Probably related:
http://www.womensenews.org/story/women-in-science/100623/it-jobs-offer-growth-women-are-bailing-out
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Дана Wednesday 23 June 2010 18:27:43 Nikola Smolenski написа:
> Anyway, I made this so anyone who would like to experiment, can.
> http://toolserver.org/~nikola/snrss.php
I see that people who tried it either haven't written any new articles
recently or have encountered a bug (on non-English Wiki
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 6:27 PM, Nikola Smolenski wrote:
> Дана Saturday 19 June 2010 08:37:37 Milos Rancic написа:
>> I don't think that it is particularly interesting to see someone's
>> edits. If you are not a passionate Wikimedian, of course.
>
> If your friends are so disinterested in Wikiped
Дана Saturday 19 June 2010 08:37:37 Milos Rancic написа:
> On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Nikola Smolenski wrote:
> > Дана Saturday 19 June 2010 07:37:18 Milos Rancic написа:
> >> On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 7:30 AM, Nikola Smolenski
wrote:
> >> > Or perhaps we don't even have to build one, but ju
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 2:56 PM, Aphaia wrote:
> One thing we can do would be to make contributors' names more visible.
> Translators for WMF stuff too (Ting Chen made a good point about the
> latter in Alexandria). Many websites gives clear credits to
> contributors - not only for-profit media, b
One thing we can do would be to make contributors' names more visible.
Translators for WMF stuff too (Ting Chen made a good point about the
latter in Alexandria). Many websites gives clear credits to
contributors - not only for-profit media, but websites whose content
is mainly written by volunteer
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 8:17 AM, Eugene Eric Kim wrote:
> There's lots of great research and proposals on encouraging participation at:
>
> http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Participation
Thanks! This page [1] has the similar scope, actually.
[1] - http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/At
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 10:13 PM, Milos Rancic wrote:
> I've started page:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/How_to_encourage_participation
>
> Feel free to add your ideas.
>
> If the page with the same idea exists elsewhere -- let's say at
> Strategy Wiki -- please merge pages and let the list kn
I've started page: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/How_to_encourage_participation
Feel free to add your ideas.
If the page with the same idea exists elsewhere -- let's say at
Strategy Wiki -- please merge pages and let the list know.
___
foundation-l ma
I like (and support) most of all the following wording
> ... there's a lot to be said for being
> motivated enough to do it that you learn the systems without any help,
> becoming a part of the community the way most of us did. But just
> relying on those mechanisms does restrict our editor base a
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Tim Landscheidt
wrote:
> While I appreciate the efforts to encourage wider partici-
> pation, IMHO we should make sure that we keep the quality of
> our "products" and our "human resources" in mind. No edits
> at all may be better than one edit in ten days for pr
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 1:18 AM, Milos Rancic wrote:
> http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation.html
>
> As well as dopamine works during the work, not when the prize has been
> get: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrCVu25wQ5s
Watch this, too:
http://g4tv.com/videos/44277/dice-2010-design-o
> If wikipedia is to survive it needs to be fun. If wikipedia is going
> to get a broad coverage it needs to be easy.
Exactly!
> Given that 99% of the population is over 6 billion people 1 edit every
> ten days would result in a lot of worthwhile edits.
As to the best of my belief the healthier
On 22 June 2010 00:10, Tim Landscheidt wrote:
> Isn't an iPhone one of those gadgets with about 10 cm of
> screen and no keyboard? Why would we want to encourage some-
> one to edit with such a device? It must be very frustrating
> to do so properly, and we don't profit, in fact it is to our
> dis
Milos Rancic wrote:
> [...]
> Besides that, contemporary term for "site" is "social network". There
> are just more and less successful social networks. Wikimedia is
> successful social network for a very specific type of demographics:
> young middle class males. Actually, not so young anymore. I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 20/06/2010 04:33, Keegan Peterzell wrote:
> Attracting consumers is a much more complicated issue than attracting
> editors. Editors seem to find their niche or go away.
>
> Attracting readers takes a constant vigilance over how Wikimedia projects
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Milos Rancic wrote:
>
> You are missing the point again :) I am not talking about transforming
> user pages into MySpace pages, but about new layer at all Wikimedia
> projects, which would stay at the place of Special:Preferences. So, it
> is about personal space,
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 5:23 PM, Noein wrote:
> Moreover, I think attracting readers is very different from attracting
> editors. I don't see how it would be positive to convince people to edit
> articles with superficial reasons in mind.
>
I'm glad to see that you were being saterical before.
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Keegan Peterzell
wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Milos Rancic wrote:
>>
>> While I would like to see good articles about every episode of
>> whatever on Wikipedia, this was not the point.
>>
>> The point is to make "personal space" on Wikimedia projects
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Noein wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Wikipedia should be kept a neutral repository of knowledge, not a social
> ground for games. Once you take the path of creating a futile community,
> there is no way to talk about the long term goa
Oh, I agree that thanking someone for their service to WMF projects is
important, too. We need to do more to recognize the invaluable contributions
that we people make to keep the various projects going.
But, in addition to giving encouragement though thanks and recognition, I
support introducing
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Wikipedia should be kept a neutral repository of knowledge, not a social
ground for games. Once you take the path of creating a futile community,
there is no way to talk about the long term goals of the WMF, the
vision, the ethics, the humanity, the kn
Sydney,
I agree with your thoughts here. But you are talking about activities
community members can participate in. I am talking about how those community
members interact with each other.
Marc
on 6/19/10 5:58 PM, Sydney Poore at sydney.po...@gmail.com wrote:
> English Wikipedia has numerous c
English Wikipedia has numerous contests during the year. Some people
regularly participate in them and enjoy them.
Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Contest is an example of one that is
ongoing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MILCON
Picture of the year is popular with some people on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 19/06/2010 19:53, Keegan Peterzell wrote:
> My jaw just dropped. While I know these are ideas intended to help increase
> the socialization, this is turning Wikipedia into youtube. The day that
> happens I'm resigning all my permissions and packin
on 6/19/10 4:58 PM, Keegan Peterzell at keegan.w...@gmail.com wrote:
.
>
> There was a great TED speech that I need to look up but don't have the time
> for at the moment. The premise of the presentation is that studies have
> shown time and time again that things like games, prizes, awards and
Just a comment in general and not a reply to anyone specific.
The ultimate goal of Wikipedia is building an Encyclopedia, and all the
activities around it (Talk pages, discussion pages, IRC channels and so on)
are intended to support these goals. Sure, we have a friendly discussion on
a talk page
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Milos Rancic wrote:
>
> While I would like to see good articles about every episode of
> whatever on Wikipedia, this was not the point.
>
> The point is to make "personal space" on Wikimedia projects. Adding
> features to the profile (now: Special:Preferences) will
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 7:53 PM, Keegan Peterzell wrote:
> My jaw just dropped. While I know these are ideas intended to help increase
> the socialization, this is turning Wikipedia into youtube. The day that
> happens I'm resigning all my permissions and packing my bags. Softening
> notability
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 4:02 AM, Noein wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Some ideas to increase the social aspect of Wikipedia:
> - - insert a small chat with channels for each chapter (for example where
> the interwiki links were ;) )
> - - make a tab for personal comm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Some ideas to increase the social aspect of Wikipedia:
- - insert a small chat with channels for each chapter (for example where
the interwiki links were ;) )
- - make a tab for personal comments for articles, where people can
express their feelings
-
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Nikola Smolenski wrote:
> Дана Saturday 19 June 2010 07:37:18 Milos Rancic написа:
>> On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 7:30 AM, Nikola Smolenski wrote:
>> > Or perhaps we don't even have to build one, but just use the existing
>> > ones. [People are always against making W
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 12:40 AM, Nikola Smolenski wrote:
>
> Then your Facebook friends will see that you are doing interesting things
> on
> Wikipedia projects and will want to do them too.
>
> ___
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikime
Дана Saturday 19 June 2010 07:37:18 Milos Rancic написа:
> On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 7:30 AM, Nikola Smolenski wrote:
> > Or perhaps we don't even have to build one, but just use the existing
> > ones. [People are always against making Wikipedia a social network.] Have
> > RSS feeds of articles you
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 7:30 AM, Nikola Smolenski wrote:
> Дана Saturday 19 June 2010 05:58:31 Milos Rancic написа:
>> That means that we need games for women. While I think that we should
>> build full social network, just a basic one would help.
>
> Or perhaps we don't even have to build one, bu
Дана Saturday 19 June 2010 05:58:31 Milos Rancic написа:
> That means that we need games for women. While I think that we should
> build full social network, just a basic one would help.
Or perhaps we don't even have to build one, but just use the existing ones.
[People are always against making
Дана Saturday 19 June 2010 05:58:31 Milos Rancic написа:
> That means that we need games for women. While I think that we should
> build full social network, just a basic one would help.
Ability to make other editors your "friends", then you could watch their
Special:Contributions jointly (see wh
After reading the post below, I have nothing to add to today's
extensive dialog about men's and women's participation, but I have
decided to block Greg Maxwell indefinitely for hate speech against
blondes.
Newyorkbrad
On 6/16/10, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 8:26 PM, phoebe
There is one point around Greg's story about diversities between genders.
Men enjoy in playing war (with real guns, paintball, football, edit
war, argument war...). Women enjoy in playing less aggressive games.
The only games available on Wikipedia are games for men. Facebook is
different. At the
hilippe to take a look at TED's translation community and see if
there's anything we can learn from it -- others might want to do the same.
Thanks,
Sue
-Original Message-
From: Milos Rancic
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 22:21:03
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Subject: Re:
Here are my two cents...
I am organizing now TEDx event in Belgrade. (Unlike others, our
speakers will sign contract for CC-BY-SA, too.) And I am carefully
watching gender and age involvement at the Facebook page.
Our predispositions were again dominantly male: 5 males and one female
in organizat
Ryan Kaldari wrote:
> Gregory,
> I'm sorry if I misinterpreted your post, but it sounded very much like
> you were saying that encyclopedia writing is a skill that is too
> academic for women:
> "...general approaches which make Wikipedia more palatable to "average
> people"... may have a greate
Gregory,
I'm sorry if I misinterpreted your post, but it sounded very much like
you were saying that encyclopedia writing is a skill that is too
academic for women:
"...general approaches which make Wikipedia more palatable to "average
people"... may have a greater impact at reducing gender imba
I've been following this thread and it occurred to me that Phoebe is the
lone woman posting to it, so I feel somewhat duty-bound to share my own
perspective as a woman editor on English Wikipedia. I don't intend this to
encapsulate everything that there is to be said on the subject, and it's a
topi
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 1:35 AM, Keegan Peterzell wrote:
> Eugene's post is too long for me to snip but it's basically what I would
> have said if I was in my usual verbose mood.
>
> Basically, I went through a similar thing on strategy wiki selecting the
> "official members" of the Living People
Eugene's post is too long for me to snip but it's basically what I would
have said if I was in my usual verbose mood.
Basically, I went through a similar thing on strategy wiki selecting the
"official members" of the Living People Task Force. After discussion with
Cary and Philippe, we went with
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:00 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 11:08 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:
>> I don't think scapegoating Wikipedia's gender imbalances to biological
>> differences is especially helpful. And the suggestion that it may not be
>> possible to dumb-down Wikipedia
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 12:00 AM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>
> The characterization of my mainstreaming suggestion as "dumb-down
> Wikipedia enough to attract women" is exceptionally uncharitable and
> contributed significantly to my impression that you were trying to
> make a target out of me. Jus
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:15 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> If nothing else I hope that my frequent incoherence can serve as an
> example of why it is essential to be patient and tolerant when we
> communicate with others.
Indeed. And you're being too hard on yourself; I don't think you were
incoh
Ask any librarian about what men and women are reading. Men prefer non
fictional, women fictional works. Not all of them, of course, but in
large majorities. I doubt that that has no consequences for Wikipedia
editing behavior.
And, as a women once told to a magazine: Women are too polite to
correc
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 1:00 AM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> counter argument in a respectful discussion between colleges we build
If I can't even manage to say "colleague" without screwing it up, how
can we assume that anything I say was an insult to anything and not
just some kind of unfortunate m
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 11:08 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:
> I don't think scapegoating Wikipedia's gender imbalances to biological
> differences is especially helpful. And the suggestion that it may not be
> possible to dumb-down Wikipedia enough to attract women is ridiculous
> (and offensive). Regar
I don't think scapegoating Wikipedia's gender imbalances to biological
differences is especially helpful. And the suggestion that it may not be
possible to dumb-down Wikipedia enough to attract women is ridiculous
(and offensive). Regardless of our genetic predispositions, there are
very real c
Hoi,
Have you had a look at the Indonesian competition? The Indonesian chapter
organised a competition among students of 10 universities. The result is
many more editors for the id.wp and the majority is female. I am convinced
that in many countries a similar result can be achieved.
Thanks,
G
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 6:16 PM, George Herbert
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 5:26 PM, phoebe ayers wrote:
>> There's been discussion of the gender gap among Wikimedia editors on
>> and off for many years now, and it's a focus of the strategic planning
>> process. This is a part of a larger is
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 5:26 PM, phoebe ayers wrote:
> There's been discussion of the gender gap among Wikimedia editors on
> and off for many years now, and it's a focus of the strategic planning
> process. This is a part of a larger issue of how to get members of
> underrepresented groups to edi
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 8:26 PM, phoebe ayers wrote:
> There's been discussion of the gender gap among Wikimedia editors on
> and off for many years now, and it's a focus of the strategic planning
> process. This is a part of a larger issue of how to get members of
> underrepresented groups to edi
There's been discussion of the gender gap among Wikimedia editors on
and off for many years now, and it's a focus of the strategic planning
process. This is a part of a larger issue of how to get members of
underrepresented groups to edit more, to combat system bias on all
fronts. (Or, simply how t
58 matches
Mail list logo
