Thank you Risker/Anne
for this statement which I think is true:
(most editors do not gender-identify ...
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/2012-June/002876.html
what follows from this is, in my opinion, that any specific-looking numbers the Wikimedia
Foundation (e.g.,
Wikipedia editor survey) chooses to have published about how many women act as editors
should not be
trusted and hence not be perpetuated
and best not in our list description, either...
"The most recent Wikipedia editor survey indicates that the percentage of female
contributors in Wikimedia
projects is approximately nine percent."
could this starting sentence be changed, maybe, to reflect the fact stated by Anne/Risker
and not feed into
such a seemingly negatively perceived climate in the first place?
ah, yes, this is me again, trying to raise some awareness also about the promotional
paradoxes in results
created by patriarchally-inspired statistics exercises that purport to come up with facts,
apologies if this makes you groan, maybe again,
I will stick to my point though until I hear better arguments - which, certainly, I am
happy to take on this
point
:-) thanks & cheers,
Claudia
koltzenburg(a)w4w.net