Wikimedia LGBT/2022-02-19

This online videoconference is open to all participants of the LGBT+ User Group, and is intended as an opportunity to discuss shared opportunities, challenges, and issues.

  • Date: Saturday 19 February 1700 UTC (1700 UK, 1800 DE, 0900 PDT, 1200 EST)

The Wikimedia Friendly Space Policy and Universal Code of Conduct will be followed for this meeting.

Agenda edit

Please feel free to add to the agenda!

  1. Intro
  2. QW2022: Planning team status
  3. Conversation series proposal
    1. Draft: Wikimedia LGBT+/conversation series proposal
    2. General idea: ask WMF for about US$25,000 to hire a person to organize monthly talks on social and ethical issues
    3. WMF has money to fund talks on Movement Strategy, which is very important for them right now
    4. Along with Movement Strategy, Wiki LGBT+ has its own issues to discuss
    5. For now need general feedback on making the proposal
  4. Deadnaming query from Trust & Safety
  5. Wiki Unseen project
    1. Lane would like to organize a collaboration
    2. anyone can join
    3. Lane would like to organize this as a partnership between Wiki LGBT+ and WMF as well as any relevant Wikimedia community organizations

Attendees edit

Notes edit

Pre-meeting notes
  1. Proposal: Wikimediga LGBT+ collaborates with AfroCROWD Wikimedia user group in the Wiki Unseen campaign
    1. general situation: Wikimedia Foundation is commissioning artists to create portraits for biographies when no free one is available
    2. AfroCROWD is already participating in this
    3. Lane can take care of all details, however, anyone else can join Lane.
    4. Media:
    5. Proposed biographies for portrait illustration with AfroCROWD
      1. en:Ali Forney in partnership with en:Ali Forney Center
      2. en:Sylvia Rivera in partnership with en:Metropolitan Community Church of New_York
      3. en:Marsha P. Johnson in partnership with a legacy org for en:Street Transvestite Action Revolutionaries (Rivera also founded that org)
      4. All three are black, which fits with AfroCROWD. All three are trans, which fits with Wiki LGBT+.
    6. Although AfroCROWD could not be a partner for the following, WM Bangladesh could be
      1. en:Xulhaz Mannan
      2. This person was Bangladeshi but worked at American embassy, so got multinational attention for their LGBT-motivated murder
Meeting notes
some attendees not named for security and privacy
* Lane Rasberry
* Z. Blace
* Owen Blacker
1. Intro
2. Wikimedia Foundation community town hall meetings
2.1. Wikimedia Foundation and representatives from the board of trustees hosted a community meeting to present the Universal Code of Conduct
2.2. Owen attended and reported that there 1 specific person in attendance complaining that the existence of a code of conduct will suppress personal freedom
2.3. Owen countered that the LGBT+ community and others want a code of conduct and that this has been a long-term well documented community decision
3. QW2022: Planning team status
3.1. we need a communication plan
3.1.1. we have several very popular and visible communication channels, including our twitter account
3.1.2. we need a policy about what kinds of statements come from our channels
3.1.3. like for example, under what circumstances do we want to go beyond posting Wikimedia LGBT+ issues and post general LGBT+ issues, and when should we discourage that about being out of scope?
3.1.4. we have a global audience and many issues can be political or only regionally relevant
3.1.5. we have a lot of volunteers who make requests that we push content through our channels, and we need documentation to explain to them when we can and cannot push messages
4. Conversation series proposal
4.2. Draft: Wikimedia LGBT+/conversation series proposal
4.3. General idea: ask WMF for about US$25,000 to hire a person to organize monthly talks on social and ethical issues
4.4. WMF has money to fund talks on Movement Strategy, which is very important for them right now
4.5. Along with Movement Strategy, Wiki LGBT+ has its own issues to discuss; we could use these sessions to host both discussions.
4.6. We would need to have better, consistent communications — off-wiki, not just the User Group, maybe on Meetup etc. We need someone to moderate and handle safe-space issues during sessions. We need secretarial support and someone to take notes — including who does and does not want to be named and attributing. We need decisions to be noted, circulated for discussion and translation.
4.7. This feels like 2 people: 1 on publicity, comms and safe space, 1 on secretarial, notes, translations, publication etc.
4.8. For 1-hour meetings, that's prolly around 20 hours of prep-work, ≈$4k /mtg
4.9. Action: For now need general feedback on making the proposal
4.10. We have a sense that $15k is the threshold above which grant proposals become more complicated; it might be worth putting this in as 2× $25k-ish grants, with a 4-meeting pilot. (Which also means we can make mistakes and learn from them.)
4.11. Each session could also benefit from a facilitator to handle getting different perspectives in, ensuring that different groups do get represented, for example. We should expect that guest speakers would want a stipend of maybe a few hundred dollars.
4.12. We should aim for at least one of these meetings not be in English — possibly hosting in French or Spanish with simultaneous translation.
4.13. We might also want to make a ~5-minute topical summary of each of the 1-hour meetings, so should expect some video-editing work there too.
4.14. There would also be some setup costs — not least to hire the paid-staff and get everything set up. We may also wish to consider honorariums for active participation in any sessions that want more-detailed discussion. An online panel survey of 1½ hours can pay participants £50 to be involved and it helps the participants feel more responsible for being involved and actually putting effort in — if there's even token compensation, it means that people are unlikely to drop out or "just turn up". We do have to remember the cost of sending money, if payment is financial rather than vouchers.
4.15. Some potential names were discussed, who might be worth considering for the pilot — to avoid the risks involved in vetting unknown candidates, given that it's just a pilot.
5. Deadnaming query from Trust & Safety
5.1. The Wikimedia Foundation asked us to address a deadnaming issue in a language without a lot of development from the Wikimedia LGBT+ community
5.2. two proposed ways to address: we could expend significant resources to address the problem as a one time, one off; or we could organize a general global conversation and address the issue in general
5.3. this could be a research project. One of our contributors outlined what kind of conversation, research, literature review, survey, and focus groups could lead to publishing a paper. All of this is worthwhile considering the frequency and intensity of this problem. What would this cost though? $15k? 70k? More? What resources do we have and how much should we request?
5.4. WMF legal seemed to be concerned about legal liability for this very common issue. If this escalated into a lawsuit then likely the legal trouble would be a useless unproductive legal conflict of no benefit to the Wikimedia community. Otherwise, the Wikimedia community could have ready answers for this and perhaps prevent the legal problem.
5.5. If we had an essay on meta and the start of an RfC then that would draw good participation and engagement, and likely satisfy critics.
5.6. Art and Feminism has an essay on reliable publications which seeks to argue for a different standard of sourcing for minority communities. The general idea is that there are communities who edit Wikipedia but who cannot find sources about themselves which meet English Wikipedia's reliable source guidelines, yet these sources are normalized within a community. That guideline defines a set of circumstances for accepting other kinds of sources.
5.7. Wiki Cred funded the Art and Feminism project
5.8. If we did this project then this could be a pilot for more research for many other issues.
5.9. How much insight can we get from English Wikipedia's policy? The WMF legal team suggested that policy there could simply be translated. There was disagreement that this could be so, and we wanted a more global conversation.
5.10. When and how should we apply for money for this? It seems like a big issue to advance right now, but also, many of our members are involved in the Queering Wikipedia conference, and we might also organize this conversation series proposal
5.11. The Wikimedia France chair is supportive of diversity and may be able to provide support and referrals if we want support from the French language community
6. Wiki Unseen project
6.1. Lane would like to organize a collaboration, specifically Ali Forney, Marsha P Johnson and Silvia Rivera
6.2. anyone can join
6.3. Lane would like to organize this as a partnership between Wiki LGBT+, AfroCrowd and WMF as well as any relevant Wikimedia community organizations (Z. Blace is happy to help AfroCROWD lead this as we already have connection and has experience from own visual art practice and curating)
6.4. Wikimedia LGBT domain
6.4.1. we eventually may want to develop a website for publication off Wikimedia platform
6.4.2. external partners are known to respect some kinds of publications more if they are off Wikimedia
6.4.3. we may have other kinds of materials which are not compatible with the Wikimedia platform, such as republication of third party media for distribution