Wikimedia community member Liz Henry blogs here: http://bookmaniac.org/journalists-dont-understand-wikipedia-sometimes/ and does a little bit of digging into edit histories.
"Just from these three samples, it does not seem that there is any particular movement among a group of Wikipedia editors to remove women from the “novelists” category and put them in a special women category instead. I would say that the general leaning, rather, is to stop people who would like to label women writers as women writers *in addition* to labeling them as writers, claiming there is no need for Category: American women writers at all and that it is evidence of bias to identify them by gender. ... The sexist thing we should be up in arms about isn’t labelling women as women! It’s the efforts to delete entire categories (like Haitian women writers, for example) because someone has decided that that meta-information is unnecessary “ghettoization”..."
-----Original Message----- From: Sumana Harihareswara
Wikimedia community member Liz Henry blogs here: http://bookmaniac.org/journalists-dont-understand-wikipedia-sometimes/ and does a little bit of digging into edit histories.
"Just from these three samples, it does not seem that there is any particular movement among a group of Wikipedia editors to remove women from the “novelists” category and put them in a special women category instead. I would say that the general leaning, rather, is to stop people who would like to label women writers as women writers *in addition* to labeling them as writers, claiming there is no need for Category: American women writers at all and that it is evidence of bias to identify them by gender. ... The sexist thing we should be up in arms about isn’t labelling women as women! It’s the efforts to delete entire categories (like Haitian women writers, for example) because someone has decided that that meta-information is unnecessary “ghettoization”..." --
As a pending comment I have at her blog observes, I find it a little strange that no one, certainly not the media but (more puzzlingly) the community has bothered to look into the history of this category. Apparently, it was created by User:Gareth E Kegg last fall as part of what seems to have been a general housekeeping effort to reduce the size of many "novelists by nationality" categories. (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&offset=2...)
If it isn't just novelists, and it isn't just Americans, then there is an awfully large mess to clean up (which is why some people at the CfD have called for a procedural close to put all these categories up in a reopened discussion). And until I just left a comment at his talk page, no one had bothered to even let him know about this (which I would think would be the first thing you'd want to do).
Daniel Case
FYI, I just got this link from Wikipediocracy responding to Liz Henry: http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2130&p=38953#p38... "She claims there was no systematic move to put women into a separate category. It looks like she is wrong though: in this discussionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_talk:American_novelists#Sexist_and_other_discriminatory_subclassifications people are pointing out that a single editor, *Johnpacklamberthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Johnpacklambert * (T http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Johnpacklambert-Chttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=100&target=Johnpacklambert -Lhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Johnpacklambert ), made thousands of edits reclassifying biographies."
Adeline Koh, Ph.D. Visiting Faculty Fellow, Humanities Writ Large, Duke University (Fall 2012-Spring 2013) Assistant Professor of Literature, Richard Stockton College Email: Adeline.Koh@duke.edu or Adeline.Koh@stockton.edu Twitter: @adelinekoh w: http://adelinekoh.org
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Sumana Harihareswara <sumanah@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Wikimedia community member Liz Henry blogs here: http://bookmaniac.org/journalists-dont-understand-wikipedia-sometimes/ and does a little bit of digging into edit histories.
"Just from these three samples, it does not seem that there is any particular movement among a group of Wikipedia editors to remove women from the “novelists” category and put them in a special women category instead. I would say that the general leaning, rather, is to stop people who would like to label women writers as women writers *in addition* to labeling them as writers, claiming there is no need for Category: American women writers at all and that it is evidence of bias to identify them by gender. ... The sexist thing we should be up in arms about isn’t labelling women as women! It’s the efforts to delete entire categories (like Haitian women writers, for example) because someone has decided that that meta-information is unnecessary “ghettoization”..." -- Sumana Harihareswara Engineering Community Manager Wikimedia Foundation
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Adrianne posted a nice response on a website. Probably the best response I've seen so far:
http://hastac.org/blogs/wadewitz/2013/04/09/wikipedia-pushing-boundaries-sch...
To the point, from a Wikipedian point of view. I have been pretty overwhelmed by the response to this - things have surely blown out of proportion. I only hope that this engages more people to click edit.
-Sarah
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Adeline Koh adelinekoh@gmail.com wrote:
FYI, I just got this link from Wikipediocracy responding to Liz Henry: http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2130&p=38953#p38... "She claims there was no systematic move to put women into a separate category. It looks like she is wrong though: in this discussionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_talk:American_novelists#Sexist_and_other_discriminatory_subclassifications people are pointing out that a single editor, *Johnpacklamberthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Johnpacklambert
- (T http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Johnpacklambert-Chttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=100&target=Johnpacklambert
-Lhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Johnpacklambert ), made thousands of edits reclassifying biographies."
Adeline Koh, Ph.D. Visiting Faculty Fellow, Humanities Writ Large, Duke University (Fall 2012-Spring 2013) Assistant Professor of Literature, Richard Stockton College Email: Adeline.Koh@duke.edu or Adeline.Koh@stockton.edu Twitter: @adelinekoh w: http://adelinekoh.org
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Sumana Harihareswara < sumanah@wikimedia.org> wrote:
Wikimedia community member Liz Henry blogs here: http://bookmaniac.org/journalists-dont-understand-wikipedia-sometimes/ and does a little bit of digging into edit histories.
"Just from these three samples, it does not seem that there is any particular movement among a group of Wikipedia editors to remove women from the “novelists” category and put them in a special women category instead. I would say that the general leaning, rather, is to stop people who would like to label women writers as women writers *in addition* to labeling them as writers, claiming there is no need for Category: American women writers at all and that it is evidence of bias to identify them by gender. ... The sexist thing we should be up in arms about isn’t labelling women as women! It’s the efforts to delete entire categories (like Haitian women writers, for example) because someone has decided that that meta-information is unnecessary “ghettoization”..." -- Sumana Harihareswara Engineering Community Manager Wikimedia Foundation
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
Hi all,
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 13:56:39 -0400 Sumana Harihareswara sumanah@wikimedia.org wrote:
Wikimedia community member Liz Henry blogs here: http://bookmaniac.org/journalists-dont-understand-wikipedia-sometimes/ and does a little bit of digging into edit histories.
"Just from these three samples, it does not seem that there is any particular movement among a group of Wikipedia editors to remove women from the “novelists” category and put them in a special women category instead. I would say that the general leaning, rather, is to stop people who would like to label women writers as women writers *in addition* to labeling them as writers, claiming there is no need for Category: American women writers at all and that it is evidence of bias to identify them by gender. ... The sexist thing we should be up in arms about isn’t labelling women as women! It’s the efforts to delete entire categories (like Haitian women writers, for example) because someone has decided that that meta-information is unnecessary “ghettoization”..."
Seems like good write-up and I tend to agree. It's too bad there was so much misunderstanding in the media about it.
Regards,
Shlomi Fish
If people are concerned about sexism in Wikipedia categories they should be drawing attention to edits like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elizabeth_Gillies&curid=19682...
While the rest of the world is moving away from gender-specific job names (like policeman and actress), Wikipedia is moving in the opposite direction. That seems like a much worse problem than categorizing women as women.
Ryan Kaldari
On 4/25/13 11:34 PM, Shlomi Fish wrote:
Hi all,
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 13:56:39 -0400 Sumana Harihareswara sumanah@wikimedia.org wrote:
Wikimedia community member Liz Henry blogs here: http://bookmaniac.org/journalists-dont-understand-wikipedia-sometimes/ and does a little bit of digging into edit histories.
"Just from these three samples, it does not seem that there is any particular movement among a group of Wikipedia editors to remove women from the “novelists” category and put them in a special women category instead. I would say that the general leaning, rather, is to stop people who would like to label women writers as women writers *in addition* to labeling them as writers, claiming there is no need for Category: American women writers at all and that it is evidence of bias to identify them by gender. ... The sexist thing we should be up in arms about isn’t labelling women as women! It’s the efforts to delete entire categories (like Haitian women writers, for example) because someone has decided that that meta-information is unnecessary “ghettoization”..."
Seems like good write-up and I tend to agree. It's too bad there was so much misunderstanding in the media about it.
Regards,
Shlomi Fish
The recent discussion on this (which never really came to a clear consensus):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)/Archive_101#Ac...
- Andrew
On 27 April 2013 01:49, Ryan Kaldari rkaldari@wikimedia.org wrote:
If people are concerned about sexism in Wikipedia categories they should be drawing attention to edits like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elizabeth_Gillies&curid=19682...
While the rest of the world is moving away from gender-specific job names (like policeman and actress), Wikipedia is moving in the opposite direction. That seems like a much worse problem than categorizing women as women.
Ryan Kaldari
On 4/25/13 11:34 PM, Shlomi Fish wrote:
Hi all,
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 13:56:39 -0400 Sumana Harihareswara sumanah@wikimedia.org wrote:
Wikimedia community member Liz Henry blogs here: http://bookmaniac.org/journalists-dont-understand-wikipedia-sometimes/ and does a little bit of digging into edit histories.
"Just from these three samples, it does not seem that there is any particular movement among a group of Wikipedia editors to remove women from the “novelists” category and put them in a special women category instead. I would say that the general leaning, rather, is to stop people who would like to label women writers as women writers *in addition* to labeling them as writers, claiming there is no need for Category: American women writers at all and that it is evidence of bias to identify them by gender. ... The sexist thing we should be up in arms about isn’t labelling women as women! It’s the efforts to delete entire categories (like Haitian women writers, for example) because someone has decided that that meta-information is unnecessary “ghettoization”..."
Seems like good write-up and I tend to agree. It's too bad there was so much misunderstanding in the media about it.
Regards,
Shlomi Fish
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Women are inferior to men and exterminated like ants.
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 7:17 AM, Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.ukwrote:
The recent discussion on this (which never really came to a clear consensus):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)/Archive_101#Ac...
- Andrew
On 27 April 2013 01:49, Ryan Kaldari rkaldari@wikimedia.org wrote:
If people are concerned about sexism in Wikipedia categories they should
be
drawing attention to edits like this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elizabeth_Gillies&curid=19682...
While the rest of the world is moving away from gender-specific job names (like policeman and actress), Wikipedia is moving in the opposite
direction.
That seems like a much worse problem than categorizing women as women.
Ryan Kaldari
On 4/25/13 11:34 PM, Shlomi Fish wrote:
Hi all,
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 13:56:39 -0400 Sumana Harihareswara sumanah@wikimedia.org wrote:
Wikimedia community member Liz Henry blogs here: http://bookmaniac.org/journalists-dont-understand-wikipedia-sometimes/ and does a little bit of digging into edit histories.
"Just from these three samples, it does not seem that there is any particular movement among a group of Wikipedia editors to remove women from the “novelists” category and put them in a special women category instead. I would say that the general leaning, rather, is to stop
people
who would like to label women writers as women writers *in addition* to labeling them as writers, claiming there is no need for Category: American women writers at all and that it is evidence of bias to identify them by gender. ... The sexist thing we should be up in arms about isn’t labelling women as women! It’s the efforts to delete entire categories (like Haitian women writers, for example) because someone has decided that that meta-information is unnecessary “ghettoization”..."
Seems like good write-up and I tend to agree. It's too bad there was so much misunderstanding in the media about it.
Regards,
Shlomi Fish
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
--
- Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
????
Regardless...I'm beginning to feel like I'm the only person on earth who feels having a category for "Women foo" is a good idea for the sake of women's studies and feminist studies. I find immense value in categories based around gender and ethnicity - it makes my writing and work a lot easier (as a researcher who writes about women and minorities) when working in Wikipedia and wanting to expand content about those subjects. As long as they get listed in other appropriate non-gender/non-ethnicity/non-foo categories, I think it's okay. We're not a library, we're an online collaborative encyclopedia.
Even on Wiki, I feel like one of the few people voicing my opinion about it only to get told I'm in the wrong. It's really depressing.
I almost feel like a jerk for feeling that way. Go figure.
-Sarah
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 3:12 PM, Akhil Mulgaonker liberalufp@gmail.comwrote:
Women are inferior to men and exterminated like ants.
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 7:17 AM, Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.ukwrote:
The recent discussion on this (which never really came to a clear consensus):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)/Archive_101#Ac...
- Andrew
On 27 April 2013 01:49, Ryan Kaldari rkaldari@wikimedia.org wrote:
If people are concerned about sexism in Wikipedia categories they
should be
drawing attention to edits like this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elizabeth_Gillies&curid=19682...
While the rest of the world is moving away from gender-specific job
names
(like policeman and actress), Wikipedia is moving in the opposite
direction.
That seems like a much worse problem than categorizing women as women.
Ryan Kaldari
On 4/25/13 11:34 PM, Shlomi Fish wrote:
Hi all,
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 13:56:39 -0400 Sumana Harihareswara sumanah@wikimedia.org wrote:
Wikimedia community member Liz Henry blogs here:
http://bookmaniac.org/journalists-dont-understand-wikipedia-sometimes/
and does a little bit of digging into edit histories.
"Just from these three samples, it does not seem that there is any particular movement among a group of Wikipedia editors to remove women from the “novelists” category and put them in a special women category instead. I would say that the general leaning, rather, is to stop
people
who would like to label women writers as women writers *in addition*
to
labeling them as writers, claiming there is no need for Category: American women writers at all and that it is evidence of bias to identify them by gender. ... The sexist thing we should be up in arms about isn’t labelling women as women! It’s the efforts to delete entire categories (like Haitian women writers, for example) because someone has decided that that meta-information is unnecessary “ghettoization”..."
Seems like good write-up and I tend to agree. It's too bad there was so much misunderstanding in the media about it.
Regards,
Shlomi Fish
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
--
- Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
-- *AKHIL MULGAONKER *
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Hi Ryan,
On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 17:49:58 -0700 Ryan Kaldari rkaldari@wikimedia.org wrote:
If people are concerned about sexism in Wikipedia categories they should be drawing attention to edits like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elizabeth_Gillies&curid=19682...
While the rest of the world is moving away from gender-specific job names (like policeman and actress), Wikipedia is moving in the opposite direction. That seems like a much worse problem than categorizing women as women.
One should note that the obsession of having a gender-neutral way to refer to both men and women is a peculiarity of the English language, after several centuries of erosion, and European languages such as French, German, Italian, Spanish, and Semitic languages such as Hebrew or Arabic have compulsory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_gender (male, female, and sometimes also neuter), including for inanimate objects. So it's not the "rest of the world" - it's only the American English-speaking Feminist-influenced media.
Regards,
Shlomi Fish
Ryan Kaldari