I can'thelp but think what deep fear of women and indigenous people must go into this kind of AfDobviously related to women- and even their psychological power to chastise patriarchy...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Council_of_13_Indigenous_Grandmot...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/the_remaining_m...
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 4:38 PM, Carol Moore DC carolmooredc@verizon.net wrote:
I can't help but think what deep fear of women and indigenous people must go into this kind of AfD obviously related to women - and even their psychological power to chastise patriarchy...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Council_of_13_Indigenous_Grandmot...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/the_remaining_m...
I call bullshit, Carol.
This AfD is about what seems to have been a pure PR stunt, with no evidence whatsoever of notability outside of press releases.
Washington Post - http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/guestvoices/2008/09/grandmothers_... USA Today - http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/topstories/2007-07-29-4016345612_x.htm Seattle Times - http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2014653274_grandmoms01m.html Not press releases, I'm afraid. I'm usually a pretty strict deletionist, but I'm baffled by this AfD nomination as the sourcing is quite solid. -tm
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 19:38:25 -0500 From: orangemike@gmail.com To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Gendergap] AfD on Indigenous Grandmothers
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 4:38 PM, Carol Moore DC carolmooredc@verizon.net wrote:
I can't help but think what deep fear of women and indigenous people must go into this kind of AfD obviously related to women - and even their psychological power to chastise patriarchy...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Council_of_13_Indigenous_Grandmot...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/the_remaining_m...
I call bullshit, Carol.
This AfD is about what seems to have been a pure PR stunt, with no evidence whatsoever of notability outside of press releases.
-- Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey
"When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food and clothes." -- Desiderius Erasmus
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
On 6/6/2013 9:13 PM, Tarc . wrote:
...
I'm usually a pretty strict deletionist, but I'm baffled by this AfD nomination as the sourcing is quite solid.
-tm
^Maybe it's got something to do with those Iroquois Clan mothers. Main thing I remember is they could stop wars. This Is what Wikipedia says: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clan_Mother
/The Clanmothers are usually the elder women, who are wise and have experienced many years. Clanmothers control the nation. They are considered the life givers. Not only did they appoint the tribal chief (also called the Hoyaneh) but they also watched them during all meetings judging them fairly to make sure they were not voting for themselves, but the whole tribe. If one did not meet these expectations, he would immediately get thrown out of power and the clan mother would choose a new hoyaneh. It was a great shame to be kicked out of power by the clan mothers.[1]/
Hey, lots of women think that would be a great plan for modern society, too... Thus perhaps the primal fear of some males...
The same fear that makes them put all sorts of sexist stuff on wikipedia and tell obvious women editors (or a transgender one recently) things like why do you get so emotional?? I heard that twice in the last couple weeks over some dispute involving various policy violations. I doubt if I had a male name they'd have used that "argument."
If we can't admit somewhere that that's the kind of primal emotional male dominance we see too regularly on Wikipedia, why does this list exist??
CM in DC ^
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Carol Moore DC carolmooredc@verizon.net wrote:
On 6/6/2013 9:13 PM, Tarc . wrote:
...
I'm usually a pretty strict deletionist, but I'm baffled by this AfD nomination as the sourcing is quite solid.
-tm
Maybe it's got something to do with those Iroquois Clan mothers. Main thing I remember is they could stop wars. This Is what Wikipedia says: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clan_Mother
The Clanmothers are usually the elder women, who are wise and haveexperienced many years. Clanmothers control the nation. They are considered the life givers. Not only did they appoint the tribal chief (also called the Hoyaneh) but they also watched them during all meetings judging them fairly to make sure they were not voting for themselves, but the whole tribe. If one did not meet these expectations, he would immediately get thrown out of power and the clan mother would choose a new hoyaneh. It was a great shame to be kicked out of power by the clan mothers.[1]
The Beloved Woman by herself, or the Woman's Council, had similar powers among the Cherokee (it may be no consequence that we're a matrilocal people). That's got nothing to do with whether this made-up "Council" is notable.
On 6/6/2013 9:59 PM, Michael J. Lowrey wrote:
The Beloved Woman by herself, or the Woman's Council, had similar powers among the Cherokee (it may be no consequence that we're a matrilocal people). That's got nothing to do with whether this made-up "Council" is notable.
Thanks for expanding my knowledge to another group with a similar practice.
Of course, every grouping was "made up" by somebody at some time...
In 1766 who were all those guys who signed the declaration of independence in 1776? A bunch of people who mostly might not have their own wikipedia articles (or someone might have tried to AfD?)
;-)
CM
This posting led to an ANI which was quickly closed; too tired to figure out why right now.
I thought I'd seen AfDs there a number of times over last couple years. Don't know easy way to search through archives.
If they are NOT appropriate, and anything else not appropriate, good idea to put it in the message footer of each message.
CM in DC
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Carol Moore DC carolmooredc@verizon.netwrote:
This posting led to an ANI which was quickly closed; too tired to figure out why right now.
I thought I'd seen AfDs there a number of times over last couple years. Don't know easy way to search through archives.
If they are NOT appropriate, and anything else not appropriate, good idea to put it in the message footer of each message.
CM in DC
I'm confused too about when posting to this list might constitute a violation of [[WP:CANVAS]], or if it does whether we ought to pay attention to it. Is posting to this public list an example of what the guideline calls "stealth canvassing*": "*Contacting users off-wiki ..."?
There have been several occasions where issues directly relevant to the treatment of women on Wikipedia have arisen, and I've been hesitant to mention them because they involved an RfC, AfD or similar.
I can understand the concern, but on the other hand it's leading to people who might be interested in an issue not being told about it.
What do others think? Where should we draw the line?
Sarah
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:47 PM, Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Carol Moore DC carolmooredc@verizon.net wrote:
This posting led to an ANI which was quickly closed; too tired to figure out why right now.
I thought I'd seen AfDs there a number of times over last couple years. Don't know easy way to search through archives.
If they are NOT appropriate, and anything else not appropriate, good idea to put it in the message footer of each message.
CM in DC
I'm confused too about when posting to this list might constitute a violation of [[WP:CANVAS]], or if it does whether we ought to pay attention to it. Is posting to this public list an example of what the guideline calls "stealth canvassing": "Contacting users off-wiki ..."?
There have been several occasions where issues directly relevant to the treatment of women on Wikipedia have arisen, and I've been hesitant to mention them because they involved an RfC, AfD or similar.
I can understand the concern, but on the other hand it's leading to people who might be interested in an issue not being told about it.
What do others think? Where should we draw the line?
Sarah
Seems to me that this list is a very appropriate place to discuss these matters; obviously we don't have a hive mind which agrees on all topics under discussion!
+1. I think when these things have come up they have stimulated a good variety of views and served to explore ways of making good decisions. The fact that the last is open subscription supports that dynamic too.
Pete User:Peteforsyth On Jun 7, 2013 6:44 PM, "Michael J. Lowrey" orangemike@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:47 PM, Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Carol Moore DC <carolmooredc@verizon.net
wrote:
This posting led to an ANI which was quickly closed; too tired to figure out why right now.
I thought I'd seen AfDs there a number of times over last couple years. Don't know easy way to search through archives.
If they are NOT appropriate, and anything else not appropriate, good
idea
to put it in the message footer of each message.
CM in DC
I'm confused too about when posting to this list might constitute a violation of [[WP:CANVAS]], or if it does whether we ought to pay
attention
to it. Is posting to this public list an example of what the guideline
calls
"stealth canvassing": "Contacting users off-wiki ..."?
There have been several occasions where issues directly relevant to the treatment of women on Wikipedia have arisen, and I've been hesitant to mention them because they involved an RfC, AfD or similar.
I can understand the concern, but on the other hand it's leading to
people
who might be interested in an issue not being told about it.
What do others think? Where should we draw the line?
Sarah
Seems to me that this list is a very appropriate place to discuss these matters; obviously we don't have a hive mind which agrees on all topics under discussion!
-- Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey
"When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food and clothes." -- Desiderius Erasmus
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
We are discussing at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Canvassing what the policy should be on official wikipedia mailing lists like this.
Also probably needs discussion more at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mailing_lists.
These are current such lists https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo
CM
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 10:17 PM, Carol Moore DC carolmooredc@verizon.netwrote:
We are discussing at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/** Wikipedia_talk:Canvassinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Canvassingwhat the policy should be on official wikipedia mailing lists like this.
Also probably needs discussion more at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/** Wikipedia:Mailing_listshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mailing_lists .
These are current such lists https://lists.wikimedia.org/** mailman/listinfo https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo
CM
There seems to be a starting consensus at [[WT:Canvas]] that if the mailing list is a Foundation one with a public archive, and if the initial email about the issue is worded neutrally (e.g. here is a discussion that list members might be interested in), there shouldn't be a problem.
Sarah
On 6/8/2013 1:53 AM, Sarah wrote:
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 10:17 PM, Carol Moore DC <carolmooredc@verizon.net mailto:carolmooredc@verizon.net> wrote:
We are discussing at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Canvassing what the policy should be on official wikipedia mailing lists like this. Also probably needs discussion more at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mailing_lists. These are current such lists https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo CMThere seems to be a starting consensus at [[WT:Canvas]] that if the mailing list is a Foundation one with a public archive, and if the initial email about the issue is worded neutrally (e.g. here is a discussion that list members might be interested in), there shouldn't be a problem.
Sarah
And I assume all the ranting and raving that may follow - and which may or may not be relevant to the initial topic - is just part of fulfilling the email lists purpose??
:-)
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 8:36 AM, Carol Moore DC carolmooredc@verizon.netwrote:
On 6/8/2013 1:53 AM, Sarah wrote:
There seems to be a starting consensus at [[WT:Canvas]] that if the mailing list is a Foundation one with a public archive, and if the initial email about the issue is worded neutrally (e.g. here is a discussion that list members might be interested in), there shouldn't be a problem.
Sarah
And I assume all the ranting and raving that may follow - and which may or may not be relevant to the initial topic - is just part of fulfilling the email lists purpose??
:-)
Yes, we always ignore the ranting and raving. :)
On 6/8/2013 11:51 AM, Sarah wrote:
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 8:36 AM, Carol Moore DC <carolmooredc@verizon.net mailto:carolmooredc@verizon.net> wrote:
On 6/8/2013 1:53 AM, Sarah wrote:There seems to be a starting consensus at [[WT:Canvas]] that if the mailing list is a Foundation one with a public archive, and if the initial email about the issue is worded neutrally (e.g. here is a discussion that list members might be interested in), there shouldn't be a problem. SarahAnd I assume all the ranting and raving that may follow - and which may or may not be relevant to the initial topic - is just part of fulfilling the email lists purpose?? :-)Yes, we always ignore the ranting and raving. :)
Sorry, to clarify: I meant ranting and raving /by other posters/ (to which original poster may respond I assume)...