Inline replies to 3 people...

On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 1:57 PM, J Hayes <slowking4@gmail.com> wrote:
the smaller wikis have ownership issues , the arguments are so vehement because the stakes are so small.

i would advise trying out lots of other wikis like commons or wikisource or wikidata. friendlier at source, and lots more metadata cleanup to do at commons / wikidata.

Hello J. When someone comes to an issue-specific list to discuss that issue, why would you recommend that they just edit somewhere else and not speak to their question? Isn't it the point of this list to discuss gendergap issues?

 
On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 3:13 AM, Peter Southwood <peter.southwood@telkomsa.net> wrote:

At the risk of being labelled biased, I do not see that that was a legitimate fix to address systemic bias. It looked rather pointy to me.  Perhaps you could explain just how it addressed systemic bias in a useful way.

Cheers, Peter


Peter, what I see in that first edit was the removal of a sentence that spoke about the appearance of a woman for no reason at all. There is more information here http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Beauty_duty

 

 From: Gendergap [mailto:gendergap-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Jessy D. King

Sent: Wednesday, 26 April 2017 7:27 PM
To: Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Gendergap] Wiktionary *desperately* needs more gender-aware editors

 

Hi,

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. 


Hello Jessy, I appreciate your efforts to remove gender issues from Wiktionary. I am disappointed that you found a similar reaction in this list.

Warmly,
Heather


 

 

 


_______________________________________________
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