*Actually, given that the template was cascade protected by virtue of it being on the main page, only administrators can edit it. You're not an administrator on Commons, but you do have a staff flag. Therefore I'd say that's a staff action.*
That said, changed the picture without any discussion, only because some people don't want to see a half-naked anime girl on Main Page (btw: What is the problem with that picture? I'm a girl, and i'm not AT ALL offended for see that in main page) was a act that NO ONE should do without consensus. Not an adm, not an editor, not a staff.
And do that by abusing the tools WMF and the communitty gave you only made everything even worse.
That said, i restored the original image of the day and would love if you people decide if the picture should stay or not in main page ON COMMONS. _____ *Béria Lima* http://wikimedia.pt/ (351) 925 171 484
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.***
2011/5/16 Aaron Adrignola aaron.adrignola@gmail.com
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 2:13 AM, Neil Kandalgaonkar neilk@wikimedia.orgwrote:
I changed the picture. I'd like to note that I did this not owing to any 'authority' I might have as a WMF employee, just as a regular person associated with Commons.
Actually, given that the template was cascade protected by virtue of it being on the main page, only administrators can edit it. You're not an administrator on Commons, but you do have a staff flag. Therefore I'd say that's a staff action.
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
*Actually, given that the template was cascade protected by virtue of it being on the main page, only administrators can edit it. You're not an administrator on Commons, but you do have a staff flag. Therefore I'd say that's a staff action.*
That said, changed the picture without any discussion, only because some people don't want to see a half-naked anime girl on Main Page (btw: What is the problem with that picture? I'm a girl, and i'm not AT ALL offended for see that in main page) was a act that NO ONE should do without consensus. Not an adm, not an editor, not a staff.
And do that by abusing the tools WMF and the communitty gave you only made everything even worse.
That said, i restored the original image of the day and would love if you people decide if the picture should stay or not in main page ON COMMONS _____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
2011/5/16 Aaron Adrignola aaron.adrignola@gmail.com
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 2:13 AM, Neil Kandalgaonkar neilk@wikimedia.orgwrote:
I changed the picture. I'd like to note that I did this not owing to any 'authority' I might have as a WMF employee, just as a regular person associated with Commons.
Actually, given that the template was cascade protected by virtue of it being on the main page, only administrators can edit it. You're not an administrator on Commons, but you do have a staff flag. Therefore I'd say that's a staff action.
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
--- On Mon, 16/5/11, Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt wrote: From: Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons To: "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Monday, 16 May, 2011, 14:10
That said, changed the picture without any discussion, only because some people don't want to see a half-naked anime girl on Main Page (btw: What is the problem with that picture? I'm a girl, and i'm not AT ALL offended for see that in main page) was a act that NO ONE should do without consensus. Not an adm, not an editor, not a staff.
And do that by abusing the tools WMF and the communitty gave you only made everything even worse.
That said, i restored the original image of the day and would love if you people decide if the picture should stay or not in main page ON COMMONS
I still don't understand what that image that you restored is doing on the main page ofCommons. If I record an original, unpublished post-punk song with my completely non-notable garage band, will you feature that too on the main page, as an educational exampleof post-punk? If not, how is that image different? Does Commons now provide free advertising for up-and-coming artists eager to makea name for themselves? Andreas
In my opinion there's a large and pervasive problem behind today's controversy: in striking contrast to our core value of openness, it is very difficult to even *perceive* how important decisions like this are made. Both the technical and the editorial processes are pretty opaque to the average main page visitor.
I suspect there are ways the Commons pages relating to Picture of the Day could be improved to make it clearer to the reader how decisions are made, and how to meaningfully participate in those processes.
For instance, main page content could have a link named something like "how did this get here?" that would permit the reader to view the discussion that led to its inclusion on the main page. (This is just an off-the-cuff idea, to illustrate the general kind of usability changes I would like to explore.)
To put it another way, the issue behind today's controversy that interests me most is access. Increasing the ability of a large and diverse group to participate in important decisions (like what gets featured on the main Commons page) is something that would both honor the basic values of our project, and (I believe) support better content decisions in the future.
Anybody interested in tackling this issue? -Pete
On 5/16/2011 11:49 AM, Pete Forsyth wrote:
Anybody interested in tackling this issue? -Pete
As we know on this list, inclusiveness is a key to making Wikimedia what it is. I do wish that I could erase the 'your country vs. my country' ideals that are within many of these peoples heads.
I'm working on diving into the HOW-TO this summer for Wiki. I do want to see all of these topics covered - and I'll contribute in anyway I can. Where do we start? ;-)
Side note re: Commons image:
If anyone is interested in contributing to the decisions made about what goes up on the front page of Commons, please visit here, I just found out about this today, and I look forward to contributing:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Featured_picture_candidates
One of the reasons for approving the image of the day was because the featured "fictional" person had "big tits."
#wikilove,
Sarah
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 11:36, Sarah Stierch sarah@sarahstierch.com wrote:
If anyone is interested in contributing to the decisions made about what goes up on the front page of Commons, please visit here, I just found out about this today, and I look forward to contributing:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Featured_picture_candidates
One of the reasons for approving the image of the day was because the featured "fictional" person had "big tits."
The breasts were indeed a factor, and one comment in favour was "i like her big tits".
The old discussion is here -- http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_cand...
Sarah
I was all ready to point out that administrators (at least on en.wiki, theoretically) discount comments like that, but that was *not* done in this case per the closing summary.
Nepenthe
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 12:50 PM, Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 11:36, Sarah Stierch sarah@sarahstierch.comwrote:
If anyone is interested in contributing to the decisions made about what goes up on the front page of Commons, please visit here, I just found out about this today, and I look forward to contributing:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Featured_picture_candidates
One of the reasons for approving the image of the day was because the featured "fictional" person had "big tits."
The breasts were indeed a factor, and one comment in favour was "i like her big tits".
The old discussion is here --
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_cand...
Sarah
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Sarah Stierch sarah@sarahstierch.comwrote:
On 5/16/2011 11:49 AM, Pete Forsyth wrote:
Anybody interested in tackling this issue? -Pete
I'm working on diving into the HOW-TO this summer for Wiki. I do want to see all of these topics covered - and I'll contribute in anyway I can. Where do we start? ;-)
Hi Sarah,
I'd be really happy to work on this with you! (And anyone else).
My sense is that there's a lot of work to do in identifying the problem -- or rather, evaluating the collection of interrelated issues, and determining where it's best to focus. The things that seem significant to me are:
(1) Picture of the Day on Commons often seems to be the source of unnecessary strife (moreso than, say, PotD on English Wikipedia); (2) It appears that there is not a clearly identified set of editorial values around what DOES constitute a worthwhile PotD on Commons; (3) The technical and social processes for setting a PotD are difficult to understand and poorly documented.
How about if we collaborate a bit on documenting how things currently work? I think that process will point the way toward recommending a solution.
I've set up a page for this project, if you're game! http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Peteforsyth/PotD
-Pete
This anime image is not appropriate on the front page. Questions of art, of education, and of publication, all require judgement. Judgement in these matters is normal and necessary and is not of itself something which needs apology. Here are some reasons why I think it is okay to decide NOT to put this picture on the front page. This is not to say that it should be deleted, it is simply not appropriate for the front page – and that does not constitute censorship.
The commonality of discriminatory product placement
Most areas of endeavour exercise care and some discrimination about their products. It's not that they are illegal or censored; it's that they are inappropriate in some places. For example, at a recent exhibition in the Art Gallery of New South Wales, a very explicit drawing was placed at the far end of the exhibition and a sign was placed discreetly to inform members of the public who had to make a choice about whether to view them. In the case of Wikimedia, there might be gory images, for example, of the effect of land-mines which explode in children's faces. They are probably valuable – encyclopedic and even educational – but would they be appropriate on the front page? Their value is not diminished by leaving them in the body of the repository and it is not censorship to make some small efforts necessary to access them.
The woman's body
If you put a large-breasted indigenous naked woman in an image, people would not be commenting on the size of her breasts. They would see them as part of the woman herself, whereas the breasts on which people have commented in this anime are plainly “designed” for service to (some) viewers. In fact, this image's offensiveness to many comes not from the size of the breasts but rather from the whole backbreaking pose of the woman.
Art and education
If this is a form of art, the question is not whether or not you like the breasts (there are lots of breasts in art) but whether the art has its own integrity. That is an aesthetic question, which is why the colour palette is not under challenge as it contributes to the integrity of the image. Commons has criteria for aesthetic quality, but they do not specify or restrict subject matter. However, whether you like this art or any component part of it in any image is irrelevant. Audience approval of the “tits” is only relevant if the image is about titillation. Only if this is the purpose, does the approval of the pose and body parts become relevant.
If the image is not about art but is rather about education, then the subject's body and pose are misleading, as are the clothes and everything else, even the colour palette. Above all, if it is about education, then an argument that its primary purpose to educate about the art form (manga) or the medium (the software) is spurious and disingenuous.
Thanks,
Whiteghost.ink
PS I am a newbie female Åustralian Wikipedian and have been following this list for a while but this is my first contribution to it. I really think this is the wrong sort of image for the front page. Apart from all the other arguments, I think it is likely to deter whole demographics (plural) from contributing to any of the WM projects.
I'd also be interested in contributing-- the BLP experience of last week was incredibly enlightening, and got me thinking about access... having the right key unlocked a wealth of knowledge and aid. How to make that key more widely available, or second nature/common knowledge? I'm hoping to blog about it soon. In any case, I'd like to come at some of the HOW-TO issues in general from that noob perspective.
cheers dz
On May 16, 2011, at 9:23 PM, Pete Forsyth wrote:
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Sarah Stierch sarah@sarahstierch.com wrote: On 5/16/2011 11:49 AM, Pete Forsyth wrote:
Anybody interested in tackling this issue? -Pete
I'm working on diving into the HOW-TO this summer for Wiki. I do want to see all of these topics covered - and I'll contribute in anyway I can. Where do we start? ;-)
Hi Sarah,
I'd be really happy to work on this with you! (And anyone else).
My sense is that there's a lot of work to do in identifying the problem -- or rather, evaluating the collection of interrelated issues, and determining where it's best to focus. The things that seem significant to me are:
(1) Picture of the Day on Commons often seems to be the source of unnecessary strife (moreso than, say, PotD on English Wikipedia); (2) It appears that there is not a clearly identified set of editorial values around what DOES constitute a worthwhile PotD on Commons; (3) The technical and social processes for setting a PotD are difficult to understand and poorly documented.
How about if we collaborate a bit on documenting how things currently work? I think that process will point the way toward recommending a solution.
I've set up a page for this project, if you're game! http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Peteforsyth/PotD
-Pete _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Hi dz,
Great to hear you'd like to be involved. I've been /really/ busy the past few weeks with finishing school, a trip to California, and GLAM related activities (oh and Regional Ambassadorness!) - so I haven't had time to sit down and get my "stuff together" for the HOW-TO. But, I'd love to add you to our HOW-TO gang if you like.
=)
Sarah
On 5/17/2011 8:17 AM, Deanna Zandt wrote:
I'd also be interested in contributing-- the BLP experience of last week was incredibly enlightening, and got me thinking about access... having the right key unlocked a wealth of knowledge and aid. How to make that key more widely available, or second nature/common knowledge? I'm hoping to blog about it soon. In any case, I'd like to come at some of the HOW-TO issues in general from that noob perspective.
cheers dz
On May 16, 2011, at 9:23 PM, Pete Forsyth wrote:
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Sarah Stierch <sarah@sarahstierch.com mailto:sarah@sarahstierch.com> wrote:
On 5/16/2011 11:49 AM, Pete Forsyth wrote:Anybody interested in tackling this issue? -PeteI'm working on diving into the HOW-TO this summer for Wiki. I do want to see all of these topics covered - and I'll contribute in anyway I can. Where do we start? ;-)Hi Sarah,
I'd be really happy to work on this with you! (And anyone else).
My sense is that there's a lot of work to do in identifying the problem -- or rather, evaluating the collection of interrelated issues, and determining where it's best to focus. The things that seem significant to me are:
(1) Picture of the Day on Commons often seems to be the source of unnecessary strife (moreso than, say, PotD on English Wikipedia); (2) It appears that there is not a clearly identified set of editorial values around what DOES constitute a worthwhile PotD on Commons; (3) The technical and social processes for setting a PotD are difficult to understand and poorly documented.
How about if we collaborate a bit on documenting how things currently work? I think that process will point the way toward recommending a solution.
I've set up a page for this project, if you're game! http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Peteforsyth/PotD
-Pete _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org mailto: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
This response here is emblematic of the misogyny and ageism pervading Commons: http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File_talk%3AOn_the_edge_-_fre... Coming up with "stuff old women like" would actually be a good idea, but I don't think thecontributor meant it that way. At this deletion request http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Paleis_lang... I pointed out that the creator of the manga image placed it on a photograph of the Escher museum, making it appear his image appeared there. This is deceptive, and against Commons image guidelines. The only response to the deletion request so far is a Keep. The request to remove featured status from the Edge of the World manga image, startedindependently of our discussions by a Russian Wikipedia editor, is heading for a Keep: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/remova... Here is the original nomination: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:O... The image failed to achieve featured status in German Wikipedia: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Kandidaten_f%C3%BCr_exzellente_Bilder... 7 for, 8 against, which based on objective criteria of artistic and educational merit is still kindto the image. I am thinking of writing a letter to the Commons Village Pump to ask the community to takea long hard look at its basic competence. Sue, any ideas? Andreas
--- On Tue, 17/5/11, Sarah Stierch sarah@sarahstierch.com wrote:
From: Sarah Stierch sarah@sarahstierch.com Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Tuesday, 17 May, 2011, 16:19
Hi dz,
Great to hear you'd like to be involved. I've been really busy the past few weeks with finishing school, a trip to California, and GLAM related activities (oh and Regional Ambassadorness!) - so I haven't had time to sit down and get my "stuff together" for the HOW-TO. But, I'd love to add you to our HOW-TO gang if you like.
=)
Sarah
On 5/17/2011 8:17 AM, Deanna Zandt wrote:
I'd also be interested in contributing-- the BLP experience of last week was incredibly enlightening, and got me thinking about access... having the right key unlocked a wealth of knowledge and aid. How to make that key more widely available, or second nature/common knowledge? I'm hoping to blog about it soon. In any case, I'd like to come at some of the HOW-TO issues in general from that noob perspective.
cheers dz
On May 16, 2011, at 9:23 PM, Pete Forsyth wrote:
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Sarah Stierch sarah@sarahstierch.com wrote:
On 5/16/2011 11:49 AM, Pete Forsyth wrote:
Anybody interested in tackling this issue? -Pete
I'm working on diving into the HOW-TO this summer for Wiki. I do want to see all of these topics covered - and I'll contribute in anyway I can. Where do we start? ;-)
Hi Sarah,
I'd be really happy to work on this with you! (And anyone else).
My sense is that there's a lot of work to do in identifying the problem -- or rather, evaluating the collection of interrelated issues, and determining where it's best to focus. The things that seem significant to me are:
(1) Picture of the Day on Commons often seems to be the source of unnecessary strife (moreso than, say, PotD on English Wikipedia); (2) It appears that there is not a clearly identified set of editorial values around what DOES constitute a worthwhile PotD on Commons; (3) The technical and social processes for setting a PotD are difficult to understand and poorly documented.
How about if we collaborate a bit on documenting how things currently work? I think that process will point the way toward recommending a solution.
I've set up a page for this project, if you're game! http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Peteforsyth/PotD
-Pete
_______________________________________________
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
--
Wikipedia Regional Ambassador, The Nation's Capital
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Art
--
Sarah Stierch Consulting Historical, cultural & artistic research, advising & event planning. ------------------------------------------------------ http://www.sarahstierch.com/
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Andreas,
Again: Stop canvassing your POV!!! This list (and Commons-l) are not for that. That is my last warning _____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt/ (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
2011/5/18 Andreas Kolbe jayen466@yahoo.com
This response here is emblematic of the misogyny and ageism pervading Commons:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File_talk%3AOn_the_edge_-_fre...
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File_talk%3AOn_the_edge_-_free_world_version.jpg&action=historysubmit&diff=54489618&oldid=54483841Coming up with "stuff old women like" would actually be a good idea, but I don't think the contributor meant it that way.
At this deletion request
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Paleis_lang...
I pointed out that the creator of the manga image placed it on a photograph of the Escher museum, making it appear his image appeared there. This is deceptive, and against Commons image guidelines. The only response to the deletion request so far is a Keep.
The request to remove featured status from the Edge of the World manga image, started independently of our discussions by a Russian Wikipedia editor, is heading for a Keep:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/remova...
Here is the original nomination:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:O...
The image failed to achieve featured status in German Wikipedia:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Kandidaten_f%C3%BCr_exzellente_Bilder...
7 for, 8 against, which based on objective criteria of artistic and educational merit is still kind to the image.
I am thinking of writing a letter to the Commons Village Pump to ask the community to take a long hard look at its basic competence.
Sue, any ideas?
Andreas
--- On *Tue, 17/5/11, Sarah Stierch sarah@sarahstierch.com* wrote:
From: Sarah Stierch sarah@sarahstierch.com Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Tuesday, 17 May, 2011, 16:19
Hi dz,
Great to hear you'd like to be involved. I've been *really* busy the past few weeks with finishing school, a trip to California, and GLAM related activities (oh and Regional Ambassadorness!) - so I haven't had time to sit down and get my "stuff together" for the HOW-TO. But, I'd love to add you to our HOW-TO gang if you like.
=)
Sarah
On 5/17/2011 8:17 AM, Deanna Zandt wrote:
I'd also be interested in contributing-- the BLP experience of last week was incredibly enlightening, and got me thinking about access... having the right key unlocked a wealth of knowledge and aid. How to make that key more widely available, or second nature/common knowledge? I'm hoping to blog about it soon. In any case, I'd like to come at some of the HOW-TO issues in general from that noob perspective.
cheers dz
On May 16, 2011, at 9:23 PM, Pete Forsyth wrote:
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Sarah Stierch <sarah@sarahstierch.comhttp://mc/compose?to=sarah@sarahstierch.com
wrote:
On 5/16/2011 11:49 AM, Pete Forsyth wrote:
Anybody interested in tackling this issue? -Pete
I'm working on diving into the HOW-TO this summer for Wiki. I do want to see all of these topics covered - and I'll contribute in anyway I can. Where do we start? ;-)
Hi Sarah,
I'd be really happy to work on this with you! (And anyone else).
My sense is that there's a lot of work to do in identifying the problem -- or rather, evaluating the collection of interrelated issues, and determining where it's best to focus. The things that seem significant to me are:
(1) Picture of the Day on Commons often seems to be the source of unnecessary strife (moreso than, say, PotD on English Wikipedia); (2) It appears that there is not a clearly identified set of editorial values around what DOES constitute a worthwhile PotD on Commons; (3) The technical and social processes for setting a PotD are difficult to understand and poorly documented.
How about if we collaborate a bit on documenting how things currently work? I think that process will point the way toward recommending a solution.
I've set up a page for this project, if you're game! http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Peteforsyth/PotD
-Pete _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.orghttp://mc/compose?to=Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing listGendergap@lists.wikimedia.org http://mc/compose?to=Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
--
Wikipedia Regional Ambassador, The Nation's Capitalhttp://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Regional_Ambassadors_Current Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch -- Sarah Stierch Consulting Historical, cultural & artistic research, advising & event planning.
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.orghttp://mc/compose?to=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, 18/5/11, Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt wrote: From: Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons To: "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Wednesday, 18 May, 2011, 12:54
Andreas, Again: Stop canvassing your POV!!! This list (and Commons-l) are not for that. That is my last warning
This list was set up to discuss systemic issues in Foundation projects. In the opinion of several contributors here, this specific issue is profoundly symptomatic of the issue this list was set up to discuss. This includes Commons selecting images for featured status on the basis of comments like "I like her big tits", rather than artistic merit, and then featuring them on the main page. Or creating categories like "People using vacuum cleaners". http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:People_using_vacuum_cleaners In my view, it's a basic community competence issue. Andreas
The community is already discussing this matter Andreas.
What you are doing is, since your "vote" is not going the way you want (the picture, apparentely, will remain as a FP) you are canvassing votes here, so people can go there are vote to delist the image.
That, my dear, is pure canvass, and is not allowed in any project.
So, again, stop do that. _____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt/ (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
2011/5/18 Andreas Kolbe jayen466@yahoo.com
--- On *Wed, 18/5/11, Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt* wrote:
From: Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons To: "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" < gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org> Date: Wednesday, 18 May, 2011, 12:54
Andreas,
Again: Stop canvassing your POV!!! This list (and Commons-l) are not for that. That is my last warning
This list was set up to discuss systemic issues in Foundation projects. In the opinion of several contributors here, this specific issue is profoundly symptomatic of the issue this list was set up to discuss.
This includes Commons selecting images for featured status on the basis of comments like "I like her big tits", rather than artistic merit, and then featuring them on the main page. Or creating categories like "People using vacuum cleaners".
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:People_using_vacuum_cleaners
In my view, it's a basic community competence issue.
Andreas
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
--- On Wed, 18/5/11, Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt wrote:From: Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons To: "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Wednesday, 18 May, 2011, 14:19
The community is already discussing this matter Andreas. What you are doing is, since your "vote" is not going the way you want (the picture, apparentely, will remain as a FP) you are canvassing votes here, so people can go there are vote to delist the image.
That, my dear, is pure canvass, and is not allowed in any project. So, again, stop do that.
Dear Beria, You would have a leg to stand on if anyone, at all, who had read my posts on this or any other mailing list, had voted in my favour in these communitydiscussions. I am not aware that anyone has. Of the 5 people who have voted to delist,I do not recognise a single name from the mailing lists. And I believe ifanyone here had decided to vote, they would be experienced enough, andhave enough integrity, to disclose along with their vote that they becameaware of the discussion through a mailing list post. Further: If list members had commented, which they have not, and the vote were goingagainst you, which it is not, you would be well within your rights to contest the result, and ask the community to look into any undue effect mailing listdiscussions may have had on the discussion. However, nothing like this hashappened. As it is, you are out of line to threaten me on my Commons user page for participating in discussions on this list. Regards,Andreas
I'm only warning a commons user that canvassing is not accepted. And since you need to be warned on wiki, i did that. And btw, you don't recognize any name, but I do (i will not mention here because that would be rude to then)
So, again, you will stop that idiot crusade against this picture and we can move on to discuss the original propose of that list, or we will need to change that to the Adm noticeboard in commons? _____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt/ (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
2011/5/18 Andreas Kolbe jayen466@yahoo.com
--- On *Wed, 18/5/11, Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt* wrote:
From: Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons To: "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" < gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org> Date: Wednesday, 18 May, 2011, 14:19
The community is already discussing this matter Andreas.
What you are doing is, since your "vote" is not going the way you want (the picture, apparentely, will remain as a FP) you are canvassing votes here, so people can go there are vote to delist the image.
That, my dear, is pure canvass, and is not allowed in any project.
So, again, stop do that.
Dear Beria,
You would have a leg to stand on if anyone, at all, who had read my posts on this or any other mailing list, had voted in my favour in these community discussions.
I am not aware that anyone has. Of the 5 people who have voted to delist, I do not recognise a single name from the mailing lists. And I believe if anyone here had decided to vote, they would be experienced enough, and have enough integrity, to disclose along with their vote that they became aware of the discussion through a mailing list post.
Further:
If list members had commented, which they have not, and the vote were going against you, which it is not, you would be well within your rights to contest the result, and ask the community to look into any undue effect mailing list discussions may have had on the discussion. However, nothing like this has happened.
As it is, you are out of line to threaten me on my Commons user page for participating in discussions on this list.
Regards, Andreas
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
--- On Wed, 18/5/11, Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt wrote: From: Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons To: "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Wednesday, 18 May, 2011, 12:54
Andreas, Again: Stop canvassing your POV!!! This list (and Commons-l) are not for that. That is my last warning
This list was set up to discuss systemic issues in Foundation projects. In the opinion of several contributors here, this specific issue is profoundly symptomatic of the issue this list was set up to discuss.
I doubt women generally support censorship or benefit from it.
This includes Commons selecting images for featured status on the basis of comments like "I like her big tits", rather than artistic merit, and then featuring them on the main page.
You've been informed several times that such remarks are discounted when discussions are evaluated.
Fred
Fred, as I've already noted, the offending comment was apparently *not*eliminated from the final tally of the votes made by George Chernilevsky, though omitting it would not have changed the outcome of the vote.
Nepenthe
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 8:23 AM, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
--- On Wed, 18/5/11, Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt wrote: From: Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons To: "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Wednesday, 18 May, 2011, 12:54
Andreas, Again: Stop canvassing your POV!!! This list (and Commons-l) are not for that. That is my last warning
This list was set up to discuss systemic issues in Foundation projects. In the opinion of several contributors here, this specific issue is profoundly symptomatic of the issue this list was set up to discuss.
I doubt women generally support censorship or benefit from it.
This includes Commons selecting images for featured status on the basis of comments like "I like her big tits", rather than artistic merit, and then featuring them on the main page.
You've been informed several times that such remarks are discounted when discussions are evaluated.
Fred
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Fred, as I've already noted, the offending comment was apparently *not*eliminated from the final tally of the votes made by George Chernilevsky, though omitting it would not have changed the outcome of the vote.
Nepenthe
It should not have been considered. That is our standard practice with inane "reasons".
In the background is the question of whether something should have been "done". What would be appropriate? A private note, a note on the users talk page? A warning? Removal of the remark from the discussion? Deletion of the edit? Suppression of the edit? Perhaps a discussion of the remark at the Village Pump on Commons?
We do have a deletion reason WP:RD2
Grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive material that has little/no encyclopedic or project value and/or violates our Biographies of living people policy. This includes slurs, smears, and grossly offensive material of little or no encyclopedic value, but not mere factual statements, and not "ordinary" incivility, personal attacks or conduct accusations. When attack pages or pages with grossly improper titles are deleted, the page names may also be removed from the delete and page move logs.
I think this falls within "ordinary incivility", but someone might have a different opinion.
Fred
--- On Wed, 18/5/11, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
From: Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons To: "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Wednesday, 18 May, 2011, 14:23
--- On Wed, 18/5/11, Béria Lima
beria.lima@wikimedia.pt wrote:
From: Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the
Day on Wikimedia
Commons To: "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia
projects"
gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Wednesday, 18 May, 2011, 12:54
This list was set up to discuss systemic issues in
Foundation projects.
In the opinion of several contributors here, this
specific issue is
profoundly symptomatic of the issue this list was set
up to discuss.
I doubt women generally support censorship or benefit from it.
Could we agree that a decision not to feature a medicore and non-notable piece of original art that offers no or little educational value is _not_ censorhip?
And could we agree that featuring a medicore and non-notable piece of original art that offers no or little educational value, just because it has tits in it, is questionable?
This includes Commons selecting images for featured
status on the basis
of comments like "I like her big tits", rather than
artistic merit, and
then featuring them on the main page.
You've been informed several times that such remarks are discounted when discussions are evaluated.
You have been informed several times that the comment was not discounted.
Those who supported featured status for the image explained their reasons as follows:
1. Support. Kawaii :) (Japanese for "cute" or "charming")
2. Support I like it. Well it's manga so the colors or landscape do not have to make sense ;-)
3. Support
4. Support Superb work
5. Support i like her big tits :-)
6. Support i know that it was very much of work for the user. i have seen the first lines of it and can see now the result: a wunderful work.
7. Support - very good work.
8. strong Support I have seen this work evolve and it is brilliant. Keep up the good work niabot!
The end result was 8 support, 2 oppose, 2 neutral => featured.
Discussion here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:O...
Personally, I found those who commented or opposed a bit more articulate than those who supported in that discussion.
Andreas
Could we agree that a decision not to feature a medicore and non-notable piece of original art that offers no or little educational value is _not_ censorhip?
And could we agree that featuring a medicore and non-notable piece of original art that offers no or little educational value, just because it has tits in it, is questionable?
No, the image had political content, read policy for Commons, as an allegory of Liberty. Bare breasts, although usually somewhat smaller breasts, are standard in images of Liberty, at least French, or European ones, see File:1672 Gérard de Lairesse - Allegory of the Freedom of Trade.jpg
You keep saying, "just because it has tits in it". That is specious. See the author's note on the description of the image, "Author: Niabot, because commons should stay free
Fred
--- On Wed, 18/5/11, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
From: Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons To: "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Wednesday, 18 May, 2011, 15:23
No, the image had political content, read policy for Commons, as an allegory of Liberty. Bare breasts, although usually somewhat smaller breasts, are standard in images of Liberty, at least French, or European ones, see File:1672 Gérard de Lairesse - Allegory of the Freedom of Trade.jpg
I am sure the editor who said "I like her big tits" had that political message in mind.
You keep saying, "just because it has tits in it". That is specious. See the author's note on the description of the image, "Author: Niabot, because commons should stay free“
I have honestly not seen Niabot claim that he was trying to riff on traditional bare-breasted representations of Liberty. The only person I have seen make that claim is you. Even if true, the question is whether the artistic, historic and educational merit of this particular riff on the Liberty figure warrant featuring this image. In my opinion, they do not, and I honestly suspect any of these concerns were way over the heads of those who voted for it.
Niabot has a recent habit of signing his images with a political tag line. The same "because commons should stay free" tag line is present in this close-up of the cat in the image:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:On_the_edge_-_free_world_version_(kit...
Here (*deservedly* a featured picture by him), he says: “Niabot, because wikimedia commons lost his roots”.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Anime_Girl.png
Personally I disagree with the statement, as the roots of Commons are not manga, or sites like DeviantArt, but in this case the image is deservedly featured.
The same "commons has lost its roots" tag line is also on these images:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dojikko.png http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Futanari.png
I don't think the author's tag line affects image quality one way or the other.
Andreas
I am sure the editor who said "I like her big tits" had that political message in mind.
Andreas
OK, Einstein, what is the psychological significance of a bare-breasted Liberty, as opposed to a modestly draped Liberty? It IS a revolutionary symbol.
Fred
--- On Wed, 18/5/11, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
From: Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net
I am sure the editor who said "I like her big tits"
had that political
message in mind.
Andreas
OK, Einstein, what is the psychological significance of a bare-breasted Liberty, as opposed to a modestly draped Liberty? It IS a revolutionary symbol.
I am more interested in the psychological significance of the fact that Bunnyfrosch's user talk in German Wikipedia,
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer_Diskussion:Bunnyfrosch
which his Commons talk page redirects to, features multiple contributors (including the editor who wrote the Featured Article on BDSM in German Wikipedia) requesting of him that he should please stop adding links to porn images to German Wikipedia articles.
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer_Diskussion:Bunnyfrosch#Links_auf_Porno...
And more in that vein.
I noticed that when I went to let him know, as a courtesy, that we were discussing his "Support i like her big tits" comment here.
Andreas
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 07:23, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
This includes Commons selecting images for featured status on the basis of comments like "I like her big tits", rather than artistic merit, and then featuring them on the main page.
You've been informed several times that such remarks are discounted when discussions are evaluated.
How do you know the comments were discounted, Fred? And that's not really the point anyway. The comments were made. People felt it was okay to make them. That's the culture we're trying to change.
Sarah
In this case, Sarah, change the policy of what should be in Main Page, or change the Sexual policy (in discussion by the way).
Create a cruzade against that image would not change anything. And btw, take political, ideological or any other kind of ideas from a 5 words phrase requires much imagination. Is not better ask the person what he meant by that? _____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt/ (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
2011/5/18 Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 07:23, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.netwrote:
This includes Commons selecting images for featured status on the basis of comments like "I like her big tits", rather than artistic merit, and then featuring them on the main page.
You've been informed several times that such remarks are discounted when discussions are evaluated.
How do you know the comments were discounted, Fred? And that's not really the point anyway. The comments were made. People felt it was okay to make them. That's the culture we're trying to change.
Sarah
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
In this case, Sarah, change the policy of what should be in Main Page, or change the Sexual policy (in discussion by the way).
*Béria Lima*
So where is that discussion? I found Commons:Sexual content and Help:Sexual content and its talk page. But what we're talking about here is not content, but behavior, a sexist remark. Is that being discussed anywhere?
Fred
not that i know Fred. And behaivor will be very difficult to fill in a policy or guideline. but nothing prevent you from start a discussion about. Be bold ;) _____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt/ (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
2011/5/18 Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net
In this case, Sarah, change the policy of what should be in Main Page, or change the Sexual policy (in discussion by the way).
*Béria Lima*
So where is that discussion? I found Commons:Sexual content and Help:Sexual content and its talk page. But what we're talking about here is not content, but behavior, a sexist remark. Is that being discussed anywhere?
Fred
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 09:45, Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt wrote:
In this case, Sarah, change the policy of what should be in Main Page, or change the Sexual policy (in discussion by the way).
Create a cruzade against that image would not change anything. And btw, take political, ideological or any other kind of ideas from a 5 words phrase requires much imagination. Is not better ask the person what he meant by that?
Hi Beria,
My point is this: a significant number of women (current and potential editors) don't want to work in a "I like the big tits" atmosphere, whatever was meant by it. Others don't mind. Point is that some *do* mind.
So they are an important five words. Behind them lies a long and sorry tale of sexism and objectification of women, and people thinking it's okay to write and behave that way.
Some of us on this list would like to see that culture change, bit by bit. Hard to know how to do that, and I take your point that it's not going to change by singling out these five words. On the other hand, if not these five words, which words? Change comes in tiny steps, each one perhaps insignificant in itself.
Sarah
My point is this: a significant number of women (current and potential editors) don't want to work in a "I like the big tits" atmosphere, whatever was meant by it. Others don't mind. Point is that some *do* mind.
Sarah
So, was it an inane remark or a symptom of an atmosphere? I'm pretty sure you don't want to see an authoritarian crackdown either. We come down heavy on Wikipedia sometimes, but for much more egregious behavior.
The problem is that such moves don't change culture, in fact, may sometimes facilitate it, if traction can be gained by aggrieved users who feel they are being treated unfairly.
Fred
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:16, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
My point is this: a significant number of women (current and potential editors) don't want to work in a "I like the big tits" atmosphere, whatever was meant by it. Others don't mind. Point is that some *do* mind.
So, was it an inane remark or a symptom of an atmosphere? I'm pretty sure you don't want to see an authoritarian crackdown either. We come down heavy on Wikipedia sometimes, but for much more egregious behavior.
The problem is that such moves don't change culture, in fact, may sometimes facilitate it, if traction can be gained by aggrieved users who feel they are being treated unfairly.
I see it as an inane remark that's symptomatic of the culture, in the sense that the poster thought it appropriate to post it.
Moving away from discussing this image now, to the broader issue, we do see a fair number of comments like that on Wikipedia, and letting them pass without comment simply means they'll never stop.
We had a situation recently where we were discussing a BLP, and part of the content was that the woman had experienced a serious sexual assault. In the course of discussing how to approach it, a couple of remarks were made that tended to downplay what had happened to her, and one person -- in a different section on the talk page -- commented on how attractive she was, and how he wanted to have her babies.
I was so disgusted by this that I felt (and to some extent still feel) that I didn't want to be involved in the project anymore, because why am I wasting my time in that kind of atmosphere? I felt that it said something about me, rather than about them.
I also had to decide whether to say something, or let it lie, and if I did say something, I had to make sure I was polite and circumspect, rather than screaming it from the rooftops, which is what I wanted to do. And it suddenly felt like nothing had changed in the last 40 years, that these remarks still appear, and that women are still made to feel bad if they challenge them. And if we do challenge them, must be extra polite about it. Not make a fuss.
So that felt kind of depressing.
Sarah
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:16, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
My point is this: a significant number of women (current and
potential
editors) don't want to work in a "I like the big tits" atmosphere, whatever was meant by it. Others don't mind. Point is that some *do* mind.
So, was it an inane remark or a symptom of an atmosphere? I'm pretty sure you don't want to see an authoritarian crackdown either. We come down heavy on Wikipedia sometimes, but for much more egregious behavior.
The problem is that such moves don't change culture, in fact, may sometimes facilitate it, if traction can be gained by aggrieved users who feel they are being treated unfairly.
I see it as an inane remark that's symptomatic of the culture, in the sense that the poster thought it appropriate to post it.
Moving away from discussing this image now, to the broader issue, we do see a fair number of comments like that on Wikipedia, and letting them pass without comment simply means they'll never stop.
We had a situation recently where we were discussing a BLP, and part of the content was that the woman had experienced a serious sexual assault. In the course of discussing how to approach it, a couple of remarks were made that tended to downplay what had happened to her, and one person -- in a different section on the talk page -- commented on how attractive she was, and how he wanted to have her babies.
I was so disgusted by this that I felt (and to some extent still feel) that I didn't want to be involved in the project anymore, because why am I wasting my time in that kind of atmosphere? I felt that it said something about me, rather than about them.
I also had to decide whether to say something, or let it lie, and if I did say something, I had to make sure I was polite and circumspect, rather than screaming it from the rooftops, which is what I wanted to do. And it suddenly felt like nothing had changed in the last 40 years, that these remarks still appear, and that women are still made to feel bad if they challenge them. And if we do challenge them, must be extra polite about it. Not make a fuss.
So that felt kind of depressing.
Sarah
Now we're getting down to a serious discussion. The actual horns of the dilemma a Wikipedia administrator is in. In a way being limited to text fails to communicate the immediate expression of disgust that would happen in a face-to-face situation, so there is a failure to communicate feedback effectively. A polite note fails.
Fred
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:37, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
We had a situation recently where we were discussing a BLP, and part of the content was that the woman had experienced a serious sexual assault. In the course of discussing how to approach it, a couple of remarks were made that tended to downplay what had happened to her, and one person -- in a different section on the talk page -- commented on how attractive she was, and how he wanted to have her babies.
I was so disgusted by this that I felt (and to some extent still feel) that I didn't want to be involved in the project anymore, because why am I wasting my time in that kind of atmosphere? I felt that it said something about me, rather than about them.
I also had to decide whether to say something, or let it lie, and if I did say something, I had to make sure I was polite and circumspect, rather than screaming it from the rooftops, which is what I wanted to do. And it suddenly felt like nothing had changed in the last 40 years, that these remarks still appear, and that women are still made to feel bad if they challenge them. And if we do challenge them, must be extra polite about it. Not make a fuss.
So that felt kind of depressing.
Sarah
Now we're getting down to a serious discussion. The actual horns of the dilemma a Wikipedia administrator is in. In a way being limited to text fails to communicate the immediate expression of disgust that would happen in a face-to-face situation, so there is a failure to communicate feedback effectively. A polite note fails.
I did say something in the end, and an uninvolved admin left a note on talk
asking that the remarks cease. And though he meant well, and I was and remain grateful to him for stepping in, he asked that they cease as a matter of courtesy to me. But I didn't want them to stop as a matter of courtesy. I wanted people to recognize that they were politically unacceptable.
Then I had to explain why the remarks were offensive, when what I really wanted was for them to end, and the meta-discussion to end. Eventually it did die down and a couple of other editors stepped in, and one of the earlier ones apologized, so it was okay.
But I would love to find a way to nip this kind of thing in the bud. I've thought of trying to write an essay or a guideline -- but then people will cry censorship, and will want to know what kind of comments are suddenly not permitted, and who is to judge whether they're offensive, and will argue that not all women agree on definitions of sexism anyway. So it felt like too much of an uphill struggle even to begin it.
Sarah
On May 18, 2011, at 12:47 PM, Sarah wrote:
I did say something in the end, and an uninvolved admin left a note on talk asking that the remarks cease. And though he meant well, and I was and remain grateful to him for stepping in, he asked that they cease as a matter of courtesy to me. But I didn't want them to stop as a matter of courtesy. I wanted people to recognize that they were politically unacceptable.
Then I had to explain why the remarks were offensive, when what I really wanted was for them to end, and the meta-discussion to end. Eventually it did die down and a couple of other editors stepped in, and one of the earlier ones apologized, so it was okay.
But I would love to find a way to nip this kind of thing in the bud. I've thought of trying to write an essay or a guideline -- but then people will cry censorship, and will want to know what kind of comments are suddenly not permitted, and who is to judge whether they're offensive, and will argue that not all women agree on definitions of sexism anyway. So it felt like too much of an uphill struggle even to begin it.
This is the struggle of social justice issues on a wider scale, in many ways-- how can we address the -isms of the world in a way that enables processing and change to happen, versus pushing them further underground? In some ways, seeing terrible behavior is the unfortunate and painful reminder that there is work to be done... it's a balancing act that few have been able to pull off in the last couple decades, I feel. In any case, Sarah, I'm with you on this. You explain the challenges and frustrations well, in a way that I think represents how many previously-marginalized voices feel coming into these spaces.
dz
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:52, Deanna Zandt deanna@deannazandt.com wrote:
On May 18, 2011, at 12:47 PM, Sarah wrote:
I did say something in the end, and an uninvolved admin left a note on talk asking that the remarks cease. And though he meant well, and I was and remain grateful to him for stepping in, he asked that they cease as a matter of courtesy to me. But I didn't want them to stop as a matter of courtesy. I wanted people to recognize that they were politically unacceptable.
Then I had to explain why the remarks were offensive, when what I really wanted was for them to end, and the meta-discussion to end. Eventually it did die down and a couple of other editors stepped in, and one of the earlier ones apologized, so it was okay.
But I would love to find a way to nip this kind of thing in the bud. I've thought of trying to write an essay or a guideline -- but then people will cry censorship, and will want to know what kind of comments are suddenly not permitted, and who is to judge whether they're offensive, and will argue that not all women agree on definitions of sexism anyway. So it felt like too much of an uphill struggle even to begin it.
This is the struggle of social justice issues on a wider scale, in many ways-- how can we address the -isms of the world in a way that enables processing and change to happen, versus pushing them further underground? In some ways, seeing terrible behavior is the unfortunate and painful reminder that there is work to be done... it's a balancing act that few have been able to pull off in the last couple decades, I feel. In any case, Sarah, I'm with you on this. You explain the challenges and frustrations well, in a way that I think represents how many previously-marginalized voices feel coming into these spaces.
What I found upsetting was that a couple of the involved editors, one in
particular, were people I would regard as politically aware, even progressive. Yet they simply could not see why what they wrote was inappropriate, and seemed a little offended by the suggestion.
So I ended up feeling extremely marginalized and awkward. Say nothing, and you feel as though you're being silenced, and worse than that you're silencing yourself. Say something, and have the tables turned on you -- you're accusing, you're trying to censor, you're being too sensitive, you're being offensive for pointing out the offence. I'm an experienced editor, yet it made me feel very unsure of myself.
The worst thing is that I remember having discussions like this at university more than a couple of decades ago. So what happened? We thought we had sorted it all out! :)
Sarah
On May 18, 2011, at 12:47 PM, Sarah wrote:
I did say something in the end, and an uninvolved admin left a note on talk asking that the remarks cease. And though he meant well, and I was and remain grateful to him for stepping in, he asked that they cease as a matter of courtesy to me. But I didn't want them to stop as a matter of courtesy. I wanted people to recognize that they were politically unacceptable.
Then I had to explain why the remarks were offensive, when what I really wanted was for them to end, and the meta-discussion to end. Eventually it did die down and a couple of other editors stepped in, and one of the earlier ones apologized, so it was okay.
But I would love to find a way to nip this kind of thing in the bud. I've thought of trying to write an essay or a guideline -- but then people will cry censorship, and will want to know what kind of comments are suddenly not permitted, and who is to judge whether they're offensive, and will argue that not all women agree on definitions of sexism anyway. So it felt like too much of an uphill struggle even to begin it.
This is the struggle of social justice issues on a wider scale, in many ways-- how can we address the -isms of the world in a way that enables processing and change to happen, versus pushing them further underground? In some ways, seeing terrible behavior is the unfortunate and painful reminder that there is work to be done... it's a balancing act that few have been able to pull off in the last couple decades, I feel. In any case, Sarah, I'm with you on this. You explain the challenges and frustrations well, in a way that I think represents how many previously-marginalized voices feel coming into these spaces.
dz
Actually one of those "previously-marginalized voices" is that of socially inept geeks who have little contact with women and are unaware that there is even an issue. They are clever little devils though and will learn quickly if they receive consistent feedback. We just need to make sure they get it. This:
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/w/index.php?title=Benutzer_Diskuss...
is a good example of taking it home to them.
Fred
Fred
You can be bold and write an essay Sarah. But to that became a policy the community will need to agree. And in fact there are in en.wiki guidelines about what not to write in a request for deletion, so you could create somenthing like "what not to write in a Featured Picture request". _____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt/ (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
2011/5/18 Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:37, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.netwrote:
We had a situation recently where we were discussing a BLP, and part
of
the content was that the woman had experienced a serious sexual assault. In the course of discussing how to approach it, a couple of remarks were made that tended to downplay what had happened to her, and one person -- in a different section on the talk page -- commented on how attractive she was, and how he wanted to have her babies.
I was so disgusted by this that I felt (and to some extent still feel) that I didn't want to be involved in the project anymore, because why am I wasting my time in that kind of atmosphere? I felt that it said
something
about me, rather than about them.
I also had to decide whether to say something, or let it lie, and if I did say something, I had to make sure I was polite and circumspect, rather than screaming it from the rooftops, which is what I wanted to do. And it suddenly felt like nothing had changed in the last 40 years, that these remarks still appear, and that women are still made to feel bad if they challenge them. And if we do challenge them, must be extra polite about it. Not make a fuss.
So that felt kind of depressing.
Sarah
Now we're getting down to a serious discussion. The actual horns of the dilemma a Wikipedia administrator is in. In a way being limited to text fails to communicate the immediate expression of disgust that would happen in a face-to-face situation, so there is a failure to communicate feedback effectively. A polite note fails.
I did say something in the end, and an uninvolved admin left a note on
talk asking that the remarks cease. And though he meant well, and I was and remain grateful to him for stepping in, he asked that they cease as a matter of courtesy to me. But I didn't want them to stop as a matter of courtesy. I wanted people to recognize that they were politically unacceptable.
Then I had to explain why the remarks were offensive, when what I really wanted was for them to end, and the meta-discussion to end. Eventually it did die down and a couple of other editors stepped in, and one of the earlier ones apologized, so it was okay.
But I would love to find a way to nip this kind of thing in the bud. I've thought of trying to write an essay or a guideline -- but then people will cry censorship, and will want to know what kind of comments are suddenly not permitted, and who is to judge whether they're offensive, and will argue that not all women agree on definitions of sexism anyway. So it felt like too much of an uphill struggle even to begin it.
Sarah
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Beria, -------- Original-Nachricht --------
Datum: Wed, 18 May 2011 12:54:57 +0100 From: "Béria Lima" beria.lima@wikimedia.pt To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Re: [Gendergap] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons
Andreas,
Again: Stop canvassing your POV!!! This list (and Commons-l) are not for that.
Closing the gender gap is a political issue. How else other than canvassing are you gonna further that issue? Par ordre du mufti? You yourself rightfully criticized a WMF staff member for attempting to do so. Thus, this list is definitely a venue for canvassing.
Thomas aka fossa
This response here is emblematic of the misogyny and ageism pervading Commons: http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File_talk%3AOn_the_edge_-_fre... Coming up with "stuff old women like" would actually be a good idea, but I don't think thecontributor meant it that way.
One misinformed user is not a climate of misogyny; and I must say, other than one user, now banned, I've never encountered agism on our projects. Although sometimes things older people know about are not understood or appreciated by a crew of younger people.
Fred
Dear, I would like to draw your attention to the history of article "migrantas" an initiative in Berlin on the empowerment of migrant women, that was deleted by the concept autopromotion and later by the attribution of irrelevance.Men and women worked for improving it but it seems without results.It would be good to have some suggestions on that.best regards, Patricia
--- On Tue, 5/17/11, Sarah Stierch sarah@sarahstierch.com wrote:
From: Sarah Stierch sarah@sarahstierch.com Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Tuesday, May 17, 2011, 8:19 AM
Hi dz,
Great to hear you'd like to be involved. I've been really busy the past few weeks with finishing school, a trip to California, and GLAM related activities (oh and Regional Ambassadorness!) - so I haven't had time to sit down and get my "stuff together" for the HOW-TO. But, I'd love to add you to our HOW-TO gang if you like.
=)
Sarah
On 5/17/2011 8:17 AM, Deanna Zandt wrote:
I'd also be interested in contributing-- the BLP experience of last week was incredibly enlightening, and got me thinking about access... having the right key unlocked a wealth of knowledge and aid. How to make that key more widely available, or second nature/common knowledge? I'm hoping to blog about it soon. In any case, I'd like to come at some of the HOW-TO issues in general from that noob perspective.
cheers dz
On May 16, 2011, at 9:23 PM, Pete Forsyth wrote:
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Sarah Stierch sarah@sarahstierch.com wrote:
On 5/16/2011 11:49 AM, Pete Forsyth wrote:
Anybody interested in tackling this issue? -Pete
I'm working on diving into the HOW-TO this summer for Wiki. I do want to see all of these topics covered - and I'll contribute in anyway I can. Where do we start? ;-)
Hi Sarah,
I'd be really happy to work on this with you! (And anyone else).
My sense is that there's a lot of work to do in identifying the problem -- or rather, evaluating the collection of interrelated issues, and determining where it's best to focus. The things that seem significant to me are:
(1) Picture of the Day on Commons often seems to be the source of unnecessary strife (moreso than, say, PotD on English Wikipedia); (2) It appears that there is not a clearly identified set of editorial values around what DOES constitute a worthwhile PotD on Commons; (3) The technical and social processes for setting a PotD are difficult to understand and poorly documented.
How about if we collaborate a bit on documenting how things currently work? I think that process will point the way toward recommending a solution.
I've set up a page for this project, if you're game! http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Peteforsyth/PotD
-Pete
_______________________________________________
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
--
Wikipedia Regional Ambassador, The Nation's Capital
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Art
--
Sarah Stierch Consulting Historical, cultural & artistic research, advising & event planning. ------------------------------------------------------ http://www.sarahstierch.com/
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Dear, I would like to draw your attention to the history of article "migrantas" an initiative in Berlin on the empowerment of migrant women, that was deleted by the concept autopromotion and later by the attribution of irrelevance.Men and women worked for improving it but it seems without results.It would be good to have some suggestions on that.best regards, Patricia
(del/undel) 15:12, April 7, 2011 JamesBWatson (talk | contribs | block) deleted "Migrantas" ‎ (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion: and WP:CSD#G12: copyright infringement of http://www.balsas.cc/project-migrantasorg-looking-dialogue-pictograms/) (view/restore)
That's the English Wikipedia.
Fred
Dear, I would like to draw your attention to the history of article "migrantas" an initiative in Berlin on the empowerment of migrant women, that was deleted by the concept autopromotion and later by the attribution of irrelevance.Men and women worked for improving it but it seems without results.It would be good to have some suggestions on that.best regards, Patricia
(del/undel) 15:12, April 7, 2011 JamesBWatson (talk | contribs |block) deleted "Migrantas" ‎ (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion: and WP:CSD#G12: copyright infringement of http://www.balsas.cc/project-migrantasorg-looking-dialogue-pictograms/) (view/restore)
There was only one edit, the edit by Migrantas-Berlin creating it.
That's the English Wikipedia.
Fred
For example do a google search for "Each drawing is shown and commented upon within the group" which is a sentence in the deleted article. It gets three hits, for example:
http://www.grassrootsfeminism.net/cms/node/310
I think what needs to be done is to do the article over again without doing the extensive word for word copying. It seems notable. As to "Unambiguous advertising or promotion" there was only one editor, who also was blocked. creation of that article seems to be their only edit:
(del/undel) 15:22, April 7, 2011 JamesBWatson (talk | contribs | block) blocked Migrantas-Berlin (talk | contribs) (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of indefinite ‎ ({{spamusernameblock}}) (unblock | change block)
This block is within the rules as the user name is the name of the project they were promoting in their only edit. They can create an account with a different name.
Fred
Just for reference, the relevant guidelines are:
Unambiguous use of a name or URL of a company, group or product as a
username is generally not permitted, and users who adopt such a username may
be blocked if their editing behavior appears to be promotional. However,
users who adopt such usernames but who are not editing problematically
should not be summarily blocked if their edits are otherwise constructive;
instead, they should be gently but firmly encouraged to change their
username.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Usernames_for_administrator_attention...
Unambiguous use of a name or URL of a company, group or product as a
username is generally not permitted.
Users who adopt such a username and engage in inappropriately promotional
behaviors in articles about the company, group, or product, are usually
blocked.
Users who adopt such usernames, but who are not editing problematically in
related articles, should not be blocked. Instead, they should be gently
encouraged to change their username.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Username#Company.2Fgroup_names
That blocking policy sometimes comes across as a bit harsh. It is always
better to have a word with the editor first, rather than block them
outright.
Andreas
--- On Fri, 20/5/11, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
From: Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Please , a question on deleted article SP "Migrantas" on women´s empowermente To: fredbaud@fairpoint.net, "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Friday, 20 May, 2011, 15:13
Dear, I would like to draw your attention to the history
of article
"migrantas" an initiative in Berlin on the empowerment of
migrant women, that was
deleted by the concept autopromotion and later by
the attribution of
irrelevance.Men and women worked for improving it
but it seems without
results.It would be good to have some suggestions
on that.best regards,
Patricia
(del/undel) 15:12, April 7,
2011 JamesBWatson (talk | contribs |
block) deleted "Migrantas" (G11: Unambiguous
advertising or
promotion: and WP:CSD#G12: copyright infringement of http://www.balsas.cc/project-migrantasorg-looking-dialogue-pictograms/) (view/restore)
There was only one edit, the edit by Migrantas-Berlin creating it.
That's the English Wikipedia.
Fred
For example do a google search for "Each drawing is shown and commented upon within the group" which is a sentence in the deleted article. It gets three hits, for example:
http://www.grassrootsfeminism.net/cms/node/310
I think what needs to be done is to do the article over again without doing the extensive word for word copying. It seems notable. As to "Unambiguous advertising or promotion" there was only one editor, who also was blocked. creation of that article seems to be their only edit:
(del/undel) 15:22, April 7, 2011 JamesBWatson (talk | contribs | block) blocked Migrantas-Berlin (talk | contribs) (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of indefinite ({{spamusernameblock}}) (unblock | change block)
This block is within the rules as the user name is the name of the project they were promoting in their only edit. They can create an account with a different name.
Fred
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
I've changed this block to allow account creation under a new name. If a new account is created the user should do some other editing besides just promoting their own organization, and, of course, not copy text.
It is OK to promote an organization or viewpoint; the problem arises when you go too far and the article is simply advertising rather than an article about the subject.
Fred
Just for reference, the relevant guidelines are:
Unambiguous use of a name or URL of a company, group or product as a
username is generally not permitted, and users who adopt such a username may
be blocked if their editing behavior appears to be promotional. However,
users who adopt such usernames but who are not editing problematically
should not be summarily blocked if their edits are otherwise constructive;
instead, they should be gently but firmly encouraged to change their
username.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Usernames_for_administrator_attention...
Unambiguous use of a name or URL of a company, group or product as a
username is generally not permitted.
Users who adopt such a username and engage in inappropriately promotional
behaviors in articles about the company, group, or product, are usually
blocked.
Users who adopt such usernames, but who are not editing problematically in
related articles, should not be blocked. Instead, they should be gently
encouraged to change their username.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Username#Company.2Fgroup_names
That blocking policy sometimes comes across as a bit harsh. It is always
better to have a word with the editor first, rather than block them
outright.
Andreas
--- On Fri, 20/5/11, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
From: Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Please , a question on deleted article SP "Migrantas" on women´s empowermente To: fredbaud@fairpoint.net, "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Friday, 20 May, 2011, 15:13
Dear, I would like to draw your attention to the history
of article
"migrantas" an initiative in Berlin on the empowerment of
migrant women, that was
deleted by the concept autopromotion and later by
the attribution of
irrelevance.Men and women worked for improving it
but it seems without
results.It would be good to have some suggestions
on that.best regards,
Patricia
    (del/undel) 15:12, April 7,
2011 JamesBWatson (talk | contribs |
block) deleted "Migrantas" â (G11: Unambiguous
advertising or
promotion: and WP:CSD#G12: copyright infringement of http://www.balsas.cc/project-migrantasorg-looking-dialogue-pictograms/) (view/restore)
There was only one edit, the edit by Migrantas-Berlin creating it.
That's the English Wikipedia.
Fred
For example do a google search for "Each drawing is shown and commented upon within the group" which is a sentence in the deleted article. It gets three hits, for example:
http://www.grassrootsfeminism.net/cms/node/310
I think what needs to be done is to do the article over again without doing the extensive word for word copying. It seems notable. As to "Unambiguous advertising or promotion" there was only one editor, who also was blocked. creation of that article seems to be their only edit:
  (del/undel) 15:22, April 7, 2011 JamesBWatson (talk | contribs | block) blocked Migrantas-Berlin (talk | contribs) (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of indefinite â ({{spamusernameblock}}) (unblock | change block)
This block is within the rules as the user name is the name of the project they were promoting in their only edit. They can create an account with a different name.
Fred
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
--- On Fri, 20/5/11, patricia morales mariadelcarmenpatricia@yahoo.com wrote:
From: patricia morales mariadelcarmenpatricia@yahoo.com Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Please, a question on deleted article SP "Migrantas" on women´s empowermente To: "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Cc: "Roberto Fiadone" ruperto61@yahoo.com.ar Date: Friday, 20 May, 2011, 13:19
Dear, I would like to draw your attention to the history of article "migrantas" an initiative in Berlin on the empowerment of migrant women, that was deleted by the concept autopromotion and later by the attribution of irrelevance.Men and women worked for improving it but it seems without results.It would be good to have some suggestions on that.best regards, Patricia Hi Patricia, It looks like the article was deleted because it directly copied text from anexisting website, and because it appeared promotional. You could try to recreate the article, but would have to write it from the pointof view of third-party sources writing about Migrantas. The best sources I can find are: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/28/style/28iht-agerm.html http://www.morgenpost.de/printarchiv/berlin/article1608757/Kanzlerin-ueberpr... I can't see all of that article, but it appears to mention that a "Kollektiv migrantas" won a prize: http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=migrantas+... The German chancellor seems to have been involved. Winning a prominentaward usually helps to establish notability, justifying an article in Wikipedia. There is also a reference here:http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ZyXnAAAAMAAJ&q=%22migrantas%22+berlin... However, this is not a third-party reference. It would help to have more sources. Two good third-party sources may notbe enough to pass notability. Perhaps others here can help research theorganisation; Spanish sources would be fine too. At any rate, if you do want to recreate the article, it would be best to create adraft in your user space first and then let some editors look at it to advise you as to whether it would survive a deletion request, before putting it inarticle space. Best,Andreas
Béria Lima changed the image back to the original "On the Edge" graphic.
Given that there are some people who think I abused my staff status and/or didn't wait for consensus, I think I will bow out at this point, rather than get into a revert war on the Main Page.
(However, note that the captions are now all wrong in other languages -- some of them were updated in the meantime to reflect the Amazonian image.)
The captions were reverted as well. _____ *Béria Lima* http://wikimedia.pt/(351) 925 171 484
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.***
2011/5/16 Neil Kandalgaonkar neilk@wikimedia.org
Béria Lima changed the image back to the original "On the Edge" graphic.
Given that there are some people who think I abused my staff status and/or didn't wait for consensus, I think I will bow out at this point, rather than get into a revert war on the Main Page.
(However, note that the captions are now all wrong in other languages -- some of them were updated in the meantime to reflect the Amazonian image.)
-- Neil Kandalgaonkar |) neilk@wikimedia.org