Talk:Wikimania Women

Discussion at Wikimania

Please see here : https://wikimania2016.wikimedia.org/wiki/Discussions#Women

Now is time that we be a little bit more specific about what we are looking for as goal for this discussion.

The submissions currently approved on our favorite topic are

• Wikidata Human Gender Index: How Should Biography Gender Gap Data Serve The Community?
• How we organized a 1500 person meetup (and you could too)
• Gender gap in the global south: Lessons from policy and outreach
• Content Gender Gap, an International Movement

I read that the last presentation proposes At the conclusion of this presentation, I'll propose three things: a wikipage to assist with coordinating WIR outreach with other language Wikipedias; brainstorming with Wikimania attendees to develop an agenda for an international thematic conference on CGG; and the convening of an international thematic conference within the following six months. This presentation's approach is to address the historic systemic bias issue related to CGG, describe one group's strategy to increase the number of women's biographies, and propose an international conference and movement in this regard.

could I suggest that the discussion space be about this element .... brainstorming to develop an agenda for a thematic conference ? location ? funding ? ---> strategy for this action ? What do you think ? Anthere (talk)

@Rosiestep: @FloNight: @Ciell: @Esh77: @Islahaddow: @Jane023: @Margott: @LaMèreVeille:

Has there ever before been talk about a global GG conference? Sounds like an interesting idea and I'd like to talk about it, but I feel like I've missed something. Ciell (talk) 20:39, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Is there any more movement on this? @Rosiestep: you sent an email from the Wikimedia Conference, did anyone respond? @FloNight: any thoughts after the WIkimedia Conf? I feel this needs to be sorted out pretty soon so that we know what to expect. Are we going to have the lunch and a discussion, or just a discussion? We don't want to miss out on the lunch if that is expected? Islahaddow (talk) 08:55, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Isla, sorry for the delay in responding. Most of the responders to my email said that June is too soon for them to commit to attending an international conference as they already made vacation plans etc. But I think Wikimania would be a good opportunity to plan for an international content gender gap conference, a conference which would be convened in the future, e.g. March 2017 in conjunction with Women's History Month. So, yes, I strongly support Anthere's suggest for a discussion space about this element. Are we in agreement to set aside time at Wikimedia for as a planning session? If yes, shall we start on a draft agenda? @Anthere: @Ciell: @Esh77: @FloNight: @Islahaddow: @Jane023: @LaMèreVeille: @Margott: @Rosiestep: --Rosiestep (talk) 20:06, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

The Discussion committee met last Sunday to discuss which discussions propositions would be retained and which would be dumped. I can't say our proposition to discuss gender gap issues raised a huge support. It was considered that a meet-up could be the solution, in particular because the agenda of the discussion and the outcome expected were unclear. My feeling is that we need more than a meet-up. The main problem that I see with a meet-up is that it is essentially getting together in a bar, probably with small tables and small groups, no internet or ways to easily track outcome of our discussion. So I rephrased the discussion request to make it a bit more appealing. BUT I WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR FEEDBACK AND IMPROVEMENTS :)Thanks. Discussions#Women_and_Gender_gap_:_the_way_forward Anthere (talk)

@Ciell: @Esh77: @FloNight: @Islahaddow: @Jane023: @LaMèreVeille: @Margott: @Rosiestep:

Sorry, I am late to this discussion, but I totally agree that we need to have a room with internet and a beamer and etherpad to hash out what we have and how to use it, what is lacking and how to propose it, and what the agenda could be for a WiR-specific GLAM-tool-related hackathon. One thing is certain: our progress will remain very slow without proper tooling, and with Wikidata I feel proper tooling is within reach. Jane023 (talk) 12:35, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

OK just got back from the Wikimania website and couldn't see where I am supposed to edit there. It seems like a really long list of topics and it's not clear anyone reads that? Maybe we should use the Wikiwomen fb page? Anyways, what I wanted to propose was a quick run-through of all the tips&tricks we currently use to 1) find the notable women already in the Wikiverse but not yet on WP (harvesting redlinks per language wiki) and 2) battling the notability gap due to a lack of reliable sources by finding alternative reliable sources and easing their usage methods as a way to encourage re-use. Next I wanted to talk about ways forward to encourage the creation of a "Gendergap" WP page per language wiki. This is a Wikiverse issue that deserves a Wikipedia page, and most large wikis have yet to publish one. We are three years into this goal and so far only English and Spanish? The printed sources (mostly in response to March 8th activity) are generally English, but that should not be the major show-stopper it seems to be now. So in summary, tell how we do what we currently do, and tell how we could do more if we had better publicity for our readers and better tooling for our editors and reviewers. Jane023 (talk) 12:59, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

I was on the same call as @Anthere: where we discussed our proposed Discussion on Women and Gender gap : the way forward. What I would add to her comment is that we should be cognizant of (a) the other "women" events/proposed events when re-developing our Proposed Discussion as there is a feeling that some of what we had proposed might already be covered in the Wikimania program, and (b) explain clearly why a meetup space will not work for our Proposed Discussion, and (c) be convincing that at least 10 Wikimania attendees will want to attend our re-worded proposed Discussion. We need to convince the Discussion Committee of the value of our Discussion Proposal; just want you to be cognizant of that.

• To make things easier, here is a link to the Programme; the the 3 "Gender Gap Critical Issues" presentations are scheduled for Saturday morning:

• "Gender gap in the global south: Lessons from policy and outreach by "
• "Identity-based motivation in Wikipedia as a key to collaboration and content spreading between language editions"
• "Content Gender Gap, an International Movement"

• Historically, there is a WikiWomen Lunch at Wikimania; could someone add the link if you can locate it? Date/time?
• There is also a proposed Training regarding "women" but I couldn't find a link; @FloNight:, could you please add it? Are you able to give us an update of what the Training Committee is saying about the proposed training? Date/time?

I like Jane's proposal and would like to add 2 items (note: I'll be mentioning them in my Critical Issues presentation but I think they need group discussion follow-up):

• resolution to commit to an international content gender gap conference (possibly March 2017 for Women's History Month)
• a dedicated communication channel for content gender gap editors across languages vs. what we currently have, which is so stovepiped: FB, Twitter, Telegram, Skype, Wikipedia talkpages, Wikimedia talkpages, Wikiproject talkpages, etc.

Would it be useful if we could get at least 10 Wikimania attendees to commit to our re-written proposed Discussion? I believe it would be helpful if we were unified in our approach. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:28, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

• The Training link
• The Lunch; but you should be aware there will probably not be an official women lunch as usual, because lunchers are allocated to restaurants. Instead, we will probably allocate women to the same restaurant... Anthere (talk)

@Anthere: @Ciell: @Esh77: @FloNight: @Islahaddow: @Jane023: @LaMèreVeille: @Margott: @Rosiestep:

Sorry for the slow the reply. I went camping for a long weekend and was without internet access most of the time. It was lovely being off of the grid. :-)

I was contacted by the Programme Committee asking that the Women in Red Training session be merged with a session on Content Translation tool. I said yes, because although not ideal, the session could give Women in Red access to a different audience. Plus translation of biographies of missing women in one language that exist in another is a good approach for people interested in translation. I'll ask to have the session re-written to make it reflect Women in Red and Content Translation to make it easier to find. Sydney Poore/FloNight (talk) 15:31, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Bit of an odd mix - the CX tool is a great addition for organizers of editathons and definitely deserves its own session. I guess the reason you were asked that is because most people associate WiR with editathons, though the problem needs attention from all aspects of the community, not just talking to newbies. I guess most people think we will solve the gap just by recruiting female editors, but that is just one small piece of the puzzle actually. --Jane023 (talk) 15:38, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm quoting a friend who I regard highly: "One of the biggest complaints about sessions is they lack design and outcomes, especially discussion sessions, need specific process and goals to be successful." So maybe it's a good idea to break down our proposal into components, address them, and then design the proposal around them: (a) What is the goal of the discussion? (b) What outcomes do we seek? (c) What process will we use?

I gathered our proposed topic areas from above and I think this is the definitive possibilities list. I think in 40 minutes, it would be hard to address them all. Or maybe not? I think we can continue the conversation away from the Discussion Room, e.g. at a Meetup or something like that. --Rosiestep (talk) 01:49, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

1. brainstorming to develop an agenda for a thematic conference ? location ? funding ? ---> strategy for this action ?
2. quick run-through of all the tips&tricks we currently use to find the notable women already in the Wikiverse but not yet on WP (harvesting redlinks per language wiki)
3. quick run-through of all the tips&tricks we currently use to battling the notability gap due to a lack of reliable sources by finding alternative reliable sources and easing their usage methods as a way to encourage re-use.
4. ways forward to encourage the creation of a "Gendergap" WP page per language wiki. This is a Wikiverse issue that deserves a Wikipedia page, and most large wikis have yet to publish one. We are three years into this goal and so far only English and Spanish? The printed sources (mostly in response to March 8th activity) are generally English, but that should not be the major show-stopper it seems to be now.
5. in summary, tell how we do what we currently do, and tell how we could do more if we had better publicity for our readers and better tooling for our editors and reviewers.
6. resolution to commit to an international content gender gap conference (possibly March 2017 for Women's History Month)
7. a dedicated communication channel for content gender gap editors across languages vs. what we currently have, which is so stovepiped: FB, Twitter, Telegram, Skype, Wikipedia talkpages, Wikimedia talkpages, Wikiproject talkpages, etc.