Gendergap September 2011

gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

61 participants
73 discussions

Derby..
by Sarah Stierch 21 Sep '11

21 Sep '11

Scored three roller derby shots from photographer Tom Klubens today, OTRS is pending. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Photographs_by_Tom_Klubens Hopefully I can weasel a few more! All it takes is an email. I encourage you all to reach out to a photographer about something that needs better coverage on Wikimedia, and ask them for a media donation today. Then, of course, brag about them on Facebook, Twitter, mailing lists, etc, and praise them for how awesome they are for helping the mission and encourage others to join in. ;) -Sarah -- GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia <http://www.glamwiki.org> Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Art<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch> and Sarah Stierch Consulting *Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising.* ------------------------------------------------------ http://www.sarahstierch.com/

1 0

Re: [Gendergap] Question for the Foundation about photographs
by Jutta von Dincklage 20 Sep '11

20 Sep '11

> Message: 1 > Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 11:33:30 -0700 > From: Pete Forsyth <peteforsyth(a)gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Question for the Foundation about photographs > of women > To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects > <gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org> > Message-ID: > <CAGWts0H0U4POruZN0qtCwqNJZuWY- > 30=UsAxwCxhYuqwUFctVQ(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Update, and a request: > > The discussion thread John started has been very active, with I think about > 30 posts from a wide variety of customer service (OTRS) volunteers. > This could be a good idea, but let's not forget that women who start editing Wikipedia first need to find out how to get help and this needs to be obvious in the interface. I recently supported a female colleague of mine to join and start editing Wikipedia and I witnessed her signing up etc. and it was surprisingly hard and confusing... Unfortunately, we ended up in this testing group for account creation :http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Account_Creation_Improvement_Project/Testing_content/Login_page/Frank%27s_proposal In this testing group, the second screen is the one about topics. 'Health', the topic that we needed, was not one of them, so we selected 'biology' instead and a whole list of topics that need improvements was presented to us... However, she already knew which article she wanted to create, so it was a bit like 'Ok, how can I get out of here and draft my article?' I ended up showing her how she can do this and also ended up putting the Template:New_user_bar manually onto her user page, so that she's got a nicer profile page. I am sure we would potentially have lost her without my help... I thought I share this little experience. I think what I'll do next, is "test" her and see how she goes in getting some help without asking me ;-) Cheers, Jutta

3 3

A translation request
by Ole Palnatoke Andersen 20 Sep '11

20 Sep '11

I compiled a small article about FastCompany.com's "Most Influential Women in Technology". Most or all of these women are notable, I guess - they are on the list for a reason... http://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/FastCompany.com%27s_Most_Influential_Women_in_… - it is in Danish, but should be fairly readable. Regards, Ole -- http://palnatoke.org * @palnatoke * +4522934588

2 1

Nice new English article
by Steven Walling 20 Sep '11

20 Sep '11

The "Did you know..?" hook on the Main Page is a little unfortunate, but it's nice we now have an article on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Peru Note the redlinks in the navbox at the bottom of the article, if you're interested in filling out the gender gap in content. :-) -- Steven Walling Fellow at Wikimedia Foundation wikimediafoundation.org

1 0

"Women Rock at Supporting Nonprofit Causes"
by Sarah Stierch 20 Sep '11

20 Sep '11

Doing a bit of research on trends in museums (for an internship) and stumbled across this article from May... http://nonprofit.about.com/od/generationalfundraising/a/Women-Rock-At-Suppo… A lot of it solidifies many things some of us have been saying, believing and reading about for a while now. I think it's so important for us to see the gender differences in donations in Wikimedia, how we can really latch into getting women who contribute as donors to be contributing beyond just "reading", and really let women know (donor or not) that just by contributing content or images, or edits, is a donation, in a way, to the world of knowledge. It's so important to let one another know that the work we're doing is important - regardless of gender - but that it also has a special image on women..and our contributions. Your daily reminder... :) -Sarah -- GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia <http://www.glamwiki.org> Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Art<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch> and Sarah Stierch Consulting *Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising.* ------------------------------------------------------ http://www.sarahstierch.com/

1 0

Bikini example
by Arnaud HERVE 19 Sep '11

19 Sep '11

I just found an example which seems to me exemplary of a male dominated disaster : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bikini In the Article page what struck me as wrong was : 1) The Sports bikini in beach volleyball photo, which has non pertinent erotic content imho 2) The chapter about male underwear, which seems to me so inappropriate AND ridiculous I can't even begin to describe it. In the Discussion page there is totally male point of view discussion about whether the girl in red is in good shape enough. Then there is the raging Outrage comment which I fear might become systematic if you leave the door opened for that. I have never seen a kid being shocked by going to the beach and seeing bikinis. That's a perverse erotic assumption imho, under the guise of high morality. I took the time to have a look at the German page : http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bikini 1) The first photo is semantically right, it shows better that bikinis are used to go the beach and swimming 2) The history chapter is better developed 3) The gallery and the drawings aptly show different kinds of bikinis 4) No ridiculous male underwear content Also, there was a beach sports photo which seemed to me much better and devoid of erotic content yesterday. But sadly it's been removed at the moment I speak. It was this one : http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Beach_volleyball-Huntington_Beach-Ca… Ah yes and also the discussion on the German page is more competent and calm imho. So as a conclusion, the German bikini page represents for me a right state of mind and proper educational content, fit to be used in a school with students interested in fashion. The English page seems to me more influence by more or less lunatic authors, or authors less interested in knowledge. Arnaud

4 4

Question for the Foundation about photographs of women
by Sarah 19 Sep '11

19 Sep '11

Several women, including on WikiProject Feminism on the English Wikipedia, have recently expressed concern about the number of photographs of women's body parts that Wikimedia hosts, particularly regarding the issue of permission. It's far from clear in many cases that the women have given consent. It's also sometimes unclear that the subjects are above the age of consent. Another concern is what a woman is meant to do if someone uploads an image of her without her knowledge. Is she supposed to write to an anonymous person at OTRS? Does she have to give her real name? How does it work? Any information from the Foundation about the legal situation, and what Foundation policy is, would be very helpful. Sarah

8 19

Kelly Wearstler
by Sarah Stierch 19 Sep '11

19 Sep '11

An article was brought to my attention about an interior designer, Kelly Wearstler, who is also a fashion designer. The interesting twist - she was Playboy of the Month in September 1994. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_Wearstler One user is arguing that she's more famous as a one time Playboy centerfold (which she did under a pseudonym to pay her student loans), and not so much as a designer. I argue that (hell, just compare the Google statistics - over 200,000 for "Kelly Wearstler" designer and about 27,500 for "Kelly Wearstler" Playboy. I know who she is, and it isn't because she is a Playboy model (and I'm not an uninformed person, I've "read" my fair share of Playboys). Anyway, they want to have a special "centerfold" infobox (or something of that sort) that tell her breast size, etc. Another user is arguing it goes against [[WP:Undue]] not balancing the article correctly. I agree. No point in having a fashion designer and interior designers one time Playboy bunny moment overweigh the fact that she's got best selling books, has been a judge on a reality show on Bravo called "Top Design" and she sells her designs at Bergdorf Goodman. Check out the talk page, it's short, but interesting. -Sarah -- GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia <http://www.glamwiki.org> Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Art<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch> and Sarah Stierch Consulting *Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising.* ------------------------------------------------------ http://www.sarahstierch.com/

2 1

Re: [Gendergap] Weird lame body fashion whatever website of the, day
by The Richardsons 18 Sep '11

18 Sep '11

On 9/17/2011 3:00 PM, Sarah Stierch wrote: > The choices are really mediocre for the "neckline" women's section. One of > the photos is titled "Boobies.jpg." I saw that "boobies.jpg" was changed to "Cleavage (breasts).jpg" about four hours ago by Mattbuck. +1 for Gendergap!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That was the good news The bad news is that, from earlier posts about labiaplasty, it seemed that users wanted to remove the picture from the page, but that others put it back up. What I believe is that you had no right to take the picture off without consensus. Please excuse me if I missed something that would prove that there was consensus otherwise. Again, though, what troubles me is that SlimVirgin did get talked to rudely, being mockingly (in my opinion) called an "Administratrix" and being told to "play by the rules you claim to enforce". Also, you seem to be right in saying that the picture isn't a "hypertrophy" (although I wouldn't know) and I am pleased to see that a note was added early this morning UTC. But my main problem is how we get to reach a consensus on this, by, which we certainly can, by questioning its "licensed medical image" status, pointing out that it is two different people, and pointing out that the labia minora are not hypertrophies. --- RDW2210

5 4

Feminism, connectivity and urbanism
by Gillian White 17 Sep '11

17 Sep '11

Hi All, Here is an essay published today that provides food for thought about the relationship between feminism and connectivity and their possible impact on urban design (the author is an architect and planner). She postulates that the new connectivity "may be allied to a parallel shift in gender dominance; a replacement of the aggressive, individualist male paradigm with female principles of networking, connectivity and relationship. A replacement of thrust, you might say, by chatter. An emergence." She also wonders if we might have "passed 'peak male', just as we're said to have passed peak oil, peak water and peak food". Interesting. http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/gender-and-the-city-20110916-1kdtd.html Gillian White [[User:Whiteghost.ink]]

1 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

Gendergap September 2011