Hi,
I posted this a while ago, an investigation on gender bias where a member
of Wikimedia Chile was involved, in his personal capacity though:
There are many things that can be addressed individually and as a movement
or collective, if we believe the conclusions are valid, which I personally
do, since they are supported with data and not on our personal impressions.
Cheers!
El jue., may. 10, 2018 10:27, Peter Southwood <peter.southwood(a)telkomsa.net>
escribió:
Notability and verifiability are important. They allow
us to produce
reasonably reliable work. Moving away from those constraints opens the
doors to extremely unreliable material. If Wikipedia is to remain open to
anyone to edit, there do not appear to be any robust alternatives. Other
projects may work around this problem, but would then probably not be open
for anyone to edit. Or can you suggest another way?
Cheers,
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On
Behalf Of Jean-Philippe Béland
Sent: 10 May 2018 15:01
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
"Nothing odd, it's baked in: Wikipedia is a summary of the canon of
knowledge, the corpus of generally accepted knowledge."
But it is what we accept as part of the canon of "knowledge" as Wikipedia
that could be improved. We have a very western approach to that saying that
it needs to be published in such books or journals to be notable enough,
when different cultures use different ways to build their canon of
knowledge.
JP
User:Amqui
On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 5:53 AM FRED BAUDER <fredbaud(a)fairpoint.net>
wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: Jane Darnell <jane023(a)gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Thu, 10 May 2018 04:02:46 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
...because of our rules regarding references. Oddly,
Wikipedia can at best only echo the systemic bias, but will never be able
to correct it."
Nothing odd, it's baked in: Wikipedia is a summary of the canon of
knowledge, the corpus of generally accepted knowledge.
The knowledge industry could do better. And when it does, Wikipedia will
reflect that. in the meantime it is helpful if gender and other bias
issues
are noted and accommodated. Our mission is more
modest than full
correction
of all bias, but we can contribute or even lead.
Fred
_______________________________________________
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(a)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(a)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
_______________________________________________
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(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>