Dear, I would like to draw your attention to the history of article "migrantas" an initiative in Berlin on the empowerment of migrant women, that was deleted by the concept autopromotion and later by the attribution of irrelevance.Men and women worked for improving it but it seems without results.It would be good to have some suggestions on that.best regards, Patricia
--- On Tue, 5/17/11, Sarah Stierch sarah@sarahstierch.com wrote:
From: Sarah Stierch sarah@sarahstierch.com Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Tuesday, May 17, 2011, 8:19 AM
Hi dz,
Great to hear you'd like to be involved. I've been really busy the past few weeks with finishing school, a trip to California, and GLAM related activities (oh and Regional Ambassadorness!) - so I haven't had time to sit down and get my "stuff together" for the HOW-TO. But, I'd love to add you to our HOW-TO gang if you like.
=)
Sarah
On 5/17/2011 8:17 AM, Deanna Zandt wrote:
I'd also be interested in contributing-- the BLP experience of last week was incredibly enlightening, and got me thinking about access... having the right key unlocked a wealth of knowledge and aid. How to make that key more widely available, or second nature/common knowledge? I'm hoping to blog about it soon. In any case, I'd like to come at some of the HOW-TO issues in general from that noob perspective.
cheers dz
On May 16, 2011, at 9:23 PM, Pete Forsyth wrote:
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Sarah Stierch sarah@sarahstierch.com wrote:
On 5/16/2011 11:49 AM, Pete Forsyth wrote:
Anybody interested in tackling this issue? -Pete
I'm working on diving into the HOW-TO this summer for Wiki. I do want to see all of these topics covered - and I'll contribute in anyway I can. Where do we start? ;-)
Hi Sarah,
I'd be really happy to work on this with you! (And anyone else).
My sense is that there's a lot of work to do in identifying the problem -- or rather, evaluating the collection of interrelated issues, and determining where it's best to focus. The things that seem significant to me are:
(1) Picture of the Day on Commons often seems to be the source of unnecessary strife (moreso than, say, PotD on English Wikipedia); (2) It appears that there is not a clearly identified set of editorial values around what DOES constitute a worthwhile PotD on Commons; (3) The technical and social processes for setting a PotD are difficult to understand and poorly documented.
How about if we collaborate a bit on documenting how things currently work? I think that process will point the way toward recommending a solution.
I've set up a page for this project, if you're game! http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Peteforsyth/PotD
-Pete
_______________________________________________
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
--
Wikipedia Regional Ambassador, The Nation's Capital
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Art
--
Sarah Stierch Consulting Historical, cultural & artistic research, advising & event planning. ------------------------------------------------------ http://www.sarahstierch.com/
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap