A women's project might be a nice complement to the collaborative and the teahouse. The collaborative is a great choice for women who like to use Facebook and Twitter, but some don't. The teahouse is OK (and I'd like to offer myself as a mentor for women editors there), but even there the testosterone can run high sometimes.

Lightbreather

On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 9:56 AM, Sarah Stierch <sarah.stierch@gmail.com> wrote:

Some thoughts...some ok some negative about a project for women.

Spaces that promote sisterhood and women only that are public generally have overwhelming woman. participation and men often play the role of observers.

That's why I created the WikiWomens Collab. While men "like it", it's extremely rare they interact with it. A place can be public and be focused on women.

But, I do think it will be a challenge on EN WP. That is why WWC was a social media campaign. Women are there. There is a wiki women's group on Facebook too and a few guys have joined but they don't interact on it. its clearly for Women by women (those identifying as women).

I am concerned about a shit storm starting a woman centric space on WP. As long as there is research to prove to the community it might work. You have to show it - we had to do it with the Teahouse. It was nominated for deletion when it was created!!

I put together an entire project page on meta with this research someplace..

There is also an editor retention project already. People will ask - why not just work in that space?

Also, the wikiprojects for WP feminism, women art/science/writers are also overwhelmingly female. I recruited at the beginning but now I am just burnt out so I don't spend time doing it..and the subject gets little press coverage anymore so cries to engaging women have lowered in the press. So this will require more on the boots support. And how will you promote it - especially if you don't know the gender of editors. I guess you can build it and they will come.

So I would think hard before creating something new and thing about what already exists and how to leverage it. And if you cannot leverage it...try it.

I spent a year of my life at WMF working on all of this. We had that idea and canned it and ended up creating the Teahouse. That was created to welcome and help new editors with research focusing on women. It worked. It sounds like you would just be making another Teahouse but for women.

It's funny seeing this conversation happening again. :) it's good though

Sarah
(Sent from my phone)

On Dec 31, 2014 8:38 AM, "LB" <lightbreather2@gmail.com> wrote:

I've started two separate mailing list topics today  - Women of GGTF and WP:WOMEN - but they haven't posted. You do send to Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org, right? I think that's what I've used before.

Lightbreather

On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 9:25 AM, Risker <risker.wp@gmail.com> wrote:

On 31 December 2014 at 11:18, LB <lightbreather2@gmail.com> wrote:

I can imagine the complaints and hurdles. The discussion is it possible? Could it work?

To your specific questions, if there's no page-protection option, can there be? If it's absolutely impossible, then the moderators would have to keep an eye on those things. Also, I think there would be parts of the project that would be vehemently opposed, but others who wouldn't care one way or another, and some who would welcome such a space with open arms.

I don't know about EEML. I will read that.

 

 

The EEML (Eastern European Mailing List) was an invitation-only mailing list populated by a group of editors who supported each other in content contributions, deletion discussions, and other on-wiki activities related generally to the Eastern European region of the world (including articles on the  history, economics, politics,  notable persons, geography, etc. of the region).  The mailing list was non-public.  Almost all participants on the list were very significantly sanctioned (including some permanent bans, some topic bans, and a desysop) because of the attempt to manage content in a non-transparent way, in addition to the entire canvassing aspect. 

 

There was once a Wikichix mailing list, moderated and very similar to the one described by Lightbreather.  It died a slow death several years ago because, essentially, nobody really had much to say there, absent the ability to discuss actual content.

 

Risker/Anne

_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap