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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Gergő Tisza <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Keegan Peterzell < >>>> [email protected]> >>>>> 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: [email protected] >>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, >>>> <mailto:[email protected]?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: [email protected] >>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, >>> <mailto:[email protected]?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: [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[email protected]?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: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
