Grants talk:APG/Proposals/2015-2016 round1/Amical Wikimedia/Staff proposal assessment

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Hello @Katy, all the staff.

I have a comment to the assessment. It has been stated that:

P4. Diversity |Neither | Other than including programs that have target audiences that include many female participants, Amical does not appear to be specifically addressing gender or reaching out to currently diverse communities

This is something I wouldn't fully agree with. It is true that Amical does not write a lot about a gender but in substance their programmes - as you pointed out - look better: they are rather gender-neutral or even minority gender-specific. E.g. libraries project: I am not 100% sure about Catalonia but in Poland (and many other countries I know) libraries are dominated by females. Personally I made a huge workshop for librarians and scientific information specialists once and during the lectures 90+%, and workshop sessions 100% of participants were women. In my experience this situation created a great diversification opportunity, enabling the participants their practice in a pleasant environment, but also we avoided labeling and I use it as an example of a smart diversification action.

IMHO such professionals and environments are actually an efficient way to reach some demographies without labeling it as "gender-specific action per se" (which is IMHO good because not in many cultures outside of U.S. people like/are acustomed to such actions).

Similarly, I don't have any proof that the classroom projects are gender-biased. This is why I see them in some better light, :) even if they hadn't written some general gender paragraph. :) Best, aegis maelstrom δ 14:42, 13 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]