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(a)sarahstierch.com> wrote:
From: Sarah Stierch <sarah(a)sarahstierch.com>
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons
To: gendergap(a)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(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap