<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
And of all the emails sent recently on this list, this is probably
my favorite :) Thank you to Delphine for asking the question. Thank
you to Sandy to give it a try to answer.<br>
<br>
Some emails on this list have been giving good points and good
suggestions, but I do not think venting the various frustrations we
have met on Wikipedia or in our professional life or in our personal
life is going to really make for a big change.<br>
<br>
My view would rather be that we indeed start with asking ourselves
the question "What would women bring to Wikipedia ? Would that help
us in our big dream to get more women participation ? "<br>
- Because if the answer is "we need more women to reach our goal of
collecting and bringing knowledge to the world", great.<br>
- If the answer is "we need more women because equality should
require that we have a 50%-50% men-women", then we fail. Making sure
women are respected, listened to, involved, blablabla, is great. But
that's not what we are collectively looking for. Our goal is not
gender equality, right ?<br>
<br>
Second, once we have identified the reason for more participation
(if we have agreed it would be helpful), then we should identify
what would be the indicators for success. Because again, forgive me
for being bold... but if we set up an official goal of say-25%
participation of women... then it means that what we are currently
doing is working toward a goal of more "men-women equality". I
personally do not care for this goal. I am here on Wikipedia to
allow every one to have access to a complete, accurate, uptodate,
neutral information. So, a goal of "more women" or a goal of "at
least 25% women contributors" makes no sense to me.<br>
<br>
If "improve the breadth of our articles" is our goal (to make sure
lipstick and russian women biographies are properly covered), then
set up a goal with regards to "content breadth". And implement a
tracking system to follow evolution.<br>
<br>
If "50% of women readers in north african countries" is our goal,
then set up a goal with regards to "readership stats". And implement
a tracking system to follow "readership stats".<br>
<br>
If "getting good PR so that the press loves us and so that big
foundations give us cash" is our goal, then set up a goal with
regards to "25% women participation". And implement a tracking
system to follow women participation and buzz the results.<br>
<br>
But as long as we do not know what our "goals" are, it is weird to
define indicators of success and weird to rely on stats that carry
little significance. <br>
<br>
Third, when goals and indicators are set up (and perhaps different
groups will have different goals and indicators), then it will be
time to foster the best conditions so that this happens over time.
Some will choose a totally western strategy and organize "women
day", "women awards", "special projects for women". Others will
choose a more let-it-be strategy, merely avoiding the least
favorable paths and influencing to get us on favorable paths.
Usually, Wikipedians strategy is rather of the second type.<br>
<br>
<br>
For those who understand French, I have blogged on the topic here:
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.anthere.org/post/2011/02/09/Wikipedia%2C-les-femmes-et-la-philosophie-du-non-agir">http://www.anthere.org/post/2011/02/09/Wikipedia%2C-les-femmes-et-la-philosophie-du-non-agir</a><br>
<br>
<br>
Anthere<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 2/8/11 2:13 PM, Sandra ordonez wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:AANLkTiknsfC0sYXuorcA3A0RrFur7b+sUMfMjnQm9VQ4@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">Now that I've vented, I've been thinking of Delphine's
original question(s) regarding the why...this is what i came up
with. <b><br>
<br>
1) Improve the quality of information.</b> Information is shaped
by perspective, regardless of how NPOV you aim to be, and
perspective is shaped by experience. When you experience the world
in a certain perspective, you see things that others don't see. A
Chinese immigrant in the United States may notice things that a
American born may not see, just like it is very likely that a
female may notice things their male counterparts don't see. <br>
<b><br>
2) Open doors to more groups</b>.The inclusion of women might
have a domino affect, and open doors for other groups,
particularly those that are traditionally dis-empowered, such as
people of color in the United States. (You can include whatever
other group you want here..I can only speak to the US). <br>
<b><br>
3) Improved processes and systems.</b> Collaboration is improved
by diversity - everyone in this group knows this. More female
participation may result in better collaborative brainstorming and
problem solvin.<br>
<br>
<b>4) Better organization.</b> Studies reveal that women tend to
be great multi-taskers. IMHO, women are great multitaskers because
they also plan their world to be more "efficient" for
multitasking. I can totally see a group of women helping improve
the organization of Wikipedia's rules, background knowledge,
presentation, etc. <br>
<br>
<b>5) Stronger community. </b>Reports are also showing that more
women than men are on social media. This is because women tend to
focus on creating community. A larger, more sophisticated
Wikipedian community is so powerful, I'm not even sure how to
describe its potential in words. However, it would have the
ability to help the projects but bring change worldwide.<br>
<br>
<b><br>
6) Better image. </b>Organizations that are ethical are usually
favored and respected by society, which increase's an org's
success. I am not talking "left vs right," and this is not a
philosophical question, it is a public relations one. Talk to any
PR practioner and they can share why this works, and examples of
organizations taking this PR strategy. And, at a minimum, I can
guarantee it will increase how many women worldwide see the
project, which btw are 50% of the world's population. <br>
<br>
<b>7) Better parties and possibly more Wikilove!</b> As corny as
it sounds, I am quite positive that more women will improve the
festivities in any wiki get together, and possibly result in more
wikilove :) lolol Why not!! What a perfect place to meet someone
that shares your interest, and better parties are usually always
welcomed. <br>
<br>
<b>8) A better world society.</b> Wikipedia has this ability to
affect the world and start revolutions in what seems to be very
silent but effective ways. I really believe that the inclusion of
women will have amazing revolutionary affects on the world, and
make it better. Channeling Jeff Bridges, "information is really
power, man." And maybe we have come to take for granted that the
world is informed/educated through wikipedia on a daily basis.
This has an effect. <br>
<br>
<b>9) Its the right thing to do.</b> Wikipedia has always gone
against the grain, even though at times it ruffled society's
feathers b/c transparency in knowledge sharing is more important
than the agenda of any group. Its part of the free culture
movement, dedicated to empowering people worldwide, and has done
much in that area. Why wouldn't it come together now to improve on
this systematic problem that affects not only the project, but
humans at large. <br>
<b><br>
10) Who else is going to do it? </b>No one has the ability to
look and tackle this complex issue like Wikipedian community. No
other community has the strength in numbers, intellect, and
structure to address an issue like this. I guarantee that other
groups will embrace any solutions the community finds, b/c its not
Wikipedia is not only a pioneer, but its a "best-in-breed" virtual
project that comes up with "best-in-breed" solutions. <br>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<br>
-- <br>
Sandra Ordonez<br>
Web Astronaut<br>
<br>
"Helping you rock out in the virtual world."<br>
<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.collaborativenation.com" target="_blank">www.collaborativenation.com</a></b>
<br>
<br>
<pre wrap=""><fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org">Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap">https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>