Hi Migdia,
I suggest, that if you feel there are major issues at hand you visit
- volunteers there
devote a large portion of their Wikipedia work to doing just that: resolving
disputes, advising contributors and advising folks on delicate matters like
this.
While we like to keep an open door to examine situations and experiences
within Wikipedia and related projects here about the gender gap, we can't
quite take the reigns to help undelete content, or make judgement calls on
situations when the details aren't as apparent to uninvolved-parties. You
have been directly involved in this experience, so perhaps you have a
different view and understanding of it than myself, and Dominic, who have
both read your talk page and the deletion and both seemed to be unable to
find anything that jumped out at us...
Also, since you are involved in the film industry, it might be worth it to
take a close read at
- that is the
policy that Wikipedia has regarding notability guidelines and films. It
might help in your further article creations! While there are many great
films out there, including many made by women and Latinos, not every film
merits inclusion in the encyclopedia due to notability. IMDB is a great
resource for films of all levels of notability.
Regardless, welcome to the list, and I hope that dispute resolution can help
you with any concerns you have and that you'll continue to contribute to
Wikipedia in regards to women and film.
Sarah Stierch
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 11:07 PM, Migdia Chinea <migdia.chinea(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
The issues brought forth by "anonymous (street
meat)" are/were social and
gender-based -- the film has been well-received and its reception has
preceded anything on Wikipedia. The page was not written in any
self-promotional mode -- but in an informational mode. I think I stepped on
someone's toes because more than a year go I called attention to "Saturday
Night Special" a short which was extremely laudatory of its director, cast
and crew. I suggested an edit. No one paid attention to it and when they
did, after being on the web for four years or more, it was selective. I
believe that the Wikipedia page on that short (which was, incidentally,
passing itself off as a full length feature without anyone even questioning
it at all, as I certainly didn't know) was written and maintained by
someone close to that person. The deletion was 11th hour because I brought
up issues is selectivity and double-standard -- and I believe that they were
there.
The orange gentleman seems to think that he was polite when he's been
accusing me of self-promotion and lying while ignoring all I had to say over
and over and over again in several different exhausting venues. I pointed
out that films by women are precious few and far between -- films by
Hispanic women even more so -- that in and of itself is noteworthy if anyone
should ever look it up on Wikipedia. The rudeness of that man's remarks are
mean-spirited and I think he was particularly so because I am a woman, but
it's an unnecessary attitude in regards to anyone of any gender. The page
for "Saturday Night Special" was removed without nary a comment. My
comments and their remarks were kept on, I believe, to humiliate me. I have
concluded that this is an exhausting unkind process as evidenced by bullying
as a deterrent. It's no wonder more women do not contribute.
I have an assignment to write.
Thank you and kind regards --
Mig --
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 4:35 PM, <gendergap-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org>wrote;wrote:
> Send Gendergap mailing list submissions to
> gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> gendergap-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> gendergap-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Gendergap digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Women's Voices Women Vote | feminist lobby group wants help
> (Audrey Cormier)
> 2. Women, collective intelligence, and Wikipedia (Pete Forsyth)
> 3. and to contrast...one stop Commons hosiery shopping!
> (Sarah Stierch)
> 4. "anonymous (street meat)" (Migdia Chinea)
> 5. Re: "anonymous (street meat)" (Nathan)
> 6. Re: "anonymous (street meat)" (Michael J. Lowrey)
> 7. Deterrent (Mig)
> 8. Re: Deterrent (Jeremy Baron)
> 9. From Jezebel: "Men?s Rights Fight Breaks Out On Wikipedia"
> (Sarah Stierch)
> 10. Re: "anonymous (street meat)" (Dominic)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 17:57:12 -0400
> From: Audrey Cormier <cormier.home(a)yahoo.ca>
> Subject: [Gendergap] Women's Voices Women Vote | feminist lobby group
> wants help
> To: gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Message-ID: <EC558D9B-4CC3-4B8B-9B8D-09C93ADEEB72(a)yahoo.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> I can add info from the draft to the article (under new title to reflect
> the organization's new name) this evening, if no one else has done it
> already. Will copy edit as well if needed.
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 08:42:18 -0700
> From: Pete Forsyth <peteforsyth(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: [Gendergap] Women, collective intelligence, and Wikipedia
> To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
> <gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <C3A999FC-5154-4225-9B54-8396642CC390(a)gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> Hi all,
>
> Eugene Kim, the consultant who facilitated Wikimedia's amazing five-year
> strategic planning process, has just posted an interesting blog post (with
> his new consulting agency, Groupaya).
>
>
http://groupaya.net/blog/2011/10/do-women-make-groups-smarter/
>
> An excerpt:
>
> > Tom Malone is the director of MIT?s Center for Collective Intelligence.
> A few months ago, he published research with Carnegie Mellon?s Anita Woolley
> suggesting that groups with more women exhibited greater collective
> intelligence. It?s not that women have higher IQs than men. (Individual IQ
> had little correlation with collective intelligence.) It?s that women tend
> to exhibit more social sensitivity than men, and social sensitivity is a
> much stronger contributing factor to group intelligence.
>
> Kim goes on to discuss the implications for Wikipedia, a project that is
> highly collaborative and mostly male. He concludes with the idea that, in
> the interest of pursuing more effective collaboration, Wikipedia would
> benefit from more participation by women.
>
> A good read, I recommend it.
> -Pete
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:20:16 -0400
> From: Sarah Stierch <sarah.stierch(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: [Gendergap] and to contrast...one stop Commons hosiery
> shopping!
> To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
> <gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
> <CAKiGLfqA_RUi9_X8US3c=
> krc34k8XOAmDoh1NAD+6Y_jHt+5KQ(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> While reviewing new content for my scoop.it (
>
http://www.scoop.it/t/women-and-wikimedia), where I posted the recent
> blog
> link that Pete shared..I was suggested this: (safe for work)
>
>
>
http://hosieryadvocate.blogspot.com/2011/10/hosiery-in-wikimedia-sexy-hallo…
>
> The blog writer has an entire set of tags devoted to photographs of women
> in
> hosiery that are found on Wikipedia/Media/Commons.
>
> Here is the blog when the writer praises Commons for it's excellent job at
> categorizing hosiery.
>
>
http://hosieryadvocate.blogspot.com/2011/05/hosiery-in-wikimedia.html
>
> "Wikimedia Commons <http://commons.wikimedia.org/> does a great job of
> finding hosiery photos for you, when you search for hosiery, pantyhose,
> tights and stockings, but there are many photos on the site, that do not
> turn up with those searches. Those photos show up under different
> searches,
> and will do just fine."
>
> -- On a personal note, my first high end retail job, at 18, was working in
> the hosiery department at Nordstroms. I became well aware of the fetish
> around hosiery due to a selected clientele we had. But this gave me quite
> a
> chuckle and brought back "Early retail" memories.
>
> I'm impressed that so many men know so much about women's hosiery on
> Commons, presuming that the majority of categorizers handling that
> department are males....(I could be wrong, but statistically...)
>
> Sarah
>
> --
> GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia <http://www.glamwiki.org>
> Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
>
Art<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch>
> and
> Sarah Stierch Consulting
> *Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising.*
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
>