Hi everyone,
I'm starting a list of media (specifically still photography but with potential for video, as well) which needs improvement or doesn't exist on Commons. Not specifically "women's themes" (we all love to argue what that is), but, media that might involve women (doesn't have to be sexual in nature) or you believe is male-dominated in certain themes and lacks in equal gender representation.
This can include subjects or content like:
- Contemporary female painters - Manicures - Pierced females (they are often either anthropological images or really poor casual/cutesy myspace style snapshots wiped off of Flickr) (for males, too) - Hairstyles - Clothing
Just tossing out ideas. You're welcome to post here to the list or email me directly.
And as always, I encourage you to assist in curating Commons and uploading quality educational content to make it a healthier and better place. The Commons uploader is really great and I think rather cut and dry, but, if I can ever be of any assistance in helping you learn how to use Commons and upload content, just ask.
Right now, I believe there are upwards of only about 3-5 active "open" female contributors to the project, which probably contributes to the unhealthy atmosphere and lack of representational content.
Thanks,
Sarah
Because the two editors calling for deletion may be biased vs. woman pianist's ethnicity, I don't know if this really is an article fit for deletion, especially for those of us who are inclusionists.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Zvart_Sarkissia...
I wasn't sure if should where I should post this here or Wikiproject Feminism. This is one of those times a "Wikiproject Gender gap" might be useful in addition to feminism.
The older I get, the more I get confused by wikipedia policies etc. Don't tell all those 22 year old guys.
Or maybe I'm still not over this darned head cold. That's the ticket! :-)
Carol in dc
* Carol Moore wrote:
Because the two editors calling for deletion may be biased vs. woman pianist's ethnicity, I don't know if this really is an article fit for deletion, especially for those of us who are inclusionists.
Could you explain the difference between people who are biased with respect to other people's ethnicity -- and racists?
On 11/19/2011 10:48 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
- Carol Moore wrote:
Because the two editors calling for deletion may be biased vs. woman pianist's ethnicity, I don't know if this really is an article fit for deletion, especially for those of us who are inclusionists.
Could you explain the difference between people who are biased with respect to other people's ethnicity -- and racists?
All I know is what I read in wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_%28classification_of_humans%29 *"Race* is classification of humans http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human into large and distinct populations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population or groups http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_%28sociology%29 by factors such as heritable phenotypic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenotype characteristics or geographic ancestry, but also often influenced by and correlated with traits such as appearance, culture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture, ethnicity http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnicity, and socio-economic status http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socioeconomic_status. ... Accordingly, the racial paradigms http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigm employed by different kinds of biological or social scientists may vary in their emphasis on biological reduction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_reductionism as contrasted with societal construction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_constructivism...."
So I guess I can be allowed my own incomplete, ambiguous, contradictory and/or muddled views :-)
But maybe the discussion of what is and is not a woman would be more appropriate here :-)
CM in DC
On 19 November 2011 13:06, Carol Moore contactme@carolmoore.net wrote:
Because the two editors calling for deletion may be biased vs. woman pianist's ethnicity, I don't know if this really is an article fit for deletion, especially for those of us who are inclusionists.
I've taken a look at this. I'm not seeing any evidence of bias about either ethnicity or sex; I'm seeing at best a bias against low-quality sourcing in a BLP. That does not mean the subject of the article is not notable; it means that the reference sources provided aren't supporting it terribly well. My suspicion is that there might be better sources in the language spoken where she lives, or possibly in hard-copy vs online sources. Some reviews of her performances rather than just a listing might even be sufficient, but the notability threshold does not appear to have been met with the current sources.
I confess, having been one of the people who's had to deal with some pretty serious problems in BLPs, especially small ones with few devoted watchers, I wonder if Ms. Sarkissian is best served by being mentioned in the articles of her students whose notability is more easily established, rather than in a standalone article. I have to say that I'd expect some stronger sourcing specific to the subject herself rather than mentions of her in the biographies of her students; the theory that "notability isn't inherited" goes in both directions. I can assure you that my grade school piano teacher, who also taught at least three people who went on to become respected professional musicians, is not noteworthy.
Risker/Anne