Grants talk:IdeaLab/Disconnect 'feminism' from editing by women

Add topic
Active discussions

This is great! I'd argue that the "measure of success" surveying people should also be the first step. I've thought that instead of full hackathons for editing maybe a weekly meetup where we do a little bit and discuss relevant facts / how the information and connections with the community impacts daily life. Based on personal experience, I hypothesize women who don't primarily identify as feminist value optimization of daily life and relationship with loved ones or their personal network more than impacting the grand world that wikipedia editing offers. Frances Soong (talk) 17:07, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Lacks call-to-actionEdit

Given that the goal here is driving female participation, since (feminist women) + (non-feminist women) > (feminist women), this is hella on-point. But it needs specific, concrete steps to achieve the goal of more inclusiveness to non-feminist perspectives, and I don't know what those are. We can't just call editors in front of ArbCom, ask them "Are you, or have you ever been, a feminist?" and ban them if they say yes or nothing (it'd be pretty funny though). For example, you can't just say "We have to make it so people don't think only feminist perspectives are welcome." You need to say "By doing X, we will make non-feminist perspectives more welcome." Dingsuntil (talk) 05:33, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

The Art And Feminism Meetup advertisements (and WMF's tone deafness) was likely the reason that Bfpage wrote this propsal. A Call-To-Action might be to just review proposals and remove "pinkifying" elements. Dispenser (talk) 21:06, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Just found the discussion place...Edit

What a humorous this direction this could go! Women = feminist women + women do not identify themselves as feminist. The sum is greater than the parts. It really is simple. I don't know how feminism got mixed in with recruitment anyway. I don't even know if I'm not NOT a feminist. It is a distinction that I've not developed any motivation to resolve. It doesn't have to be resolved. Wikipedia participation by women is not a feminist issue. As long as we see it is a feminist issue, my friends are going to be talking about the weather, their kids, their dinner plans, the doctoral thesis they are working on over the publicity of feminist-edithons, userboxes, 'gender-parity' (that is a LONG story) and feel that Wikipedia is about feminism. Women who edit don't necessary want to change the world and right all the wrongs or fight about birth control. Real equality is when gender and age (don't get me started on THAT) don't matter on Wiki.

What are the non-feminist perspectives? A non-feminist perspective is to ignore controversies tied to feminism. That is why one day when I tried to copyedit the Sexism article, SURPRISE! You had discuss the dictionary, spelling and capitalization because it was controversial...whhaaa? I didn't approach the topic from a perspective I still don't understand and got chewed up and spit out over it. I learned my lesson, believe me. They still don't think that I am a woman, maybe I don't write one, I don't know. Maybe there is an anti-anti-feminist bias. I don't know and I'm not going to look for it, either. This has been a fascinating discussion.

  Bfpage |leave a message  22:03, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

A positive approach: Events for traditional womenEdit

Would like to see this turned into a positive approach so that we have a variety of activities that ensure all sorts of women are welcome, of different viewpoints and ways of life. Howabout creating a new series of editing events for traditional women, focused on topics related to home, family, sewing, crafts, gardening, food preservation and canning, fashion, childrearing, childrens' health, elder care, K-12 education, homeschooling, home-based businesses and etiquette?

If you coordinated these events internationally, you might find some very interesting exchanges on these topics, and greatly expand the perspectives in our articles.

There are also many thematic possibilites for women-focused editathons, such as women's health, female sports such as gymnastics, water ballet, and womens' basketball, women in teaching, nursing, and librarianship, female religious figures and nuns, women outlaws, prostitutes and criminals, women's organizations, famous socialites, cosmetics and the cosmetics industry, the history of women in specific countries, ethnic or religious groups, traditional social games and the the art of gracious entertaining ... --Djembayz (talk) 01:16, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Rename to describe a positive focus of this project; examples of other projectsEdit

Hello Bfpage,

I agree that having events about a broad range of topics is likely to attract more women because people often will have a particular area that interests them especially during the first articles they edit.

Right now the wording of the ideas seems too negative as if you are trying to stop the people who are currently organizing events from doing them. I suggest that you rename this idea to indicate the focus on editing events that would appeal to your target audience. This proposal would be an additional type of project that joins other successful projects.

Additionally, I would would love to see this proposal focus on creating Wiki Editing Clubs or WikiSalons (or another catchy name) for long term regular events instead of edit-a-thons. The change of name reflects a different method of gathering a group together that may work better for people who need to juggle busy schedules. These groups could still sponsor or participate in edit-a-thons, meet ups or Wiknics as a group but would not be the main focus. Instead the groups would attempt to attract a stable group of people who attend many times.

Also creating a network of people who can help expand the reach is an important if you want to create an event as successful as some of the ones I list below. So, having pre-event training materials and sessions (off and online) will improve the success of the events when women new to Wikipedia are launching events. Networking will not happen immediately, but it is an important concept to build into the proposal.

Examples to learn from: I suggest looking at both success and failures from these programs and other similar projects.


Possible measures of success:

Topics:

Let's brainstorm about possible alternative names for the proposal and objectives that portray the positive ideas that you want to accomplish.

(I strongly encourage you to not copy the objectives from any of these past events but rather use them as starting ideas for better measures of success.) Sydney Poore/FloNight (talk) 19:27, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Starting to get itEdit

Thank you for helping me to begin to understand how my idea could actually turn into a project, a successful project. Yes, I think renaming my idea with out a negative tone would be better. Although a new name escapes me at the moment I have thought of some ways to implement and measure the success of the project.

What are the objectives of this program? Please include metrics.
  • Getting more women to create more content on Wikipedia.
  • Identifying the new recruits, and tallying their edits and article creations.
Progress against these objectives (include metrics and # of volunteers/staff involved)?
  • 20 new editors attracted through the banner campaign.
  • 5 volunteers that are capable of providing orientation to the new recruits.
  • At least one contact per day from each of the volunteers with a new editor.
  • The creation of training videos available on YouTube in a friendly welcoming tone with a special appreciation for editors who will be bringing more balance to Wikipedia.
Activities conducted.
  • Encouragement to participants via the new editors talk pages.
  • Ask for a high level welcome message to be sent to the new editors after their first 50 successful edits or first article creation.


Any additional details:

  • It might be fun to set up a new women's editor training center portal and allow non-Wikipedia related chatter.

There we go! Am I getting any closer?

  Bfpage |leave a message  20:56, 20 March 2015 (UTC)


You're doing great! I'm getting excited reading about your ideas. :-)
So far I see you saying that your proposal would include:
!) Banner campaign to convert women readers into new women editors
2) Specialized training Youtube video tailored for the target group of women.
3) Recruitment and training of online volunteers to help new editors
4) Training and coaching of new editors
5) Daily contact with new editors on talk pages
6) Messages to new editors talk pages acknowledging success--article creation or 50 edits
7) New womnen's editor training portal with non wikipedia related chatter.
8) Evaluation tools to measure content creation for impact (# articles created, # edits, photos uploaded, increase # references, .....)
9) Other?
Next will need to identify the resources that you need:
1) Types of people
2) Funds
3) Other

Sydney Poore/FloNight 00:43, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Best wishesEdit

Hi there! I am writing to wish you and your project well. I myself am a feminist but I recognize that a lot of women, including women I'd like to work with, don't care for the term (for instance, some prefer to identify as womanist). Good luck! Sumana Harihareswara 12:31, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Eligibility confirmed, Inspire CampaignEdit

This Inspire Grant proposal is under review!

We've confirmed your proposal is eligible for the Inspire Campaign review. Please feel free to ask questions and make changes to this proposal as discussions continue during this community comments period.

The committee's formal review begins on 6 April 2015, and grants will be announced at the end of April. See the schedule for more details.

Questions? Contact us at grants(at)wikimedia.org.

Community notificationsEdit

@Bfpage:, good work in getting your idea to the eligibility stage. One of the steps now is to make some posts to community boards/mailing lists/etc. for the idea. Do you have a plan for where to post about it? If not, I can help. Best, PEarley (WMF) (talk) 17:53, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

I have no idea what community boards/mailing lists would have any interest at all in my proposal. I've not met even one editor who is of a similar background. Best Regards,
  Bfpage |leave a message  23:39, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Aggregated feedback from the committee for Disconnect 'feminism' from editing by womenEdit

Scoring rubric Score
(A) Impact potential
  • Does it have the potential to increase gender diversity in Wikimedia projects, either in terms of content, contributors, or both?
  • Does it have the potential for online impact?
  • Can it be sustained, scaled, or adapted elsewhere after the grant ends?
3.7
(B) Community engagement
  • Does it have a specific target community and plan to engage it often?
  • Does it have community support?
3.8
(C) Ability to execute
  • Can the scope be accomplished in the proposed timeframe?
  • Is the budget realistic/efficient ?
  • Do the participants have the necessary skills/experience?
2.7
(D) Measures of success
  • Are there both quantitative and qualitative measures of success?
  • Are they realistic?
  • Can they be measured?
2.7
Additional comments from the Committee:
  • Project seeks to increase gender diversity in terms of contributors by changing the messaging on WMF sites which the grantee believes is discouraging/intimidating/unwelcoming for non-feminists. I think elements of this project could potentially be impactful - particularly the idea of creating a banner campaign that shows images of a diverse group of female editors.
  • I am skeptical of the suggestion that the gender gap is in part caused by "the aggressiveness of a few women editors on Wikipedia" and fear that a banner campaign that only shows images of "traditionally feminine" activities would be isolating for others (not just feminists)
  • The idea has potential to attract a broader demographic of women to edit Wikipedia, and also to create content. Still needs more info in order for us to clearly understand if it is something that could be adapted into a longterm project or be replicated.
  • I can see the potential here, but focus is still a bit unclear.
  • Proposal would be stronger if 1) feminism was defined and operationalized 2) the title and goals were expressed in a positive manner.
  • I have lukewarm feelings for "educating" campaigns. I actually think this idea has the potential of making matters worse.
  • Seems to have a high potential for alienating potential contributors who identify as women and/or as feminists.
  • It'd be nice to engage communities (editors and non-editors) in the development of messaging/selection of images
  • There is support for the idea on the proposal and talk page, and some discussion around Wikipedia English. But the plan is not detailed enough for there to be support for a specific plan.
  • Definitely could be accomplished (given that it's a banner campaign) but I'm not sure if the grantee intends or has the skills to properly engage communities in the development of messaging
  • The idea is basic but would be labor intensive to do the level of engagement. And the project would need to have a full team of people with a broad range of skills.
  • Would want more details on the budget
  • The measures of success listed on the talk page are the right idea but need to be tweaked in order to get at the impact desired.
  • Seems like this would be particularly difficult to measure, given how hard it is to prove a negative, without extensive and expensive survey infrastructure.
  • Might consider having elements of this proposal being combined with the proposal "Feature banners asking women for help"
  • Needs too much work to be funded in this Inspire cycle.
  • While I understand the gist of this proposal, I'd like to see it re-framed as a positive and more inclusive project.

Inspire funding decisionEdit

This project has not been selected for an Inspire Grant at this time.

We love that you took the chance to creatively improve the Wikimedia movement. The committee has reviewed this proposal and not recommended it for funding, but we hope you'll continue to engage in the program. Please drop by the IdeaLab to share and refine future ideas!


Next steps:

  1. Review the feedback provided on your proposal and to ask for any clarifications you need using this talk page.
  2. Visit the IdeaLab to continue developing this idea and share any new ideas you may have.
  3. To reapply with this project in the future, please make updates based on the feedback provided in this round before resubmitting it for review in a new round.
  4. Check the Individual Engagement Grant schedule for the next open call to submit proposals or the Project and Event Grant pages if your idea is to support expenses for offline events - we look forward to helping you apply for a grant in the future.
Questions? Contact us at grants wikimedia.org


Return to "IdeaLab/Disconnect 'feminism' from editing by women" page.