[Gendergap] Gendergap Digest, Vol 1, Issue 77
Robin Kelley
robintkelley at yahoo.com
Tue Feb 15 00:56:55 UTC 2011
I agree.
--- On Mon, 2/14/11, gendergap-request at lists.wikimedia.org <gendergap-request at lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
> From: gendergap-request at lists.wikimedia.org <gendergap-request at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Gendergap Digest, Vol 1, Issue 77
> To: gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org
> Date: Monday, February 14, 2011, 6:57 PM
> Send Gendergap mailing list
> submissions to
> gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help'
> to
> gendergap-request at lists.wikimedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> gendergap-owner at lists.wikimedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more
> specific
> than "Re: Contents of Gendergap digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Moderation? (Oliver Keyes)
> 2. Wikiproject: Womens Cafe for all
> language wikis
> (carolmooredc at verizon.net)
> 3. Re: Wikiproject: Womens Cafe for all
> language wikis (Oliver Keyes)
> 4. Re: Moderation? (Andreas Kolbe)
> 5. Press inquiry (Steven Walling)
> 6. Re: Hardcore images essay (Andreas
> Kolbe)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 22:44:58 +0000
> From: Oliver Keyes <scire.facias at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Moderation?
> To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
> <gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTiko1DQ06v8yw5RWnyFfkaaD+9876qDFKn1EJCR9 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Seconded. I don't think "another for broader issues" would
> be at all useful.
> People are welcome to have wide-ranging discussions about
> the necessary
> changes to society etc etc, but the fact of the matter is
> that the WMF can't
> *make* those changes.
>
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 10:39 PM, Casey Brown <lists at caseybrown.org>
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 5:36 PM, SlimVirgin <slimvirgin at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > I wonder whether it would make sense to have two
> lists -- one for
> > > Wikipedia-specific suggestions, and another for
> the broader issues.
> >
> > Maybe, or just more clear expectations of what isn't
> the most helpful
> > things here. I've been seeing a lot of
> general/deep philosophical
> > questions and topics like the Bible and
> capitalism. I don't know
> > about anyone else, but I just click "mark all as read"
> for those ones.
> > :-) This list is about increasing gender
> diversity in Wikimedia
> > projects, not about describing the history of gender
> issues throughout
> > time.
> >
> > --
> > Casey Brown
> > Cbrown1023
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Gendergap mailing list
> > Gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20110214/3d93a10d/attachment-0001.htm
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 17:49:06 -0500
> From: carolmooredc at verizon.net
> Subject: [Gendergap] Wikiproject: Womens Cafe for all
> language wikis
> To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
> <gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <4D59B162.6040409 at verizon.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1;
> format=flowed
>
> IDEA - start WIKIPROJECT in all languages called: Womens
> Cafe (or
> something sociable and helpful sounding) as an outreach,
> education and
> support network
>
> There are several feminism wikiprojects fr:Projet:Femmes -
>
> pl:Wikiprojekt:Gender Studies - sv:Wikipedia:Projekt
> kvinnor -
> es:Wikiproyecto:Feminismo - En. Wikiproject:Feminism There
> also is a
> proposal for WomensHistory. However, many women are not
> interested in
> editing on womens topics and/or want more general education
> and
> support. (And some of course steer away from the word
> feminism, though
> this project hopefully would complement, not compete with
> any
> wikiprojects feminism.) Men of course would be allowed to
> help and
> learn, but doubtless there would be a low tolerance for
> questionable and
> trolling behavior.
>
> Each project could link to some of the helpful things
> other projects do:
>
> *Quick help box like
> http://en.wikipedia.or/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Feminism
>
> *List of relevant articles about women in wikipedia,
> including some
> gender gap ones, so they can understand context.
>
> *An articles issues page to list articles that whose
> subject women might
> be more interested in, where women can ask for help on
> where to go when
> having problems in articles, or even can list articles
> where women feel
> they are being hassled and would like uninvolved editors'
> (especially
> womens') opinion.
>
> *Links to training videos that show women how to edit on
> wikipedia and
> quickly deal with issues.
>
> *Other relevant links, material, pages, resources, etc.
>
> I don't want to start one in En. WIkipedia, but would
> certainly join and
> help out.
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 23:00:33 +0000
> From: Oliver Keyes <scire.facias at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Wikiproject: Womens Cafe for all
> language
> wikis
> To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
> <gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTimFnP-WNHAgWB2cRoD0nLGOCai4OBvuEFsB3DBM at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> "Men of course would be allowed to help and
> learn, but doubtless there would be a low tolerance for
> questionable and
> trolling behavior."
> How nice of you to tolerate our barbarianism.
>
> Again, this comes down to "do we want to divide the
> community"? If it's
> behavioural issues within the community, the behaviour of
> the community has
> to change. Dissecting it will only cause greater problems
> further down the
> line.
>
> I want to again take this opportunity to emphasise that *we
> don't know why
> so few women edit compared to men*. Is there any chance we
> could gather some
> statistically reliable data first, and come up with ideas
> on how to fix the
> (currently baseless) presuppositions later?
>
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 10:49 PM, <carolmooredc at verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
> > IDEA - start WIKIPROJECT in all languages called:
> Womens Cafe (or
> > something sociable and helpful sounding) as an
> outreach, education and
> > support network
> >
> > There are several feminism wikiprojects
> fr:Projet:Femmes -
> > pl:Wikiprojekt:Gender Studies - sv:Wikipedia:Projekt
> kvinnor -
> > es:Wikiproyecto:Feminismo - En. Wikiproject:Feminism
> There also is a
> > proposal for WomensHistory. However, many women are
> not interested in
> > editing on womens topics and/or want more general
> education and
> > support. (And some of course steer away from the
> word feminism, though
> > this project hopefully would complement, not compete
> with any
> > wikiprojects feminism.) Men of course would be allowed
> to help and
> > learn, but doubtless there would be a low tolerance
> for questionable and
> > trolling behavior.
> >
> > Each project could link to some of the helpful
> things other projects do:
> >
> > *Quick help box like
> > http://en.wikipedia.or/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Feminism
> >
> > *List of relevant articles about women in wikipedia,
> including some
> > gender gap ones, so they can understand context.
> >
> > *An articles issues page to list articles that whose
> subject women might
> > be more interested in, where women can ask for help on
> where to go when
> > having problems in articles, or even can list articles
> where women feel
> > they are being hassled and would like uninvolved
> editors' (especially
> > womens') opinion.
> >
> > *Links to training videos that show women how to edit
> on wikipedia and
> > quickly deal with issues.
> >
> > *Other relevant links, material, pages, resources,
> etc.
> >
> > I don't want to start one in En. WIkipedia, but would
> certainly join and
> > help out.
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Gendergap mailing list
> > Gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20110214/6ec0b23e/attachment-0001.htm
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 23:34:49 +0000 (GMT)
> From: Andreas Kolbe <jayen466 at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Moderation?
> To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
> <gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <599332.42810.qm at web29617.mail.ird.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> --- On Mon, 14/2/11, Casey Brown <lists at caseybrown.org>
> wrote:
> > From: Casey Brown <lists at caseybrown.org>
>
> > Maybe, or just more clear expectations of what isn't
> the
> > most helpful
> > things here.? I've been seeing a lot of general/deep
> > philosophical
> > questions and topics like the Bible and capitalism.?
> I
> > don't know
> > about anyone else, but I just click "mark all as read"
> for
> > those ones.
> > :-)? This list is about increasing gender diversity
> in
> > Wikimedia
> > projects, not about describing the history of gender
> issues
> > throughout
> > time.
>
> I agree with Casey (although I still read most of these
> posts).
> We can't start the discussion with Adam and Eve.
>
> Andreas
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 15:53:09 -0800
> From: Steven Walling <swalling at wikimedia.org>
> Subject: [Gendergap] Press inquiry
> To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
> <gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <3994FD21-106A-4D35-9BFC-1A8C1F51BD53 at wikimedia.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hey everyone,
>
> So a writer from the (widely read and pretty influential)
> tech blog ReadWriteWeb would like to whip up something that
> follows up on the New York Times piece. Her name in Audrey
> Watters, and on Jay and Moka's recommendation I'm bringing
> it to the list because she's interested in talking to
> someone who is involved in a project to recruit new female
> editors.
>
> It's awesome that she's interested in what's being planned
> in the way of constructive change, and she's already seen
> efforts like the Women's History WikiProject on English
> Wikipedia. If you're interested in talking to her in any
> capacity, let me know and I'll forward you along to her.
> (She'd be most happy to talk to someone who is comfortable
> being quoted directly, but if you not just be up front about
> it and she'll respect your preference.)
>
> I'd like to especially prod editors like Phoebe,
> SlimVirgin, and Pharos who are helping plan things now and
> have lots of experience with past efforts around the gender
> gap. :-)
>
> Steven Walling
> Fellow at the Wikimedia Foundation
> wikimediafoundation.org
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20110214/f5f35c02/attachment-0001.htm
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 23:57:00 +0000 (GMT)
> From: Andreas Kolbe <jayen466 at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Hardcore images essay
> To: fredbaud at fairpoint.net,
> Increasing female participation in
> Wikimedia projects
> <gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <754928.32495.qm at web29607.mail.ird.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> --- On Mon, 14/2/11, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at fairpoint.net>
> wrote:
> https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/User_talk:Herostratus/Hardcore_images#Userfy
> >
> > He has now asked for mediation.
> >
> > Although I agree with the position taken in the essay,
> and,
> > indeed, would
> > go much further, I doubt this is the issue to lead on.
> It
> > has done me no
> > good.
>
>
> I don't think so far it has done anyone any good who has
> tried to argue for
> a more mature attitude towards pornographic content, Jimbo
> and Herostratus
> included. Or for an attitude towards this content that more
> closely matches
> that employed by what we call reliable sources. Yet it is
> an issue that cannot
> be bypassed. Once a more mature community consensus on this
> issue is reached,
> a lot of other things will fall into place. It is a key
> issue, and an
> emblematic reflection of the present community demographics
> which we are
> hoping to change.
>
>
> > That said, it should be possible to resurrect the
> essay in
> > the Wikipedia
> > namespace if others are motivated to do so, and the
> > author's WP:OWN
> > issues are dealt with.
>
>
> Herostratus makes the point that --
>
> "Look, the Britannica doesn't host porn. Are they
> 'censored'? Of course not.
> They are exercising editoral judgement. I think it'd be
> silly to say 'The
> Britannica is censored'. The Great Chinese Encyclopedia (or
> whatever they
> have) is censored, and that's totally different."
>
> It is a sensible point, yet is always greeted with a chorus
> of "Wikipedia is
> not censored."
>
> To be clear: Wikipedia is not Britannica, and we will cover
> and illustrate
> topics, including sexual topics, that Britannica does not.
> I am not saying
> that Wikipedia must not have nudity in an article like
> hogtie bondage, or
> that Commons must not have creampie images. Reliably
> published sex manuals
> etc. have similar images. But we should not blaze a trail
> on Wikipedia's
> pages that is way beyond mainstream publishing. We make a
> policy commitment
> not to go beyond the standards of reliable sources in our
> texts, and we
> should do the same for illustrations in Wikipedia.
>
> The fact is that our present community standards in this
> and other areas
> are not defined by sources, but by single young males'
> interests. The
> bias of these standards relative to the real-world
> mainstream is very
> obvious in this area (especially so in Commons). Not
> challenging these
> standards where they clearly depart from mainstream
> publishing feeds an
> unreflected sense of entitlement masquerading as
> self-congratulatory
> liberalism. We need more reflection, not less.
>
> I understand the reluctance of women, and the silent
> majority (if indeed
> there is such a silent "majority"), to get involved in this
> area, because
> it will get nasty. But it's a nettle that has to be grasped
> before things
> will get better.
>
> YMMV.
>
> Andreas
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
>
> End of Gendergap Digest, Vol 1, Issue 77
> ****************************************
>
More information about the Gendergap
mailing list