Talk:Charting diversity

Comments on the PDF

Nice compilation of previous publications, it's also useful for skimming. As for the proposals, they can basically be divided in training modules and advertising. Advertising is something that was done in the past by WMDE and WMIT so we have some experience. As for training, for instance cMOOC, I'd like to see some feasibility study because it may have an effect only if involving thousands of persons. I note we still have no idea whatsoever of what sort of actions could actually work. In particular, when/if a certain demographic group just doesn't click the "edit" button in the first place, we have no idea how to change that. --Nemo 06:06, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

I share a bit of the concern about the nature of the proposals, because the implication seems to be "women have a problem with Wikipedia, how do we fix the women?". Maybe we need to say "Wikipedia has a problem with women, how do we fix Wikipedia?". What might we do to address the aggressive culture of Wikipedia? How do we reach out and help new editors if they don't know about user talk pages (or are using the mobile interface and can't even get to the User Talk page)? Kerry Raymond (talk) 02:01, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Maybe I misread or I misremember, but I think the idea of cMOOC was also directed at existing editors. If we have demonstrated, identified behavioural antipatterns of the editing community against women and of their impact (do we?!), then the idea of "correcting" them with massive courses is interesting: I could see such courses as an accelerator of learning processes which on wiki can be extremely painful, even though they eventually manage to teach people how to work together. Still, a feasibility study would be needed. So many open questions! --Nemo 13:35, 16 September 2014 (UTC)