>Support the sharing of free knowledge around the world: donate today<https://donate.wikimedia.org/>

Again, I would like to point that meta is a wiki and all of us have usernames there. So I would suggest all of you to *be bold *and correct what is not correct in your opinion. _____ *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. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. <http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos>* On 1 February 2012 13:18, Sarah Stierch &lt;sarah.stierch(a)gmail.com&gt;wrote;wrote: > Laura - Thanks for asking for more contributions. I was wondering > what was going on, since the project has seemed a bit quiet lately! Glad to > know it's catching steam again. I made some edits a few months ago to the > US section. (See comments below) > > > On 2/1/12 5:18 AM, Lodewijk wrote: > > Perhaps it would be helpful if you could add some explanation why you > are collecting this information, what you want to make clear. Because as I > explained before to you privately (and I see nothing has changed) at least > for the Netherlands the stats that have been put up are almost hilarious. > Lots of percentages, but every Dutch person will be able to tell you that > many of them are of no meaning (Ripuarian is not a language spoken at any > significant level in the Netherlands, Zealandic is considered mainly a > dialect and has 1 admin, of course there are no Dutch women in the enwiki > arbcom, because to my best knowledge there are no Dutch people in there at > all at this moment, and I would wonder why there are no Dutch female admins > on the Portuguese Wikinews...) I am not sure if it is just me, but reading > this page ( > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiWomenCamp/FAQ/Perspectives/Netherlands ) > I would almost think that this is a parody of something - I can't tell if > it is the same in other countries. > > > I've also been highly confused by these statistics. It confused me so > much that I acted boldy and removed them from the United States section. > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiWomenCamp/FAQ/Perspectives#United_States > When I started to see information on how there were no Portuguese women > involved in Algerian Wikipedia I was like "why would there be? and is this > information here?" > > I rewrote the majority of the section to just discuss women's roles in > the United States - at WMF, as fellows, as researchers, as Wikimedians and > active editors, etc. I created a list of people who are active US > Wikimedians who are known to be women (didn't want to make assumptions > about anyone) and some of the cool things they've been doing. Of course, > these are limited to people I know, so I hope others are added (as someone > did me). I also removed the "US related on Wikipedia" in regards to the > subject matter (which was added back). I wasn't really sure why netball > would be featured because it's not popular in America at all, so to me it > doesn't really tell us anything, but it's not popular. Same with roller > derby. (But other women's sports aren't discussed?) So I guess if someone > has interest in discussing American women's sports, this area has room for > expansion, or IMHO removal. And the list of popular biographies makes sense > - Amy Winehouse died when this data was retrieved and I'm sure her > popularity has been replaced. And it's no surprise that "someone from > Barbados" is in the top 10 - it's Rhianna, and same for Nicki Minaj (two of > the most famous pop stars in the world, at least in the US.) I just don't' > think this shows much about women who contribute to Wikipedia except that > people of all genders like reading articles about pop stars and media > frenzies. > > I'm more curious about how women are active and what women are doing. > Who are planning events, have those been successes? Are people being hired > by Wiki companies? (Not just Wikimedia.) What is participation like > regarding women and other Wiki websites? (This conference is about that > right, not just Wikimedia?). Sadly I can't gather data on those, nor do I > know how, but it would be cool to know what the most popular Wiki's are for > women and so forth. > > > I am sure your intentions are good though, so perhaps it would be > helpful to state somewhere what kind of information you're looking for that > is *really* informative, and get rid of the non-relevant parts? I would say > that the semi-automated adding of information isn't exactly helpful in at > least the Dutch case - again, I can't vouch for other countries. Some > information *is* interesting (interest ratios on Facebook or other external > websites) and it would be a waste if that gets discarded because of the > irrelevance of the rest of the page. > > > +1. I think this has really cool potential to focus on "original > research" - just knowing who is doing what and sharing that information. I > took the time on the US section to not only celebrate who is doing what, > but, opportunities that women have been given in the movement in the US. I > wanted people to see what women were doing in the United States, not what > they *aren't* doing. We already know the statistics are depressing > about women's participating - so what are women doing to change that or to > be a part of that? > > Thanks Lodewijk and Srikanth for sharing your thoughts! I was > beginning to think I was the only person who had these thoughts! > > And thanks Laura for spearheading a unique and interesting opportunity > to learn more about women around the world in the community. I hope people > be bold and participate! > > Sarah > > -- > *Sarah Stierch* > *Wikimedia Foundation Community Fellow* > >>Support the sharing of free knowledge around the world: donate today<https://donate.wikimedia.org/> > << > > _______________________________________________ > Gendergap mailing list > Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap > > _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

I can't answer for her, but I believe she was only gathering data. Since she isn't Brazilian or Indian or Dutch, maybe might be difficult for her to know what is excatly relevant or not.

I put in my list correct Brazil's and Portugal's entry, but I still didn't find time to do so, but please - If anyone has the time, do it for your country (and for mine if you have spare time) :-) _____ *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. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. <http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos>* On 1 February 2012 13:51, Risker &lt;risker.wp(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > I suspect people have been hesitant to remove the information because > it's not clear why it was added in the first place; on the whole, > Wikimedians are content collectors rather than content removers, unless > they are very comfortable that the information being removed is of no > significant value or is actively harmful. > > Having a quick glance, I see comments like "no women were elected to > Arbcom" for projects that don't have Arbcoms, and references to no women on > projects that don't exist for that language group. > > As the majority of the data was completed by Laura (thanks for all > your research!), perhaps she could help the list to understand what the > intention was in including some of this information. > > Risker/Anne > > Risker/Anne > > > On 1 February 2012 10:41, Béria Lima &lt;beria.lima(a)wikimedia.pt&gt; wrote: > >> Again, I would like to point that meta is a wiki and all of us have >> usernames there. So I would suggest all of you to *be bold *and >> correct what is not correct in your opinion. >> _____ >> *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. Ajude-nos >> a construir esse sonho. <http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos>* >> >> >> On 1 February 2012 13:18, Sarah Stierch &lt;sarah.stierch(a)gmail.com&gt;wrote;wrote: >> >>> Laura - Thanks for asking for more contributions. I was wondering >>> what was going on, since the project has seemed a bit quiet lately! Glad to >>> know it's catching steam again. I made some edits a few months ago to the >>> US section. (See comments below) >>> >>> >>> On 2/1/12 5:18 AM, Lodewijk wrote: >>> >>> Perhaps it would be helpful if you could add some explanation why >>> you are collecting this information, what you want to make clear. Because >>> as I explained before to you privately (and I see nothing has changed) at >>> least for the Netherlands the stats that have been put up are almost >>> hilarious. Lots of percentages, but every Dutch person will be able to tell >>> you that many of them are of no meaning (Ripuarian is not a language spoken >>> at any significant level in the Netherlands, Zealandic is considered mainly >>> a dialect and has 1 admin, of course there are no Dutch women in the enwiki >>> arbcom, because to my best knowledge there are no Dutch people in there at >>> all at this moment, and I would wonder why there are no Dutch female admins >>> on the Portuguese Wikinews...) I am not sure if it is just me, but reading >>> this page ( >>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiWomenCamp/FAQ/Perspectives/Netherlands ) >>> I would almost think that this is a parody of something - I can't tell if >>> it is the same in other countries. >>> >>> >>> I've also been highly confused by these statistics. It confused me >>> so much that I acted boldy and removed them from the United States section. >>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiWomenCamp/FAQ/Perspectives#United_States >>> When I started to see information on how there were no Portuguese women >>> involved in Algerian Wikipedia I was like "why would there be? and is this >>> information here?" >>> >>> I rewrote the majority of the section to just discuss women's roles >>> in the United States - at WMF, as fellows, as researchers, as Wikimedians >>> and active editors, etc. I created a list of people who are active US >>> Wikimedians who are known to be women (didn't want to make assumptions >>> about anyone) and some of the cool things they've been doing. Of course, >>> these are limited to people I know, so I hope others are added (as someone >>> did me). I also removed the "US related on Wikipedia" in regards to the >>> subject matter (which was added back). I wasn't really sure why netball >>> would be featured because it's not popular in America at all, so to me it >>> doesn't really tell us anything, but it's not popular. Same with roller >>> derby. (But other women's sports aren't discussed?) So I guess if someone >>> has interest in discussing American women's sports, this area has room for >>> expansion, or IMHO removal. And the list of popular biographies makes sense >>> - Amy Winehouse died when this data was retrieved and I'm sure her >>> popularity has been replaced. And it's no surprise that "someone from >>> Barbados" is in the top 10 - it's Rhianna, and same for Nicki Minaj (two of >>> the most famous pop stars in the world, at least in the US.) I just don't' >>> think this shows much about women who contribute to Wikipedia except that >>> people of all genders like reading articles about pop stars and media >>> frenzies. >>> >>> I'm more curious about how women are active and what women are >>> doing. Who are planning events, have those been successes? Are people being >>> hired by Wiki companies? (Not just Wikimedia.) What is participation like >>> regarding women and other Wiki websites? (This conference is about that >>> right, not just Wikimedia?). Sadly I can't gather data on those, nor do I >>> know how, but it would be cool to know what the most popular Wiki's are for >>> women and so forth. >>> >>> >>> I am sure your intentions are good though, so perhaps it would be >>> helpful to state somewhere what kind of information you're looking for that >>> is *really* informative, and get rid of the non-relevant parts? I would say >>> that the semi-automated adding of information isn't exactly helpful in at >>> least the Dutch case - again, I can't vouch for other countries. Some >>> information *is* interesting (interest ratios on Facebook or other external >>> websites) and it would be a waste if that gets discarded because of the >>> irrelevance of the rest of the page. >>> >>> >>> +1. I think this has really cool potential to focus on "original >>> research" - just knowing who is doing what and sharing that information. I >>> took the time on the US section to not only celebrate who is doing what, >>> but, opportunities that women have been given in the movement in the US. I >>> wanted people to see what women were doing in the United States, not what >>> they *aren't* doing. We already know the statistics are depressing >>> about women's participating - so what are women doing to change that or to >>> be a part of that? >>> >>> Thanks Lodewijk and Srikanth for sharing your thoughts! I was >>> beginning to think I was the only person who had these thoughts! >>> >>> And thanks Laura for spearheading a unique and interesting >>> opportunity to learn more about women around the world in the community. I >>> hope people be bold and participate! >>> >>> Sarah >>> >>> -- >>> *Sarah Stierch* >>> *Wikimedia Foundation Community Fellow* >>> >>Support the sharing of free knowledge around the world: donate >>> today <https://donate.wikimedia.org/><< >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gendergap mailing list >>> Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gendergap mailing list >> Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Gendergap mailing list > Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap > > _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap