* what people from The Philippines have to say
about education. What people from the Philippines have to say about
education probably has little to do with the internal American debates on
this topic. And of course it breaks down further, because a person who
lives in the capital of Philippines and knows English has different things
to say about education from a person who lives in a village in Philippines
and doesn't know English.

On articles about education I want to hear from all of them. And about
every other topic. (And yes, I want contributions from people who don't
know English in the English Wikipedia. By definition they cannot contribute
directly, but we must do everything we can to make at least an indirect
contribution possible.)

How do we do it right?

How do we get more different people to even try to contribute to articles?
How do we get everybody's contributions to be accepted? (Guess whose
contributions are more likely to be challenged as "non-notable",
"unencyclopedic", or 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

[Amir E. Aharoni]

This is a sensitive topic, and I'm a white man myself, so please slap me if
I say something dumb.

2018-05-07 7:10 GMT+03:00 Romaine Wiki :

>
> What has happened?
>
> She was invited to participate in a Wikimedia activity, because:
> 1. she is a woman
> 2. she is from a minority
> 3. she is from an area in the world with much less editors (compared to
> Europe/US)
>
> and perhaps also because her colour of her skin is a bit different then
> mine (Caucasian).
>
> At the same time she has the impression that the work she does on the
> Wikimedia wiki('s) is not valued, nor taken into account.
>

By whom?

By the people who invited her?

By other participants in the event?

By other editors in the same wiki site?

By the readers?



> She does not want to be invited because she is a woman, nor because she is
> from a minority, nor ... etc. This is offensive.
> She only wants to be invited because of the work she contributes on
> Wikipedia/etc.
>

This makes a lot of sense to me, but that's just me and attitudes are
different for each person.


> Besides the many good initiatives and intentions, this kind of approaches
> to our contributors is demotivating them, please be aware of this.


Again, it's probably demotivating to some. Maybe to 98%, maybe to 30%,
maybe to 5%. I honestly don't know.

I believe demotivation/frustration is the largest problem we face as
> movement.
>

I don't know if its the biggest problem. On this mailing list we are a
small group of meta-active Wikimedians, and we are the minority among
editors. We don't actually represent all the editors. And of course the
editors are a tiny minority compared to the readers.

I'd argue that the hard time that some editors are giving newcomers is a
bigger problem. Gender is certainly a part of that, and there are many
other parts.

We meta-wikimedians can find a better way to invite people to events, and
we can change ourselves. That doesn't sound too hard. Changing the wider
editor culture is harder.

I heard from people that the problem described is called tokenism
> .
>

Yes, that's when representation is given to a weakened group, but that
representation is too weak to be meaningful, and may do more harm than good.


> I believe the only way to close the gaps related to gender, minorities,
> etc, is to create an atmosphere in what everyone is appreciated for what
> she/he is doing, completely unrelated to the gender someone appears to
> have, the ethnicity, race, area of the world, etc etc etc etc.
>

So that's where it gets really complicated, because it's always related, in
ways that are sometimes visible and sometimes invisible.

Let's take school education as a hopefully easy example. People from
different areas of the world will have very different things to write about
it. In some areas of the world everybody gets school education—boys and
girls, rich and poor, rural and urban. In other areas it may be only boys;
or only people in cities; or only people who know a certain language; or
only people who belong to a certain religion; or only people who have a
certain amount of money; or only people who have a certain skin color. I
want articles about education to have contributions from as many people as
possible, from different genders, from different skin colors, and from
different areas, and so on.

An American white woman has different things to say about education from an
American black man. These differences are important and frequently
discussed in American media. But the American white woman and the American
black man *don't even imagine* what people from The Philippines have to say
about education. What people from the Philippines have to say about
education probably has little to do with the internal American debates on
this topic. And of course it breaks down further, because a person who
lives in the capital of Philippines and knows English has different things
to say about education from a person who lives in a village in Philippines
and doesn't know English.

On articles about education I want to hear from all of them. And about
every other topic. (And yes, I want contributions from people who don't
know English in the English Wikipedia. By definition they cannot contribute
directly, but we must do everything we can to make at least an indirect
contribution possible.)

How do we do it right?

How do we get more different people to even try to contribute to articles?
How do we get everybody's contributions to be accepted? (Guess whose
contributions are more likely to be challenged as "non-notable",
"unencyclopedic", or "unreferenced".)

I don't know. Am I even asking the right questions?

--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
‪“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: