https://wikimania2013.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submissions_sorted_by_number_of_in…
- some of the most-wanted talks are "Towards bridging the gender gap in
Indian Wikimedia community" and "Recruiting Librarians and Archivists to
Help Close the Wikipedia Gender Gap" with "Bridging the Gender Gap with
Women Scientists" a little further behind.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ombudsman_commission#Gender_neutrality
has several people speaking up in favor of a more gender-neutral name.
(Feel free to pipe up there.)
The Wikimedia engineering department's participation in Outreach Program
for Women internships
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Outreach_Program_for_Women#Round_6 led to
far more women and genderfluid people applying for the Google Summer of
Code internships than we'd ever recruited before. Previous years: 0-2
non-spammy applications. This year: ~10. Practicing affirmative
outreach and explicitly welcoming women really works. One applicant
told me that #mediawiki is one of the few open source-related IRC
channels she's felt comfortable and welcomed in.
Various Wikimedian women are going to be speaking at Open Source Bridge
next month
http://opensourcebridge.org/blog/2013/05/2013-speakers-list-is-here/ ,
including Sucheta Ghoshal, me, Alolita Sharma, and Valerie Aurora.
So, we have a lot to do, but I just wanted to take a moment to say yay.
--
Sumana Harihareswara
Engineering Community Manager
Wikimedia Foundation
Anne, you're absolutely right on the 'high profile'. The broader the reach,
impact, exposure, the more likely you are to become the target of good and
bad 'attention'. The question is, much like in real-life, the higher up you
are in an organization the more 'support' and/or protection you will likely
need/get, as a community should we be able to insure a similar mechanism.
This community resilience won't be built on a MadMax
fighting-your-way-through model (I know it's rather dramatic :)
My interest is around capacity building, right now I'm trying to understand
why we're having such a hard time engaging and on-boarding half of the
world's population (women).
Sylvia
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 16:34:35 -0400
> From: Risker <risker.wp(a)gmail.com>
> To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
> <gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Accidental Troll Policy - beyond gender gap
> Message-ID:
> <
> CAPXs8yQyxUwuWPhHakXBDK6Npzyn+AWZWxjHEicd6ooXUido8A(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> What a lovely and thoughtful essay, Sylvia.
>
> For my part, I see a significant difference between sharing information
> with people I choose to share information with, and posting my personal
> details on a publicly accessible, top-10 website, where the people most
> likely to abuse that information don't even need to log in to see it, and
> where there are no privacy control options.
>
> I have always gone to significant trouble to keep my personal information
> to myself. I don't "do" facebook, or twitter, or google+. Several of my
> family members (who share my rather obscure surname) have been subjected to
> telephone calls, facebook and twitter messages intended to harass *me*. I
> do not participate in media interviews or any surveys where my personal
> information would be included. I don't participate on websites where I know
> personal information of wikipedians is exchanged, and in fact rarely access
> them and then only with an anonymizing proxy. For all intents and
> purposes, I only participate regularly on one non-WMF website/forum....and
> sure enough, at one point someone tracked down my account there and
> manipulated other forum members to provide information about me, which was
> later used to try to blackmail me in my role as an English Wikipedia
> arbitrator.
>
> Those worries are real, and these events do happen; however, much of it
> relates to how "high profile" someone is. One of the biggest downsides in
> being amongst the small number of self-identifying women on WMF sites is
> the fact that we become higher profile simply because of our rarity. The
> overwhelming majority of Wikimedians are never bothered in these ways; I'd
> suggest that it's probably less than 1% of us who have been so aggressively
> dealt with. But when it happens, and especially if it's out of the blue,
> it is an horrendous experience.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 9 May 2013 14:58, Sylvia Ventura <sylvia.ventura(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I command Sarah, Sarah, Anne and few other women and men commenting on
> > this list for their tireless work trying to move the needle. I wish I had
> > seen more movement/women coming forward and stepping up – but I would not
> > be surprised if many of us were…. uncomfortable. I know I am.
> >
> > or simply burned out … which seems to be the case.
> >
> >
> >
> > I had to think long and hard about writing this. Sarah, once again is
> > trying to be constructive by creating momentum and a page
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_gap/Policy_revolution to capture
> > and focus conversations. I think it's a great initiative but I also think
> > the problem we're dealing with is more systemic and might need
> > a tougher conversation.
> >
> >
> > How can we 'speak openly' in a forum like "Policy Revolution" when a few
> > of us are playing a different game – most folks here use their real
> > identities, take their contribution work at heart, we know who we are.
> But
> > then we have the Ghosts, those hiding behind the cloak of “Privacy”
> > (perverse effect of a well-meant policy I am sure) while
> > trolling, harassing, messing with images/content with impunity. If we are
> > serious about creating a broader more sustainable more representative
> > participation to the projects the WMF folks (those with some level of
> > mandate) need to seriously revise the community’s rules of engagement and
> > stand behind it.
> >
> >
> >
> > A have been sitting on this note (below) for a while, I understand the
> > need for privacy in the context of political/individual/speech freedom
> and
> > to insure personal safety in some cases. This group is composed of some
> of
> > the smartest people on the planet, we surely can come up with some
> > mechanism to protect those who need protection (anonymity) while
> creating a
> > healthy, open, constructive, environment.
> >
> >
> >
> > == NB: this was written shortly after Hersfold resignation, focuses on
> > harassment but its relevant to all questionable behavior.==
> >
> >
> > Accidental troll policy
> >
> >
> >
> > My ID was recently deleted on Meta-Wiki, the reason given was: wait for
> > it… Vandalism. Little than I knew I had breached protocol – as a newbie I
> > had created a page on Meta and had clearly broken the rules. Or was it,
> > since then, I learned that your individual history (been
> banned/suspended,
> > etc…) determines your capacity of progressing in the ranks of WP – so
> this
> > might have been purely accidental or not.
> >
> >
> >
> > But back to my point, after being notified of my ban, as a good citizen
> > and a steward of open-culture I felt it was my duty to get educated. I
> > checked the Wikipedia’s user policy. What I found was lengthy, detailed
> but
> > overall clear. Except for a portion that was particularly unsettling.
> The
> > one about “Use of Real Name and Harassment”. [[excerpt: use of real name
> > may make a contributor more vulnerable to issues such as harassment<
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Harassment>,
> > both on and off Wikipedia]]
> >
> >
> >
> > After reading the posting about the Resignation of arbitrator Hersfold<
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hersfold>in yesterday’s Signpost I
> can’t let go of the idea that the policy might
> > actually enable the very problem it is trying to avoid <harassment> by
> > perpetuating the culture of obscurity and by allowing trolls to hide
> behind
> > anonymity.
> >
> >
> >
> > In an era where information is a commodity, where online traceability is
> > child’s play for anyone with rudimentary tech skills I can’t imagine that
> > concealing one’s real-life identity on Wikipedia will minimize the
> > incidence of harassment. The reasons for Hersfold<
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hersfold>resignation againshed a
> gloomy light on this. Granted, arbitration is a “hot seat” to hold
> > but unless we are willing to put in place a “witness protection program”
> > style for wikipedians involved in conflict resolution, it will be
> > impossible to prevent this from happening again.
> >
> >
> >
> > So the question I’m thorn with is who’s really benefiting from the
> > “Privacy - no Real name Policy”? The folks trying to do their job
> sensibly
> > and seeking some distance between their work on Wikipedia and their
> > personal lives/families/jobs or the trolls that haven’t yet found that
> > clear boundary and are, by design, allowed to create a toxic and
> > unwelcoming environment.
> >
> >
> >
> > Looking at it from the other end. What if the system promoted total
> > transparency? Where everyone in it is really who they say they are. A
> > system where real-life ID is tied to the online work, no place to hide,
> > where the very act of signing up and becoming a wikipedian is a pledge
> for
> > civility, respect and trust. Where personal status is a currency based on
> > both hard and soft skills, (number/quality of contributions and the
> manner
> > in which we interact with each other). Maybe you get to play anonymously
> > for a while but if you want to get serious and become a ‘ranked’
> wikipedian
> > tell us who you are.
> >
> >
> > I honestly don’t know how much implementation of a formal vetting system
> > would violate the foundation’s DNA – and it might - but knowing what
> > mechanisms/policies facilitate harassment will help us find solutions to
> > prevent it from perpetuating. In this case ‘anonymity’ could be a weak
> > link.
> >
> >
> > How about associating a Wikipedia ID to a mobile phone number at sign up,
> > send the access code and instructions to new users before they get
> started
> > – à la craigslist. If this is not acceptable let’s find another way to
> > tie in real-life ID with Wikipedia’s ID and keep the community healthy,
> > truly open and safe. Who do we risk losing by getting to know who we are?
> > The trolls – yes. because there will be no place to hide and play big
> bad
> > wolf. Who do we attract? Potentially everyone that has once considered
> > contributing to Wikipedia but found it to be unsafe and off-putting.
> >
> >
> > Some might argue: “look, this is not a social club, this is how we’ve
> > always done it, grow a skin or move along”. I’d say: totally agree,
> > institutional knowledge is important, let’s keep the good - and there is
> > plenty - and shed the bad. Wikipedia has evolved greatly in the past 10
> > years and so has the world, and general expectations for social
> > interactions have changed. We are steadily losing some and still missing
> > many voices on Wikipedia. Clearly harassment is not the chief cause, but
> > since *people* are the most important part (asset) of Wikipedia, we need
> to
> > start developing a much-needed social protocol and insure the free flow
> of
> > knowledge over ethos.
> >
> >
> >
> > Sylvia
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Gendergap mailing list
> > Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
> >
> >
>
Karina, you might want to start here, there might be other more recent
pages, the Teahouse is also a good place to get advice and get started.
<gendergap%40lists.wikimedia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BGendergap%5D%20Gendergap%20Digest%2C%20Vol%2028%2C%20Issue%2019&In-Reply-To=%3C518BFC19.20401%40gmail.com%3E>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_scientists
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 09 May 2013 12:42:17 -0700
> From: Karina Alexanyan <karina.alexanyan(a)gmail.com>
> To: gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Gendergap Digest, Vol 28, Issue 19
> Message-ID: <518BFC19.20401(a)gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> Hi folks,
>
> I've just been watching this list quietly (and the other one I'm
> interested in, Education). I'm a newbie to Wikipedia and this
> conversation in general.
>
> But I have an idea - what about a list of "problem pages" (in terms of
> gender content) for women to go to and edit. Especially newbies who
> don't know where to start playing around with Wikipedia - a list of
> pages that could use some female love and attention...
>
> This list could be easily accessed & added to - I could post it on FB,
> on my university email list (I'm a recent graduate of the Communications
> PhD program at Columbia) etc.
>
> Do you like the idea or do you think it would create a mess?
>
> Best,
> Karina
>
>
> On 5/9/13 12:24 PM, gendergap-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
> > Send Gendergap mailing list submissions to
> > gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > gendergap-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > gendergap-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of Gendergap digest..."
> >
> >
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> > 1. Space on Meta to discuss policy change interests - please
> > help!!!!! (Sarah Stierch)
> > 2. Accidental Troll Policy - beyond gender gap (Sylvia Ventura)
> > 3. Re: Accidental Troll Policy - beyond gender gap (Katherine Casey)
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 08:07:47 -0700
> > From: Sarah Stierch <sarah.stierch(a)gmail.com>
> > To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
> > <gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> > Subject: [Gendergap] Space on Meta to discuss policy change interests
> > - please help!!!!!
> > Message-ID:
> > <
> CAKiGLfoyrx6A-KUbVi_f4OOXXxksou5K2FDnMSxbcL1_B-c8hg(a)mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> >
> > Please see and [EDIT] here:
> >
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_gap/Policy_revolution
> >
> > Meta is where large scale policy change and discussion takes place. I
> > really hope people will help build this page out.
> >
> > I have limited time right now that I can completely absorb into this
> sadly,
> > so it's important other people come along. I also can't risk more burn
> out,
> > or I'll be useless, right? :)
> >
> > It's also important that women and those who identify as women help out.
> > I'm reviewing the policies that have been developed recently that Erik
> > shared and the majority of them were developed, written and lead by men.
> > While that could be "well and good," it's critical that women have a say
> in
> > this.
> >
> > Just like [[pregnancy]] it's important that women have their voices
> heard -
> > and maybe some of you don't care about these concerns, that's important,
> > too!
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Sarah
> >
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
>
> End of Gendergap Digest, Vol 28, Issue 20
> *****************************************
>
Hi folks,
I've just been watching this list quietly (and the other one I'm
interested in, Education). I'm a newbie to Wikipedia and this
conversation in general.
But I have an idea - what about a list of "problem pages" (in terms of
gender content) for women to go to and edit. Especially newbies who
don't know where to start playing around with Wikipedia - a list of
pages that could use some female love and attention...
This list could be easily accessed & added to - I could post it on FB,
on my university email list (I'm a recent graduate of the Communications
PhD program at Columbia) etc.
Do you like the idea or do you think it would create a mess?
Best,
Karina
On 5/9/13 12:24 PM, gendergap-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
> Send Gendergap mailing list submissions to
> gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> gendergap-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> gendergap-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Gendergap digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Space on Meta to discuss policy change interests - please
> help!!!!! (Sarah Stierch)
> 2. Accidental Troll Policy - beyond gender gap (Sylvia Ventura)
> 3. Re: Accidental Troll Policy - beyond gender gap (Katherine Casey)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 08:07:47 -0700
> From: Sarah Stierch <sarah.stierch(a)gmail.com>
> To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
> <gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: [Gendergap] Space on Meta to discuss policy change interests
> - please help!!!!!
> Message-ID:
> <CAKiGLfoyrx6A-KUbVi_f4OOXXxksou5K2FDnMSxbcL1_B-c8hg(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Please see and [EDIT] here:
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_gap/Policy_revolution
>
> Meta is where large scale policy change and discussion takes place. I
> really hope people will help build this page out.
>
> I have limited time right now that I can completely absorb into this sadly,
> so it's important other people come along. I also can't risk more burn out,
> or I'll be useless, right? :)
>
> It's also important that women and those who identify as women help out.
> I'm reviewing the policies that have been developed recently that Erik
> shared and the majority of them were developed, written and lead by men.
> While that could be "well and good," it's critical that women have a say in
> this.
>
> Just like [[pregnancy]] it's important that women have their voices heard -
> and maybe some of you don't care about these concerns, that's important,
> too!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sarah
>
Katherine, you bring some valid points. Frankly, I don't know what the
answer is, but the statuquo is not optimal. I am not familiar with
Citizendium - I am pretty new to this. The mantra "the truth will set you
free" works both ways, if we know who the perpetrators are it will be way
easier to enforce policy. Maybe our personal information needs to be kept
by a third party - and can only be accessed in case of a conflict. Again I
dont know what the answer is but the current system is not optimal, we can
(need to) do better! :)
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 15:24:03 -0400
> From: Katherine Casey <fluffernutter.wiki(a)gmail.com>
> To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
> <gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Accidental Troll Policy - beyond gender gap
> Message-ID:
> <
> CA+arXE8Ja-pE6oND-u1SxfiEz2zPosFhv9yJ8WhW10d0N0zTDA(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> What you're describing sounds a lot like Citizendium, which is about as
> much of a failure as it's possible to get in the crowdsourcing world. Users
> who were told they couldn't contribute unless they turned over their
> real-life details mostly just opted to not sign up. The ones who did sign
> up found themselves mercilessly sorted by an imposed pseudo-meritocracy of
> real-life credentials, and what's left now is a a handful of "editors" who
> rule now-empty topic kingdoms.
>
> As far as safety, knowing what I know about the number of violent threats
> and libelous statements that are directed at Wikipedians quite regularly
> (and to which, I think it could be argued, female editors can
> be disproportionately subjected), I don't think there's much ground to
> stand on when it comes to assuring people that somehow they'll be *more
> *safe
> when the people who hate them have access to their real names, phone
> numbers, and addresses. I mean, I see how you could come to the conclusion
> that anonymity gives the trolls another weapon to use against the
> non-trolls, but unless you first do something about the threats, etc,
> you're going to have a hell of a time convincing anyone it's in their best
> interest to give the people threatening them their name and home address.
> Keeping ourselves as safe as possible is not a "game" we play for fun; it's
> literally a survival strategy when you know there are people out there
> trying to physically harm Wikipedians.
>
> Rather than forcing contributors to give up their personal details in
> exchange for being allowed to edit, why not focus on strengthening the
> harassment policies and the WMF's relationships with law enforcement, and
> maybe create relationships with some counselling services, such that anyone
> who makes another editor feels threatened or harassed is no longer welcome,
> and anyone who is threatened or harassed is completely supported?
>
>
> On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Sylvia Ventura <sylvia.ventura(a)gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > I command Sarah, Sarah, Anne and few other women and men commenting on
> > this list for their tireless work trying to move the needle. I wish I had
> > seen more movement/women coming forward and stepping up – but I would not
> > be surprised if many of us were…. uncomfortable. I know I am.
> >
> > or simply burned out … which seems to be the case.
> >
> >
> >
> > I had to think long and hard about writing this. Sarah, once again is
> > trying to be constructive by creating momentum and a page
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_gap/Policy_revolution to capture
> > and focus conversations. I think it's a great initiative but I also think
> > the problem we're dealing with is more systemic and might need
> > a tougher conversation.
> >
> >
> > How can we 'speak openly' in a forum like "Policy Revolution" when a few
> > of us are playing a different game – most folks here use their real
> > identities, take their contribution work at heart, we know who we are.
> But
> > then we have the Ghosts, those hiding behind the cloak of “Privacy”
> > (perverse effect of a well-meant policy I am sure) while
> > trolling, harassing, messing with images/content with impunity. If we are
> > serious about creating a broader more sustainable more representative
> > participation to the projects the WMF folks (those with some level of
> > mandate) need to seriously revise the community’s rules of engagement and
> > stand behind it.
> >
> >
> >
> > A have been sitting on this note (below) for a while, I understand the
> > need for privacy in the context of political/individual/speech freedom
> and
> > to insure personal safety in some cases. This group is composed of some
> of
> > the smartest people on the planet, we surely can come up with some
> > mechanism to protect those who need protection (anonymity) while
> creating a
> > healthy, open, constructive, environment.
> >
> >
> >
> > == NB: this was written shortly after Hersfold resignation, focuses on
> > harassment but its relevant to all questionable behavior.==
> >
> >
> > Accidental troll policy
> >
> >
> >
> > My ID was recently deleted on Meta-Wiki, the reason given was: wait for
> > it… Vandalism. Little than I knew I had breached protocol – as a newbie I
> > had created a page on Meta and had clearly broken the rules. Or was it,
> > since then, I learned that your individual history (been
> banned/suspended,
> > etc…) determines your capacity of progressing in the ranks of WP – so
> this
> > might have been purely accidental or not.
> >
> >
> >
> > But back to my point, after being notified of my ban, as a good citizen
> > and a steward of open-culture I felt it was my duty to get educated. I
> > checked the Wikipedia’s user policy. What I found was lengthy, detailed
> but
> > overall clear. Except for a portion that was particularly unsettling.
> The
> > one about “Use of Real Name and Harassment”. [[excerpt: use of real name
> > may make a contributor more vulnerable to issues such as harassment<
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Harassment>,
> > both on and off Wikipedia]]
> >
> >
> >
> > After reading the posting about the Resignation of arbitrator Hersfold<
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hersfold>in yesterday’s Signpost I
> can’t let go of the idea that the policy might
> > actually enable the very problem it is trying to avoid <harassment> by
> > perpetuating the culture of obscurity and by allowing trolls to hide
> behind
> > anonymity.
> >
> >
> >
> > In an era where information is a commodity, where online traceability is
> > child’s play for anyone with rudimentary tech skills I can’t imagine that
> > concealing one’s real-life identity on Wikipedia will minimize the
> > incidence of harassment. The reasons for Hersfold<
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hersfold>resignation againshed a
> gloomy light on this. Granted, arbitration is a “hot seat” to hold
> > but unless we are willing to put in place a “witness protection program”
> > style for wikipedians involved in conflict resolution, it will be
> > impossible to prevent this from happening again.
> >
> >
> >
> > So the question I’m thorn with is who’s really benefiting from the
> > “Privacy - no Real name Policy”? The folks trying to do their job
> sensibly
> > and seeking some distance between their work on Wikipedia and their
> > personal lives/families/jobs or the trolls that haven’t yet found that
> > clear boundary and are, by design, allowed to create a toxic and
> > unwelcoming environment.
> >
> >
> >
> > Looking at it from the other end. What if the system promoted total
> > transparency? Where everyone in it is really who they say they are. A
> > system where real-life ID is tied to the online work, no place to hide,
> > where the very act of signing up and becoming a wikipedian is a pledge
> for
> > civility, respect and trust. Where personal status is a currency based on
> > both hard and soft skills, (number/quality of contributions and the
> manner
> > in which we interact with each other). Maybe you get to play anonymously
> > for a while but if you want to get serious and become a ‘ranked’
> wikipedian
> > tell us who you are.
> >
> >
> > I honestly don’t know how much implementation of a formal vetting system
> > would violate the foundation’s DNA – and it might - but knowing what
> > mechanisms/policies facilitate harassment will help us find solutions to
> > prevent it from perpetuating. In this case ‘anonymity’ could be a weak
> > link.
> >
> >
> > How about associating a Wikipedia ID to a mobile phone number at sign up,
> > send the access code and instructions to new users before they get
> started
> > – à la craigslist. If this is not acceptable let’s find another way to
> > tie in real-life ID with Wikipedia’s ID and keep the community healthy,
> > truly open and safe. Who do we risk losing by getting to know who we are?
> > The trolls – yes. because there will be no place to hide and play big
> bad
> > wolf. Who do we attract? Potentially everyone that has once considered
> > contributing to Wikipedia but found it to be unsafe and off-putting.
> >
> >
> > Some might argue: “look, this is not a social club, this is how we’ve
> > always done it, grow a skin or move along”. I’d say: totally agree,
> > institutional knowledge is important, let’s keep the good - and there is
> > plenty - and shed the bad. Wikipedia has evolved greatly in the past 10
> > years and so has the world, and general expectations for social
> > interactions have changed. We are steadily losing some and still missing
> > many voices on Wikipedia. Clearly harassment is not the chief cause, but
> > since *people* are the most important part (asset) of Wikipedia, we need
> to
> > start developing a much-needed social protocol and insure the free flow
> of
> > knowledge over ethos.
> >
> >
> >
> > Sylvia
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Gendergap mailing list
> > Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
> >
> >
>
Please see and [EDIT] here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_gap/Policy_revolution
Meta is where large scale policy change and discussion takes place. I
really hope people will help build this page out.
I have limited time right now that I can completely absorb into this sadly,
so it's important other people come along. I also can't risk more burn out,
or I'll be useless, right? :)
It's also important that women and those who identify as women help out.
I'm reviewing the policies that have been developed recently that Erik
shared and the majority of them were developed, written and lead by men.
While that could be "well and good," it's critical that women have a say in
this.
Just like [[pregnancy]] it's important that women have their voices heard -
and maybe some of you don't care about these concerns, that's important,
too!
Thanks,
Sarah
--
--
*Sarah Stierch*
*Museumist, open culture advocate, and Wikimedian*
*www.sarahstierch.com*
[please pardon this crossposting]
Hello everyone!
I am pleased to announce the first Program Evaluation and Design Workshop!
- *When*: 22–23 June 2012
- *Where*: Budapest, Hungary
The application process is now open. We have only 20 slots available for
this workshop and the application deadline ends on May 17th. This two-day
event will be followed by a pre-conference workshop at Wikimania 2013.
Ideally, applicants would commit to attending both events.
*Why are we offering this workshop?* Over the next couple of years, the
Wikimedia Foundation will be building capacity among program leaders around
evaluation and program design. A better understanding of how to increase
impact through better planning, execution and evaluation of programs &
activities will help us to move a step closer to achieving our mission of
offering a free, high quality encyclopedia to our readers around the world.
*What will take place at this and the following workshops?* Our long-term
goals are:
1. Participants gain a basic shared understanding of program evaluation
2. Participants will work collaboratively to map and prioritize
measurable outcomes, beginning with a focus on the most common program &
activities
3. Participants will gain increased fluency in common language of
evaluation (i.e. goals versus objectives, inputs & outputs versus outcomes
& impact)
4. Participants will learn and practice how to extract and report data
using the UserMetrics API
5. Participants will commit to working as a community of evaluation
leaders who will implement evaluation strategies in their programmatic
activities and report back at the pre-conference workshop at Wikimania 2013
6. …and participants will have a lot of fun and enjoy networking with
other program leaders!
We will publish a detailed agenda for the event in Budapest soon on meta.
*Which programs & activities are we going to focus on?* During the workshop
in Budapest, we will only have a limited amount of time. Therefore, we will
be focusing on the some of the more common programs & activities:
- *Wikipedia editing workshops* where participants learn how to or
actively edit (i.e. edit-a-thon, wikiparty, hands-on Wikipedia workshop)
- *Content donations* through partnerships with GLAMs & related
organizations
- *Wiki Takes/Expeditions* where volunteers participate in day/weekend
events to photograph site specific content
- *Wiki Loves Monuments* which takes place in September
- *Education program/classroom editing* where volunteers support
educators who have students editing Wikipedia in the classroom
- *Writing competitions* which generally take place online in the form
of contests, WikiCup, and challenges – often engaging experienced editors
to improve content.
*Who should apply?* Community members who play an *active role* in
planning and executing programs & activities as described above in the
Wikimedia community. Your experience and knowledge will make this workshop
a success!
*What about the costs for travel and accomodation?* Hotels, flights and
other transportation costs will be on your chapter; the Wikimedia
Foundation will provide the venue, handouts, breakfasts and light lunches,
and a dinner for all participants on Saturday. If you're not affiliated
with a chapter and cannot afford to attend the event, please send me a
private email – we have a small amount of money set aside for those cases.
Applications are open until May 17. You can apply via this Google
Form<https://docs.google.com/a/wikimedia.org/forms/d/11yCoOls5ae8FqAXIdp9Tua76il…>
.
Thanks for your interest, and I look forward to a great group of
participants!
-Sarah
--
*Sarah Stierch**
Wikimedia Foundation Program Evaluation & Design Community Coordinator
*Donate<http://wikimediafoundation.org/w/index.php?title=Donate/en&utm_source=&utm_…>today
and keep it free!
Visit me on Wikipedia <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch>!
Regarding the question of "what can you do",
I had the experience last week of starting a new job.
I had to read through the guidelines for the organization,
which included a section on Equal Opportunity and Freedom from Harassment.
Prominent on the first page:
"Harassment Defined
1. Hostile Environment
Harassment prohibited under this policy includes verbal, visual,
or physical conduct relating to matters of race, national origin,
sex, sexual preference, religion, age or disability which is
unwelcome to the reasonable person, and
a. has the purpose or effect of interfering with a person's
work performance
b. has the purpose or effect of creating an intimidating,
hostile or offensive working environment. "
Item 2 goes on to deal with more direct incidents such as "unwelcome
sexual attention, sexual advances," etc.
I also looked at the relevant page on Wikipedia, to see what
Wikipedia's policy is.
(Sorry I don't have the link to hand to include.) It covered item 2.
But "Hostile environment", item 1 on my workplace's guidelines,
is not included.
Note too that item 1 is not limited to sexual materials;
this is not identified as a "feminist problem" but as a type of behavior
potentially relevant and unacceptable to anyone.
I would suggest that one reason that it's hard to get people to address
this sort of situation is that it's not clearly identified at a high
level as unacceptable
behavior which creates a "hostile environment"
Mary
--
----------------------------------------------------------
Mary Mark Ockerbloom http://members.verizon.net/~vze48qpu/
Celebration of Women Writers celebration.women(a)gmail.com
"To make books is to time travel, to magically acquire the
ability to be in many places at once." -- Audrey Niffenegger