(Please excuse cross-posting)
Over the next few months, I will be overhauling the Welcome to Wikipedia
brochure[1] to better reflect what new editors need to know when learning
how to contribute to Wikipedia. I'm hoping to get a wide variety of
feedback on what people like and do not like about the current brochure so
I can create a new version that reflects the best knowledge we collectively
have about outreach to newbies.
Please see more details and add your feedback here:
https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Welcome_to_Wikipedia_(Bookshelf)/2013_e…
LiAnna
[1]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Welcome_to_Wikipedia_brochure_EN.pdf
--
LiAnna Davis
Wikipedia Education Program Communications Manager
Wikimedia Foundation
http://education.wikimedia.org
(415) 839-6885 x6649
ldavis(a)wikimedia.org
Hi all,
I just wanted to let you know about a proposal I've put up on Meta. I'm
currently piloting a project at my university, Loyola University Chicago,
to increase participation among women students and improve content on women
scientists. I want to learn from this model and create a template that can
be used at other institutions and conduct outreach and testing in the
Chicago area. I've put in an IEG proposal here (
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Women_Scientists_Workshop_Develo…)
and I would love to have some feedback from people on this list! Thanks
very much.
-Emily
Hi folks. Just wanted to let you know I'm unsubscribing from the
gendergap list in advance of the start of my sabbatical - more info at
http://www.harihareswara.net/sumana/2013/08/28/1 . If you need to talk
about Wikimedia technical community stuff or communication before
January, please consult Quim Gil, qgil at wikimedia dot org, or
Guillaume Paumier, gpaumier at wikimedia dot org. Thanks! Looking
forward to coming back in January.
Sumana Harihareswara
Engineering Community Manager
Wikimedia Foundation
Somehow you appear to think that equality and sameness are synonymous.
It is not possible to close the gender gap by defining male and female
as the same. This kind of thinking will drive the wedge deeper because
each will be invalidated for who they are.
________________________________
From: "gendergap-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org" <gendergap-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
To: gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 6:00 AM
Subject: Gendergap Digest, Vol 32, Issue 10
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. Re: Gendergap Digest, Vol 32, Issue 9 (john allyn)
2. Re: Gendergap Digest, Vol 32, Issue 9 (Emily Monroe)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 14:21:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: john allyn <jaddtwo(a)yahoo.com>
To: "gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org" <gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Gendergap Digest, Vol 32, Issue 9
Message-ID:
<1379366467.96269.YahooMailNeo(a)web120001.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Somehow you appear to think that equality and sameness are synonymous. It is not possible to close the gender gap by defining male and female as the same. This kind of thinking will drive the wedge deeper because each will be invalidated for who they are.
________________________________
From: "gendergap-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org" <gendergap-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
To: gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 6:00 AM
Subject: Gendergap Digest, Vol 32, Issue 9
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. Re: Archaic gendered terminology (Lane Rasberry)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2013 15:43:47 -0400
From: Lane Rasberry <lane(a)bluerasberry.com>
To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the
participation of women within Wikimedia projects."
<gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Archaic gendered terminology
Message-ID:
<CAJb6Kh5SLCkCo9BFB4LHJCf+NJkAcMno6XNk+Mk0EhKUAez8qQ(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hello,
I expect that many people will continue to use the term "actress" for
females in the profession. I notice that the Amy Johnson discussion raises
that.
A couple of years ago I got to review an elementary English textbook being
distributed in very large numbers in North India. It was an original work
seemingly derived from public domain content and had a section on gendered
nouns, including "negro" and "negress". I looked at the time for a style
guide on best practices for gendered term and I could not find anything
clear when I looked then, but obviously there is bad information to be
found online among the public domain texts and it really grated on me that
new print works were being distributed to teach children such things.
We might not be so far from the day when someone could publish a Wikipedia
Manual of Style and expect it to be an authoritative text. I am not sure
what the right answer is in this case but whatever you find please consider
noting on the manual of style because this question will come up again.
Thanks for sharing.
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 7:31 PM, Gobonobo <gobonobo(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> I've been going through a lot of historical biographies lately and am
> surprised to see how often archaic gendered terms such as poetess,
> sculptress, and aviatrix crop up in Wikipedia articles. I know some of
> these come from the older sources such as the 1911 Britannica, but in other
> cases their inclusion is the result of decisions being made by editors.
> There's currently a discussion on [[Talk:Amy Johnson]] over whether she
> should be referred to as an aviatrix, for instance.
>
> I'm wondering how this has been dealt with previously and if there are
> specific policies surrounding such uses. I've found the essays
> [[Wikipedia:Gender-neutral language]] and [[Wikipedia:Use modern language]]
> and note that [[WP:MOS]] says "use gender-neutral language where this can
> be done with clarity and precision". It seems as if despite these fairly
> clear precepts, the use of these terms persists.
>
> Are there any archaic terms where it has been broadly agreed that using
> them is not encyclopedic? I would be much obliged if anyone could point me
> to previous discussions about this.
>
> ~Gobonobo
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/gendergap<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap>
>
--
Lane Rasberry
206.801.0814
lane(a)bluerasberry.com
Hey everyone,
this is just a reminder that tomorrow, Friday, 20 September 2013, is the
last day open to submit session proposals and apply for scholarships to the
Wikimedia Diversity Conference [1], taking place on 9 and 10 November 2013
in Berlin, Germany.
You may still register for participating in the conference until *20
October 2013*, but there will no longer be an option to apply for
scholarships and submit session proposals.
For further questions, please do not hesitate to get in touch with the
organising team [2].
Kind regards,
Cornelia
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Diversity_Conference
[2] diversity(a)wikimedia.de
--
Cornelia Trefflich
------------------------------
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.
Obentrautstraße 72
10963 Berlin
Telefon 030 - 219 158 26-0
www.wikimedia.de
Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch freien Zugang zu der
Gesamtheit des Wissens der Menschheit hat. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
http://spenden.wikimedia.de/
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
Somehow you appear to think that equality and sameness are synonymous. It is not possible to close the gender gap by defining male and female as the same. This kind of thinking will drive the wedge deeper because each will be invalidated for who they are.
________________________________
From: "gendergap-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org" <gendergap-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
To: gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 6:00 AM
Subject: Gendergap Digest, Vol 32, Issue 9
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. Re: Archaic gendered terminology (Lane Rasberry)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2013 15:43:47 -0400
From: Lane Rasberry <lane(a)bluerasberry.com>
To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the
participation of women within Wikimedia projects."
<gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Archaic gendered terminology
Message-ID:
<CAJb6Kh5SLCkCo9BFB4LHJCf+NJkAcMno6XNk+Mk0EhKUAez8qQ(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hello,
I expect that many people will continue to use the term "actress" for
females in the profession. I notice that the Amy Johnson discussion raises
that.
A couple of years ago I got to review an elementary English textbook being
distributed in very large numbers in North India. It was an original work
seemingly derived from public domain content and had a section on gendered
nouns, including "negro" and "negress". I looked at the time for a style
guide on best practices for gendered term and I could not find anything
clear when I looked then, but obviously there is bad information to be
found online among the public domain texts and it really grated on me that
new print works were being distributed to teach children such things.
We might not be so far from the day when someone could publish a Wikipedia
Manual of Style and expect it to be an authoritative text. I am not sure
what the right answer is in this case but whatever you find please consider
noting on the manual of style because this question will come up again.
Thanks for sharing.
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 7:31 PM, Gobonobo <gobonobo(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> I've been going through a lot of historical biographies lately and am
> surprised to see how often archaic gendered terms such as poetess,
> sculptress, and aviatrix crop up in Wikipedia articles. I know some of
> these come from the older sources such as the 1911 Britannica, but in other
> cases their inclusion is the result of decisions being made by editors.
> There's currently a discussion on [[Talk:Amy Johnson]] over whether she
> should be referred to as an aviatrix, for instance.
>
> I'm wondering how this has been dealt with previously and if there are
> specific policies surrounding such uses. I've found the essays
> [[Wikipedia:Gender-neutral language]] and [[Wikipedia:Use modern language]]
> and note that [[WP:MOS]] says "use gender-neutral language where this can
> be done with clarity and precision". It seems as if despite these fairly
> clear precepts, the use of these terms persists.
>
> Are there any archaic terms where it has been broadly agreed that using
> them is not encyclopedic? I would be much obliged if anyone could point me
> to previous discussions about this.
>
> ~Gobonobo
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/gendergap<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap>
>
--
Lane Rasberry
206.801.0814
lane(a)bluerasberry.com
I've been going through a lot of historical biographies lately and am
surprised to see how often archaic gendered terms such as poetess,
sculptress, and aviatrix crop up in Wikipedia articles. I know some of
these come from the older sources such as the 1911 Britannica, but in
other cases their inclusion is the result of decisions being made by
editors. There's currently a discussion on [[Talk:Amy Johnson]] over
whether she should be referred to as an aviatrix, for instance.
I'm wondering how this has been dealt with previously and if there are
specific policies surrounding such uses. I've found the essays
[[Wikipedia:Gender-neutral language]] and [[Wikipedia:Use modern
language]] and note that [[WP:MOS]] says "use gender-neutral language
where this can be done with clarity and precision". It seems as if
despite these fairly clear precepts, the use of these terms persists.
Are there any archaic terms where it has been broadly agreed that using
them is not encyclopedic? I would be much obliged if anyone could point
me to previous discussions about this.
~Gobonobo
Hey all,
Over recent months I have uploaded around 150,000 photos from high
value Flickr streams, and as I go through the uploads cleaning them up
I am coming across photos of many notable females (politics, social
activists, diplomatic, etc) that should probably have articles on our
projects, but which don't exist. I have written many an article based
purely on the notion of us having freely licenced media available, and
I was wondering if anyone would be interested if I wrote up a list of
these missing articles that people might like to look at writing up.
Cheers,
Russavia