attitude- elderly man googling

List overview All Threads
Download

newer

older

Roth is an elderly man googling

don't make the other person feel...

Kathleen McCook

8 Sep 2012 8 Sep '12

3:49 p.m.

The Wikipedia community fosters a young male zeitgeist.This IS an attitude problem that causes women to drop out. I have been a long time low level contributor and thus have had a variety of response to efforts I have made. Persistence has shown me that what one editor sees as "not credible" may be that particular editor's world view and a contributor--CANNOT, EVER- change the mind of most editors. So one needs to give up on that point, even if you have gone to primary sources and have them on your table in front of you. You have to move on. However, this resigned way of working w/in Wikipedia is not going to be the way that many people approach it. Rebuffed or being called "not credible" will mean we lose many contributors. It should not be on the contributor to understand the editor. Contributors come from all ages and societies. There are far fewer women contributing than men. Why? Women take the harsh rebukes with more hurt. Really. I am a teacher and suggest that students write for Wikipedia. Invariably the female students have been made to feel stupid by editors and won't go back. The male students are more likely to keep at it. This is the culture that Wikipedia fosters. There are many exceptions….but generally, the tone could be less harsh in dealing with contributors. ============== On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 11:35 AM, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

On 8 September 2012 15:43, Thomas Morton <morton.thomas(a)googlemail.com> wrote:

I haven't had chance to look into this;

That statement invalidates this statement:

Rather than whining about him we need to see the problem; it's an attitude problem HERE.

-d.

Show replies by date

Fred Bauder

9 Sep 9 Sep

11:39 a.m.

Everybody here who contributes runs into a brick wall from time to time and has to give up regarding some matter. The factual basis of the theory about gender you're advancing is not established; as everyone experiences the same frustrations. I've tried to edit certain articles controlled by point of view editors, doggedly advancing good sources while they relied on biased sources and been completely defeated. All it takes is two or three independent and determined point of view pushers and you're done. It does make you want to give up, fork the project, and rant and rave. Molly Ivins would be a good model for women editors. She didn't give up; she raised hell, and made everyone laugh doing it. Fred

...

The Wikipedia community fosters a young male zeitgeist.This IS an attitude problem that causes women to drop out. I have been a long time low level contributor and thus have had a variety of response to efforts I have made. Persistence has shown me that what one editor sees as "not credible" may be that particular editor's world view and a contributor--CANNOT, EVER- change the mind of most editors. So one needs to give up on that point, even if you have gone to primary sources and have them on your table in front of you. You have to move on. However, this resigned way of working w/in Wikipedia is not going to be the way that many people approach it. Rebuffed or being called "not credible" will mean we lose many contributors. It should not be on the contributor to understand the editor. Contributors come from all ages and societies. There are far fewer women contributing than men. Why? Women take the harsh rebukes with more hurt. Really. I am a teacher and suggest that students write for Wikipedia. Invariably the female students have been made to feel stupid by editors and won't go back. The male students are more likely to keep at it. This is the culture that Wikipedia fosters. There are many exceptions.but generally, the tone could be less harsh in dealing with contributors. ============== On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 11:35 AM, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:

On 8 September 2012 15:43, Thomas Morton <morton.thomas(a)googlemail.com> wrote:

I haven't had chance to look into this;

That statement invalidates this statement:

Rather than whining about him we need to see the problem; it's an attitude problem HERE.

-d.

_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Martijn Hoekstra

5:51 p.m.

This is quite interesting in the light of engaging a female editorship. Could you give examples of behaviours that drive off female potential editors, but are ok with male prospective editors? On Sep 9, 2012 10:57 AM, "Kathleen McCook" <klmccook(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

On 8 September 2012 15:43, Thomas Morton <morton.thomas(a)googlemail.com> wrote:

I haven't had chance to look into this;

That statement invalidates this statement:

Rather than whining about him we need to see the problem; it's an attitude problem HERE.

-d.

Charles Matthews

6:09 p.m.

On 9 September 2012 18:51, Martijn Hoekstra <martijnhoekstra(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:

...

This is quite interesting in the light of engaging a female editorship. Could you give examples of behaviours that drive off female potential editors, but are ok with male prospective editors?

Not a sensible formulation. We know reasonably well what women don't like: "being yelled at". Being male doesn't by itself make being yelled at acceptable. For our civility scoff-laws, perhaps it just generates adrenaline, but they are not representative of the male gender as a whole. Charles

Kathleen McCook

9:20 p.m.

I sense the raised (ironic) eyebrow in this question and since you know the answer, I need not tell you, On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Martijn Hoekstra <martijnhoekstra(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:

...

The Wikipedia community fosters a young male zeitgeist.This IS an

attitude

problem that causes women to drop out. I have been a long time low level contributor and thus have had a variety of response to efforts I have

made.

Persistence has shown me that what one editor sees as "not credible" may

that particular editor's world view and a contributor--CANNOT, EVER-

change

the mind of most editors. So one needs to give up on that point, even if you have gone to primary sources and have them on your table in front of you. You have to move on. However, this resigned way of working w/in Wikipedia is not going to be the way that many people approach it.

Rebuffed

or being called "not credible" will mean we lose many contributors. It should not be on the contributor to understand the editor. Contributors come from all ages and societies. There are far fewer women contributing than men. Why? Women take the harsh rebukes with more hurt. Really. I am a teacher and suggest that students write for Wikipedia. Invariably the female students have been made to feel stupid by editors and won't

back. The male students are more likely to keep at it. This is the

culture

that Wikipedia fosters. There are many exceptions….but generally, the

tone

could be less harsh in dealing with contributors. ============== On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 11:35 AM, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:

On 8 September 2012 15:43, Thomas Morton <morton.thomas(a)googlemail.com

wrote:

I haven't had chance to look into this;

That statement invalidates this statement:

Rather than whining about him we need to see the problem; it's an attitude problem HERE.

-d.

David Gerard

9:29 p.m.

On 9 September 2012 22:20, Kathleen McCook <klmccook(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

I sense the raised (ironic) eyebrow in this question and since you know the answer, I need not tell you,

I think it was a genuine question, and one I had too. - d.

Sarah

10:30 p.m.

On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 3:29 PM, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

On 9 September 2012 22:20, Kathleen McCook <klmccook(a)gmail.com> wrote:

I sense the raised (ironic) eyebrow in this question and since you know the answer, I need not tell you,

I think it was a genuine question, and one I had too.

It's not that there is bad behaviour that's okay with men and not okay with women. It's that women may notice it earlier or be more upset by it, more likely to be seen as "thin-skinned," rather than legitimately sensitive. In an environment that had more women, certain kinds of sensitivity (if that is the right word) would be the norm. Sarah

Fred Bauder

10 Sep 10 Sep

1:58 a.m.

...

True, no question. Fred

4270

days inactive

4272

days old

wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Manage subscription

7 comments

6 participants

tags (0)

participants (6)

Charles Matthews
David Gerard
Fred Bauder
Kathleen McCook
Martijn Hoekstra
Sarah