Talk:Wikimedia LGBT

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Portal Activities Business History Participants & Supporters Privacy Resources Discussion

Lesbian, Bisexual, Gay and Transgender Heritage Initiative - National Park Service[edit]

--Another Believer (talk) 15:04, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

I know the folks behind this if anyone is interested in more info. --Varnent (talk)(COI) 18:52, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

General questions by Affiliations Committee to the interested affiliate[edit]


We've received a request from one of the proposed board members (Dorothy Howard) to get affiliated as a User Group. Here is set of general questions usually we ask to interested affiliate to help us to understand things better (and also for the record).

01. What is the proposed name of the user group? Please do note "Wikimedia X" is reserved for Chapters, so please gain consensus about some other name, preferably a name which has "User Group" in it.

  • LGBT Community User Group
  • LGBT User Group
  • LGBT Wikimedians User Group
  • User Group LGBT
  • Wiki Group LGBT
  • Wiki Project LGBT
  • Pride User Group
  • RAINBOW User Group
I invite others to suggest names and/or state their preference.
One concern I have is that a name like "LGBT Wikimedians User Group" might imply that supporters are, or should, identify as LGBT, when this is not the case. Participants and supporters of this group are not required to identify as LGBT. The purpose of this group is to promote the development of LGBT-related content. I have spoken with several non-Wikimedians about these various group names, and they have expressed that "Wiki Project LGBT" most accurately represents the group's focus and implies LGBT self-identification the least. For this reason, my vote is for Wiki Project LGBT, but I ask others to also share their thoughts. --Another Believer (talk) 15:41, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • This reminds me of long discussions about naming the Chapters Association and the eventual advice we had from WMF legal. This group is inclusive, though it is natural to presume that anyone active in the group has a commitment to both improve the experience of LGBT Wikimedians contributing to our projects, and the cause of better open knowledge about LGBT topics; beyond this there is no expectation for anyone's self identification. If anyone has reason to fear being thought to be LGBT, then publicly joining the Group would make little sense, though from the start we have remained cautious to offer non-public and anonymous participation.
To be a user group, then one of the names with User Group in it makes sense to me. "Wiki Project LGBT" looks like the name for a WikiProject which is a different sort of thing. From the legal point of view, if the common terminology is WM-LGBT (which is the abbreviation I've been using for the last two years), there is no harm in using this in addition to UG-LGBT, common usage is a different issue to the official name.
There may be some mileage in keeping the international context in mind. Our recognizable special logo with LGBT imagery, may actually be more important to many people at conferences and events than specific words, or the Wikimedia "brand". -- (talk) 18:15, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

02. Who are the people behind this application?

  • Group development and the goal of user group status have been discussed for some time. The tipping point for submitting a user group application occurred at the inaugural WikiConference USA, held in New York City during 30 May - 1 June 2014. An LGBT Meetup was held on June 1, where a group of several individuals supported the concept of a Wikimedia user group which promotes the development of LGBT content, among other goals. We posted a note on this page (see "Sign on to be a Founding Member of a WikiLGBT Usergroup") in order to provide people not attending the conference an opportunity to support the application. Individuals who have signed on include Dorothy Howard (User:OR drohowa), User:RachelWex, User:Fæ, User:Ladsgroup, User:Mozucat, User:Rich Farmbrough, User:CT Cooper and myself. Nearly fifty users have indicated their support for the group which has been referred to as Wikimedia LGBT up to this point, but the aforementioned list of names represents those who specifically support the user group application. --Another Believer (talk) 15:16, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

03. Which geographical area and context you cover (or plan to cover) with your entity?

  • The global LGBT community and allies. The group will promote the development of LGBT-related content around the world, in all languages. --Another Believer (talk) 15:19, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

04. How many people do you have behind this application?

  • See question 2. In short, nearly 50 people support the concept and a group of 8 have signed on to navigate the user group application process. --Another Believer (talk) 15:16, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

05. Do you have any prominent Wikimedians behind this application, if so name a few.

  • I invite others to provide descriptions of their activity, but here is a start:
  • Dorothy Howard (User:OR drohowa): Wikipedian in Residence at the Metropolitan New York Library Council (METRO) since August 2013; organizes in-person meetups and co-organizer of Wiki Loves Pride 2014; 5,000+ edits at Wikipedia
  • Rachel Wexelbaum (User:RachelWex): librarian and professor, works at St Cloud State University
  • User:Fæ: millions of edits at Commons (bot operator, mass uploader, image reviewers, OTRS); 4,000+ edits at cy.wikipedia; 77,000+ edits at en.wikipedia; 1,000+ edits at Meta-Wiki; former Wikimedia UK board member and first Chair of the Wikimedia Chapters Association; co-founder of Wikimedia LGBT
  • User:Ladsgroup: nearly 50,000 contributions to more than 500 projects (45,000+ at Persian Wikipedia, 3,000+ edits at Wikidata, ~800 at English Wikipedia, 250+ at Meta-Wiki, etc.); 8 years of activity, bot operator (more than 15M edits) and mw:pywikibot developer
  • User:Mozucat: ~500 Wikipedia edits, librarian at City University of New York, leading campus ambassador helping staff and classes throughout the CUNY system, Wikimedia NYC board member, 5 years of activity and coordination of NYC training workshops
  • User:Rich Farmbrough: more than 1 million edits to 150+ projects, but mostly English Wikipedia
  • Christopher T Cooper (User:CT Cooper): 33,000+ edits at Wikipedia, also active at Commons and Meta-Wiki; Wikimedia UK member since 2009 and London meetup attendee since 2010; served on the Scholarship Committee from December 2012 to present and on the Grants Committee from December 2013 to present
  • User:Another Believer: 7-year contributor (67,000+ edits at Wikipedia; 40,000+ edits at Commons; etc.), follower of many Wikimedia initiatives including GLAM-Wiki and the Wikipedia Education Program; organizes in-person meetups and co-organizer of Wiki Loves Pride 2014

--Another Believer (talk) 16:20, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

06. Please give a short summary of your time path from the founding up to now.

  • Prior to 2011, gatherings for LGBT Wikimedians and friends were hosted at Wikimania conferences. An "LGBT and Friends Outing" was held at Wikimania in Haifa, Israel (2011), and later that year, Wikimedians worked with the Tom of Finland Foundation Library in Los Angeles to host an event called "Queering Wikipedia Editathon" as part of Wiki Loves Libraries. In 2012, the LGBT Outreach Project was created at Outreach Wiki, along with an associated IRC channel and mailing list. That same year, the 3rd Annual LGBT Meetup was held at Wikimania in Washington, D.C., the group migrated from Outreach Wiki to Meta-Wiki, and a couple of other meetings were held on IRC. At the 4th Annual LGBT Meetup at Wikimania in Hong Kong, discussion took place regarding user group status, privacy concerns and a Wikimedia global harassment policy, and representation at the Wikimedia Diversity Conference, among other topics and housekeeping tasks. In November 2013, there was LGBT representation at the Diversity Conference. 2014 saw the first Wiki Loves Pride campaign, co-oganized by Dorothy Howard and myself. I presented "Wikimedia LGBT: Past, Present and Future?" at WikiConference USA and also hosted an LGBT Meetup, where a group of individuals decided to submit an application for user group status. --Another Believer (talk) 16:38, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

07. Have there been any activities/meetings etc of this group of people? If yes, please give a short summary of your activities.

  • As my point of view, Wikimedia LGBT/Wikimania is the list of LGBT-related events that supporters and creators of Wikimedia LGBT particpated, you can see even report and outcome of these meetings. also I think Wiki Loves Pride off-line events needs to be considered into account. Amir (talk) 17:10, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • As Amir pointed out, Wikimedia LGBT/Wikimania provides a list of past Wikimania meetups. There have also been a few LGBT meetings on IRC, though I don't believe since 2012. Organizing meetings online can be challenging, given the group's global, multi-lingual scope. In-person meetups are likely to happen at the regional level and/or at movement-wide events such as Wikimania. We will see how meetings are organized moving forward, but I think participants are committed to trying various methods and seeing what works best. To date, most organizing and discussion has taken place via the Meta-Wiki talk page and mailing list. An LGBT Meetup was held at WikiConference USA, and another is planned for the upcoming Wikimania in London.
2014 saw the first Wiki Loves Pride campaign, which gained traction most at English Wikipedia. The Results page provides an overview of the campaign's outcomes. Wikimedia UK, currently focused on organizing Wikimania, has expressed interest in hosting an LGBT-related event later this year, and additional Wiki Loves Pride events are currently being planned in India (see India Access To Knowledge/Events/Wiki Loves Pride 2014). Our hope is that the campaign evolves each year, taking different forms and inspiring various projects in different parts of the world. Perhaps "Wiki Loves Pride" is an annual campaign in the United States each June (in conjunction with Pride Month), but a separate project takes place in the United Kingdom in February in conjunction with LGBT History Month. Project supporters can self-organize as they see fit. It should also be noted that the inaugural Wiki Loves Pride campaign inspired the creation of the LGBT task force at Wikidata. We want to see more off-shoot projects like this!

--Another Believer (talk) 17:57, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

08. Do you keep any monthly/half-yearly/yearly reports of you activities? If yes, please provide links.

  • To date, there has not been much need for regular reporting. Or, reporting has been done at the project level, such as the Results page for the Wiki Loves Pride 2014 campaign. It would be nice to have a regular report or newsletter about ongoing LGBT-related Wikimedia activities and projects. I believe having a group like Wikimedia LGBT to monitor and group various LGBT initiatives will increase the chance of this happening. The group will serve as a hub, connecting LGBT WikiProjects and providing channels for communications and reporting. --Another Believer (talk) 18:05, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

09. What kind of activities are planned for the future in the group?

  • Other possible future projects?
    • collaborations with the GLAM and Education programs
    • activities specific to Wikimedia projects such as Wikibooks, Wikinews, Wikisource or Wikivoyage
    • working with Wiki Project Med on health and medical content
    • collaborating with cultural institutions (particularly LGBT organizations) to enhance Wikimedia projects and perhaps inspire content donations
We believe there are many potential intersections between the field of LGBT studies and Wikimedia projects. --Another Believer (talk) 18:09, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

10. Do you have an overview of how many Wikimedians would like to join the User Group when founded?

  • Nearly fifty users have signed on as supporters of the group, some based on the concept and others as active participants. The group's size is expected to grow over time, as more outreach is conducted and more projects come to fruition. Because the group is multinational and multilingual, some activities may take hold in certain parts of the globe and "sub-groups" may lead language- or nation-specific projects. --Another Believer (talk) 16:26, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

11. Is you entity already legally registered?

12. Do you have a bylaws for you entity? If yes, have the bylaws been reviewed by a lawyer/specialist?

13. Please, summarize your focus in a few lines.

  • The group's mission is to promote the development of LGBT content on Wikimedia projects, in all languages, to encourage LGBT organizations to use Wikimedia projects and to adopt the values of free future and open access, and to build greater community among LGBT Wikimedians and allies. Other goals include coordinating cross-wiki efforts among various LGBT WikiProject, participating in discussions related to non-discrimination policies, and encouraging safe environments for LGBT contributors. --Another Believer (talk) 16:38, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your interest and please let us know if you have any more questions.

Tanvir Rahman
— T. 08:06, 11 July 2014 (UTC)


About the name of the user group, I strongly oppose the third name "LGBT Wikimedians user group" and I'm a little bit oppose the first one, becuase I think these names close doors to allies, you don't need to be a Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, or Transgender to join the user group. Amir (talk) 17:10, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Amir. Do you have a preference for LGBT User Group, User Group LGBT, or Wiki Project LGBT? -Another Believer (talk) 17:35, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
@: In your above comment, are you suggesting a preference for WM-LGBT? Or, do you prefer one of the other user group names other than Wiki Project LGBT? I am sure you know that the name Wiki Project LGBT is consistent with Wiki Project Med. You raise good points above, but I am curious about your specific recommendation. --Another Believer (talk) 18:25, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
I prefer the second one, the first one and the third one, respectively Amir (talk) 18:30, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
So, of all five options, User Group LGBT is your preference, followed by LGBT User Group then Wiki Project LGBT? Just making sure I understand. --Another Believer (talk) 18:35, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Yes :) Amir (talk) 20:18, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
I was just saying that I commonly use WM-LGBT, it's not a name I'm proposing. I am content with "User Group LGBT" if "Wikimedia LGBT" is not going to be allowed as an "official" name. In practice these are "Wikimedia User Groups" anyway, meh, tomato, tomato, to quote Ginger Rogers... -- (talk) 08:57, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. Hopefully others will chime in on this discussion, as so far we have three people preferring three different names. :) Amir and I have both expressed opposition re: "LGBT Community User Group" and "LGBT Wikimedians User Group"--shall we strike these from the list of options? --Another Believer (talk) 15:13, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
I'd presume this should take a week at minimum (i.e. a small RFC), so best leave as many options as possible. Maybe someone will pop up with a clever name we have not thought of, something off the wall, like the "Rainbow" or "Pride" User Group. Fancy being a PUG? :-) -- (talk) 15:17, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Sounds good! --Another Believer (talk) 15:23, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Here's my take purely on name: we want the word "wiki" to indicate scope, if the focus is on content it should have LGBT at the end. So of those suggested Wiki Project LGBT is my preferred. However it is confusable with WikiProject LGBT on en:WP. And content is not the sole focus, AIUI. So perhaps Wiki Group LGBT.
Rich Farmbrough 01:08 13 July 2014 (GMT).
  • I suppose another option could be Wiki User Group LGBT. --Another Believer (talk) 02:54, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Maybe I'm out of my element, but what if we called it "Usergroup Diversity" to side step this whole problem of inclusion/exclusion that comes with using the loaded acronym "LGBT," which seems to be always up for debate. Otherwise, what about "Wikimedia Pride." (?) or "Usergroup Pride." (?)OR drohowa (talk) 20:40, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for producing this report. I think the only point of contention currently is the name. It's a shame we can't use "Wikimedia LGBT"; though I guess if in the distant future we became a thematic organization, that would change. As it stands I believe any name should i) keep the door open for allies, ii) have LGBT or similar in the name; anything else leaves too much potential for confusion, and iii) have wiki or similar in the name, for obvious reasons. I'm not sure about "Wiki Project LGBT". Yeah, it's consistent with Wiki Project Med but, on its own, it's too easy to confuse with WikiProject LGBT Studies. If "Wiki Project" is going to be in the name, so should "User Group" in my opinion. My current preference is for Wiki User Group LGBT (abbreviation: WUG-LGBT?); it's not very exciting, but it's clear and ticks all the boxes for me.

My full preferences are as follows: 1) Wiki User Group LGBT, 2) Wiki Group LGBT, 3) Wiki Project LGBT User Group, 4) Wiki Project LGBT, 5) User Group LGBT, 6) LGBT User Group, 7) Pride User Group. Feel free to only list the first three, if that makes things easier. CT Cooper · talk 01:07, 15 July 2014 (UTC)


  • Amir: 1.) User Group LGBT, 2.) LGBT User Group, 3.) Wiki Project LGBT
  • Another Believer: 1.) Wiki Project LGBT, 2.) User Group LGBT, 3.) Wiki Group LGBT
  • Fæ: 1.) User Group LGBT 2.) Pride User Group
  • Rich Farmbrough: 1.) Wiki Project LGBT, 2.) Wiki Group LGBT
  • CT Cooper: 1.) Wiki User Group LGBT, 2.) Wiki Group LGBT, 3.) Wiki Project LGBT User Group, 4.) Wiki Project LGBT, 5.) User Group LGBT, 6.) LGBT User Group, 7.) Pride User Group
  • Dorothy 1.) User Group Pride 2. Pride User Group. 3. User Group LGBT

--Another Believer (talk) 02:24, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

  • Could you please let me know on my talk page or via email when you reach a decision? Thanks! — T. 09:52, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Will do. I think we can narrow the list down to User Group LGBT, Wiki User Group LGBT, Wiki Group LGBT, or Wiki Project LGBT (listed alphabetically) based on the above preferences. Does that seem fair and accurate, co-founders? A couple of these are similar--Wiki User Group LGBT is actually a combination of two others. I don't want to rush this, but I think sufficient time has been allowed for people to voice their ideas and suggestions. Is a simple vote of these 4 options the best way to determine our name? --Another Believer (talk) 15:27, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Good idea Another Believer, I cast my vote for "Wiki User Group LGBT" I wait for others to vote Amir (talk) 07:58, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm a bit late to the naming discussion - my apologies - but I have a preference for "User Group Pride" and "Pride User Group", after Fae, as these can avoid the inclusion/exclusion issues of the acronym "LGBT" and make it even more inclusive. OR drohowa (talk) 20:45, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
To me, User Group Pride reads as though one takes pride in being part of a user group. Also, as evidenced by the Wiki Loves Pride talk page, some people are concerned that "pride" in general does not have a universal LGBT connotation. In other words, "LGBT" is a defined community, as evidenced by the Wikipedia article. The same cannot be said for the article for Pride. At minimum, it would need to be the LGBT Pride User Group, but I can see the accusations of bias and agenda-wiedling from a mile away... --Another Believer (talk) 21:08, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
Yeah I think we need to narrow down our option a bit to reach a consensus. I'm also going for "Wiki User Group LGBT", per Amir and my early first preference vote. CT Cooper · talk 23:15, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Does it seem fair to narrow this down to User Group LGBT and Wiki User Group LGBT? I am proposing this based on our collective preferences above. These seem to be the most common preferences. We could take a poll between the two options, unless someone has a better suggestion. --Another Believer (talk)
I would personally prefer that Wikimedia be kept in the name, just my two cents. I agree that Pride is too broad, so despite the concerns, suggest LGBT. If for whatever reason, Wikimedia isn't to be included in the name, then I think it should absolutely include the word wiki. Project makes me think more of the WikiProjects than user groups, so I am not a fan of that wording. So while I think "Wikimedia User Group LGBT" or "Wikimedia LGBT User Group" would be better, of the options presented, I would prefer "Wiki User Group LGBT". --Varnent (talk)(COI) 06:33, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

... "Wiki User Group LGBT" seems to be emerging as the preferred name here, per @Ladsgroup:, @CT Cooper:, @Varnent: and myself. @:'s first preference is for "User Group LGBT" (as is @OR drohowa:'s third preference) and @Rich Farmbrough:'s second preference was "Wiki Group LGBT"... both of these are very close to "Wiki User Group LGBT". Might I suggest we go ahead and adopt this as our name? I don't want to come across as heavy handed, but I think this is the best name based on everyone's preferences and no one else has suggested an alternative method for deciding a final name (such as a direct vote, etc.). Please indicate your support or opposition to adopting "Wiki User Group LGBT" as our name. --Another Believer (talk) 16:15, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

I support "Wiki User Group LGBT" but I also feel its a little long so I would support the use of the nickname/shortened name of just, "User Group LGBT" for more common usage. OR drohowa (talk) 16:48, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
I support "Wiki User Group LGBT" as our official name. CT Cooper · talk 03:23, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

It has just been brought to my attention that we are allowed to have the name Wikimedia LGBT User Group (per Tanvir). This would be my preference over Wiki User Group LGBT. Do others agree? --Another Believer (talk) 16:53, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

During last night's LGBT Meetup, we discussed the group's name. There was a very clear and strong preference for Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, with the plus sign being added to include other sexual and gender minorities who do not specifically identify as L, G, B, or T. I strongly support this addition, though we should acknowledge there may be times when a plus sign cannot be included for technical reasons, which would still read as Wikimedia LGBT User Group. We took a vote and this was the decision, though I still want to give online group participants (especially user group co-founders) a chance to also state their support or concerns before we email AffCom. Please indicate your support or concern for the name Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group. --Another Believer (talk) 08:31, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
As per the meetup, I support the addition of the plus sign to the name to address the valid concerns raised for those individuals that don't feel they fall under the LGBT banner. It's only a minor change and don't see any major downsides to it. So to be clear, I believe the name should be Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group (Wikimedia LGBT+ in branding), or if it turns out that that name isn't avaliable after all, then Wiki User Group LGBT+ is my second choice per the earlier discussion. CT Cooper · talk 02:41, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
I think the show of hands at the meet-up was sufficient, I didn't count the numbers, but I think at least 15 people supported it, with a magnitude fewer for any other variation. In terms of process, I think that as the number of Wikimedians supporting the name is much greater than the numbers that have taken part so far in discussion about this in this thread on meta, it would be fair to consider this online discussion as satisfactorily complete; though others are welcome to discuss issues and options, especially as the title will need to be supported with an explanation of what we mean by Wikimedia and "LGBT+". Even in the UK I sometimes get asked "what does LGBT mean?". Face-smile.svg
P.S. it is great news that Affcom are happy for use to use "Wikimedia" in the official name, this makes it much easier for the general public to understand what we are about. -- (talk) 04:22, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
OK. I will email AffCom and submit our name request. --Another Believer (talk) 07:21, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Unless anyone objects very soon, I have no objection to immediate submission. CT Cooper · talk 07:53, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done. I sent an email to Tanvir. --Another Believer (talk) 20:25, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

LGBT Meetup at Wikimania 2014[edit]

With Wikimania 2014 just around the corner, we might discuss any goals for the LGBT Meetup, currently scheduled for the evening of Saturday, August 9. Just a handful of people have signed up thus far, but I am not sure how many people are visiting the wiki now. Do we want this to be a very casual meet and greet, or do we want to have an agenda to discuss the state of Wikimedia LGBT or the state of LGBT projects within the Wikimedia movement in general? I am okay with either. If anyone wants to meet to discuss WMLGBT outside of the LGBT Meetup, just let me know. --Another Believer (talk) 14:32, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm looking forward to it. I don't have a strong opinion on the format – how was it done in the past? CT Cooper · talk 23:24, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
In 2012, we had about 35 people in the room and mainly decided we needed a group. It was an informal discussion for about an hour, then going on to a social evening. This year it would be useful to get some notes recorded as we need to lay down evidence that the User Group has meetings to have resolutions and documented actions. In effect we do this virtually, but the physical meeting has value too. -- (talk) 04:20, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Sadly I will not be at Wikimania this year, so can not help organize this year's gathering. However, I sincerely hope one does happen again this year. --Varnent (talk)(COI) 06:34, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
I think it could be fun to find a cultural institution with an LGBT exhibition, or a space/bar/coffeeshop with an LGBT history to hold the Wikimedia LGBT meetup. I know so little about Britain's LGBT history, come to think of it, but I'm sure it is rich and interesting. Anyone know of some interesting LGBT spaces in London? Perhaps User:CT Cooper can direct us a bit more if I am correct in saying you currently live in London? --OR drohowa (talk) 17:01, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
It's a nice idea, time is limited though. Rich Farmbrough 17:45 3 August 2014 (GMT).
As I've said at User talk:CT Cooper, I don't know London's LGBT locations that well. I contacted a friend of mine, but he only knew bars well. He said the Retro Bar was the most civilized gay bar in London, though it's not that close to the Barbican unfortunately. CT Cooper · talk 03:18, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
I've always been around London and have lived fairly centrally for the last 15 years. I would strongly recommend we make the effort to get to Old Compton Street as there are very few choices around the Barbican (the gayest places in walking distance being for the more adventurous, such as impressively extensive Expectations if you want to buy something "for a friend" or really want to splash out on that tight leather/rubber singlet in your colour (the staff are very helpful), or feel like spending the night hanging out in Chariots Shoreditch, the UK's largest gay sauna).
In Soho there are a number of very well known old gay pubs, such as The Admiral Duncan (read the Wikipedia article) or Comptons of Soho, as well as the more trendy young crowds in the Rupert Street Bar and the G-A-Y bar (3 stories high)—this could become a mini gay pub crawl. These days, I think all have free wifi. I suggest visitors take a look at this TimeOut guide. As well as bars and pubs there is a wide variety of late opening cafés (Bar Italia is open 24 hours), restaurants (Balans, Espana), and some of the gay shops stay open late (Prowler open until 10pm). Around the corner on Charing Cross Road is Manbar (charges for entry after 10.30 and runs as a club to 3am) and if you are near Trafalgar Square it is worth dropping in to Halfway to Heaven for a half, cheaper than most Soho bars.
P.S. In terms of cultural institutions, the Museum of London in the Barbican has an eclectic collection (free) which does include a bit of gay London, but not a lot, the British Museum (free) has the incredible Warren Cup (Addendum: should have returned frem the Isle of Wight by now, worth double-checking) and you may want to get a copy of Richard Parkinson's "A Little Gay History" from the BM bookshop to make your own tour of other LGBT artefacts in the museum (COI: Richard is an old friend of mine). If you really want to get to grips with gay archives, then the LSE in Holborn is home to the main part of the Hall–Carpenter Archives and the Hogwarts-style Bishopsgate Library near Liverpool Street is home to the book collection of the HCA archives, both would need a phone-call first to make sure you can have access. -- (talk) 04:26, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for taking the time to give all this information. Yeah, I think if we want to meet in an LGBT themed venue, then going to Soho is the way to go. We just need to agree a time and place to meet at the end of the day and then we can be away. We are booked into Frobisher 6 from 18:30 onwards on Saturday. If we want to have a "formal session" beforehand, we could start there. CT Cooper · talk 00:26, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
We should start in the conference space and go from there for those who wish. Let's do that 6:30 meetup in the designated room. Blue Rasberry (talk) 08:20, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
I agree. Let's meet at 6:30 at the Barbican to discuss LGBT work within the Wikimedia movement. Then, whether we travel together or just plan to meet again at a specific time and place (it sounds like Soho is best), we can have a more casual meet and greet. That way, people can attend one or the other, or both! --Another Believer (talk) 08:24, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Soho will be a trek from the Barbican, which might prevent some people from going. It will also be packed on a Saturday night. I am not opposed, but would attendees prefer somewhere within walking distance from Barbican? It doesn't have to be a gay bar... but again, either works for me. --Another Believer (talk) 08:34, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
There are a fair few venues that would let us book some space gratis, even on a Saturday night. Also, so long as it's a LGBT+ friendly space, I don't have a problem with it being a space that isn't explicitly an LGBT+ specific venue. Retro Bar, off Strand, would probably be my favoured venue, but mainly because it's familiar to me and convenient (and not full of irritating scene queens and one of the few LGBT+ spaces in London that's genuinely non-gendered). Given I've not travelled thousands of miles and I'm not actually attending the conference itself, though, I think my personal preference should not be terribly relevant ;o)
I have no problem with travelling up to the Barbican if that's more convenient for everyone else; similarly I don't mind missing a preliminary Barbican-based thing but joining you all in Soho (or wherever). To my mind, the priorities should be somewhere that's (a) convenient, particularly for non-Londoners, (b) not going to be unpleasantly full and (c) not going to be extortionately expensive. If we're starting at Barbican, though, schlepping to Soho does seem like quite the trek; it would probably make more sense to stay in or near the Square Mile.
If there's a specific set of proposals to be put to vote, then please leave a message on my talk page on en.wp, as that will email me to ensure I participate :o) — OwenBlacker (Talk) 09:46, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
It looks like starting at the Barbican is the way to go. The Retro Bar seems like a popular choice and would meet our needs, perhaps we should make our way there after we've finished our discussion at the Barbican. CT Cooper · talk 13:41, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
We could move twds Retro, but if that's the plan we should book one of the upstairs booths and it's worth bearing in mind that it's a fair trek (GMaps says it's a 35-minute walk)… — OwenBlacker (Talk) 14:01, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
A 35 minute walk doesn't bother me too much, though I know others might not feel the same way. I guess, using the tube is an alternative option. CT Cooper · talk 23:19, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Keep in mind that many will want to go back to their hotel first, leave their stuff or get changed, then meet up at a venue. Personally I would find this a bit too far to walk after a long day. To get to the Retro Bar by tube/subway, you can get the Circle line from the Barbican or Moorgate and then it's 10 stops to Embankment (leaving, walk up to the Strand then heading East along the Strand a short way, or go via John Adam Street) TfL planner shows 18-20 mins. If you want to go on to another venue, then the gay Soho area is not actually that far away, about a 5 minute walk from the Retro Bar, going up Charing Cross Road, or if you want to check it out anyway, from the Barbican Station you would go more directly taking any line to Liverpool Street, the Central line to Tottenham Court Road Station, then walk via Soho Square to the gay area, TfL planner shows 13-16 mins). I've never tried the Retro Bar, but then I prefer gay bars. With regard to crowds, Saturday night should be busy, but an advantage of Old Compton Street is that folks can chill out in a choice of cafes which in the gay area are gay spaces too Face-smile.svg. -- (talk) 04:50, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
@: Fwiw, Retro is also a gay space, just not gender-segregated and not exclusively gay. (And I mean "gay" in the broadest, LGBT+ sense.) Your point about the variety of spaces around Old Compton St is definitely valid, though Face-smile.svgOwenBlacker (Talk) 14:28, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Retro Bar

Have we come to a decision? It would be good to finalize ASAP so we can start inviting people throughout the day. --Another Believer (talk) 10:22, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

I would suggest either Retro Bar or (if we want to go into Soho) The Yard. Neither are particularly OTT, although both may be rather busy. Retro is lovely, but Soho has the advantage that the 76/N76 bus exists to get people back towards The City/Old Street area. —Tom Morris (talk) 11:27, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
I vote for Retro, especially if this is the more appropriate location for a potentially diverse group of "strangers" to meet and greet. People are of course welcome to break away, but we should have a set time and place to share with people throughout the day. Shall we say between 8:30 and 9? --Another Believer (talk) 11:49, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
8:30 might be a bit late. 8pm instead? —Tom Morris (talk) 12:25, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
Sure! We should keep the LGBT meetup short then, yes? Maybe from 6:30-7:15? That would only give 45 minutes for people to get ready and make their way to the venue. --Another Believer (talk) 12:41, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
If people are a little late, it shouldn't matter too much, now that we've agreed on a venue. I'll try and be at the Retro Bar for 20:00 and no later than 20:30. I look forward to seeing you all. CT Cooper · talk 12:51, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
It's settled then. Retro Bar at 8pm. I will update the LGBT Meetup page at the Wikimania wiki. --Another Believer (talk) 12:57, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi! I'll be at the 6:30 meetup. Not sure yet about going out as I'm down with some sort of sickness, but I'll see you all soon. OR drohowa (talk) 14:00, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
For all who arrived to this discussion late, we are going to be meeting at Frobisher 6 at 6:30 today (Sat) and others will go to Retro Bar (on the Strand) after! OR drohowa (talk) 16:45, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
I'd just like to thank everyone for a nice meetup! I have a good feeling about the goals we discussed and it was great seeing people in person.--Tommikovala (talk) 10:25, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
Ditto! I had a great time and look forward to seeing how the group evolves moving forward. --Another Believer (talk) 10:57, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, it was great seeing everyone in person and I'm pleased it was so welcoming for everyone. It was slightly embarrassing when you all applauded me for coming out this year, but it was also very sweet, so thank you. CT Cooper · talk 19:56, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
Some things are worth celebrating! :) --Another Believer (talk) 20:01, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
Definitely worth celebrating, always a brave step to take in our hetero-normative society (hugs). Face-smile.svg -- (talk) 04:34, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

The Wikimania mini-gay bar crawl was a lot of fun, and during the various conversations it was fascinating to compare the realities of LGBT+ life in different countries. I had no idea that Grindr was "ruder" in the US than the UK, the Americans were amazed you are allowed to walk along Old Compton Street openly carrying a pint of beer, and it was interesting to compare notes on the experience of being in same-sex marriages and civil partnerships as governments have implemented them so differently. There was confusion about some historic references (sigh, I'm old), so here's a few out of interest:

I would love to see some LGBT History related events in the coming year, which seems a natural addition to the Wiki Loves Pride campaign. -- (talk) 05:34, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

... carrying drinks down the street, and the visible urinals...! It seems transparency is highly valued in London. :p --Another Believer (talk) 07:28, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Well I wasn't familiar with the open urinals either – they love them in the Netherlands but they're a relatively new thing here. And oh yeah, I thought the Friend of Dorothy thing was just a friendly reference to the 1939 film. Well you learn something new everyday. CT Cooper · talk 07:51, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Help keep a bit of LGBT history free[edit]

Re: c:Commons:Deletion_requests/AIDS_education_posters_from_the_Wellcome

Hi, I have had to create a deletion request on Commons for a number of AIDS education posters from the 1990s. If you have some time during Wikimania, take a look and leave a note in the deletion discussion if you can write to the original publishers to see if we can get a release on OTRS. Unfortunately, though the Wellcome released these, they now doubt that their change over to a full free release can be backed up with releases from the original creators—if we get a release on record, then I would be happy to upload the very high resolution scanned version from Wellcome. This should be of particular interest for anyone with personal contacts in ACT UP. Thanks -- (talk) 17:26, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

August 7: Wikimania LGBT Meetup with AffCom liaisons[edit]

Here is a link to the etherpad for the August 7 LGBT meetup with AffCom liaisons:

(This is separate from the LGBT meetup(s) scheduled for Saturday, August 8.) --Another Believer (talk) 11:25, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for posting this. I would never rule out Wikimedia LGBT becoming a thematic organization, since it has its own benefits, but I think making one step at a time would be best. We should first establish ourselves, find our niche and make it work. CT Cooper · talk 20:02, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
Indeed. Perhaps my wording was a bit ambiguous, but I agree with your sentiment. --Another Believer (talk) 20:10, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

August 8: LGBT Meetup[edit]

Notes from the meeting posted above, in case the etherpad disappears. Feel free to expand/edit. Also, a request to page watchers to please indicate support or opposition to the name Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group in the above section. Thanks! --Another Believer (talk) 20:58, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Based on the meet-up, as I'm active on OTRS, I'm happy to take an action to follow-up on an "official" email address for LGBT+ User Group related Wikimedia enquiries (such as LGBT at I'll raise this as a possible new OTRS queue which would be confidential and only readable by those approved to the queue using the normal OTRS procedure. The work will be defining its scope and creating starting materials for "standard" enquiries and advice for OTRS volunteers as to when enquiries are out of bounds, such as credible legal issues or when a correspondent is asking for the sort of help that ought to be given by professional bodies (e.g. "I'm 16 and live in Indonesia, where can I meet other gay people?").
The OTRS queue may or may not be part of our response to concerns about LGBT+ related hounding or harassment, how exactly it is used can be refined downstream depending on how many volunteers are interested in helping out and what we can measure as a level of need.
It is possible to have email redirects if we have a web domain registered. I suggest we defer discussing whether we need this sort of thing until the User Group is fully formal and we are confident that the name is finalized. -- (talk) 13:22, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Page started at Wikimedia LGBT/OTRS

It looks like a good time was had by all, and I'm sorry I was unable to join the group at Wikimania, though I suspect the pub crawl would have been too much for my weary limbs.
The question on harassment and discrimination raises a more general community issue, WRT hounding etc. It is far from clear to me that either community or foundation support for non-public assistance in the face of bad treatment on-wiki are easily accessible to an average editor.
Based on personal experience, Community support is inconsistent and, I'm sad to say, depending on the project, if you go to a notice board or similar things might actually get worse or result in actions against the complainant account (refer to the classic "fuck off with your queer agenda" case, where both telling someone to fuck off and having a queer agenda were considered acceptably civil, but saying this looks like homophobia is likely to get you blocked or spend the next month in an Arbcom case). Many do not realize that the Foundation do not offer support on these issues, even where there is criminal harassment you would be better advised to go to the police and then approach the Foundation for data rather than other types of support.
The concept for the LGBT+ OTRS channel is to provide a 'safe space' for the person who feels harassed or hounded to discuss their experience. We discussed how this might work on OTRS in the past, I just need to get some time to pen it down (I'm in Cornwall for a long weekend, so in a few days I'll probably get to it). In the same way as many gay helplines work, we might agree a basic flow-chart for enquiries, to make it easier to keep in mind our scope; legal threats have to go to legal, criminal threats ought to be a matter for immediate action such as Oversight and advice to go to the police, those with general LGBT+ questions can be pointed to information on help groups in their country, etc.
There would probably be two main types of enquiry, people asking for LGBT+ information and we point to or provide what we can, and people involved in an incident (which may include those accused of LGBT related harassment) who may be upset and will want to express that and we can listen. In the first camp may be people confused about what we stand for, or are presuming we have a political agenda (such as promoting gay marriage) and we should be able to direct even the most contentious correspondent to our FAQ on meta (which we need to build up).
If we establish our presence and are known to have a wide group of active volunteers, we might also be in a position to give an opinion on LGBT+ matters for projects that are interested on what ought to be best practice, such as civility and some issues for content. This is more true for projects that do not already have their own local WikiProject LGBT groups, which we do not intend to duplicate or supersede. -- (talk) 04:16, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
I am slightly disappointed, given the proposed scope of the group, that there are no proposals to measure or boost QUILTBAG content.
I think it would also be useful to give some thought to demographics of oppression, and demographics of ignorance, particularly by understanding the geographies (which are not hard), and converting to a linguistic basis. (This latter part is what I attempted to do in a rather crude way with sub-Saharan Africa.) This would indicate the best wikis to deliver assistive content.
Rich Farmbrough 19:36 12 August 2014 (GMT).
The research side of this sounds like an interesting project that could fall under our umbrella. Perhaps you could think of writing it up as a proposal? P.S. to avoid confusion, LGBT+ is intended to cover a range of other terms, including QUILTBAG, but there is no judgement on which terms are better to use, the consensus to stay with LGBT was based on it probably being more widely understood by the international community than any other wording. -- (talk) 04:16, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Oh! I wasn't speaking too the name LGBT+ is a good improvement. I'll have a think about the demographics bit. Rich Farmbrough 03:25 14 August 2014 (GMT).
I think the name is fantastic, am glad to see Wikimedia included in it, and think it allows us to keep using the Wikimedia LGBT brand when we feel it is helpful to do so.  :) Will weigh in on other items if I have anything else to add to what others have already said. --Varnent (talk)(COI) 01:40, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Updated artwork
I have updated the logo on Commons and requested a file name change to reflect the new name (yay!). The wording order is not one that we worked with WMF Comm on (go figure) - so I will need to run it past them as well just to be sure. However, I think it matches the new logo best practices and WMF logo guidelines. That said, it's a custom logo, so we have more leeway, but still... --Varnent (talk)(COI) 01:53, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Looks great! Thanks for sharing. Glad you are pleased with the name. Also, once confirmed by AffCom, we may need to move project pages to reflect the new name. --Another Believer (talk) 03:28, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done moved on Commons. Note anyone can move the pages on meta once we get the official all clear. -- (talk) 03:38, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Programmes proposal for WM-LGBT 2014/15[edit]


Hi, as we move to being recognized as a formal User Group, this is a good time to layout what our activities are likely to look like in the coming year, and to have a think about how to ensure volunteers feel empowered to have a go at creating new projects and no individual feels stressed by being responsible for driving everything themselves. Based on various discussions and recognizing the success of our Wiki Loves Pride campaign, I propose the following structure of top level programmes under which may be multiple projects in that area. For example the Wiki Loves Pride programme might include planned projects in the USA, South Africa and other countries, with each project potentially having difference groups of people interested and different needs in terms of support and funding. Being open to running projects in different ways is a healthy thing, as folks neither need to ask permission or need to feel bound to any special bureaucracy. -- (talk) 10:25, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Proposed programmes[edit]

1. Wiki Loves Pride

  • Running as multiple projects every year spanning many countries, possibly with a contest and fun prizes on Wikimedia Commons, though there could be potential for prizes for related article improvement. I see this as having an enthusiastic programme team with a bit of funding for the competition.

2. LGBT "help desk"

  • Through direct email, group email list, IRC - this is an ongoing feature of what we do, but we should think about attracting volunteers who are interested in hanging out in these different channels to help with questions. No specific funding needed, but we might need to ensure enough volunteers stay interested and we might consider if there is value in training depending on what issues arise.
  • The scope for help that we might offer is limited, this is expanded on at Wikimedia LGBT/email.

3. LGBT+ Education

  • This programme is an umbrella for LGBT+ in the education sector, so would include projects with Universities, and projects aimed at creating new educational resources supported by Wikimedia projects, such as targeted images, video and texts so that the public have authoritative resources better to understand LGBT+ issues and answer questions such as "what is LGBT?", "what is gay sex?", "what is a transsexual?", and "why do we need special LGBT rights?"
  • There are channels for advocacy for LGBT+ educational access, and we must remain clear that this is advocacy for neutral and quality knowledge, not any political bent. This would be for those passionately interested in tackling topics where access or content are problematic due to interference. One might think of China, Turkey and Russia internet restrictions, but also access to LGBT information and educational resources in schools or countries with religious governance and censorship. In many countries LGBT+ education is likely to be treated as homosexual lobbying even when the information has no specifically sexual content. It would be great if in a year's time WM-LGBT were seen as a reference group for Wikimedia projects to canvas an authoritative opinion from. There may be reasons to fund travel or conference scholarships and projects to create needed educational resources may need funding.
  • The It Gets Better project is a global initiative to create videos aimed at LGBT youth who may be experiencing harassment or discrimination, showing that it gets better. Originally started by Dan Savage in the USA, the project was created after several LGBT related suicides with significant news coverage. The initiative has an affiliates and a legal programme, both of which may be relevant for WM-LGBT as part of our education programme.

4. LGBT+ research

  • Richard F. has given an example relating to content creation, but we need much better quality information on the international experience of LGBT+ Wikimedia editors. I believe it would be straightforward to obtain research grants in this area, if anyone were to spend time developing proposals.

5. LGBT+ History and culture - including GLAM partnerships

  • This programme encompasses projects to increase both awareness of LGBT+ history from the third sex in ancient history, through to gay rights campaigns and documenting contemporary culture (interviews with rollerskating nuns anyone?). Around the world there are LGBT+ archives which would benefit from more use and improved access and the LGBT+ User Group could help ensure that the importance of virtual access is emphasized and becomes part of projects for GLAM improvements in 2015.
  • The LGBT Free Media Collective is a collaborative effort by LGBT organizations and Wikimedia projects to collect, archive and make available media files related to the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) communities. Goals for upcoming year could include more intentional outreach to new content partners and development of on-wiki marketing materials and documentation for on-wiki participants (right now a lot of it is based on GLAM outreach language designed for communication with potential outreach partners). Also - should we do a rename to reflect the "+"?

6. Wikidata:Wikidata:WikiProject LGBT

  • Assist with WikiProject LGBT on WikiData to improve LGBT-related content on Wikidata.

7. LGBT + Health and Medicine

  • Develop partnership with Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine, Wikipedia:WikiProject Pharmacology, and other health and medicine related Wikipedia projects to set goals in improving the coverage of LGBT health Wikipedia articles within these WikiProjects, and to enliven the discussion about LGBT health articles on Wikipedia.

Please do chip in with your thoughts or feel free to add or extend to the above. -- (talk) 10:25, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

This is great. Thanks for fleshing out your ideas, Fae. I am sure these fit into one of the above categories, but I didn't specifically see the Education Program or GLAM mentioned. I think it would be great if we partnered with existing programs and supported LGBT-related projects at universities and cultural institutions. LGBT+GLAM! (Artwork, anyone?) :) --Another Believer (talk) 14:25, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm definitely willing to help specially in the LGBT help desk, I'm in OTRS queue of Persian and English so It's easier for me to help that part. Also I think it'll be good if we work on Wikimedia LGBT/It Gets Better, if you think it's not good idea let's put it aside and focus on other things Amir (talk) 07:19, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Excellent pointers. AB, I'm thinking that Education does need highlighting and I'll re-write 3 later today as it is probably a similar vein. I'll add another programme for LGBT+ History and GLAM partnerships. Though we do not want to duplicate any existing WikiProject on LGBT studies, we probably do have the capabilities to be more proactive on working with archives and institutions that are themselves interested in helping shine a light on LGBT culture and history.
Amir, do have a crack at improving the OTRS proposal, it will be helped by your language skills and perspective as to what is a priority. I'll probably try taking it forward next week. IGB is an interesting proposal, presumably we can wrap into the existing IGB global project, just providing resources for Wikimedians to share their experience. It is a positive way of addressing cyberbullying, or the fear of it, and might be part of 2 above or an Education project as part of 3. I'll ponder how to include it this evening.
Yes check.svg Done -- (talk) 09:46, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
I've just added #6 and #7 to the list as additional projects of interest! OR drohowa (talk) 14:57, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I'm unsure what projects under #6 would look like. If you have something in mind, such as pulling on a LGBT related database from elsewhere, it might be an idea to describe it. -- (talk) 10:11, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Or, perhaps we have one program section to specifically focus efforts on Wikimedia projects. Here is where we could list all WikiProjects such as the LGBT task force at Wikidata, WikiProject LGBT studies at ENWP and their equivalents at Wikipedias of other languages, LGBT Free Media Collective at Commons, LGBT Expedition at Wikivoyage, etc. --Another Believer (talk) 14:10, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
What is being described is probably fairly technical, so a LGBT geek interest programme that might be fitting. Lumping Wikimedia projects into one programme would not work as other programmes have Wikimedia project outcomes, for example Wiki Loves Pride is entirely focussed on creating Wikimedia Commons content. -- (talk) 14:19, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

"Gregory Varnum's LGBT Encyclopedia Picks Up Where Wikipedia Ends" (The Advocate)[edit]

Congrats, Greg. The Wikimedia and LGBT movements are lucky to have you! --Another Believer (talk) 21:24, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks!  :) --Varnent (talk)(COI) 03:15, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Great. Thanks, User:Varnent :) OR drohowa (talk) 19:56, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

"What a dump!", or the big WikiProject LGBT Studies cleanup drive of 2014[edit]

Over on English Wikipedia, I've proposed a cleanup drive to try and reduce the number of LGBT topic area articles that have warning templates by roughly half by the end of 2014. Please see the WikiProject talk page on English Wikipedia. —Tom Morris (talk) 06:25, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

I just saw this and will make time to do some work to help you. Thanks for the post. Yours, OR drohowa (talk) 04:53, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Request for help in German[edit]

Re: c:Commons:Help_desk#A_1910_photograph.2C_author_unspecified

If someone understands the Frauen Kultur Archiv, there's a photograph of an Lesbian activist from 1910 to save! -- (talk) 14:53, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Portland, Oregon: Feminist and Queer Art Wikipedia Edit-a-thon, Sept. 13[edit]

For anyone wanting to attend in person or support our efforts remotely, there will be a Feminist and Queer Art Wikipedia Edit-a-Thon in Portland, Oregon on Saturday, September 13. --Another Believer (talk) 17:45, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Awesome, Jason! Wish I could be there. Another time... OR drohowa (talk) 19:55, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

USA Gov Outreach - GLIFAA Office of Gays and Lesbians in Foreign Affairs[edit]

Hi everyone, I'd be interested in reaching out to governmental LGBT affairs offices as Wikimedia/Wikipedia has gotten some nice press with recent C-SPAN coverage. Specifically, I think we could have an in with the Gays and Lesbians in Foreign Affairs - GLIFAA office. We could try to reach out and talk to them about Wikipedia and public policy, and the type of information that they may be able to provide to Wikipedia. Ping me if you are interested or have thoughts on pursuing this connection. OR drohowa (talk) 19:49, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

3 thoughts on this that are a bit theoretical and a bit tangential, but I'll put out there, possibly for discussion:
  1. My related experience when both establishing a chapter and maintaining government/large organization contacts (in relation to copyright) was that from an unpaid volunteer's perspective it can be time consuming and might be of limited interest to the main body of volunteers on our network. In balance it is a real bonus to have some outreach, which might mean our local WM-LGBT+ volunteers can help with presentations ("Case studies of successful engagement with Wikipedia" etc.), be invited to sit on relevant joint committees, or a known point of contact for timely questions or press contacts. Consequently if there are volunteers happy to be the key points of contact, go for it and remain realistic as to the availability of others on our network. Sustaining involvement might be a long game.
  2. Look to invert the point of contact issue. For example when handling early GLAM partnerships that made the UK chapter rather well known on the global GLAM platform, the key to success was to encourage the internal day to day point of contact to be the Wikimedian advocate from the inside. For example, if you can get the internal person to come to some wiki-meets and get more experience as an active Wikimedia project contributor and play with our tool themselves, this becomes a great basis on which to start proposing projects. This approach decreases our reliance on significant time from an unpaid volunteer, as this inversion means that their time is increasingly seen as a valued commodity to plan and book while the project management/relationship management aspects are being pushed along by someone where this has become part of their job. Face-smile.svg
  3. Our WM-LGBT+ network has to mature, we are probably not yet ready for lots of "sub-networks", though there may be enough interest in 2 or 3 (WM-LGBT+GLAM? WM-LGBT+OTRS? WM-LGBT+OUTREACH?). Obviously the US Government could be a massive valuable resource to support our user group with LGBT related materials and guidance, so this is definitely to be pursued. At the same time we need to draw people in to the stuff that is most relevant to Wikimedia volunteers - global content creation projects. This is why Wiki Loves Pride is low hanging fruit for us and now it's running is much easier to sustain. Other things are important but harder, such as offering a confidential OTRS queue devoted to LGBT+ issues on our projects.
-- (talk) 11:22, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Creating a Translation Task Force[edit]

Another idea- I think it could be cool for us to develop a translation task force for LGBT articles, mimicking WikiProject Medicine's lead Wikipedia:TTF. If you are interested in this, let me know, otherwise, add it to the list of potential projects! OR drohowa (talk) 20:07, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

The translation group for medicine is stripped down to be as simple as possible and has had great successes, but has been unable to function properly without paid staff. It is my opinion that any project could have success in translation only with either paid staff or some point person who is as devoted as paid staff. See Grants:IEG/Medicine_Translation_Project_Community_Organizing for the model by which translation is administered on WikiProject Medicine. A lot of people put a lot of energy into finding an entirely volunteer way to manage what we were doing, and after years of trying the logistics were just too tedious to crowdsource. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:34, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi Lane, Thanks for this feedback. Perhaps we should consider, as the group progresses this year, creating a grant proposal for such a project. It could be cool to seek part-time funding, from the Foundation or elsewhere, for a few people to be translating these articles into a few different languages.OR drohowa (talk) 14:22, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

A video conference on Wikimedia LGBT activities[edit]

Hello, After some talks with User:Fæ, We need to pick a date to have a conference on our activities (Wiki Loves Pride, LGBT helpdesk, Wikidata, etc.) please pick a date, Anytime until September 6 is fine with me, after that 15-24 UTC is fine. User:OR drohowa User:Bluerasberry User:Another Believer User:Tom Morris User:Varnent: Please note that this kind of meetings are important for us to continue I have important issues to talk to you. BestAmir (talk) 14:31, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

National Coming Out Day Events![edit]

We have just over a month until National Coming Out Day! Hurrah!

I am in the process of setting up an LGBT+ editathon on Saturday 11th October which is "NCOD", with a lovely old library (the book-stacks are very "Hogwarts") with a fantastic set of gay archives. So, consider this a nudge to everyone who has been thinking about an event to pencil this day in their diary, and have a go at making it happen. Face-smile.svg -- (talk) 15:42, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

The National Coming Out Day articles seems to need some work as well. I'll start there. ;) OR drohowa (talk) 14:22, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

It's official! Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group approved by Affiliations Committee[edit]

It's official -- the user group has been approved by the Affiliations Committee. A big thank you to all who have helped to make this become a reality. --Another Believer (talk) 20:32, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

THANK YOU too, Jason. :) OR drohowa (talk) 14:20, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Hurrah! -- (talk) 07:02, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Fantastic news. Thank you for all your hard work Jason. CT Cooper · talk 16:18, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Feeling extremely happy :) thank you Jason Amir (talk) 17:45, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Fall 2014 Art+Feminism IEG & PEG Grants Notification[edit]

Hello All, the Art+Feminism Edit-a-thon organizers have prepared an IEG grant, and a PEG grant this week for the fall Wikimedia Foundation grant scholarships. These grants will fund several NYC training sessions, another major international Edit-a-thon, and the creation of infrastructure to support this year, and years going forward. The project is seeking community comment / discussion and endorsement signatures (section at the bottom of the page) to help complete the grant process. We encourage you to take a look at these grants, and offer your feedback and/or your endorsement signature if you feel the project worthy. On behalf of the other organizers. --Theredproject (talk) 01:14, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Intersex person[edit]

What is with the intersex people and their problems in everyday life. Where are the inhuman medical interventions in childhood and the problems in only 2 sex society and whose prosecution addressed? --Fiver, der Hellseher (talk) 16:22, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Fiver. This talk page is focused on projects related to the WM-LGBT+ user group rather than more general LGBT+ questions. You may find the IRC channel #gaygeeks a helpful place to chat about intersex issues.
If I have misunderstood the intended meaning of your question, please feel free to ask in German and I'll ping a native speaker to get back to you. Thanks -- (talk) 16:55, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Fund a community human resources staff person[edit]

User:Bluerasberry has put up a proposal on the IdeaLab (see:Grants:IdeaLab/Fund a community human resources staffperson with the idea of asking the WMF to fund a community human resources staff person to help mediate off-wiki problems occurring as a result of on-wiki volunteering, and other community issues concerning diversity, tolerance, and acceptance. I think this is a great idea, and very applicable to the concerns of this group. Take a look, and endorse if interested! OR drohowa (talk) 16:27, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Did you know that the most active cooperative images on Commons are LGBT projects?[edit]


I happened to come across this fact while looking into possible "image revert wars" on Commons, see the linked report. This shows that of all Commons images, it is LGBT related maps that have the best cooperation between groups of people (look for the LGBT tag, with those highlighted in green as the most stable images with the longest histories). The maps are mostly to illustrate the status of same-sex marriage recognition. A good measurable fact to drop into any discussion about the importance of LGBT projects... Face-smile.svg -- (talk) 15:23, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing. I am definitely impressed by how quickly same-sex marriage maps are updated and the amount of discussion they generate. -Another Believer (talk) 15:39, 13 November 2014 (UTC)