Hi Chris,
This is actually a very good point!
I will try to find out with the other members of ec where we stand on this. Stay tuned for updates.
Thanks and sorry for the delay
On 16 באוקטובר 2017 21:14:33 GMT+03:00, wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
Send Wikimedia-l mailing list submissions to wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
You can reach the person managing the list at wikimedia-l-owner@lists.wikimedia.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Wikimedia-l digest..."
Today's Topics:
- Re: Women in red (Peter Southwood)
- Re: Women in red (Robert Fernandez)
- Re: Women in red (Lodewijk)
- Re: [Wikimedia Announcements] Results of the 2017 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election (Chris Keating)
Message: 1 Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 19:53:01 +0200 From: "Peter Southwood" peter.southwood@telkomsa.net To: "'Wikimedia Mailing List'" wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red Message-ID: 000901d346a7$9e49dd40$dadd97c0$@telkomsa.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
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
Message: 2 Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 13:57:26 -0400 From: Robert Fernandez wikigamaliel@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red Message-ID: CAMY8yAXzYhsdvnuC1+goc42CCPdFoOPjFPCV-W0QVvRez4N7bg@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
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"
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
Message: 3 Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 11:03:32 -0700 From: Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red Message-ID: CACf6BeszfvKfnM38V1ugb7zwPOMck+Ow61N9UwAfgM9B5h81sQ@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
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"
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
Message: 4 Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 19:14:29 +0100 From: Chris Keating chriskeatingwiki@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Results of the 2017 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election Message-ID: CAFche1quo=Dj08jYbM4OwdyZPD9Zf8jk1r9hCxN1Uaz9_iY7Mw@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Hello all and particularly the Elections Committee!
I just wondered what is happening in terms of post-mortem on the elections. There was a call for comments on Meta - is there any kind of active review by the Election Committee happening? I know in previous years the EC has often made extensive comments to shape future years!
Regards,
Chris
On 21 May 2017 01:33, "matanya moses" matanya@foss.co.il wrote:
Greetings,
The certified results of the 2017 Wikimedia Foundation Board of
Trustees
election are now available on Meta-Wiki: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2017/Results
Congratulations to María Sefidari (User:Raystorm), Dariusz Jemielniak (User:pundit), and James Heilman (User:Doc James) for receiving the
most
community support. Subject to a standard background check, they will
be
appointed by the Board at their August meeting at Wikimania.
These results have been certified by the elections committee, the Wikimedia Foundation staff advisors to the committee, and the Board
of
Trustees.
There were 5,581 votes cast, with 5,120 of those being valid. The
461-vote
difference comes from recast ballots, where eligible voters recast
ballots
to change their votes, and struck votes, of which there were 34.
(Some of
the recast votes were also struck.)
Additional information is available on the Wikimedia Blog:
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/05/20/board-of-trustees-elections-2017/
More statistics on the elections and a post-mortem from the committee
will
be published in the coming days. In the meantime, we would appreciate
your
input—what went well for you in this election? What could we do
better
next time? These reports are crucial to helping future elections be
even
more successful, and we hope that you will offer your feedback and
ideas:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_ elections/2017/Post_mortem
The committee would like to thank everyone that participated in this year’s election for helping make it, again, one of the most diverse
and
representative in the movement’s history.
Sincerely, – Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee
Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be
immediately
directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more information about Wikimedia-l: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l _______________________________________________ WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list WikimediaAnnounce-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
Subject: Digest Footer
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
End of Wikimedia-l Digest, Vol 163, Issue 44
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org