On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 7:29 AM, Wil Sinclair <w...@wllm.com> wrote:
> Stepping in to add another aspect to both questions, as I think it
> might focus the discussion.
> Child Protection: Are children encouraged to use commons through any
> programs or outreach efforts of any kind?

Who are you addressing that question to?

Do you want every NGO on this list to give you a complete list of any
program that they are running which may be of concern to you?

Do you want a WMF staff member to do an audit of all Wikimedia related
programs across the world, many of which are not funded by WMF?

Who is paying to provide answers for your curiosity?

Ok, those questions are a bit rough ... but ...

If you are not expecting to be treated as anyone but your own self,
you'll need to start doing you own research:


Create a list of potential problematic programs, then report them here
for serious focused discussion.

> If so, is it morally and/or
> ethically justifiable to do so without protecting children in every
> way possible?

Why ask this question when you dont have answers to the previous question.
See next section for more on this question.

> Can that be done without removing graphic pics from
> commons?

If you have read the following, then you know the answer to that.


In which case, in my mind at least, the question is why havent we
implemented some of the simple improvements needed to reduce exposure
to the most controversial content.
This is a complex issue, and hasnt been solved in over ten years, so
dont expect that a few quick short emails with interesting questions
is going to crack this nut.  It requires hard work.

Please ask your questions, and add your insights, on that meta page,
or come to the 'user talk' pages of people who have been active in
that meta discussion.  Get to know the main players - you'll be
talking with them regularly for at least year about this issue, I
hope, if you want to see any improvements.

> Harassment: Has harassment been addressed in a comprehensive way on
> all sites, including all of the WP site? As an example, Wikipedia has
> had a problem with low and declining female participation for years,
> and the WMF has often stated that it would like to address it. Are
> women actively encouraged to participate on Wikipedia by the WMF or
> other organizations?

Why ask; you know the answer to this.

> If we're not doing everything to protect women
> and all other Wikipedians, is it morally or ethically correct to
> perform outreach to potentially vulnerable groups? I'd especially like
> to hear about this from a female perspective.

"Think of the women"?

How do we do _everything_ to protect them?  That is a lot of stuff to
do?  Do they want "we" doing _everything_ to protect them?
The world over is still struggling with this.  There is consensus that
the Wikimedia movement wants to be at the forefront of that struggle,
and we are not there yet.

More appropriate questions are:

  What are the measures that Wikimedia is currently doing to ensure
female-friendly environments.

  What are the measures that other organisations are doing to ensure
female-friendly environments, which Wikimedia should be considering.

  Are there commonly accepted best practices which the Wikimedia
movement hasnt implemented; if so, what is blocking progress.

I suggest you look at

And ask any follow up questions you have *on meta* - not here.

Wil, it is great you are getting a crash course in the wiki world.  It
isnt good that it is happening on wikimedia-l, where the entire
'movement' must watch your every bump and bingle.  You can do it all
in public, on the meta project.  That way, only the people who want to
help or hinder you need participate in that crash course spectacle.

John Vandenberg

Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Reply via email to