The discussion is located at the talk page for the article in question. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Super-spreader Just to clear up where the significant on-wiki attention took place at (my first guess was User Talk:Malke 2010). Thank you, Derric Atzrott From: gendergap-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:gendergap-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of George Herbert Sent: 06 May 2014 01:03 To: Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the participation of women within Wikimedia projects. Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Article about super-spreader might need help (enWP) This now has gotten significant on-wiki attention. List relevant but less important on-wiki (I hope) complicating factor - the editor who was felt to possibly be OWNing the article is User:Malke 2010", a female Wikipedian... On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 9:29 PM, Sue Gardner <sgardner(a)wikimedia.org> wrote: Hey folks, On my phone, so I haven't read the talk page in question. But it looks like a new female editor might be having a tough time on this article: maybe somebody has time to step in and take a look? Thanks, Sue http://dynamicecology.wordpress.com/2014/05/05/using-wikipedia-in-the-class… _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap -- -george william herbert george.herbert(a)gmail.com

Hi Jane, (Perhaps we should have this discussion on the grant page itself as well but) I do want to say that I disagree that this situation proves that step-wise editing might not help shy people. The student in this case chose to do their editing in a way which was comfortable for them. And the way they were comfortable editing was to do so in a sandbox. I think this is proof of concept that some "shy" people prefer to work in this manner and that accommodating them might help bring this population into the editor pool. I won't disagree that the *result* of this type of editing was a spectacular flame/reversion war that ultimately (probably) scared away a new editor; but was the fault 100% with *their* process (blob additions) or could some blame also be applied to the current culture of editing that disparages these kinds of additions? If we implicitly encourage this kind of editing by adding support for it, might this not change of the culture of wikipedia to make these kinds of edits (that shy people may prefer) more welcome, and potentially avert a culture clash like this in the future? While I personally do not like editing in this manner whatsoever, and I agree it carries some inherent problems, I think it's important to remember that since we personally are all editors, we're exactly NOT the kind of person we need to be recruiting- we have those kind of people already! Even if the vast majority of *current* Wikipedia editors dislike and wouldn't use these features, that doesn't mean it could potentially have a major impact on converting novice and "shy" editors. By the way, is there any plan to formally reach out to the teacher and student? -mvolz On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Jane Darnell <jane023(a)gmail.com> wrote: _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Hi All, Over the past 2-3 years, I've organized a number of edit-a-thons here at Barnard College (an all women's college) in order to promote women in the content of Wikipedia's articles and in its community of editors. In my work as a librarian, I've come to believe that Wikipedia is one of the best sites for teaching information literacy skills, so I was absolutely thrilled when a faculty member contacted me about creating a Wikipedia assignment for her seminar on Ntozake Shange this spring. However, the administration was less than enthusiastic about this assignment and is watching it closely. To address some of the points raised in this thread -- We strongly encourage students to begin editing in their sandbox. While, yes, some students may be shy about editing Wikipedia (in fact, most are), we made this decision out of respect to the existing community. Contributing to Wikipedia teaches students about writing from a neutral point of view, when and how to cite, how to find and use sources about underrepresented groups, thereby challenging the existing cannon, etc. etc.. It's an amazing experience for all, but even our most advanced students struggle with these skills. And no matter how many times we discuss these issues in a workshop, students don't fully engage with them until they start their assignment. Encouraging them to play in the sandbox not only allows them to move forward with confidence, but also allows those supporting them to identify any issues that may be of concern to the existing community. This creates a more positive experience for all. *If we are truly committed to encouraging women editors, it's imperative that we bring Wikipedia into the classroom. *(Unsure? Check out Ester Hargittai and Aaron Shaw's talk at the Berkman Center<http://wilkins.law.harvard.edu/events/luncheons/2014-01-21_shawes… screenshots of the talk available via Wikid GRRLS<http://wikidgrrls.wordpress.com/2014/01/21/internet-skills-and-wik… .) However, I'm very concerned that conflicts between students and the Wikipedia community will prevent us from offering future edit-a-thons or class assignments. As educators, we are charged with creating a safe space for students, and while I can help students navigate passive aggressive conversations on a talk page, I am unable to prevent students from experiencing the gender based hate speech that happens (I recently noticed an attack on my user page summarized as "Queen has cunt"). I don't really know what the answer is and, honestly, can't fully articulate my question. But I would greatly benefit from any resources on how to support students navigating these waters -- if they exist. I've been lurking on this list for a while and haven't posted before, but I hope these thoughts are helpful. Megan On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 8:17 AM, Jane Darnell &lt;jane023(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: -- Megan Wacha | Research and Instruction Librarian for the Performing Arts Barnard College | 3009 Broadway | New York, NY 10027 212.854.7652 | mwacha(a)barnard.edu

​... [snip] ​ To address some of the points raised in this thread -- We strongly encourage students to begin editing in their sandbox. While, yes, some students may be shy about editing Wikipedia (in fact, most are), we made this decision out of respect to the existing community. Contributing to Wikipedia teaches students about writing from a neutral point of view, when and how to cite, how to find and use sources about underrepresented groups, thereby challenging the existing cannon, etc. etc.. It's an amazing experience for all, but even our most advanced students struggle with these skills. And no matter how many times we discuss these issues in a workshop, students don't fully engage with them until they start their assignment. Encouraging them to play in the sandbox not only allows them to move forward with confidence, but also allows those supporting them to identify any issues that may be of concern to the existing community. This creates a more positive experience for all. ​ ...​ ​Hi Megan, There is a page here <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ASSIGN>that you might find helpful, about how to prepare students for assignments on Wikipedia.​ ​Sorry, it's quite a lot to read, but there are some helpful links to other pages.​ Sarah