Hi All, The Community is aware of this and is discussing it. However, it's worthwhile bringing to the attention of this list that one woman's efforts at studying gender stereotyping (reported in The New Statesmanhttp://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/internet/2012/06/dear-internet-why-you-cant-have-anything-nice) have resulted in massive and nasty vandalism of Anita Sarkeesian's page on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Sarkeesian. Gillian
Hi Gillian,
thank you for this information
do you have any suggesting as a positive action that members of this list might take, in this case as well as generally?
open for suggestions, Claudia
On Wed, 13 Jun 2012 14:33:38 +1000, Gillian White wrote
Hi All, The Community is aware of this and is discussing it. However, it's worthwhile bringing to the attention of this list that one woman's efforts at studying gender stereotyping (reported in The New Statesmanhttp://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/internet/2012/06/dear-internet- why-you-cant-have-anything-nice) have resulted in massive and nasty vandalism of Anita Sarkeesian's page on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Sarkeesian. Gillian
thanks & cheers, Claudia koltzenburg@w4w.net
Well, I've taken a look at the history and have identified "BLP" violations going back to October 2011; as such, I've extended the existing semi-protection for a full year. Some extensive cleanup has already taken place, as well as some useful article expansion.
Risker/Anne
On 13 June 2012 02:04, koltzenburg@w4w.net wrote:
Hi Gillian,
thank you for this information
do you have any suggesting as a positive action that members of this list might take, in this case as well as generally?
open for suggestions, Claudia
On Wed, 13 Jun 2012 14:33:38 +1000, Gillian White wrote
Hi All, The Community is aware of this and is discussing it. However, it's worthwhile bringing to the attention of this list that one woman's
efforts
at studying gender stereotyping (reported in The New Statesman<
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/internet/2012/06/dear-internet-
why-you-cant-have-anything-nice>) have resulted in massive and nasty vandalism of Anita Sarkeesian's page on Wikipedia <
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Sarkeesian%3E.
Gillian
thanks & cheers, Claudia koltzenburg@w4w.net
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
I've had a look at the article, and I can't believe that this hasn't yet undergone AfD.
As it says on the talk page, being a feminist and having a blog and youtube channel doesn't make one notable.
There are no reliable sources in the article which discuss Sarkeesian in-depth -- there is an interview on a blog, but this can't be used to base notability on.
As it stands now, Anita (who is hardly notable) had the misfortune to meet some trolls on the internet (welcome to Internet peoples), and now she is basically notable, because her un-notable Wikipedia biography was trolled with a pr0n imagem, and someone reported on it.
Anyone wishing to get their bio onto WP should use this case as an example of how to go about it.
The article should be at AfD, because as it stands now, it is everything that WP is not.
Russavia
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 8:56 PM, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I've taken a look at the history and have identified "BLP" violations going back to October 2011; as such, I've extended the existing semi-protection for a full year. Some extensive cleanup has already taken place, as well as some useful article expansion.
Risker/Anne
On 13 June 2012 02:04, koltzenburg@w4w.net wrote:
Hi Gillian,
thank you for this information
do you have any suggesting as a positive action that members of this list might take, in this case as well as generally?
open for suggestions, Claudia
On Wed, 13 Jun 2012 14:33:38 +1000, Gillian White wrote
Hi All, The Community is aware of this and is discussing it. However, it's worthwhile bringing to the attention of this list that one woman's efforts at studying gender stereotyping (reported in The New
Statesmanhttp://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/internet/2012/06/dear-internet- why-you-cant-have-anything-nice) have resulted in massive and nasty vandalism of Anita Sarkeesian's page on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Sarkeesian. Gillian
thanks & cheers, Claudia koltzenburg@w4w.net
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
I agree that notoriety, as opposed to notability, is not a good precedent for Wikipedia, whether the subject is man or woman.
Gillian
On 13 June 2012 23:11, Russavia russavia.wikipedia@gmail.com wrote:
I've had a look at the article, and I can't believe that this hasn't yet undergone AfD.
As it says on the talk page, being a feminist and having a blog and youtube channel doesn't make one notable.
There are no reliable sources in the article which discuss Sarkeesian in-depth -- there is an interview on a blog, but this can't be used to base notability on.
As it stands now, Anita (who is hardly notable) had the misfortune to meet some trolls on the internet (welcome to Internet peoples), and now she is basically notable, because her un-notable Wikipedia biography was trolled with a pr0n imagem, and someone reported on it.
Anyone wishing to get their bio onto WP should use this case as an example of how to go about it.
The article should be at AfD, because as it stands now, it is everything that WP is not.
Russavia
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 8:56 PM, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I've taken a look at the history and have identified "BLP"
violations
going back to October 2011; as such, I've extended the existing semi-protection for a full year. Some extensive cleanup has already
taken
place, as well as some useful article expansion.
Risker/Anne
On 13 June 2012 02:04, koltzenburg@w4w.net wrote:
Hi Gillian,
thank you for this information
do you have any suggesting as a positive action that members of this
list
might take, in this case as well as generally?
open for suggestions, Claudia
On Wed, 13 Jun 2012 14:33:38 +1000, Gillian White wrote
Hi All, The Community is aware of this and is discussing it. However, it's worthwhile bringing to the attention of this list that one woman's efforts at studying gender stereotyping (reported in The New
Statesman<
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/internet/2012/06/dear-internet-
why-you-cant-have-anything-nice>) have resulted in massive and nasty vandalism of Anita Sarkeesian's page on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Sarkeesian. Gillian
thanks & cheers, Claudia koltzenburg@w4w.net
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
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
The article underwent AfD and has been kept. It was a Snow Keep.
Sarkeesian wrote about her experience here: http://www.feministfrequency.com/2012/06/harassment-and-misogyny-via-wikiped...
Andreas
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 2:08 AM, Gillian White whiteghost.ink@gmail.comwrote:
I agree that notoriety, as opposed to notability, is not a good precedent for Wikipedia, whether the subject is man or woman.
Gillian
On 13 June 2012 23:11, Russavia russavia.wikipedia@gmail.com wrote:
I've had a look at the article, and I can't believe that this hasn't yet undergone AfD.
As it says on the talk page, being a feminist and having a blog and youtube channel doesn't make one notable.
There are no reliable sources in the article which discuss Sarkeesian in-depth -- there is an interview on a blog, but this can't be used to base notability on.
As it stands now, Anita (who is hardly notable) had the misfortune to meet some trolls on the internet (welcome to Internet peoples), and now she is basically notable, because her un-notable Wikipedia biography was trolled with a pr0n imagem, and someone reported on it.
Anyone wishing to get their bio onto WP should use this case as an example of how to go about it.
The article should be at AfD, because as it stands now, it is everything that WP is not.
Russavia
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 8:56 PM, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I've taken a look at the history and have identified "BLP"
violations
going back to October 2011; as such, I've extended the existing semi-protection for a full year. Some extensive cleanup has already
taken
place, as well as some useful article expansion.
Risker/Anne
On 13 June 2012 02:04, koltzenburg@w4w.net wrote:
Hi Gillian,
thank you for this information
do you have any suggesting as a positive action that members of this
list
might take, in this case as well as generally?
open for suggestions, Claudia
On Wed, 13 Jun 2012 14:33:38 +1000, Gillian White wrote
Hi All, The Community is aware of this and is discussing it. However, it's worthwhile bringing to the attention of this list that one woman's efforts at studying gender stereotyping (reported in The New
Statesman<
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/internet/2012/06/dear-internet-
why-you-cant-have-anything-nice>) have resulted in massive and nasty vandalism of Anita Sarkeesian's page on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Sarkeesian. Gillian
thanks & cheers, Claudia koltzenburg@w4w.net
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
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
I wouldn't call that an AFD
It was open for an entire hour and a half.
Yeah it sucks she met trolls on the internet -- god knows this isn't something new for Wikipedia -- but she just isn't notable.
In fact, this is now setting a precedent that any blogger who has been interviewed by another blogger can get their own article.
That's not good.
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 3:45 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen466@gmail.com wrote:
The article underwent AfD and has been kept. It was a Snow Keep.
Sarkeesian wrote about her experience here: http://www.feministfrequency.com/2012/06/harassment-and-misogyny-via-wikiped...
Andreas
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 2:08 AM, Gillian White whiteghost.ink@gmail.com wrote:
I agree that notoriety, as opposed to notability, is not a good precedent for Wikipedia, whether the subject is man or woman.
Gillian
On 13 June 2012 23:11, Russavia russavia.wikipedia@gmail.com wrote:
I've had a look at the article, and I can't believe that this hasn't yet undergone AfD.
As it says on the talk page, being a feminist and having a blog and youtube channel doesn't make one notable.
There are no reliable sources in the article which discuss Sarkeesian in-depth -- there is an interview on a blog, but this can't be used to base notability on.
As it stands now, Anita (who is hardly notable) had the misfortune to meet some trolls on the internet (welcome to Internet peoples), and now she is basically notable, because her un-notable Wikipedia biography was trolled with a pr0n imagem, and someone reported on it.
Anyone wishing to get their bio onto WP should use this case as an example of how to go about it.
The article should be at AfD, because as it stands now, it is everything that WP is not.
Russavia
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 8:56 PM, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I've taken a look at the history and have identified "BLP" violations going back to October 2011; as such, I've extended the existing semi-protection for a full year. Some extensive cleanup has already taken place, as well as some useful article expansion.
Risker/Anne
On 13 June 2012 02:04, koltzenburg@w4w.net wrote:
Hi Gillian,
thank you for this information
do you have any suggesting as a positive action that members of this list might take, in this case as well as generally?
open for suggestions, Claudia
On Wed, 13 Jun 2012 14:33:38 +1000, Gillian White wrote
Hi All, The Community is aware of this and is discussing it. However, it's worthwhile bringing to the attention of this list that one woman's efforts at studying gender stereotyping (reported in The New
Statesmanhttp://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/internet/2012/06/dear-internet- why-you-cant-have-anything-nice) have resulted in massive and nasty vandalism of Anita Sarkeesian's page on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Sarkeesian. Gillian
thanks & cheers, Claudia koltzenburg@w4w.net
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
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
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
I do have to say - it is a challenge explaining to people "You're not notable just because you're a popular blogger." Even if you beat people over the head with notability guidelines articles still crop up.
Perhaps we need to draft a list on Wiki of "notable bloggers" =)
Sarah
On 6/15/12 1:07 PM, Russavia wrote:
I wouldn't call that an AFD
It was open for an entire hour and a half.
Yeah it sucks she met trolls on the internet -- god knows this isn't something new for Wikipedia -- but she just isn't notable.
In fact, this is now setting a precedent that any blogger who has been interviewed by another blogger can get their own article.
That's not good.
Russavia,
I'm not sure much will be accomplished discussing notability or lack thereof on a mailing list.
I opened a section on the bio's talk page called "Notability" a couple days ago, and I haven't seen anybody start to develop a policy-based argument that she doesn't meet the notability threshold. If you feel strongly about it, I think participating in that discussion would be the best way to move forward. (Or you could skip that and just nominate the article for AfD again if you feel the previous nomination was insufficient.)
But notability is defined by the kind of third party coverage an individual (or topic) receives. The reason for them getting that coverage isn't generally considered relevant to determining notability. In this case, it seems she is clearly past the notability bar; but again, if you disagree, please do say so on wiki and outline your reasons.
-Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]]
On Jun 15, 2012, at 1:07 PM, Russavia wrote:
I wouldn't call that an AFD
It was open for an entire hour and a half.
Yeah it sucks she met trolls on the internet -- god knows this isn't something new for Wikipedia -- but she just isn't notable.
In fact, this is now setting a precedent that any blogger who has been interviewed by another blogger can get their own article.
That's not good.
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 3:45 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen466@gmail.com wrote:
The article underwent AfD and has been kept. It was a Snow Keep.
Sarkeesian wrote about her experience here: http://www.feministfrequency.com/2012/06/harassment-and-misogyny-via-wikiped...
Andreas
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 2:08 AM, Gillian White whiteghost.ink@gmail.com wrote:
I agree that notoriety, as opposed to notability, is not a good precedent for Wikipedia, whether the subject is man or woman.
Gillian
On 13 June 2012 23:11, Russavia russavia.wikipedia@gmail.com wrote:
I've had a look at the article, and I can't believe that this hasn't yet undergone AfD.
As it says on the talk page, being a feminist and having a blog and youtube channel doesn't make one notable.
There are no reliable sources in the article which discuss Sarkeesian in-depth -- there is an interview on a blog, but this can't be used to base notability on.
As it stands now, Anita (who is hardly notable) had the misfortune to meet some trolls on the internet (welcome to Internet peoples), and now she is basically notable, because her un-notable Wikipedia biography was trolled with a pr0n imagem, and someone reported on it.
Anyone wishing to get their bio onto WP should use this case as an example of how to go about it.
The article should be at AfD, because as it stands now, it is everything that WP is not.
Russavia
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 8:56 PM, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I've taken a look at the history and have identified "BLP" violations going back to October 2011; as such, I've extended the existing semi-protection for a full year. Some extensive cleanup has already taken place, as well as some useful article expansion.
Risker/Anne
On 13 June 2012 02:04, koltzenburg@w4w.net wrote:
Hi Gillian,
thank you for this information
do you have any suggesting as a positive action that members of this list might take, in this case as well as generally?
open for suggestions, Claudia
On Wed, 13 Jun 2012 14:33:38 +1000, Gillian White wrote > Hi All, > The Community is aware of this and is discussing it. However, it's > worthwhile bringing to the attention of this list that one woman's > efforts > at studying gender stereotyping (reported in The New > > > Statesmanhttp://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/internet/2012/06/dear-internet- why-you-cant-have-anything-nice>) have resulted in massive and nasty > vandalism of Anita Sarkeesian's page on Wikipedia > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Sarkeesian. > Gillian
thanks & cheers, Claudia koltzenburg@w4w.net
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
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
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
Pete Forsyth peteforsyth@gmail.com 503-383-9454 mobile
Meh; she's marginally notable - if this wasn't a pressure topic then it would probably be easy to delete (there are reams of bloggers you could dig up comparable sourcing for, none of especial notability). Very little of biographical detail exists about here; i.e. to make writing a *biography* worthwhile (but I've always thought we have way to low standards for this).
There is a good argument that, rather than give the poor woman a biography for people to attack, we should wait for the video to come out and cover it all then.
Tom
On 15 June 2012 23:02, Pete Forsyth peteforsyth@gmail.com wrote:
Russavia,
I'm not sure much will be accomplished discussing notability or lack thereof on a mailing list.
I opened a section on the bio's talk page called "Notability" a couple days ago, and I haven't seen anybody start to develop a policy-based argument that she doesn't meet the notability threshold. If you feel strongly about it, I think participating in that discussion would be the best way to move forward. (Or you could skip that and just nominate the article for AfD again if you feel the previous nomination was insufficient.)
But notability is defined by the kind of third party coverage an individual (or topic) receives. The reason for them getting that coverage isn't generally considered relevant to determining notability. In this case, it seems she is clearly past the notability bar; but again, if you disagree, please do say so on wiki and outline your reasons.
-Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]]
On Jun 15, 2012, at 1:07 PM, Russavia wrote:
I wouldn't call that an AFD
It was open for an entire hour and a half.
Yeah it sucks she met trolls on the internet -- god knows this isn't something new for Wikipedia -- but she just isn't notable.
In fact, this is now setting a precedent that any blogger who has been interviewed by another blogger can get their own article.
That's not good.
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 3:45 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen466@gmail.com
wrote:
The article underwent AfD and has been kept. It was a Snow Keep.
Sarkeesian wrote about her experience here:
http://www.feministfrequency.com/2012/06/harassment-and-misogyny-via-wikiped...
Andreas
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 2:08 AM, Gillian White <
whiteghost.ink@gmail.com>
wrote:
I agree that notoriety, as opposed to notability, is not a good
precedent
for Wikipedia, whether the subject is man or woman.
Gillian
On 13 June 2012 23:11, Russavia russavia.wikipedia@gmail.com wrote:
I've had a look at the article, and I can't believe that this hasn't yet undergone AfD.
As it says on the talk page, being a feminist and having a blog and youtube channel doesn't make one notable.
There are no reliable sources in the article which discuss Sarkeesian in-depth -- there is an interview on a blog, but this can't be used to base notability on.
As it stands now, Anita (who is hardly notable) had the misfortune to meet some trolls on the internet (welcome to Internet peoples), and now she is basically notable, because her un-notable Wikipedia biography was trolled with a pr0n imagem, and someone reported on it.
Anyone wishing to get their bio onto WP should use this case as an example of how to go about it.
The article should be at AfD, because as it stands now, it is everything that WP is not.
Russavia
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 8:56 PM, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I've taken a look at the history and have identified "BLP" violations going back to October 2011; as such, I've extended the existing semi-protection for a full year. Some extensive cleanup has already taken place, as well as some useful article expansion.
Risker/Anne
On 13 June 2012 02:04, koltzenburg@w4w.net wrote: > > Hi Gillian, > > thank you for this information > > do you have any suggesting as a positive action that members of this > list > might take, in this case as well as > generally? > > open for suggestions, > Claudia > > On Wed, 13 Jun 2012 14:33:38 +1000, Gillian White wrote >> Hi All, >> The Community is aware of this and is discussing it. However, it's >> worthwhile bringing to the attention of this list that one woman's >> efforts >> at studying gender stereotyping (reported in The New >> >> >> Statesman<
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/internet/2012/06/dear-internet-
>> why-you-cant-have-anything-nice>) have resulted in massive and
nasty
>> vandalism of Anita Sarkeesian's page on Wikipedia >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Sarkeesian. >> Gillian > > > thanks & cheers, > Claudia > koltzenburg@w4w.net > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
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
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
Pete Forsyth peteforsyth@gmail.com 503-383-9454 mobile
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
This case presents a good argument for flagged revisions. Given that the people who made these edits weren't logged in, none of their additions and changes would have been visible to the public.
Andreas
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 7:04 AM, koltzenburg@w4w.net wrote:
Hi Gillian,
thank you for this information
do you have any suggesting as a positive action that members of this list might take, in this case as well as generally?
open for suggestions, Claudia
On Wed, 13 Jun 2012 14:33:38 +1000, Gillian White wrote
Hi All, The Community is aware of this and is discussing it. However, it's worthwhile bringing to the attention of this list that one woman's
efforts
at studying gender stereotyping (reported in The New Statesman<
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/internet/2012/06/dear-internet-
why-you-cant-have-anything-nice>) have resulted in massive and nasty vandalism of Anita Sarkeesian's page on Wikipedia <
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Sarkeesian%3E.
Gillian
thanks & cheers, Claudia koltzenburg@w4w.net
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
I'm not so sure. As soon as the incident was noted, the article was semi-protected, which solved the problem.
Perhaps you are suggesting flagged revisions for *all* biographies of living persons (BLPs), by default?
-Pete
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen466@gmail.com wrote:
This case presents a good argument for flagged revisions. Given that the people who made these edits weren't logged in, none of their additions and changes would have been visible to the public.
Andreas
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 7:04 AM, koltzenburg@w4w.net wrote:
Hi Gillian,
thank you for this information
do you have any suggesting as a positive action that members of this list might take, in this case as well as generally?
open for suggestions, Claudia
On Wed, 13 Jun 2012 14:33:38 +1000, Gillian White wrote
Hi All, The Community is aware of this and is discussing it. However, it's worthwhile bringing to the attention of this list that one woman's efforts at studying gender stereotyping (reported in The New
Statesmanhttp://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/internet/2012/06/dear-internet- why-you-cant-have-anything-nice) have resulted in massive and nasty vandalism of Anita Sarkeesian's page on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Sarkeesian. Gillian
thanks & cheers, Claudia koltzenburg@w4w.net
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 Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 9:00 PM, Pete Forsyth peteforsyth@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not so sure. As soon as the incident was noted, the article was semi-protected, which solved the problem.
Perhaps you are suggesting flagged revisions for *all* biographies of living persons (BLPs), by default?
Indeed I am. Sorry for not making that clearer.
Note by the way that some of the vandalism was quite clueful. Adding a Nazi stub template? That wasn't a random forum poster, but someone who knew their way around Wikipedia.
Andreas
It also gives a good argument for admins actually applying semi-protection properly. BLPs under attack should always have a LONG semi-protection that can be shortened if it is determined the risk is abated. I was fairly flabbergasted to see a very brief SP applied when it was obvious there was a serious external campaign happening.
Risker/Anne
On 15 June 2012 15:54, Andreas Kolbe jayen466@gmail.com wrote:
This case presents a good argument for flagged revisions. Given that the people who made these edits weren't logged in, none of their additions and changes would have been visible to the public.
Andreas
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 7:04 AM, koltzenburg@w4w.net wrote:
Hi Gillian,
thank you for this information
do you have any suggesting as a positive action that members of this list might take, in this case as well as generally?
open for suggestions, Claudia
On Wed, 13 Jun 2012 14:33:38 +1000, Gillian White wrote
Hi All, The Community is aware of this and is discussing it. However, it's worthwhile bringing to the attention of this list that one woman's
efforts
at studying gender stereotyping (reported in The New Statesman<
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/internet/2012/06/dear-internet-
why-you-cant-have-anything-nice>) have resulted in massive and nasty vandalism of Anita Sarkeesian's page on Wikipedia <
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Sarkeesian%3E.
Gillian
thanks & cheers, Claudia koltzenburg@w4w.net
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