Hello all -
I'm Monika, longtime reader of this list! I've been following this conversation on
increasing the diversity of Wikipedias contributors with some interest, as well as the
conversation on professional connections on Wikipedia spaces. It seems relevant and
valuable to share with this group details about the project in working on -- and to invite
I'm a WIR for Oclc's 18-month Wikipedia + Libraries project.
This fall the project is running an online training program for up to 500 US public
library staff to learn about engaging Wikipedia in their libraries for their communities.
The curriculum will cover a wide variety of subjects specific to English Wikipedia
(it's history, pillars, community norms, issues of reliability, authority control,
organization and user roles, editing and editorial flow, COI, etc.). Through observations,
exercises, case studies and small assignments, the participants will slowly learn best
practices, then gain strategies to apply what they know about Wikipedia to improve info
literacy in their communities. By the end the goal is to have the participants be
confident that they can engage Wikipedia, understand what they are doing and how it works,
and make a plan for next step in editing and designing programming.
The course will take place on Webjunction, a learning place for libraries that's been
serving 80,000+ library staff globally since 2003. By participating in the nine week
course, US public library staff will earn a certificate and some can apply for continuing
education credits for their participation. As a WebJunction course, the focus will be on
how Wikipedia editing and programming is relevant to library work. Public library staff
participating will see how Wikipedia make sense to them as information professionals and
possibly, give them reasons to make Wikipedia editing and outreach a part of their staff
duties. The curriculum will make suggestions about activities to try at their libraries
and include guest speakers who have edited and done outreach as public library staff.
Given the interest in this thread on helping newcomers, and how that works, I wanted to
share the specifics of this project and I invite folks in this list to participate in the
program as a volunteer guide for one (or more) of the course modules.
When I reading Fluffernutter's story, and Pine's, I was smiling - thank you for
sharing, I completely agree, the times I've felt most encouraged in trying something
new have been when I am genuinely curious and feel comfortable in asking questions -- for
me this has also been in a course environment; a safe learning space is critical to
gaining the confidence to participate in something new. I think it holds for a big project
like Wikipedia, which has many esoteric technical features and so many guides and
For this reason I am interested in recruiting a few thoughtful, helpful editors to join
this program to mentor / guide public library staff. Most of the participants in the nine
week course (Sept 13 - Nov 15; six live online sessions) will be new to editing and the
technical/community aspects of editing. ~77% of public library respondents in the preview
webinar survey said they use Wikipedia weekly but have never edited Wikipedia. 98% said
Wikipedia is relevant to their jobs. They would benefit from meeting and getting help and
support from real human Wikipedians familiar with the social norms and features of the
technical interface. In return, you can learn more about public libraries, what they do,
their services and missions. Public libraries and Wikipedia share many values -- including
commitments to civility and providing free open access to information.
The course will take place on WebJunction's learning platform. To ensure privacy, the
interactive forums are all there. Guiding and mentoring would require about hour or three
for a 2-week module (and you could help out in more than one module). Modules are
(roughly): 1) about Wikipedia, 2) editing 101, 3) Wikipedia and information literacy
programs, 4) Wikipedia and community outreach.
I am glad for the opportunity to share this with the gender gap list, and I hope that if
you are curious you will reach out. I'm actually writing this en-route to Montreal
(first time at Wikimania! Excited! Pls pardon grammar and informality, I'm writing
this on my phone!) and will be presenting the project at 4pm on Thursday and Sunday at
11:00am... feel free to email me directly or attend if you are also coming. also share!
There's also a simple form to fill out if you prefer too
Thanks to the members of this list for your consideration / attention to my email and for
the dynamic conversations over the years on tough-to-solve issues ...
Sent from my mobile phone possibly using voice control, please pardon errors
On Aug 8, 2017, at 5:00 AM,
Send Gendergap mailing list submissions to
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
You can reach the person managing the list at
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Gendergap digest..."
1. Re: FYI - GGTF case appeal (Neotarf)
2. "Selective incivility" (Neotarf)
3. Re: How to increase the diversity of Wikimedia technical
contributors and staff? (Fluffernutter wiki)
4. Re: How to increase the diversity of Wikimedia technical
contributors and staff? (JJ Marr)
5. Re: FYI - GGTF case appeal (Risker)
6. Re: FYI - GGTF case appeal (Neotarf)
7. Re: How to increase the diversity of Wikimedia technical
contributors and staff? (Peter Southwood)
8. Re: FYI - GGTF case appeal (Risker)
9. Re: FYI - GGTF case appeal (Robert Fernandez)
10. Re: FYI - GGTF case appeal (Neotarf)
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 08:21:56 -0400
From: Neotarf <neotarf(a)gmail.com>
To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the
participation of women within Wikimedia projects."
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] FYI - GGTF case appeal
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I have no way of investigating something I was not supposed to find out
about in the first place. Given Wikipedia's culture of retaliation against
anyone who speaks out, I am unlikely to find out more, but it did seem
credible. These agreements are becoming more common, for instance here a
female employee wanted to get out of her non-disparagement agreement but
Angel List said no.
Also the internal Google gender manifesto that was just leaked "Until about
a week ago, you would have heard very little from me publicly about this,
because (as a fairly senior Googler) my job would have been to deal with it
internally, and confidentiality rules would have prevented me from saying
much in public.But as it happens, (although this wasn’t the way I was
planning on announcing it) I actually recently left Google..."
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:16 AM, Risker
On 6 August 2017 at 23:08, Neotarf
Women who do not want to interact on these terms, with individuals who
are quite probably minors, are being silenced. I have heard that
professional women are being recruited for Wikipedia, women whose employers
would ordinarily be expected to protect them from a 'hostile work place',
but they are being required to post their real identities on their talk
pages, along with the names of their employers. and a COI form statement.
They are also required to sign a non-disclosure agreement that prevents
them from revealing any harassment they experience in Wikipedia, or from
even revealing they have been required to sign an NDA. These women will
join Wikipedia, and listen to the pitch and eat the bagels, and Wikipedia
gets to count them as female editors, but very few of them go on to make
that second edit, because it's their professional reputation on the line.
If Wikipedia wants women editors they are going to have to come to terms
This is a very inflammatory thing to say, Neotarf, and I need to
that you show some proof of this. Links to discussions or requirements,
please. This is far too sensationalistic to allow it to sit here without
Gendergap mailing list
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please