http://thewikipedian.net/2013/01/15/wikifoolery/
" April Fools' Day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_Fools%27_Dayis still about 2 1/2 months off, butWikipedians are already planning http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Today%27s_featured_article/requests#Icelandic_Phallological_Museum_on_April_Fools.27_Day.3Ffor the big day. Every year, editors who maintain the front page arrange for silly, sometimes misleading, and even mildly offensive articles to run during the 24-hour period covering April 1st. But aswe noted in April 2011 http://thewikipedian.net/2011/04/01/wiki-fools/, not everyone is happy that such a serious project as Wikipedia, one focused on curating the world's knowledge, spends one day per year kind of, sort of, doing the opposite. And as of today, there's athread on Jimbo Wales' Talk page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#April_Fool.27s_Day_-_an_opportunity_about_to_be_squandered_againhosting a debate on the practice. This time in the mix: whether the juvenile pranks contribute to Wikipedia'snoted gender imbalance http://thewikipedian.net/2012/11/08/all-the-women-who-edit-wiki-throw-your-hands-up-at-me/. Best comments so far: from female editors defending standing up for "women's ability to both use and appreciate dirty or giggle-inducing language"."
On 15 January 2013 21:09, Sarah Stierch sarah.stierch@gmail.com wrote:
http://thewikipedian.net/2013/01/15/wikifoolery/
" April Fools’ Day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_Fools%27_Day is still about 2 1/2 months off, but Wikipedians are already planninghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Today%27s_featured_article/requests#Icelandic_Phallological_Museum_on_April_Fools.27_Day.3F for the big day. Every year, editors who maintain the front page arrange for silly, sometimes misleading, and even mildly offensive articles to run during the 24-hour period covering April 1st. But as we noted in April 2011 http://thewikipedian.net/2011/04/01/wiki-fools/, not everyone is happy that such a serious project as Wikipedia, one focused on curating the world’s knowledge, spends one day per year kind of, sort of, doing the opposite. And as of today, there’s a thread on Jimbo Wales’ Talk pagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#April_Fool.27s_Day_-_an_opportunity_about_to_be_squandered_againhosting a debate on the practice. This time in the mix: whether the juvenile pranks contribute to Wikipedia’s noted gender imbalancehttp://thewikipedian.net/2012/11/08/all-the-women-who-edit-wiki-throw-your-hands-up-at-me/. Best comments so far: from female editors defending standing up for “women’s ability to both use and appreciate dirty or giggle-inducing language”."
I don't know that they contribute to the gender imbalance - although in fairness the women who make it as far as adminship and discussions on Jimbo's page tend to be unusually thick-skinned (I mean it as a compliment!). I think that the puerile proposals being bandied about are likely to make Wikipedia look like it's run by, well...juvenile geeks who haven't got past giggling every time they hear someone say a "bad word". It would be different if these things were actually funny, but they aren't.
Although I think it probably says something about the general mentality of a significant portion of our editorship what was being proposed for April Fool's day - sex, body parts, and swearing. Hmmm.
Risker/Anne
The April Fools DYKs are pretty tame compared to the ones we used to get from Bedford (which eventually led to a wheel war). I just wish the April Fools ones were actually funny.
Ryan Kaldari
On 1/15/13 11:23 PM, Risker wrote:
On 15 January 2013 21:09, Sarah Stierch <sarah.stierch@gmail.com mailto:sarah.stierch@gmail.com> wrote:
http://thewikipedian.net/2013/01/15/wikifoolery/ " April Fools' Day <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_Fools%27_Day>is still about 2 1/2 months off, butWikipedians are already planning <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Today%27s_featured_article/requests#Icelandic_Phallological_Museum_on_April_Fools.27_Day.3F>for the big day. Every year, editors who maintain the front page arrange for silly, sometimes misleading, and even mildly offensive articles to run during the 24-hour period covering April 1st. But aswe noted in April 2011 <http://thewikipedian.net/2011/04/01/wiki-fools/>, not everyone is happy that such a serious project as Wikipedia, one focused on curating the world's knowledge, spends one day per year kind of, sort of, doing the opposite. And as of today, there's athread on Jimbo Wales' Talk page <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#April_Fool.27s_Day_-_an_opportunity_about_to_be_squandered_again>hosting a debate on the practice. This time in the mix: whether the juvenile pranks contribute to Wikipedia'snoted gender imbalance <http://thewikipedian.net/2012/11/08/all-the-women-who-edit-wiki-throw-your-hands-up-at-me/>. Best comments so far: from female editors defending standing up for "women's ability to both use and appreciate dirty or giggle-inducing language"."I don't know that they contribute to the gender imbalance - although in fairness the women who make it as far as adminship and discussions on Jimbo's page tend to be unusually thick-skinned (I mean it as a compliment!). I think that the puerile proposals being bandied about are likely to make Wikipedia look like it's run by, well...juvenile geeks who haven't got past giggling every time they hear someone say a "bad word". It would be different if these things were actually funny, but they aren't.
Although I think it probably says something about the general mentality of a significant portion of our editorship what was being proposed for April Fool's day - sex, body parts, and swearing. Hmmm.
Risker/Anne
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Someone will find anything done "not funny".
That said, body parts humor is rarely a soaring example of high humor. If I didn't think it would go over so badly I'd do the sort of efforts I used to do on Usenet here, but it seems to be taken badly no matter what.
-george
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Ryan Kaldari rkaldari@wikimedia.org wrote:
The April Fools DYKs are pretty tame compared to the ones we used to get from Bedford (which eventually led to a wheel war). I just wish the April Fools ones were actually funny.
Ryan Kaldari
On 1/15/13 11:23 PM, Risker wrote:
On 15 January 2013 21:09, Sarah Stierch sarah.stierch@gmail.com wrote:
http://thewikipedian.net/2013/01/15/wikifoolery/
" April Fools’ Day is still about 2 1/2 months off, but Wikipedians are already planning for the big day. Every year, editors who maintain the front page arrange for silly, sometimes misleading, and even mildly offensive articles to run during the 24-hour period covering April 1st. But as we noted in April 2011, not everyone is happy that such a serious project as Wikipedia, one focused on curating the world’s knowledge, spends one day per year kind of, sort of, doing the opposite. And as of today, there’s a thread on Jimbo Wales’ Talk pagehosting a debate on the practice. This time in the mix: whether the juvenile pranks contribute to Wikipedia’s noted gender imbalance. Best comments so far: from female editors defending standing up for “women’s ability to both use and appreciate dirty or giggle-inducing language”."
I don't know that they contribute to the gender imbalance - although in fairness the women who make it as far as adminship and discussions on Jimbo's page tend to be unusually thick-skinned (I mean it as a compliment!). I think that the puerile proposals being bandied about are likely to make Wikipedia look like it's run by, well...juvenile geeks who haven't got past giggling every time they hear someone say a "bad word". It would be different if these things were actually funny, but they aren't.
Although I think it probably says something about the general mentality of a significant portion of our editorship what was being proposed for April Fool's day - sex, body parts, and swearing. Hmmm.
Risker/Anne
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
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 7:23 AM, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
I don't know that they contribute to the gender imbalance - although in fairness the women who make it as far as adminship and discussions on Jimbo's page tend to be unusually thick-skinned (I mean it as a compliment!). I think that the puerile proposals being bandied about are likely to make Wikipedia look like it's run by, well...juvenile geeks who haven't got past giggling every time they hear someone say a "bad word". It would be different if these things were actually funny, but they aren't.
Although I think it probably says something about the general mentality of a significant portion of our editorship what was being proposed for April Fool's day - sex, body parts, and swearing. Hmmm.
+1.
On 1/16/2013 2:23 AM, Risker wrote:
Although I think it probably says something about the general mentality of a significant portion of our editorship what was being proposed for April Fool's day - sex, body parts, and swearing. Hmmm.
Risker/Anne
I stooped to that level and added the one I think is funniest to Jimbo's talk page and to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Today%27s_featured_article April Fools discussion, writing at the latter:
"It took forever to get the actual article [[Circle jerk]] into Wikipedia - a female did it. So come on, it IS the funniest thing in all patriarchy, so you gotta do SOMETHING with it! (Assuming it hasn't been done multiple times already. "
I didn't mean to do a pun or whatever there at the end, by the way. But definitely setting the tone...
Women CAN be bawdy, so let us at least have our fun too...
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 5:06 AM, Carol Moore DC carolmooredc@verizon.netwrote:
"It took forever to get the actual article [[Circle jerk]] into Wikipedia
- a female did it.
Now, now, Carol. The record shows that *I* created the circle jerk article, and I am not a female.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circle_jerk_(sexual_practice)&...
However, I will concede that I created the article entirely in response to your helpful suggestion. So in a way, the credit is indeed all yours. :)
Best, Andreas
It's two very different issues to argue about a) whether "dirty word" DYKs drive off women (I'm on record on Jimbo's talk as thinking that's silly), and b) whether "dirty word" DYKs are puerile and not as good a type of joke as we should be doing, if we want to do jokes (which appears to be basically Jimbo's stance, and which I agree with). Yes, toilet and sex humor is juvenile, but I don't think it's a female-repelling type of juvenilia. And whether it is or not, we can probably do better when it comes to April Fool's, anyway.
-Fluff
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen466@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 5:06 AM, Carol Moore DC carolmooredc@verizon.netwrote:
"It took forever to get the actual article [[Circle jerk]] into
Wikipedia - a female did it.
Now, now, Carol. The record shows that *I* created the circle jerk article, and I am not a female.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circle_jerk_(sexual_practice)&...
However, I will concede that I created the article entirely in response to your helpful suggestion. So in a way, the credit is indeed all yours. :)
Best, Andreas
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
On 1/17/2013 1:24 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 5:06 AM, Carol Moore DC <carolmooredc@verizon.net mailto:carolmooredc@verizon.net> wrote:
"It took forever to get the actual article [[Circle jerk]] into Wikipedia - a female did it.Now, now, Carol. The record shows that /I/ created the circle jerk article, and I am not a female.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circle_jerk_(sexual_practice)&... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circle_jerk_%28sexual_practice%29&action=history
However, I will concede that I created the article entirely in response to your helpful suggestion. So in a way, the credit is indeed all yours. :)
Best, Andreas
Sorry, got the impression way back when that handle was a female user...
Anyway, I've had my fun and now am seriously inquiring on where to drop a draft of an April Fools article.
Let's have a bunch of us do it. :-)
CM
On 1/17/13 6:17 PM, Carol Moore DC wrote:
On 1/17/2013 1:24 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 5:06 AM, Carol Moore DC <carolmooredc@verizon.net mailto:carolmooredc@verizon.net> wrote:
"It took forever to get the actual article [[Circle jerk]] into Wikipedia - a female did it.Now, now, Carol. The record shows that /I/ created the circle jerk article, and I am not a female.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circle_jerk_(sexual_practice)&... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circle_jerk_%28sexual_practice%29&action=history
However, I will concede that I created the article entirely in response to your helpful suggestion. So in a way, the credit is indeed all yours. :)
Best, Andreas
Sorry, got the impression way back when that handle was a female user...
Anyway, I've had my fun and now am seriously inquiring on where to drop a draft of an April Fools article.
Let's have a bunch of us do it. :-)
TOTALLY. "WikiWomen fork to create friendly, user supporting, free knowledge resource." ;)
There was actually a good suggestion for one on the TFA talk page....for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacred_Cod_of_Massachusetts
It's already at GA, needs significant polishing and filling in of gaps, but is easily do-able for April 1.
Risker/Anne
On 17 January 2013 21:17, Carol Moore DC carolmooredc@verizon.net wrote:
On 1/17/2013 1:24 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 5:06 AM, Carol Moore DC carolmooredc@verizon.netwrote:
"It took forever to get the actual article [[Circle jerk]] into
Wikipedia - a female did it.
Now, now, Carol. The record shows that *I* created the circle jerk article, and I am not a female.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circle_jerk_(sexual_practice)&...
However, I will concede that I created the article entirely in response to your helpful suggestion. So in a way, the credit is indeed all yours. :)
Best, Andreas
Sorry, got the impression way back when that handle was a female user...
Anyway, I've had my fun and now am seriously inquiring on where to drop a draft of an April Fools article.
Let's have a bunch of us do it. :-)
CM
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
On 17 January 2013 22:33, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
There was actually a good suggestion for one on the TFA talk page....for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacred_Cod_of_Massachusetts
It's already at GA, needs significant polishing and filling in of gaps, but is easily do-able for April 1.
Risker/Anne
Actually, it's currently at FAC: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candida...
It needs help but with diligent work could easily pass.
Risker/Anne