--- On Mon, 7/2/11, Fred Bauder
<fredbaud(a)fairpoint.net> wrote:
I doubt he will leave, but he was certainly in
need of some
feedback.
You were right there:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Timneu22&diff=prev&…
I did think the incident would have left less of an impression on *him*.
;)
Feedback mechanisms are essential to the
functioning of any
complex system.
Feedback mechanisms only work if feedback is actually received; there is
often
little evidence of that.
On a different, but not completely unrelated issue, how do women editors
feel
about illustrations like those used here (Warning - not safe for viewing
at work):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hogtie_bondage
In my experience, any attempt to argue for editorial restraint in
illustrating
pages like this (e.g., using just *one* image, and leaving the rest to a
Commons
link) runs into a [[WP:NOTCENSORED]] brickwall. Female editors (with one
exception I believe, who has run into this brickwall repeatedly to no
effect,
and at some cost to herself) are rarely participants in such discussions.
I am fairly certain that a demographically balanced pool of editors would
come to a very different consensus than the one presently supported at
these
and similar pages.
Now one might argue that the majority of women readers and contributors
are
unlikely to visit these pages, and that therefore their look will not
adversely
affect their willingness to participate in Wikipedia. On the other hand,
if viewed
as an expression of prevailing Wikipedia demographics and community
norms, they may
also be seen as a reflection of an entrenched male-dominated culture that
is
confident in its ability to nullify and discount any challenge to its
standards
as illegitimate, and in conflict with project goals.
I think women editors need to do more to challenge this culture. Such an
effort
in itself, leading by example, might bring more female editors on board,
and also
get some male editors to reflect on their own assumptions. Perhaps a
WikiProject
or work group would be in order. Feminist action was necessary to effect
change
in society, to get people to stop and think, and I believe we need a
little of
that in Wikipedia as well. Males will not drop it by themselves, and it
is
not actually good for them to remain unchallenged on such issues.
Thoughts?
Andreas
Not saying anything about what you think is a serious issue is passive
aggression, saving up issues while neglecting to give notice that there
is a problem.
Wikiproject? Yes, go do it, tell us where you put it. Although perhaps a
bit of discussion about the exact nature of the project might be in
order.
I'm thinking a Don't bite the newbies administrative notice board might
be a good idea too.
User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Female_participation has developed further, with
examples of ugly behavior like those here:
Wikipedia_talk:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion/Archive_40#Inability_of_admins_to_recognize_patent_nonsense
And, of course, we have the usual nonsense that this user is the little
boy with his finger in the dike and everything would go to hell without
him.
And there is some truth in it, as I have pointed out. A campaign against
nastiness has its own nasty disruptive effects.
As to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hogtie_bondage there is no question
that people do this, but it is hard to see an overriding public interest
in need for information as is present in say, anal sex.
Bukkake is at least interesting. I guess all of this stuff can be
justified on that basis, seeing how the other half lives, so to speak.
I've campaigned futilely against images of Mohammad in the past, same
argument, however offensive, some are interested, and it is valid
information (if not about Mohammad, about Islamic art and European
cartoons).
Fred