[Wikimedia-l] Women in red

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
48 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

GorillaWarfare
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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Gergő Tisza <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Keegan Peterzell <
>> > [hidden email]>
>> > > 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: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> > New messages to: [hidden email]
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

Natacha Rault
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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Gergő Tisza <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Keegan Peterzell <
>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>> 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: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>>>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>>>> wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>>> New messages to: [hidden email]
>>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

Gnangarra
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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]>
> 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 <[hidden email]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Gergő Tisza <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Keegan Peterzell <
> >>>> [hidden email]>
> >>>>> 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: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >>>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >>>> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >>>> New messages to: [hidden email]
> >>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> ,
> >>>> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> >>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >>> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

Yaroslav Blanter
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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]>
>> > 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 <
>> [hidden email]>
>> > >>> wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>>>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Gergő Tisza <[hidden email]>
>> > wrote:
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Keegan Peterzell <
>> > >>>> [hidden email]>
>> > >>>>> 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:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> > >>>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> > >>>> wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> > >>>> New messages to: [hidden email]
>> > >>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ma
>> ilman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>> > ,
>> > >>>> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
>> > >>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ma
>> ilman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > >>> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
>> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>> ,
>> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

Yaroslav Blanter
My (rejected) message below anyway.

Cheers
Yaroslav

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Yaroslav Blanter <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]>
> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]>
>>> > 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 <
>>> [hidden email]>
>>> > >>> wrote:
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Gergő Tisza <[hidden email]>
>>> > wrote:
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Keegan Peterzell <
>>> > >>>> [hidden email]>
>>> > >>>>> 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:
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>>> > >>>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>>> > >>>> wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>> > >>>> New messages to: [hidden email]
>>> > >>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ma
>>> ilman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>>> > ,
>>> > >>>> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
>>> > >>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ma
>>> ilman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>> > >>> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
>>> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ma
>>> ilman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
>>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

WereSpielChequers-2
In reply to this post by Gnangarra
Hi Gnangarra

I've heard bad things about the articles for creation process, but a
minimum of either 1.5 kb  or 2,000 bytes of prose is a new one on me. Can
you link to that part of the AFC rules? I have reread things such as
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/
Reviewing_instructions and found one perfectly sensible comment about
deleting single sentence "articles". But 1,000 bytes would be a jolly long
sentence. AFC has its flaws, and I wouldn't recommend it to anyone, but is
it really as flawed as you assert?

As for the women in red contest, you might want to read the rules, and if
you have concerns there is a currently redlinked talkpage.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_
talk:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/The_World_Contest/Rules&action=edit&redlink=1

I've made a couple of bold tweaks to the competition rules myself, but they
did already cover notability and of course copyvio. Though a contest aimed
at existing editors is less likely to hit problems in those areas as an
outreach editathon targeted at new editors - there we do need to explain
our notability rules and sadly often teach people about copyright and
plagiarism.

As for criticising a project for aiming for 100,000 articles when they only
have 4 judges and 108 participants, it is two weeks until it starts and
they have a watchlist notice up to recruit more people either as
participants or judges note
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/The_World_Contest/Rules
-* "If you want to help judge the contest or help out with running it
please ensure that you add your name in the judges section on the main
page"* I could understand at the end of a project having that sort of
criticism if they had got ambitious but not tried to recruit enough
participants. However at this stage such criticism is premature and
probably misdirected. A more nuanced view would be to look at the end and
check whether they succeeded in their objective and whether they achieved
sufficient participation both of editors and judges. Criticising a project
that doesn't start for another two weeks for having insufficient judges and
participants when it currently in a major site wide recruitment drive for
judges and participants seems premature to me.

Alternatively one could look at the objective and ask whether creating
100,000 articles on women was sufficient, insufficient or excessive to deal
with the known gender gap in our coverage. The 100,000 target looks about
right to me and it will be interesting to see how much progress people can
make on it in a one month contest, but if someone is uncomfortable about it
it would be sensible to go through the figures and check if that is an
appropriate target for the problem. Treating such an ambitious target as a
problem without acknowledging that Wikipedia has coverage gaps on that
scale comes across almost as denial of the problem.



----------------------------------------------------------------------

>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2017 22:02:50 +0800
> From: Gnangarra <[hidden email]>
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <[hidden email]>
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red
> Message-ID:
>         <CAD==kbLkFbP+MKzQ=wg4ApZXVqMyp1osM6tNL8i8==K-PL+ZCg@mail.
> gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> I cant believe this
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in
> _Red/The_World_Contest
> has
> got WMF funding, the idea of trying to create 100,000 stub articles on
> english wikipedia without any thought to how it'll impact on the
> community.
>
> I find it ironic that a competition is being funded to encourage current
> contributors to do what we wont accept from new editors.  If a new editor
> was to create an article it wouldnt pass through the Articles for Creation
> process because its half the size of the minimum set there. Many of the
> competition articles will just get tagged CSD - A1, A7, A9 even G2
>
> While there is a nice bot that will count the size of the prose, there is
> no automated process for checking copyright violations, checking for
> notability and most importantly checking for BLP with the aim of 100,000
> the community will years to clean up the mess that is about to be created.
>
> ​we are 15 days from this disaster commencing​
>
> --
> G
> nangarra
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2017 08:47:30 -0600
> From: James Heilman <[hidden email]>
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red
> Message-ID:
>         <CAF1en7ULzbw+6Gf7c1=HNoFX-pRvM7A4FdYCfp9HusVk+3Kg8w@mail.
> gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> Correction:
>
> There is a tool that automatically checks for copyright infringement.
> It is called CopyPatrol
>
> https://tools.wmflabs.org/copypatrol/en
>
> James
>
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

Yaroslav Blanter
My understanding is they target 10K articles, not 100K.

Cheers
Yaroslav

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:30 AM, WereSpielChequers <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Gnangarra
>
> I've heard bad things about the articles for creation process, but a
> minimum of either 1.5 kb  or 2,000 bytes of prose is a new one on me. Can
> you link to that part of the AFC rules? I have reread things such as
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/
> Reviewing_instructions and found one perfectly sensible comment about
> deleting single sentence "articles". But 1,000 bytes would be a jolly long
> sentence. AFC has its flaws, and I wouldn't recommend it to anyone, but is
> it really as flawed as you assert?
>
> As for the women in red contest, you might want to read the rules, and if
> you have concerns there is a currently redlinked talkpage.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_
> talk:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/The_World_Contest/Rules&
> action=edit&redlink=1
>
> I've made a couple of bold tweaks to the competition rules myself, but they
> did already cover notability and of course copyvio. Though a contest aimed
> at existing editors is less likely to hit problems in those areas as an
> outreach editathon targeted at new editors - there we do need to explain
> our notability rules and sadly often teach people about copyright and
> plagiarism.
>
> As for criticising a project for aiming for 100,000 articles when they only
> have 4 judges and 108 participants, it is two weeks until it starts and
> they have a watchlist notice up to recruit more people either as
> participants or judges note
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_
> in_Red/The_World_Contest/Rules
> -* "If you want to help judge the contest or help out with running it
> please ensure that you add your name in the judges section on the main
> page"* I could understand at the end of a project having that sort of
> criticism if they had got ambitious but not tried to recruit enough
> participants. However at this stage such criticism is premature and
> probably misdirected. A more nuanced view would be to look at the end and
> check whether they succeeded in their objective and whether they achieved
> sufficient participation both of editors and judges. Criticising a project
> that doesn't start for another two weeks for having insufficient judges and
> participants when it currently in a major site wide recruitment drive for
> judges and participants seems premature to me.
>
> Alternatively one could look at the objective and ask whether creating
> 100,000 articles on women was sufficient, insufficient or excessive to deal
> with the known gender gap in our coverage. The 100,000 target looks about
> right to me and it will be interesting to see how much progress people can
> make on it in a one month contest, but if someone is uncomfortable about it
> it would be sensible to go through the figures and check if that is an
> appropriate target for the problem. Treating such an ambitious target as a
> problem without acknowledging that Wikipedia has coverage gaps on that
> scale comes across almost as denial of the problem.
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2017 22:02:50 +0800
> > From: Gnangarra <[hidden email]>
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List <[hidden email]>
> > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red
> > Message-ID:
> >         <CAD==kbLkFbP+MKzQ=wg4ApZXVqMyp1osM6tNL8i8==K-PL+ZCg@mail.
> > gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> >
> > I cant believe this
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in
> > _Red/The_World_Contest
> > has
> > got WMF funding, the idea of trying to create 100,000 stub articles on
> > english wikipedia without any thought to how it'll impact on the
> > community.
> >
> > I find it ironic that a competition is being funded to encourage current
> > contributors to do what we wont accept from new editors.  If a new editor
> > was to create an article it wouldnt pass through the Articles for
> Creation
> > process because its half the size of the minimum set there. Many of the
> > competition articles will just get tagged CSD - A1, A7, A9 even G2
> >
> > While there is a nice bot that will count the size of the prose, there is
> > no automated process for checking copyright violations, checking for
> > notability and most importantly checking for BLP with the aim of 100,000
> > the community will years to clean up the mess that is about to be
> created.
> >
> > ​we are 15 days from this disaster commencing​
> >
> > --
> > G
> > nangarra
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2017 08:47:30 -0600
> > From: James Heilman <[hidden email]>
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List <[hidden email]>
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red
> > Message-ID:
> >         <CAF1en7ULzbw+6Gf7c1=HNoFX-pRvM7A4FdYCfp9HusVk+3Kg8w@mail.
> > gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> >
> > Correction:
> >
> > There is a tool that automatically checks for copyright infringement.
> > It is called CopyPatrol
> >
> > https://tools.wmflabs.org/copypatrol/en
> >
> > James
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

Gnangarra
In reply to this post by WereSpielChequers-2
WereSpielCheckers... point taken noting that the minimum figure has shifted
from 0.75k to 1k, let leave it at that

On 16 October 2017 at 17:30, WereSpielChequers <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hi Gnangarra
>
> I've heard bad things about the articles for creation process, but a
> minimum of either 1.5 kb  or 2,000 bytes of prose is a new one on me. Can
> you link to that part of the AFC rules? I have reread things such as
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/
> Reviewing_instructions and found one perfectly sensible comment about
> deleting single sentence "articles". But 1,000 bytes would be a jolly long
> sentence. AFC has its flaws, and I wouldn't recommend it to anyone, but is
> it really as flawed as you assert?
>
> As for the women in red contest, you might want to read the rules, and if
> you have concerns there is a currently redlinked talkpage.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_
> talk:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/The_World_Contest/Rules&
> action=edit&redlink=1
>
> I've made a couple of bold tweaks to the competition rules myself, but they
> did already cover notability and of course copyvio. Though a contest aimed
> at existing editors is less likely to hit problems in those areas as an
> outreach editathon targeted at new editors - there we do need to explain
> our notability rules and sadly often teach people about copyright and
> plagiarism.
>
> As for criticising a project for aiming for 100,000 articles when they only
> have 4 judges and 108 participants, it is two weeks until it starts and
> they have a watchlist notice up to recruit more people either as
> participants or judges note
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_
> in_Red/The_World_Contest/Rules
> -* "If you want to help judge the contest or help out with running it
> please ensure that you add your name in the judges section on the main
> page"* I could understand at the end of a project having that sort of
> criticism if they had got ambitious but not tried to recruit enough
> participants. However at this stage such criticism is premature and
> probably misdirected. A more nuanced view would be to look at the end and
> check whether they succeeded in their objective and whether they achieved
> sufficient participation both of editors and judges. Criticising a project
> that doesn't start for another two weeks for having insufficient judges and
> participants when it currently in a major site wide recruitment drive for
> judges and participants seems premature to me.
>
> Alternatively one could look at the objective and ask whether creating
> 100,000 articles on women was sufficient, insufficient or excessive to deal
> with the known gender gap in our coverage. The 100,000 target looks about
> right to me and it will be interesting to see how much progress people can
> make on it in a one month contest, but if someone is uncomfortable about it
> it would be sensible to go through the figures and check if that is an
> appropriate target for the problem. Treating such an ambitious target as a
> problem without acknowledging that Wikipedia has coverage gaps on that
> scale comes across almost as denial of the problem.
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2017 22:02:50 +0800
> > From: Gnangarra <[hidden email]>
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List <[hidden email]>
> > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red
> > Message-ID:
> >         <CAD==kbLkFbP+MKzQ=wg4ApZXVqMyp1osM6tNL8i8==K-PL+ZCg@mail.
> > gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> >
> > I cant believe this
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in
> > _Red/The_World_Contest
> > has
> > got WMF funding, the idea of trying to create 100,000 stub articles on
> > english wikipedia without any thought to how it'll impact on the
> > community.
> >
> > I find it ironic that a competition is being funded to encourage current
> > contributors to do what we wont accept from new editors.  If a new editor
> > was to create an article it wouldnt pass through the Articles for
> Creation
> > process because its half the size of the minimum set there. Many of the
> > competition articles will just get tagged CSD - A1, A7, A9 even G2
> >
> > While there is a nice bot that will count the size of the prose, there is
> > no automated process for checking copyright violations, checking for
> > notability and most importantly checking for BLP with the aim of 100,000
> > the community will years to clean up the mess that is about to be
> created.
> >
> > ​we are 15 days from this disaster commencing​
> >
> > --
> > G
> > nangarra
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2017 08:47:30 -0600
> > From: James Heilman <[hidden email]>
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List <[hidden email]>
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red
> > Message-ID:
> >         <CAF1en7ULzbw+6Gf7c1=HNoFX-pRvM7A4FdYCfp9HusVk+3Kg8w@mail.
> > gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> >
> > Correction:
> >
> > There is a tool that automatically checks for copyright infringement.
> > It is called CopyPatrol
> >
> > https://tools.wmflabs.org/copypatrol/en
> >
> > James
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

Vi to
In reply to this post by Yaroslav Blanter
+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 <[hidden email]>:

> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

Ori Livneh-4
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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]>:
>
> > 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

pi zero
In reply to this post by jmh649
Based on my own experience on en.wn, I believe copyright/plagiary detection
cannot be fully automated without introducing horrific errors, for the same
reason translation can't be:  doing the task properly requires knowing what
the text means.

On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 10:47 AM, James Heilman <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Correction:
>
> There is a tool that automatically checks for copyright infringement.
> It is called CopyPatrol
>
> https://tools.wmflabs.org/copypatrol/en
>
> James
>
> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 8:02 AM, Gnangarra <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I cant believe this
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_
> in_Red/The_World_Contest
> > has
> > got WMF funding, the idea of trying to create 100,000 stub articles on
> > english wikipedia without any thought to how it'll impact on the
> > community.
> >
> > I find it ironic that a competition is being funded to encourage current
> > contributors to do what we wont accept from new editors.  If a new editor
> > was to create an article it wouldnt pass through the Articles for
> Creation
> > process because its half the size of the minimum set there. Many of the
> > competition articles will just get tagged CSD - A1, A7, A9 even G2
> >
> > While there is a nice bot that will count the size of the prose, there is
> > no automated process for checking copyright violations, checking for
> > notability and most importantly checking for BLP with the aim of 100,000
> > the community will years to clean up the mess that is about to be
> created.
> >
> > we are 15 days from this disaster commencing
> >
> > --
> > G
> > nangarra
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

Vi to
In reply to this post by Ori Livneh-4
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 <[hidden email]>:

> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]>:
> >
> > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

Robert Fernandez
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 <[hidden email]> 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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

Todd Allen
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" <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

Pax Ahimsa Gethen
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" <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 | [hidden email] | 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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

Jean-Philippe Béland
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 <
[hidden email]> 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" <[hidden email]>
>> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 | [hidden email] | 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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,[hidden email]
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

chandres
+1

> Le 16 oct. 2017 à 19:34, Jean-Philippe Béland <[hidden email]> 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 <
> [hidden email]> 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" <[hidden email]>
>>> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 | [hidden email] | 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: [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:[hidden email]?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,[hidden email]
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

Peter Southwood
In reply to this post by Pax Ahimsa Gethen
Why?

-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Pax Ahimsa Gethen
Sent: Monday, 16 October 2017 7:21 PM
To: [hidden email]
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" <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 | [hidden email] | 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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

Robert Fernandez
In reply to this post by Jean-Philippe Béland
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 <[hidden email]
> 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 <
> [hidden email]> 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" <[hidden email]>
> >> 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 <[hidden email]>
> 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 | [hidden email] | 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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,[hidden email]
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

Lodewijk
In reply to this post by Jean-Philippe Béland
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 <
[hidden email]> 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 <
> [hidden email]> 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" <[hidden email]>
> >> 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 <[hidden email]>
> 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 | [hidden email] | 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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,[hidden email]
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
123