On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 5:56 PM, Emily Monroe <emilymonroe03@gmail.com> wrote:

I don't think I've heard/read "chick" for several years.

From,
Emily

On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 8:41 AM, John Vandenberg <jayvdb@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Sarah Stierch <sarah.stierch@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I've had a few conversations, and heard/read a number of comments about the
> term "WikiChix." Now I've never been much of a "chick", and it seems other
> women tend to agree in the terminology as being a bit...hokey, old school
> and not the most contemporary.
>
> I'd like to see how we can re-develop the concept into something else. I've
> been using just the simple term of "Women in Wikimedia" etc, but I know
> that's not the most quirky or exciting sound term when it comes to trying to
> be clever at a luncheon or whatever. There's also the "Women of Wikimedia"
> but "WoW"...hehe... "Oh is this a Warcraft meet-up?"
>
> I also joined the WikiChix mailing list over a month and ago and there has
> been no activity. I'm starting to think perhaps we can retire the term for
> the sake of contemporary thinking.
>
> But, perhaps I'm just being uber and everyone thinks it's the cutest name
> ever and should be kept.
>
> Thoughts?

If you contribute to Wikisource, you can become a wikisourcerer, which
has a nice ring to it..

--
John Vandenberg

_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

--
"Only the shallow know themselves." - Oscar Wilde