As we have stated in our annual plan , “currently, community members
must search many pages and places to stay informed about Foundation
activities and resources.” We have worked in the past two quarters to
create a single point of entry. We call it the Wikimedia Resource Center,
and its alpha version is now live on Meta Wikimedia:
As the movement expands to include more affiliates and more programmatic
activities every year, newer Wikimedians are faced with lack of experience
in the movement and its various channels for requesting support. In order
to expand Wikimedia communities’ efforts, we want to provide easy access to
resources that support their very important work. The [[m:Wikimedia
Resource Center]] is a hub designed in response to this issue: it is
intended to evolve into a single point of entry for Wikimedians all over
the world to the variety of resources and types of staff support they may
need to develop new initiatives or also expand existing ones.
This version of the Resource Center is only the beginning. For phase two of
the project, we will enable volunteer Wikimedians to add resources
developed by other individuals or organizations to the Wikimedia Resource
Center, and in phase three, the Wikimedia Resource Center will include
features to better connect Wikimedians to other Wikimedians that can
We want to hear what you think about this prototype and our plans for it!
If you have comments about the Wikimedia Resource Center, you can submit
your feedback publicly, on the Talk Page, or privately, via a survey hosted
by a third party, that shouldn’t take you more than 4 minutes to complete.
A feedback button is on the top right corner on every page of the hub.
Looking forward to more collaborations!
Communications and Outreach Project Manager, Community Engagement
I would like to starts a discussion on women only events. How are they perceived and do they generate antagonism? I have always organized mixed events, until the first of march 2017, where an Art+feminism editathon was hosted by an LGBT lesbian association in Geneva, and I announced it on the French Bistrot here (among other Art+Feminism events that were all inclusive)
I did not want to impose other rules than theirs on their surroundings,so I announced a woman only event for one of the 4 events organized. Some members of the community disagreed and reacted strongly (although I can’t say all were extremely respectful this is just normal bread when dealing with the gender gap) but one was so stunning and persistant (he was blocked in the end and now has a topic ban) that this generated the thought that we might need to reflect more on safe spaces and organize such events more systematically, in each conference and each Wikimania, until this is no issue any more. I remember attending the women only picnic at Wikimania in Esino Lario and being confronted with a different attitude: there it only seemed normal.
What do you think and what is your experience on this issue? I am interested to know all points of vue provided they are formulated with respect.
Nattes à chat (mostly active on les sans pages on the French wiki)
An English Wikipedia gender neutral policy, similar to the one
developed for Commons, is now under "lively" discussion in a Requests
for Comment started this afternoon. You can read the proposed policy
and join in by adding your viewpoint at:
Full link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/RfC_to_adopt_a…
Some of the comments may be upsetting for some readers. I've actually
been a bit surprised. If it's too much drama for you, go focus on
something more fun.
Wikimedia LGBT+ https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_LGBT+
On 5 April 2017 at 11:44, Fæ <faewik(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> * https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#Defaulting_to_gende…
> One of the outcomes from my weekend at the Wikimedia Conference in
> Berlin, was that the various discussions over /feeling/ more welcoming
> in our language presumptions for non-male contributors made me think
> about taking some practical steps on my home project. Commons is lucky
> that having a standard policy language of English makes it easier to
> use neutral gender in policy statements. I'm taking that further by
> proposing that we stick to a neutral gender for all our policies and
> help pages. In practice this means that policies avoid using "he or
> she" and stick to "they" or avoid using a pronoun at all. I'm hoping
> that the outcome will feel like a much more natural space for people
> like me that prefer to stay gender neutral, possibly give a slightly
> safer feeling to the project by the very act of making the effort, as
> well as avoiding an over-emphasis on binary gender when it's pretty
> easy to simply avoid it.
> Comments are welcome on the specific proposal, or you may have ideas
> for other local projects to do something similar. I'm aware that this
> is much more difficult to make progress on in languages such as German
> or Spanish that have a presumption of male/female gender within their
> vocabulary, so any cases of on-project initiatives in non-English
> would be especially interesting. Solving these challenges is an
> opportunity to make our projects a leader on gender neutrality...
Just found out about this. I wonder if they'll break down and hire at
least 1/2 professional FEMALE journalists.
I hope that the most biased Wikipedia male trolls will not be among the
New project for whatever Gender Gap projects in Wikimedia are most
effective. (Anyone want to do an analysis of those projects? I confess
I'm way out of the loop.)
The homepage of the website states: "Articles are authored,
fact-checked, and verified by professional journalists and community
members working side by side as equals, and supported not primarily by
advertisers, but by readers who care about good journalism enough to
become monthly supporters."
I'm new to this list, this is my first post.
If Wikipedia is a boy's club, Wiktionary is an uber boy's club. It *so*
desperately needs people interested in addressing systemic bias.
Every time I try to make completely legitimate fixes to address systemic
bias of the male privilege variety (for example,
it is reverted very quickly (in the just-referenced case, within 10
minutes). Then a fight must ensue in which I'm accused of being things like
"dishonest", "disrespectful" and 'railing'. The person in this case has
demonstrated his double standards in his edit summary and in his comments
to me on his talk page, and that is absolutely (unfortunately) the norm
amongst long-term Wiktionary editors.
It is incredibly demoralising. My contributions to Wiktionary include
adding etymologies, adding quotations, all with absolutely no gender issues
involved, yet none of that work is ever recognised in any way, and I'm
treated like a resented interloper. The majority of long-term Wiktionary
editors seem to bitterly resent the very suggestion of addressing systemic
bias. It is a really, really nasty little uber boy's club in there. Which I
realise may not encourage anyone to join, I'm just being honest.
Forwarding for folks on the GG list who aren't subscribed to
and Wikimedia-l, and may want to watch the video (live or afterward) for
the section on the Keilana Effect.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Lena Traer <ltraer(a)wikimedia.org>
Date: Thu, May 18, 2017 at 4:11 PM
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Invitation to WMF May 2017 Metrics & Activities
Meeting: Thursday, May 25, 18:00 UTC
To: wikimediaannounce-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org, Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
The next Wikimedia Foundation metrics and activities meeting will take
place on Thursday, May 25, 2017 at 6:00 PM UTC (11 AM PDT). The IRC channel
is #wikimedia-office on irc.freenode.net, and the meeting will be broadcast
as a live YouTube stream.
During the May metrics meeting, we'll hear research and stories about
developing an inclusive Wikimedia movement. We'll explore some of our
challenges to becoming an inclusive movement, and what people around the
movement are doing to create a more inclusive, welcoming space where
everyone can participate.
* Welcomes, theme introduction
* Movement update
* New filters for edit review
* The Keilana effect
* Executive update
* Questions and discussion
for further information about the meeting and how to participate.
We’ll post the video recording publicly after the meeting.
Project Assistant // Communications // Advancement
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Just out of curiosity, I used the Wikidata Query Service to see how many
poems by women are in Wikidata. The answer is 5. If you do the same query
for men, you get 255. If you restrict the queries to poems that have
articles on English Wikipedia you get 1 and 57, i.e. according to Wikidata
there is only one article about a poem by a woman on English Wikipedia.
This probably isn't accurate, but it's still a surprising result. While I
understand that poetry (and writing in general) has historically been the
domain of men, does a 50 to 1 ratio really reflect the historical reality?
Anyway, just something to chew on.
If you want to run the queries yourself (or modify them) here they are:
Poems by women: http://tinyurl.com/kq4bq8x
Poems by men: http://tinyurl.com/m7mqynq
Poems by women with articles on English Wikipedia:
Poems by men with articles on English Wikipedia: http://tinyurl.com/mnmsnkl