Why is my message to this thread getting rejected? It says "Message rejected by filter rule match"?
Cheers Yaroslav
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Yaroslav Blanter ymbalt@gmail.com wrote:
Dear All,
I guess we are discussing this contest:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_ in_Red/The_World_Contest
because this is the one which starts in two weeks.
For the full disclosure, I have absolutely no relation to the contest and will likely not participate.
First, this is an internal affair of the English Wikipedia. I am not sure why it should be discussed on wikimedia-l.
Second, we have seen many writing contests and drives and personal initiatives on Wikipedia. Some were successful, some were complete disaster. Whether the contest/drive is successful depends on the organizers, and, in particular, on whether the goals are set properly.
This one aims at 10K (not 100K) new articles in two months. This is realistic and, even if some articles are substandard, will not disturb the flow of Wikipedia. I recognize a lot of people who signed up as established editors who certainly know how to source articles. The rules of the contest establish 1K of pure prose (it indeed stated in one place 0.75K, which I changed to align with what is written in the rules of the contest.) They also specify that the articles must be properly sourced. A fully sourced 1K prose is a solid stub, and I do not see how it could harm Wikipedia. The organizer is Dr. Blofeld, who previously organized events of similar scope which were successful. (I for example participated in the Arfica destubaton last year and won a prize; I closely monitored the quality and I saw how Dr. Blofeld handled the quality control, I have no issues with that).
To summarize, at this point I do not see any reasons for alarm.
I would like, however, to address two more points which were raised in this topic. First, the monetary prizes. I personally oppose giving monetary prizes for writing Wikipedia articles. When I participated in the Africa destubaton I mentioned above, I made it very clear that I am not going to accept a monetary prize. After I won the contest in the nomination of the articles on Mozambique, I had an Amazon voucher sent to me, which I spent to buy an article on the history of Mozambique. So I am definitely not a fan of monetary prizes, on the other hand, this is not the first contest which offers monetary prizes, the prizes are of a scope comparable to what what offered at similar contests previously, and if the issue has to be discussed, it has to be discussed in a broader scope, not in relation to this particular contest.
Second, I am not sure how I should interpret the opinions that the articles about women should be sourced worse than the articles about men, but currently there is consensus on the English Wikipedia on how the notability and verifiability policies should be implemented (I guess this could be different in other projects). The community is currently not accepting unsourced and poorly sourced articles, we have the trial running for autoconfirmed article creation, and the queue of new page patrol, which is now 13K articles, slowly goes down. (We actually struggled a lot to get it going down, for several years). Any unsourced article about living people gets PRODded within hours. No action which would attempt to revert this trend is going to be accepted. It is not about woman vs man or Africa vs Europe, it is about verifiability.
Having said this, if there is a competition suddenly up in the air, aimed at 100K articles, poorly organized and with unrealistically weak requirements, I would definitely call it a road to disaster. It is just what I referenced is not this.
Cheers Yaroslav
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com wrote:
This has nothing to do with Gender,
The issue is the standards required and the aim of the event not the subjects of the content....
The event set a minimum standard at 0.75k per article created, new editors going through articles for creation are required to have 1.5k of prose which is twice the requirement for this competition.
I'll repeat we should not expect more from new editors than we do from existing editors, regardless of the subject. With any competition we should be expecting a higher amount than the minimum from existing community members, mass creation of stubs is not the best way to address to encourage those editors to take an interest in developing subjects.
Any competition of this magnitude should also have the resources to ensure that in the process we dont do more damage
On 16 October 2017 at 13:57, Natacha Rault n.rault@me.com wrote:
Dear All,
I can only agree with GorillaWarfare. I am also tired of having to
proove
anything concernig gender has to be perfect, when the whole principle of Wikipedia is that everything is always perfectible. I think we should assume good faith and avoid <sarcastic> comments. Doing nothing about the gender gap would not bring a positive image of
our
movement. The gap is huge and we do need quantity. Readers noticing mistakes sometimes become contributors (dont we need new contributors?). Chosing such a tone “intentionally” (citing Gnangarra) is something I
find
shocking. I think criticism is good to make progress, one does not need
to
fuel resentmemt by making it <sarcastic>.
Kind regards,
Nattes à chat / Natacha
Le 16 oct. 2017 à 05:51, GorillaWarfare <gorillawarfarewikipedia@
gmail.com> a écrit :
Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that
this
will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in
the
document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this
project
will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not mass-producing poor-quality content).
As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist.
I
believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said
can
be
described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of
poor
wording.
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
<gorillawarfarewikipedia@
gmail.com> wrote:
Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to
this
list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue with
her
email address.
"This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women
to a
higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't
going
to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a
bunch
of
stubs.
And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's
better
than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I
shouldn't
have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 8:16 PM, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com
wrote:
No worries Keegan I read it as sarcastic, given the amount of noise
on
here I chose my tone intentionally to draw attention to the competition,
yes it
looks like a wonderful idea until to look at the mechanics of
comeptition
given it has a start time in 2 weeks, people are being encourage to
start
now in sandboxes, its being advertised on banners yet it has very
obvious
under lying issues
- unrealistic targets
- quantity not quality
- an expectation that competitors are required to do half of what
is
expected from new editors , we should hold ourselves and expect of higher standards than that we expect from new comers
- no methodology for notability. blp, copyright issues arent
weeded
out
during the event or judging
- judging is done by a bot just doing a count
To win this event all you need is a list, a script, and reliable
internet
connection, despite having so many signed up well experience good
editors
on the list. <sarcasm> Sadly one person using a Wikidata script to create articles could be the winner, just imagine the unimaginable frankenstienian horror that would create </sarcasm>
Any competition that relies on numbers alone is fraught with danger,
the
big international events all succeed not because of numbers but
because
of large teams(this run by one person alone) focused on quality with
the
whole processes divided into manageable opt-in regional sections. All the initiatives to focus on under represented topics need to be careful
few
thousands of poor quality stubs about women is more harmful than
having
nothing as people will perceive Wikipedia to be paying lip service
to
women.
On 16 October 2017 at 07:18, Keegan Peterzell <
keegan.wiki@gmail.com>
wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Gergő Tisza gtisza@gmail.com
wrote:
>> >> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Keegan Peterzell < > keegan.wiki@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> "The nerve of these women, to think that they can write
encyclopedia
>>> articles on women who must inherently be non-notable! There's nothing > to >>> write about here." >>> >>> That's basically what your email says. No complaints when the subject > is >>> anything else from you, when these thematic editing are held on other >>> subjects. >> >> >> Please avoid personal attacks based on hidden motivations you
assume
> other >> parties to have; it's contrary to the Wikimedia movement's social
best
>> practices [1] and bound to take discussions in unproductive directions. >> When criticizing what someone said, stick to what they actually
said.
>> Especially so if your accusation of bad faith would be essentially >> content-free. > > > Todd, Gnangarra, Gergő, > > My intention, as I touched on earlier, was not to make a personal
attack
> but to address the tone in which I perceived the email to be
written.
I
> don't believe Gnangarra is actually sexist. I certainly stand by my > position that the content of the initial post is unhelpful
criticism
and
> mostly hyperbole, but I'm more than willing to apologize if my
language
> came across as a personal attack. I could have written it
differently.
So, > sorry about that. > > > > -- > ~Keegan > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan > > This is my personal email address. Everything sent from this email address > is in a personal capacity. > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ma
ilman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsu
bscribe>
>
-- GN. Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik i/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ma
ilman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsu
bscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- GN. Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik i/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
My (rejected) message below anyway.
Cheers Yaroslav
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Yaroslav Blanter ymbalt@gmail.com wrote:
Why is my message to this thread getting rejected? It says "Message rejected by filter rule match"?
Cheers Yaroslav
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Yaroslav Blanter ymbalt@gmail.com wrote:
Dear All,
I guess we are discussing this contest:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in _Red/The_World_Contest
because this is the one which starts in two weeks.
For the full disclosure, I have absolutely no relation to the contest and will likely not participate.
First, this is an internal affair of the English Wikipedia. I am not sure why it should be discussed on wikimedia-l.
Second, we have seen many writing contests and drives and personal initiatives on Wikipedia. Some were successful, some were complete disaster. Whether the contest/drive is successful depends on the organizers, and, in particular, on whether the goals are set properly.
This one aims at 10K (not 100K) new articles in two months. This is realistic and, even if some articles are substandard, will not disturb the flow of Wikipedia. I recognize a lot of people who signed up as established editors who certainly know how to source articles. The rules of the contest establish 1K of pure prose (it indeed stated in one place 0.75K, which I changed to align with what is written in the rules of the contest.) They also specify that the articles must be properly sourced. A fully sourced 1K prose is a solid stub, and I do not see how it could harm Wikipedia. The organizer is Dr. Blofeld, who previously organized events of similar scope which were successful. (I for example participated in the Arfica destubaton last year and won a prize; I closely monitored the quality and I saw how Dr. Blofeld handled the quality control, I have no issues with that).
To summarize, at this point I do not see any reasons for alarm.
I would like, however, to address two more points which were raised in this topic. First, the monetary prizes. I personally oppose giving monetary prizes for writing Wikipedia articles. When I participated in the Africa destubaton I mentioned above, I made it very clear that I am not going to accept a monetary prize. After I won the contest in the nomination of the articles on Mozambique, I had an Amazon voucher sent to me, which I spent to buy an article on the history of Mozambique. So I am definitely not a fan of monetary prizes, on the other hand, this is not the first contest which offers monetary prizes, the prizes are of a scope comparable to what what offered at similar contests previously, and if the issue has to be discussed, it has to be discussed in a broader scope, not in relation to this particular contest.
Second, I am not sure how I should interpret the opinions that the articles about women should be sourced worse than the articles about men, but currently there is consensus on the English Wikipedia on how the notability and verifiability policies should be implemented (I guess this could be different in other projects). The community is currently not accepting unsourced and poorly sourced articles, we have the trial running for autoconfirmed article creation, and the queue of new page patrol, which is now 13K articles, slowly goes down. (We actually struggled a lot to get it going down, for several years). Any unsourced article about living people gets PRODded within hours. No action which would attempt to revert this trend is going to be accepted. It is not about woman vs man or Africa vs Europe, it is about verifiability.
Having said this, if there is a competition suddenly up in the air, aimed at 100K articles, poorly organized and with unrealistically weak requirements, I would definitely call it a road to disaster. It is just what I referenced is not this.
Cheers Yaroslav
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com wrote:
This has nothing to do with Gender,
The issue is the standards required and the aim of the event not the subjects of the content....
The event set a minimum standard at 0.75k per article created, new editors going through articles for creation are required to have 1.5k of prose which is twice the requirement for this competition.
I'll repeat we should not expect more from new editors than we do from existing editors, regardless of the subject. With any competition we should be expecting a higher amount than the minimum from existing community members, mass creation of stubs is not the best way to address to encourage those editors to take an interest in developing subjects.
Any competition of this magnitude should also have the resources to ensure that in the process we dont do more damage
On 16 October 2017 at 13:57, Natacha Rault n.rault@me.com wrote:
Dear All,
I can only agree with GorillaWarfare. I am also tired of having to
proove
anything concernig gender has to be perfect, when the whole principle
of
Wikipedia is that everything is always perfectible. I think we should assume good faith and avoid <sarcastic> comments. Doing nothing about the gender gap would not bring a positive image of
our
movement. The gap is huge and we do need quantity. Readers noticing mistakes sometimes become contributors (dont we need new
contributors?).
Chosing such a tone “intentionally” (citing Gnangarra) is something I
find
shocking. I think criticism is good to make progress, one does not
need to
fuel resentmemt by making it <sarcastic>.
Kind regards,
Nattes à chat / Natacha
Le 16 oct. 2017 à 05:51, GorillaWarfare <gorillawarfarewikipedia@
gmail.com> a écrit :
Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that
this
will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in
the
document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this
project
will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not mass-producing poor-quality content).
As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a
sexist. I
believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said
can
be
described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of
poor
wording.
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
<gorillawarfarewikipedia@
gmail.com> wrote:
Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to
this
list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue
with
her
email address.
"This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about
women
to a
higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't
going
to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a
bunch
of
stubs.
And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's
better
than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I
shouldn't
have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 8:16 PM, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com
wrote:
> > No worries Keegan I read it as sarcastic, given the amount of
noise on
> here > I chose my tone intentionally to draw attention to the competition,
yes it
> looks like a wonderful idea until to look at the mechanics of
comeptition
> given it has a start time in 2 weeks, people are being encourage to
start
> now in sandboxes, its being advertised on banners yet it has very
obvious
> under lying issues > > - unrealistic targets > - quantity not quality > - an expectation that competitors are required to do half of
what is
> expected from new editors , we should hold ourselves and expect
of
> higher > standards than that we expect from new comers > - no methodology for notability. blp, copyright issues arent
weeded
out
> during the event or judging > - judging is done by a bot just doing a count > > To win this event all you need is a list, a script, and reliable
internet
> connection, despite having so many signed up well experience good
editors
> on the list. <sarcasm> Sadly one person using a Wikidata script
to
> create > articles could be the winner, just imagine the unimaginable > frankenstienian horror that would create </sarcasm> > > Any competition that relies on numbers alone is fraught with
danger,
the
> big international events all succeed not because of numbers but
because
> of > large teams(this run by one person alone) focused on quality with
the
> whole > processes divided into manageable opt-in regional sections. All
the
> initiatives to focus on under represented topics need to be
careful few
> thousands of poor quality stubs about women is more harmful than
having
> nothing as people will perceive Wikipedia to be paying lip service
to
> women. > > > > > On 16 October 2017 at 07:18, Keegan Peterzell <
keegan.wiki@gmail.com>
> wrote: > >>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Gergő Tisza gtisza@gmail.com
wrote:
>>> >>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Keegan Peterzell < >> keegan.wiki@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> "The nerve of these women, to think that they can write
encyclopedia
>>>> articles on women who must inherently be non-notable! There's > nothing >> to >>>> write about here." >>>> >>>> That's basically what your email says. No complaints when the > subject >> is >>>> anything else from you, when these thematic editing are held on > other >>>> subjects. >>> >>> >>> Please avoid personal attacks based on hidden motivations you
assume
>> other >>> parties to have; it's contrary to the Wikimedia movement's social
best
>>> practices [1] and bound to take discussions in unproductive > directions. >>> When criticizing what someone said, stick to what they actually
said.
>>> Especially so if your accusation of bad faith would be
essentially
>>> content-free. >> >> >> Todd, Gnangarra, Gergő, >> >> My intention, as I touched on earlier, was not to make a personal
attack
>> but to address the tone in which I perceived the email to be
written.
I
>> don't believe Gnangarra is actually sexist. I certainly stand by
my
>> position that the content of the initial post is unhelpful
criticism
and
>> mostly hyperbole, but I'm more than willing to apologize if my
language
>> came across as a personal attack. I could have written it
differently.
> So, >> sorry about that. >> >> >> >> -- >> ~Keegan >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan >> >> This is my personal email address. Everything sent from this email > address >> is in a personal capacity. >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ >> wiki/Wikimedia-l >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ma
ilman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsu
bscribe>
>> > > > > -- > GN. > Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.or
g/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page
> WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra > Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik > i/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ma
ilman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsu
bscribe>
>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ma
ilman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- GN. Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik i/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
+1 to your email Yaroslav.
I'd just underline Gnangarra's original email wasn't sexist, it's so unfair to vilify criticism towards contests as sexism.
Vito
2017-10-16 9:33 GMT+02:00 Yaroslav Blanter ymbalt@gmail.com:
My (rejected) message below anyway. [CUT because of boring filter rule] Cheers Yaroslav
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Gnangarra admitted to deliberately using a provocative tone to get attention ("I chose my tone intentionally to draw attention to the competition"). Acting surprised that people were aggrieved is disingenuous.
On the topic of sexism: the underrepresentation in the Wikimedia community of every demographic that is not white men is such a stain on the moral character of the projects and a threat to their long-term survival. The ways in which this lack of diversity is reinforced and perpetuated by behavioral norms are by now so well-documented that ignorance and lack of malice are not excusable. In my opinion, if you are not making a conscious, deliberate effort to make this community kinder and more welcoming, you are part of the problem. All the more so when the topic under discussion is an initiative to engage women editors and improve the breadth of coverage of topics relating to women.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 6:19 AM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
+1 to your email Yaroslav.
I'd just underline Gnangarra's original email wasn't sexist, it's so unfair to vilify criticism towards contests as sexism.
Vito
2017-10-16 9:33 GMT+02:00 Yaroslav Blanter ymbalt@gmail.com:
My (rejected) message below anyway. [CUT because of boring filter rule] Cheers Yaroslav
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
How can someone rebut such absolute and perfect theorems? My weak doubts, hypothesis and views must surely surrend to such a bright parade of Eternal Thruth™.
But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying to contast is, per se, a clear defeat. To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing* about their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is, incidentally, one the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.
Apart of rethorics there are several logical fallacies in your statement: *criticism I've seen here focuses on means rather than aims *gaps (both gender and geographical) are caused by our behavioral norms? That's a great news! I always feared it was an enormous series of deep social problems while it's just a bunch of rules on a website! *the topic hardly meets the definition of *effort to make this community kinder and more welcoming* *finally, the importance of the topic dictates higher quality requirement in process, not lower.
Seriously all of this recalls me when I read suggestions about decreasing gender gap with "less complex graphical interfaces".
Vito
2017-10-16 16:47 GMT+02:00 Ori Livneh ori.livneh@gmail.com:
Gnangarra admitted to deliberately using a provocative tone to get attention ("I chose my tone intentionally to draw attention to the competition"). Acting surprised that people were aggrieved is disingenuous.
On the topic of sexism: the underrepresentation in the Wikimedia community of every demographic that is not white men is such a stain on the moral character of the projects and a threat to their long-term survival. The ways in which this lack of diversity is reinforced and perpetuated by behavioral norms are by now so well-documented that ignorance and lack of malice are not excusable. In my opinion, if you are not making a conscious, deliberate effort to make this community kinder and more welcoming, you are part of the problem. All the more so when the topic under discussion is an initiative to engage women editors and improve the breadth of coverage of topics relating to women.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 6:19 AM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
+1 to your email Yaroslav.
I'd just underline Gnangarra's original email wasn't sexist, it's so
unfair
to vilify criticism towards contests as sexism.
Vito
2017-10-16 9:33 GMT+02:00 Yaroslav Blanter ymbalt@gmail.com:
My (rejected) message below anyway. [CUT because of boring filter rule] Cheers Yaroslav
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these issues. Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest tones it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and apologies are demanded. We've culturally internalized sexism so much that even the way we talk about sexism is sexist.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying to contast is, per se, a clear defeat. To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing* about their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is, incidentally, one the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.
Is that still going on?
I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on Wikipedia. I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned out pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, on women involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of them.
But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration of quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is sexist. The same question would apply if the proposed articles were about Russian literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just because of what the subject happens to be.
I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling people sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be all for shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in this thread.
Todd
On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez" wikigamaliel@gmail.com wrote:
So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these issues. Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest tones it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and apologies are demanded. We've culturally internalized sexism so much that even the way we talk about sexism is sexist.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying to contast is, per se, a clear defeat. To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing* about their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is, incidentally, one the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine people like myself.
I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that this will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in the document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this project will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not mass-producing poor-quality content).
As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist. I believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said can be described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of poor wording.
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare <gorillawarfarewikipedia@ gmail.com> wrote:
Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to this list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue with her email address.
"This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women to a higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't going to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a bunch of stubs.
And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's better than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I shouldn't have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
- Pax aka Funcrunch
On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
Is that still going on?
I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on Wikipedia. I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned out pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, on women involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of them.
But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration of quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is sexist. The same question would apply if the proposed articles were about Russian literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just because of what the subject happens to be.
I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling people sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be all for shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in this thread.
Todd
On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez" wikigamaliel@gmail.com wrote:
So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these issues. Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest tones it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and apologies are demanded. We've culturally internalized sexism so much that even the way we talk about sexism is sexist.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying to contast is, per se, a clear defeat. To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing* about their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is, incidentally, one the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.
There is so many threads on this list that are only about English Wikipedia like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able to keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
Jean-Philippe Béland Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen < list-wikimedia@funcrunch.org> wrote:
The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine people like myself.
I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's
message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that this will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in the document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this project will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not mass-producing poor-quality content).
As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist. I believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said can be described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of poor wording.
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare <gorillawarfarewikipedia@ gmail.com> wrote:
Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to this list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue with her email address.
"This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women to a higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't going to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a bunch of stubs.
And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's better than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I shouldn't have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
- Pax aka Funcrunch
On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
Is that still going on?
I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on Wikipedia. I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned out pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, on women involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of them.
But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration of quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is sexist. The same question would apply if the proposed articles were about Russian literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just because of what the subject happens to be.
I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling people sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be all for shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in this thread.
Todd
On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez" wikigamaliel@gmail.com wrote:
So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these issues. Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest tones it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and apologies are demanded. We've culturally internalized sexism so much that even the way we talk about sexism is sexist.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying to contast is, per se, a clear defeat. To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing* about their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is, incidentally, one the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.
-- Pax Ahimsa Gethen | pax@funcrunch.org | http://funcrunch.org | Pronouns: they/them/their
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
+1
Le 16 oct. 2017 à 19:34, Jean-Philippe Béland jpbeland@wikimedia.ca a écrit :
There is so many threads on this list that are only about English Wikipedia like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able to keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
Jean-Philippe Béland Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen < list-wikimedia@funcrunch.org> wrote:
The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine people like myself.
I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's
message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that this will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in the document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this project will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not mass-producing poor-quality content).
As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist. I believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said can be described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of poor wording.
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare <gorillawarfarewikipedia@ gmail.com> wrote:
Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to this list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue with her email address.
"This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women to a higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't going to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a bunch of stubs.
And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's better than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I shouldn't have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
- Pax aka Funcrunch
On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
Is that still going on?
I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on Wikipedia. I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned out pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, on women involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of them.
But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration of quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is sexist. The same question would apply if the proposed articles were about Russian literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just because of what the subject happens to be.
I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling people sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be all for shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in this thread.
Todd
On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez" wikigamaliel@gmail.com wrote:
So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these issues. Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest tones it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and apologies are demanded. We've culturally internalized sexism so much that even the way we talk about sexism is sexist.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying to contast is, per se, a clear defeat. To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing* about their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is, incidentally, one the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.
-- Pax Ahimsa Gethen | pax@funcrunch.org | http://funcrunch.org | Pronouns: they/them/their
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
--
Jean-Philippe Béland
[image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr, chapitre national soutenant Wikipédia Vice president — Wikimedia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en, national chapter supporting Wikipedia 535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec) H2L 2P3,jpbeland@wikimedia.ca _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Is the English Wikipedia the only Wikipedia which has problems with misogyny and under-representation of female editors and articles? I am relieved to hear that!
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Jean-Philippe Béland <jpbeland@wikimedia.ca
wrote:
There is so many threads on this list that are only about English Wikipedia like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able to keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
Jean-Philippe Béland Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen < list-wikimedia@funcrunch.org> wrote:
The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine people like myself.
I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's
message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that
this
will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in the document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this project will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not mass-producing poor-quality content).
As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist. I believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said can be described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of
poor
wording.
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
<gorillawarfarewikipedia@
gmail.com> wrote:
Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to
this
list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue with
her
email address.
"This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women
to a
higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't
going
to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a bunch
of
stubs.
And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's
better
than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I
shouldn't
have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
- Pax aka Funcrunch
On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
Is that still going on?
I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on Wikipedia. I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned out pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, on
women
involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of them.
But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration of quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is sexist. The same question would apply if the proposed articles were about Russian literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just
because
of what the subject happens to be.
I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling people sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be all for shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in this thread.
Todd
On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez" wikigamaliel@gmail.com wrote:
So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these issues. Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest
tones
it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and
apologies
are demanded. We've culturally internalized sexism so much that even
the
way we talk about sexism is sexist.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com
wrote:
But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying to contast is, per se, a clear defeat. To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing* about their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is, incidentally, one the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.
-- Pax Ahimsa Gethen | pax@funcrunch.org | http://funcrunch.org | Pronouns: they/them/their
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
--
Jean-Philippe Béland
[image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr, chapitre national soutenant Wikipédia Vice president — Wikimedia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en, national chapter supporting Wikipedia 535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec) H2L 2P3,jpbeland@wikimedia.ca _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
As far as i know, it is the only project that the initiative Women in red contribute to, which is the initial subject of this thread.
It certainly is the only project where "Many of the competition articles will just get tagged CSD - A1, A7, A9 even G2" makes any sense. I am a sysop on several Wikimedia projects and participate in deletion regularly and I have no clue what CSD, A1, A7, A9 and even G2 are, which are part of the initial email of this thread, proving that it applies to only the English Wikipedia.
So my point stands. This is not a thread about "misogyny and under-representation of female editors" in general, even if it may have derived that way. The initial email and the few that followed clearly show that the authors were talking only about the English Wikipedia and showed zero interest in including the other projects in a meaningful general discussion about that issue, if not why using obscure terms that only pertain to that project?
That being said, I now thank Lodewijk for making it general and inclusive. It should have been the way this discussion was opened if it was really meant to be a more generic theme and wanted to be inclusive of the community as a whole.
JP
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:57 PM, Robert Fernandez wikigamaliel@gmail.com wrote:
Is the English Wikipedia the only Wikipedia which has problems with misogyny and under-representation of female editors and articles? I am relieved to hear that!
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Jean-Philippe Béland < jpbeland@wikimedia.ca
wrote:
There is so many threads on this list that are only about English
Wikipedia
like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able to keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
Jean-Philippe Béland Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen < list-wikimedia@funcrunch.org> wrote:
The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine people like myself.
I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's
message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that
this
will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in
the
document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this
project
will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not mass-producing poor-quality content).
As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist.
I
believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said
can
be described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of
poor
wording.
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
<gorillawarfarewikipedia@
gmail.com> wrote:
Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to
this
list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue with
her
email address.
"This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women
to a
higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't
going
to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a bunch
of
stubs.
And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's
better
than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I
shouldn't
have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
- Pax aka Funcrunch
On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
Is that still going on?
I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on
Wikipedia.
I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned
out
pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, on
women
involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of them.
But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration
of
quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is sexist.
The
same question would apply if the proposed articles were about Russian literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just
because
of what the subject happens to be.
I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling people sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be all
for
shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in this thread.
Todd
On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez" wikigamaliel@gmail.com wrote:
So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these issues. Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest
tones
it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and
apologies
are demanded. We've culturally internalized sexism so much that even
the
way we talk about sexism is sexist.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com
wrote:
But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying
to
contast is, per se, a clear defeat. To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing* about their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is,
incidentally,
one the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.
-- Pax Ahimsa Gethen | pax@funcrunch.org | http://funcrunch.org |
Pronouns:
they/them/their
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
--
Jean-Philippe Béland
[image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr, chapitre national soutenant Wikipédia Vice president — Wikimedia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en, national chapter supporting Wikipedia 535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec) H2L 2P3,jpbeland@wikimedia.ca _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Jean-Philippe Béland jpbeland@wikimedia.ca wrote:
As far as i know, it is the only project that the initiative Women in red contribute to, which is the initial subject of this thread.
Sidenote: the WikiProject itself does exist on other languages/projects: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q23875215 but this particular contribution drive is only focused on English Wikipedia. I imagine it would be significantly harder to coordinate an equivalent endeavor across multiple languages/communities simultaneously. Perhaps other languages could set up something similar for themselves? </tangent>
I understand from the original email that the venue was chosen based on the fact that it was WMF-funded as a project. I am guessing he's trying to pull that leverage.
The topic is more generic though: should we support projects that are considered by some to be a little rough on the edges, or should we only pick 'safe' projects that will land well with the community. And how much of 'be bold' can be applied to projects that operate at a somewhat larger scale.
While this particular topic seems enwp specific, its theme isn't.
Lodewijk
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Jean-Philippe Béland < jpbeland@wikimedia.ca> wrote:
There is so many threads on this list that are only about English Wikipedia like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able to keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
Jean-Philippe Béland Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen < list-wikimedia@funcrunch.org> wrote:
The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine people like myself.
I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's
message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that
this
will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in the document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this project will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not mass-producing poor-quality content).
As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist. I believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said can be described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of
poor
wording.
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
<gorillawarfarewikipedia@
gmail.com> wrote:
Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to
this
list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue with
her
email address.
"This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women
to a
higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't
going
to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a bunch
of
stubs.
And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's
better
than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I
shouldn't
have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
- Pax aka Funcrunch
On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
Is that still going on?
I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on Wikipedia. I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned out pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, on
women
involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of them.
But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration of quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is sexist. The same question would apply if the proposed articles were about Russian literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just
because
of what the subject happens to be.
I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling people sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be all for shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in this thread.
Todd
On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez" wikigamaliel@gmail.com wrote:
So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these issues. Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest
tones
it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and
apologies
are demanded. We've culturally internalized sexism so much that even
the
way we talk about sexism is sexist.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com
wrote:
But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying to contast is, per se, a clear defeat. To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing* about their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is, incidentally, one the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.
-- Pax Ahimsa Gethen | pax@funcrunch.org | http://funcrunch.org | Pronouns: they/them/their
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
--
Jean-Philippe Béland
[image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr, chapitre national soutenant Wikipédia Vice president — Wikimedia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en, national chapter supporting Wikipedia 535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec) H2L 2P3,jpbeland@wikimedia.ca _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
2017-10-16 20:03 GMT+02:00 Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org:
While this particular topic seems enwp specific, its theme isn't.
Definitely
The topic is more generic though: should we support projects that are
considered by some to be a little rough on the edges, or should we only pick 'safe' projects that will land well with the community. And how much of 'be bold' can be applied to projects that operate at a somewhat larger scale.
I think projects with a serious plan to improve contents or expanding userbase are worth funding. I don't think monetary prizes are the right way to do it, also I think projects related to contents should focus on quality rather than quantity, or, at least, they shoul set some decent (and measurable) quality target.
Vito
My opinion is that such projects should be supported, we should encourage 'be bold'. That being said, people planning projects at a large scale should communicate with the concerned communities first. As such, the concerns raised in this thread for example would have been raised during the planning phase of that project and hopefully addressed. There is a place in the application forms for grants for projects that asks to list "Community Notification". The Grant Committee should look more closely at that section and ensure that the communities have been notified before granting any fund.
JP
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org wrote:
I understand from the original email that the venue was chosen based on the fact that it was WMF-funded as a project. I am guessing he's trying to pull that leverage.
The topic is more generic though: should we support projects that are considered by some to be a little rough on the edges, or should we only pick 'safe' projects that will land well with the community. And how much of 'be bold' can be applied to projects that operate at a somewhat larger scale.
While this particular topic seems enwp specific, its theme isn't.
Lodewijk
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Jean-Philippe Béland < jpbeland@wikimedia.ca> wrote:
There is so many threads on this list that are only about English
Wikipedia
like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able to keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
Jean-Philippe Béland Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen < list-wikimedia@funcrunch.org> wrote:
The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine people like myself.
I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's
message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that
this
will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in
the
document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this
project
will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not mass-producing poor-quality content).
As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist.
I
believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said
can
be described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of
poor
wording.
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
<gorillawarfarewikipedia@
gmail.com> wrote:
Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to
this
list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue with
her
email address.
"This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women
to a
higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't
going
to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a bunch
of
stubs.
And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's
better
than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I
shouldn't
have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
- Pax aka Funcrunch
On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
Is that still going on?
I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on
Wikipedia.
I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned
out
pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, on
women
involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of them.
But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration
of
quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is sexist.
The
same question would apply if the proposed articles were about Russian literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just
because
of what the subject happens to be.
I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling people sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be all
for
shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in this thread.
Todd
On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez" wikigamaliel@gmail.com wrote:
So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these issues. Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest
tones
it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and
apologies
are demanded. We've culturally internalized sexism so much that even
the
way we talk about sexism is sexist.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com
wrote:
But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying
to
contast is, per se, a clear defeat. To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing* about their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is,
incidentally,
one the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.
-- Pax Ahimsa Gethen | pax@funcrunch.org | http://funcrunch.org |
Pronouns:
they/them/their
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
--
Jean-Philippe Béland
[image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr, chapitre national soutenant Wikipédia Vice president — Wikimedia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en, national chapter supporting Wikipedia 535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec) H2L 2P3,jpbeland@wikimedia.ca _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Are those applications published anywhere? I'd be curious to see it. I'm not really familiar with the grant process.
Todd
On Oct 16, 2017 12:47 PM, "Jean-Philippe Béland" jpbeland@wikimedia.ca wrote:
My opinion is that such projects should be supported, we should encourage 'be bold'. That being said, people planning projects at a large scale should communicate with the concerned communities first. As such, the concerns raised in this thread for example would have been raised during the planning phase of that project and hopefully addressed. There is a place in the application forms for grants for projects that asks to list "Community Notification". The Grant Committee should look more closely at that section and ensure that the communities have been notified before granting any fund.
JP
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org wrote:
I understand from the original email that the venue was chosen based on
the
fact that it was WMF-funded as a project. I am guessing he's trying to
pull
that leverage.
The topic is more generic though: should we support projects that are considered by some to be a little rough on the edges, or should we only pick 'safe' projects that will land well with the community. And how much of 'be bold' can be applied to projects that operate at a somewhat larger scale.
While this particular topic seems enwp specific, its theme isn't.
Lodewijk
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Jean-Philippe Béland < jpbeland@wikimedia.ca> wrote:
There is so many threads on this list that are only about English
Wikipedia
like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able to keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
Jean-Philippe Béland Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen < list-wikimedia@funcrunch.org> wrote:
The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary
transmasculine
people like myself.
I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's
message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns
that
this
will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in
the
document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this
project
will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not mass-producing poor-quality content).
As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a
sexist.
I
believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said
can
be described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of
poor
wording.
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
<gorillawarfarewikipedia@
gmail.com> wrote:
Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to
this
list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue
with
her
email address.
"This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about
women
to a
higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't
going
to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a
bunch
of
stubs.
And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's
better
than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I
shouldn't
have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
- Pax aka Funcrunch
On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
Is that still going on?
I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on
Wikipedia.
I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned
out
pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, on
women
involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of
them.
But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in exchange for creating large numbers of articles without
consideration
of
quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is sexist.
The
same question would apply if the proposed articles were about
Russian
literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just
because
of what the subject happens to be.
I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling
people
sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be all
for
shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in
this
thread.
Todd
On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez" <
wikigamaliel@gmail.com>
wrote:
So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about
these
issues. Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported,
sweeping
generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest
tones
it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and
apologies
are demanded. We've culturally internalized sexism so much that
even
the
way we talk about sexism is sexist.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com
wrote:
> > But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're
trying
to
> contast is, per se, a clear defeat. > To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know
*nothing*
> about > their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is,
incidentally,
> one > the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism. >
-- Pax Ahimsa Gethen | pax@funcrunch.org | http://funcrunch.org |
Pronouns:
they/them/their
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
--
Jean-Philippe Béland
[image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr, chapitre
national
soutenant Wikipédia Vice president — Wikimedia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en, national chapter supporting Wikipedia 535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec) H2L 2P3,jpbeland@wikimedia.ca _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
--
Jean-Philippe Béland
[image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr, chapitre national soutenant Wikipédia Vice president — Wikimedia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en, national chapter supporting Wikipedia 535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec) H2L 2P3,jpbeland@wikimedia.ca _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Yes it's all on Meta. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Start.
JP
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 3:21 PM Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
Are those applications published anywhere? I'd be curious to see it. I'm not really familiar with the grant process.
Todd
On Oct 16, 2017 12:47 PM, "Jean-Philippe Béland" jpbeland@wikimedia.ca wrote:
My opinion is that such projects should be supported, we should encourage 'be bold'. That being said, people planning projects at a large scale should communicate with the concerned communities first. As such, the concerns raised in this thread for example would have been raised during the planning phase of that project and hopefully addressed. There is a place in the application forms for grants for projects that asks to list "Community Notification". The Grant Committee should look more closely at that section and ensure that the communities have been notified before granting any fund.
JP
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org wrote:
I understand from the original email that the venue was chosen based on
the
fact that it was WMF-funded as a project. I am guessing he's trying to
pull
that leverage.
The topic is more generic though: should we support projects that are considered by some to be a little rough on the edges, or should we only pick 'safe' projects that will land well with the community. And how
much
of 'be bold' can be applied to projects that operate at a somewhat
larger
scale.
While this particular topic seems enwp specific, its theme isn't.
Lodewijk
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Jean-Philippe Béland < jpbeland@wikimedia.ca> wrote:
There is so many threads on this list that are only about English
Wikipedia
like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able
to
keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
Jean-Philippe Béland Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen < list-wikimedia@funcrunch.org> wrote:
The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether
a
comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary
transmasculine
people like myself.
I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this
thread:
Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of
Emily's/Keilana's
message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns
that
this
will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for
in
the
document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this
project
will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including
not
mass-producing poor-quality content).
As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a
sexist.
I
believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's
said
can
be described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism
of
poor
wording.
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
<gorillawarfarewikipedia@
gmail.com> wrote:
Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through
to
this
list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue
with
her
email address.
"This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle
some
stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to
AFD
everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about
women
to a
higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia
isn't
going
to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a
bunch
of
stubs.
And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women?
It's
better
than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I
shouldn't
have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
- Pax aka Funcrunch
On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
Is that still going on?
I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on
Wikipedia.
I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've
turned
out
pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example,
on
women
involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of
them.
But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money
in
exchange for creating large numbers of articles without
consideration
of
quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is
sexist.
The
same question would apply if the proposed articles were about
Russian
literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just
because
of what the subject happens to be.
I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling
people
sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be
all
for
shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in
this
thread.
Todd
On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez" <
wikigamaliel@gmail.com>
wrote:
So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite? > > I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about
these
> issues. Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported,
sweeping
> generalizations about the motives and actions of others and
that's
> considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the
gentlest
tones
> it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and
apologies
> are demanded. We've culturally internalized sexism so much that
even
the
> way we talk about sexism is sexist. > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com
wrote:
> >> >> But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're
trying
to
>> contast is, per se, a clear defeat. >> To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know
*nothing*
>> about >> their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is,
incidentally,
>> one >> the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism. >> >
-- Pax Ahimsa Gethen | pax@funcrunch.org | http://funcrunch.org |
Pronouns:
they/them/their
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
--
Jean-Philippe Béland
[image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr, chapitre
national
soutenant Wikipédia Vice president — Wikimedia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en, national
chapter
supporting Wikipedia 535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec) H2L 2P3,
jpbeland@wikimedia.ca
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
--
Jean-Philippe Béland
[image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr, chapitre national soutenant Wikipédia Vice president — Wikimedia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en, national chapter supporting Wikipedia 535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec) H2L 2P3,jpbeland@wikimedia.ca _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hello Todd,
This particular grant request is here on meta.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Project/Dr._Blofeld/Contest_toolkits_...
The talk page has details about the review by the community committee and also an explanation of the funding that was actually give.
There is background information about WMF grants here.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Project/Dr._Blofeld/Contest_toolkits_...
And an evaluation of contests in general. It is several years old and doesn't include some of the newer contest.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Learning_and_Evaluation/Evaluation_reports/2...
Sydney Poore User:FloNight Co-founder Kentucky Wikimedians, Co-founder WikiWomen User Group, Co-founder WikiConference North America Board member of Wiki Project Med Foundation
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 3:20 PM, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
Are those applications published anywhere? I'd be curious to see it. I'm not really familiar with the grant process.
Todd
On Oct 16, 2017 12:47 PM, "Jean-Philippe Béland" jpbeland@wikimedia.ca wrote:
My opinion is that such projects should be supported, we should encourage 'be bold'. That being said, people planning projects at a large scale should communicate with the concerned communities first. As such, the concerns raised in this thread for example would have been raised during the planning phase of that project and hopefully addressed. There is a place in the application forms for grants for projects that asks to list "Community Notification". The Grant Committee should look more closely at that section and ensure that the communities have been notified before granting any fund.
JP
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org wrote:
I understand from the original email that the venue was chosen based on
the
fact that it was WMF-funded as a project. I am guessing he's trying to
pull
that leverage.
The topic is more generic though: should we support projects that are considered by some to be a little rough on the edges, or should we only pick 'safe' projects that will land well with the community. And how
much
of 'be bold' can be applied to projects that operate at a somewhat
larger
scale.
While this particular topic seems enwp specific, its theme isn't.
Lodewijk
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Jean-Philippe Béland < jpbeland@wikimedia.ca> wrote:
There is so many threads on this list that are only about English
Wikipedia
like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able
to
keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
Jean-Philippe Béland Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen < list-wikimedia@funcrunch.org> wrote:
The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether
a
comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary
transmasculine
people like myself.
I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this
thread:
Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of
Emily's/Keilana's
message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns
that
this
will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for
in
the
document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this
project
will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including
not
mass-producing poor-quality content).
As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a
sexist.
I
believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's
said
can
be described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism
of
poor
wording.
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
<gorillawarfarewikipedia@
gmail.com> wrote:
Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through
to
this
list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue
with
her
email address.
"This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle
some
stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to
AFD
everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about
women
to a
higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia
isn't
going
to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a
bunch
of
stubs.
And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women?
It's
better
than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I
shouldn't
have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
- Pax aka Funcrunch
On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
Is that still going on?
I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on
Wikipedia.
I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've
turned
out
pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example,
on
women
involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of
them.
But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money
in
exchange for creating large numbers of articles without
consideration
of
quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is
sexist.
The
same question would apply if the proposed articles were about
Russian
literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just
because
of what the subject happens to be.
I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling
people
sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be
all
for
shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in
this
thread.
Todd
On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez" <
wikigamaliel@gmail.com>
wrote:
So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite? > > I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about
these
> issues. Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported,
sweeping
> generalizations about the motives and actions of others and
that's
> considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the
gentlest
tones
> it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and
apologies
> are demanded. We've culturally internalized sexism so much that
even
the
> way we talk about sexism is sexist. > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com
wrote:
> >> >> But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're
trying
to
>> contast is, per se, a clear defeat. >> To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know
*nothing*
>> about >> their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is,
incidentally,
>> one >> the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism. >> >
-- Pax Ahimsa Gethen | pax@funcrunch.org | http://funcrunch.org |
Pronouns:
they/them/their
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
--
Jean-Philippe Béland
[image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr, chapitre
national
soutenant Wikipédia Vice president — Wikimedia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en, national
chapter
supporting Wikipedia 535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec) H2L 2P3,
jpbeland@wikimedia.ca
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
--
Jean-Philippe Béland
[image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr, chapitre national soutenant Wikipédia Vice president — Wikimedia Canada https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en, national chapter supporting Wikipedia 535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec) H2L 2P3,jpbeland@wikimedia.ca _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Why?
-----Original Message----- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Pax Ahimsa Gethen Sent: Monday, 16 October 2017 7:21 PM To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red
The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine people like myself.
I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that this will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in the document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this project will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not mass-producing poor-quality content).
As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist. I believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said can be described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of poor wording.
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare <gorillawarfarewikipedia@ gmail.com> wrote:
Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to this list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue with her email address.
"This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women to a higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't going to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a bunch of stubs.
And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's better than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I shouldn't have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
- Pax aka Funcrunch
On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
Is that still going on?
I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on Wikipedia. I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned out pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, on women involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of them.
But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration of quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is sexist. The same question would apply if the proposed articles were about Russian literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just because of what the subject happens to be.
I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling people sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be all for shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in this thread.
Todd
On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez" wikigamaliel@gmail.com wrote:
So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these issues. Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest tones it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and apologies are demanded. We've culturally internalized sexism so much that even the way we talk about sexism is sexist.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying to contast is, per se, a clear defeat. To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing* about their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is, incidentally, one the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.
-- Pax Ahimsa Gethen | pax@funcrunch.org | http://funcrunch.org | Pronouns: they/them/their
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
--- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com
2017-10-16 18:27 GMT+02:00 Robert Fernandez wikigamaliel@gmail.com:
So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
I wrote a pretty different thing: those who use label as "sexist" anyone who doesn't *completely* agree with them share a rethorical mean with sexism.
Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's considered just fine,
You're perfectly describing Ori Livneh's statement against me.
2017-10-16 19:11 GMT+02:00 Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com:
But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration of quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is sexist. The same question would apply if the proposed articles were about Russian literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just because of what the subject happens to be.
\o/
Vito
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org