Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

2015-01-08 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Sydney Poore wrote: It has become pretty obvious that funding the interests/values of existing community members through regular channels is not creating content free of systemic bias in general nor closing the human gender gap. (I say this as someone who has read all types of WMF funding

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

2015-01-08 Thread Gregory Varnum
When I first heard about the idea - I was timid and concerned. However, after reading the responses - I am not sure that everyone is looking at this the right way. My concerns have been addressed, largely by the commitment to accept time-sensitive requests and the description of the idea. It has

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

2015-01-08 Thread Sydney Poore
Values. It is a matter of values. If you believe, as I do, that lack of diversity of Wikimedia projects is seriously compromising the content of the projects then designing a campaign that addresses one or more aspects of this concern is a reasonable top priority even if it displaces other

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Oliver Keyes
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Srikanth Ramakrishnan srik.r...@wikimedia.in wrote: Where is anyone whining about this? Nobody here is. The point being made is about why other grants are not being accepted. So, to summarise: Please, let's stop complaining on the basis that this excludes

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, The only point for this experiment is that there is not enough bandwidth to cope with all the requests for funding as it is. The idea is that by concentrating on one area it is possible to do more. The argument against is that it is highly demotivating for everyone that finds its request for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Fwd: Tilman Bayer joins Product Strategy Department

2015-01-08 Thread Oliver Keyes
Indeed, although as I understand it he's going to be independent of the actual Research Data team. On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote: Erik Moeller, 07/01/2015 20:36: It’s my pleasure to announce that Tilman Bayer is joining the Foundation’s

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Is there some Wikimedia project to host contents based on original research?

2015-01-08 Thread JP Béland
Wikibooks. 2015-01-06 11:02 GMT-07:00 Castelo Branco michelcastelobra...@gmail.com: +1 Ting Chen Original research in a wiki way = Wikiversity Original report (for recent events) and interviews = Wikinews Regards, Michel Castelo Branco 2015-01-05 12:07 GMT-02:00 Ting Chen

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Update regarding WMF's reporting practices

2015-01-08 Thread Federico Leva (Nemo)
Given https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2015-January/076324.html, some questions. Erik Moeller, 06/11/2014 07:57: Format: Effective immediately, we are shifting to a quarterly reporting format. This will impact our reporting, and the October through December

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Fwd: Tilman Bayer joins Product Strategy Department

2015-01-08 Thread Federico Leva (Nemo)
Erik Moeller, 07/01/2015 20:36: It’s my pleasure to announce that Tilman Bayer is joining the Foundation’s Product Strategy department as Senior Analyst. I would like to thank Katherine Maher for supporting and helping to prepare this move from the Communications department. Thanks. If I

[Wikimedia-l] VisualEditor office hour for February

2015-01-08 Thread Erica Litrenta
Hi everybody, and apologies for cross-posting. I'd like to announce that the next office hour for VisualEditor is in February, Thursday 19th at 1900 UTC [0]. James Forrester will be available to answer any questions about recent improvements and to provide details about ongoing and planned work.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, Given that a frequent complaint is the male chauvinist piggery that is alive and well and meets not much sanction, this behaviour it being given as one of the main reasons why so many people leave. I do suggest that the hand above the head holding attitude of culprits is why we do so poorly.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: White House response to Aaron Swartz petition

2015-01-08 Thread Federico Leva (Nemo)
Keegan Peterzell, 08/01/2015 09:15: ​For those unfamiliar with American political history in its brief existence, ​this is entirely expected. Sure, that part was the least interesting. The power over who has the right to hire and fire whom has been the center of our politics since near

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread FRED BAUDER
On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 14:53:47 +0530 Srikanth Ramakrishnan srik.r...@wikimedia.in wrote: On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog. Need I say anything else? I think you've hit the nail on the head. It should not be easier to dominate a player-killing MUD than to edit an article on Wikipedia.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread FRED BAUDER
Thank you for this thoughtful response. In the United States, at least, girls routinely test higher than boys on verbal skills and have recently surpassed young men in attaining higher education in nearly all fields. There is a lot of dead time in the lives of many women. They are all over

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread FRED BAUDER
On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 11:25:23 +0100 Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote: I partially disagree with this vision. Without the North American and European men there would not be any opportunity to say: we would share the sum of the human knowledge. Probably Wikimedia would not exist. True,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread FRED BAUDER
On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 11:29:57 +0100 Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote: As this thread demonstrates, what discussions about the massive gender imbalance in Wikimedia editorship need is more men discussing why it might or might not be important. /sarcasm Radical feminist notions that men

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Chris Keating
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 12:09 PM, FRED BAUDER fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote: On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 11:29:57 +0100 Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote: As this thread demonstrates, what discussions about the massive gender imbalance in Wikimedia editorship need is more men discussing why it

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Risker
I have one simple question: if the Grants program was to focus on some other key area rather than the gender gap, would we be having this discussion about how horrible it is to waste time this way? Would we see throwing up of hands in this way if the focus was, say, requests from the Global

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: White House response to Aaron Swartz petition

2015-01-08 Thread Austin Hair
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 9:15 AM, Keegan Peterzell keegan.w...@gmail.com wrote: For those unfamiliar with American political history in its brief existence, this is entirely expected. The power over who has the right to hire and fire whom has been the center of our politics since near

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
Yes. Finally, a voice of reason. On 8 January 2015 at 08:07, mcc99 mc...@hotmail.com wrote: Dear fellow Wikipedia devotees, While I'm new to this list, I've been an avid fan and proponent of Wikipedia and all the great service it gives people since it launched. People can learn not just all

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread FRED BAUDER
That said, it doesn't matter who writes the content on Wikipedia so long as it's relevant and factual. That's the point; it would not matter if women contributed so long as it's relevant and factual. Half the humans that could contribute are not. Actually many more than half, as there are

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Warning: Wikimedia-l Google Group

2015-01-08 Thread Austin Hair
Yes. As stated in my original messages, you can (and should) use the report link at the bottom of the subscription e-mail. Austin On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 6:41 AM, Nurunnaby Hasive nhas...@wikimedia.org.bd wrote: +1 Karthik. Better to report the group. On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Karthik

[Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread mcc99
Dear fellow Wikipedia devotees, While I'm new to this list, I've been an avid fan and proponent of Wikipedia and all the great service it gives people since it launched.  People can learn not just all the basics of nearly any topic imaginable, but for a large number, readers can with diligence

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Srikanth Ramakrishnan
On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog. Need I say anything else? On 08-Jan-2015 2:45 pm, FRED BAUDER fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote: That said, it doesn't matter who writes the content on Wikipedia so long as it's relevant and factual. That's the point; it would not matter if women

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: White House response to Aaron Swartz petition

2015-01-08 Thread Keegan Peterzell
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 1:05 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote: As to the specific personnel-related requests raised in your petitions, our response must be limited. Consistent with the terms we laid out when we began We the People, we will not address agency personnel matters

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Ilario Valdelli
I think that the realistic point of view should be another. There is a potential number of people who can be contributors (contributors and not readers) but this potential number must be *realistic*. Anyway these persons should have something to contribute to wikimedia projects an basically: a)

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Sebastian Moleski
Hi Matt, as thorough as your characterization of the issue at hand is, as misguided it is as well. The main point of the gender debate isn't the physical differences between men and women and some purported difference in authorship flowing from that. That would rightfully be considered absurd and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Liam Wyatt
As this thread demonstrates, what discussions about the massive gender imbalance in Wikimedia editorship need is more men discussing why it might or might not be important. /sarcasm -- wittylama.com Peace, love metadata ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Ilario Valdelli
I partially disagree with this vision. Without the North American and European men there would not be any opportunity to say: we would share the sum of the human knowledge. Probably Wikimedia would not exist. It is correct to say that Wikimedia must offer to *all people* any opportunity without

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Ilario Valdelli
Is there any barrier for women to participate? The discussion is open. It would be worth if someone attacks a woman for her opinion. There is more a big barrier in the participation to this thread connected with a strong level of English to be required to read and to answer to this thread. I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Srikanth Ramakrishnan
I agree. Women vs Men has never really stood out as a point of debate before and ideally shouldn't. On 08-Jan-2015 4:11 pm, Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote: Is there any barrier for women to participate? The discussion is open. It would be worth if someone attacks a woman for her

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Chris Keating
Hi there, That said, it doesn't matter who writes the content on Wikipedia so long as it's relevant and factual. Who is to decide what is relevant and factual (or indeed, the other editorial judgements we make in writing aricles)? If the only people doing that are white North American and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread geni
On 8 January 2015 at 07:07, mcc99 mc...@hotmail.com wrote: If you ask any RN the names of the greatest contributors to the nursing profession, you'll get a stream of women's names. To suggest that nursing needs more men or else it won't be able to achieve its greatest potential would be a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Nathan
You certainly put a lot of time and effort into being wrong. Any first year undergraduate writing course will tell you that to make an argument you need to address the counter-arguments, which you have failed even to mention. Diversity of contributors isn't a social justice goal, or even a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Leigh Thelmadatter
I dont think the issue is the idea of encouraging projects that increase the participation of women, but rather the message that everything else is getting shoved aside. I dont see this as sexism and playing that card is counter-productive. What I suggest is that instead of saying that for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Honorary degree for Wikipedia + meeting

2015-01-08 Thread Federico Leva (Nemo)
Romaine Wiki, 08/01/2015 18:12: Universiteit Maastricht (UM) reikt een eredoctoraat uit aan Frans Timmermans en de oprichter van Wikipedia, Jimmy Wales. Doctorate in what discipline? Nemo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Honorary degree for Wikipedia + meeting

2015-01-08 Thread Lodewijk
It is an honorary doctorate, not quite the same. As I understand it, it is not connected to a discipline. See http://www.maastrichtuniversity.nl/web/Main1/SiteWide/SiteWide11/MaastrichtUniversityAwardsHonoraryDoctoratesToFransTimmermansAndWikipediaFounderJimmyWales.htm for a bit more details - he

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New project idea: WikiTribute

2015-01-08 Thread Nathan
Matt, I think people politely declined to criticize your proposal in the knowledge that it was absolutely sure to fail, meaning vocal opposition was not required. But I can understand your frustration at the lack of response, so I'll briefly provide you with mine. The WikiTribute idea firstly

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap

2015-01-08 Thread mcc99
Hi Peter, Much of my editing has been without logging into Wikipedia.  Typically I don't create new pages but I have a couple times.  For example, I started a page for a college that closed in 1981 after finding to my surprise that no one had done so despite it being a beloved place for its

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Peter Southwood
Did someone suggest that men should reduce editing or participation? I missed that. Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of FRED BAUDER Sent: 08 January 2015 02:10 PM To: Wikimedia

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Nathan
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 9:13 AM, Leigh Thelmadatter osama...@hotmail.com wrote: I dont think the issue is the idea of encouraging projects that increase the participation of women, but rather the message that everything else is getting shoved aside. I don't see how you can come to this

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Peter Southwood
How is it possible to give a realistic answer to that question? Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Risker Sent: 08 January 2015 02:42 PM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Katherine Casey
+1 to Keilana. The fact that people still believe that valuing women somehow devalues men never fails to amaze me. It's not a zero-sum game. On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 11:35 AM, Keilana keilanaw...@gmail.com wrote: Hearing people whine “what about the men” because, God forbid, men might not get

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Srikanth Ramakrishnan
Where is anyone whining about this? Nobody here is. The point being made is about why other grants are not being accepted. On 08-Jan-2015 10:06 pm, Keilana keilanaw...@gmail.com wrote: Hearing people whine “what about the men” because, God forbid, men might not get *every single* grant this

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread FRED BAUDER
I am optimistic that some great proposals might surface. Fred On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 18:30:08 +0200 Peter Southwood peter.southw...@telkomsa.net wrote: If you take it entirely at face value, I find it quite inoffensive. As I have no experience with reviewing grant proposals, I can't comment on

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Honorary degree for Wikipedia + meeting

2015-01-08 Thread Romaine Wiki
Hello all, On Friday 16 January 2015 Wikipedia will receive in the person of Jimmy Wales a honorary doctorate in Maastricht, the Netherlands. He will receive this during the Dies Natalis of Maastricht University. The ceremony starts at 15:00 in the St.Janskerk (Minderbroedersberg). Attendees

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Jens Best
Sorry to interrupted, just a short question. I'm looking for statistics of how many project ideas/requests were submitted in the past. How many volunteers and WMF-employees were and are involved in evaluating all these submissions and so on. Can anybody provide me with a link or any other kind

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Keilana
Hearing people whine “what about the men” because, God forbid, men might not get *every single* grant this time (as they did in the pilot round of IEGs), is incredibly tiresome. On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 10:30 AM, Peter Southwood peter.southw...@telkomsa.net wrote: If you take it entirely at face

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Ilario Valdelli
I am in two grant committees, and I can assure that I comment the value of the project and not the sex or the race of the candidate. I think that a woman would appreciate more that a project is supported because it's a good project than because it is a project submitted by a woman. Anyway the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Honorary degree for Wikipedia + meeting

2015-01-08 Thread Michael Jahn
Ah, just in time for ENWP's birthday on January 15. Am 08.01.2015 18:13 schrieb Romaine Wiki romaine.w...@gmail.com: Hello all, On Friday 16 January 2015 Wikipedia will receive in the person of Jimmy Wales a honorary doctorate in Maastricht, the Netherlands. He will receive this during the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap

2015-01-08 Thread Austin Hair
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 4:30 PM, mcc99 mc...@hotmail.com wrote: But in future, I think I'll sign in more often, esp. now that half the WikiGods have my uid on an alert trigger now. :) I think the question is only being asked because you're displaying a profound lack of understanding of how

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread FRED BAUDER
It's a rhetorical question, but, based on experience, I would probably chime in if a similar proposal was floated about native people such as African tribes or American Indians; most hardly ever edit, even in their own language, and throwing money at the problem is unlikely to be productive.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread
On 8 Jan 2015 16:11, FRED BAUDER fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote: ... I've noticed that women are often quite motivated and good at writing grant proposals. Extending good faith I would presume this is irony. It does not transmit well by email. Please keep in mind how offensive this sort of thing

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap

2015-01-08 Thread Peter Southwood
I was actually wondering if Matt had much experience of the often discussed toxic environment reported for some of the Wikipedias, and cited as a reason for low female participation. Perhaps I should have asked more directly. Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Peter Southwood
If you take it entirely at face value, I find it quite inoffensive. As I have no experience with reviewing grant proposals, I can't comment on its accuracy, but I am quite happy to take Fred's word for it. Offence is often available if you search for it hard enough. Cheers, Peter -Original

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Isarra Yos
I'm just going to preface this by pointing out that I didn't actually read all of the OP due to a philosophical opposition to giant walls of text, but I think you've kind of missed the point in a few places. Also please don't call people names. That's not nice. On 08/01/15 10:52, geni wrote:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

2015-01-08 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Liam Wyatt wrote: I understand from the explanations that the reason for not accepting any non-gender-gap focused grants for several months is because of the expected workload on the staff in reviewing applications and supporting the projects that do get funded. However, what I don't understand

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Peter Southwood
If this was intended as a response to my post I'm afraid I don’t get the relevance. I was also not aware that the grants were awarded to men. I thought they were awarded to projects on merit. Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WaPo Wikipedia's 'complicated; relationship with net neutrality

2015-01-08 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Kim Bruning wrote: Found another article calling out Wikipedia. Are there also articles praising us? :-) https://medium.com/backchannel/less-than-zero-199bcb05a868 Quoting, Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp and Wikipedia become “the Internet” for the users of mobile data supported by

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Austin Hair
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 1:41 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: Frankly, there's not a single thing I've read, or a single objection I've seen raised, that wasn't about how unnecessary it is to focus on women. I don't think we've ever heard that about the global south, or non-European

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Honorary degree for Wikipedia + meeting

2015-01-08 Thread Gregory Varnum
Dr. Wikipedia only specializes in treating CN. -greg ___ Sent from my iPhone - a more detailed response may be sent later. On Jan 8, 2015, at 3:09 PM, Austin Hair adh...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 7:09 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: It is an

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Honorary degree for Wikipedia + meeting

2015-01-08 Thread Austin Hair
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 7:09 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: It is an honorary doctorate, not quite the same. As I understand it, it is not connected to a discipline. So, wait... you're saying that Wikipedia is not a real doctor, and I *shouldn't* be relying on it for medical

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread Isarra Yos
On 08/01/15 20:04, Austin Hair wrote: On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 1:41 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: Frankly, there's not a single thing I've read, or a single objection I've seen raised, that wasn't about how unnecessary it is to focus on women. I don't think we've ever heard that about