Jump to content

Talk:Queering Wikipedia 2020

Add topic
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Central discussion[edit]

This conference has lots of subpages. Please let's post all discussion to this talk page, and redirect all conversation to here as the main and possibly only on-wiki talk page for this event. Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:52, 21 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

A few remarks on Scholarships[edit]

As discussed on Telegram, I do have a few points on the current draft to discuss:

  • "Do you have relationships with Wikimedia affiliates (if any)", at first, I did read "relationship" as "interpersonal relationships". I assume we mean relationship with a Wikimedia chapter or something, not "are you the spouse of someone" ?
  • "Country" is kinda unclear. Does that mean country of residence, citizenship, others ? Citizenship would make sense if there is travel restriction and for passport, but residence would make sense for travel planning. In fact, if that's for travel planning, that's maybe best replaced by "City" or "closest airport".
  • So if full scholarship cover everything, what is covered by partial one ?
  • Would it help to list who will have access to the data, like giving the names of people ?
  • Gender, if that's to be used on visa/passport, maybe be clear that it should be what is on the paper. While I can see how that would be annoying for trans folks, if that's for the purpose of booking, it should be quite clearly articulated (IMHO).

--Misc (talk) 15:23, 21 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

  1. Relationship was intended to mean some connection with chapters, thorgs or user groups. This may be as a frequent volunteer, member, board member, anything that someone would like to list. Some Wikipedians will have multiple connections, for example, many participants in Women in Red will go to chapter events or even organize their own editathons.
  2. Country could be changed to be more about travel needs, not sure how best to phrase that, so it may need a bit more rubric to explain. In conjunction, we do not ask about languages, and maybe we should.
  3. Partial scholarships, we briefly chatted in our meeting about this, without resolution. It may be that the easiest distinction could be that some people will be happy to have something like a 50% scholarship or someone may want just one leg of their flight covered as they are travelling elsewhere before or after the conference, such as having a holiday. As accommodation is being included for free for everyone (I think), there is no need to talk through anything other than travel costs.
  4. Data, we probably will be unable to list anyone other than the scholarship team/reviewers. It could be that WMAT or WMF points of contact could be listed, but there is no benefit in listing accountants or trust & safety that may need to know who's who downstream.
  5. Gender frankly, I'm not sure that we need to know the gender on someone's passport. The person in WMAT will need a name to register for travelling, the rest of us would just want to know how an attendee wishes to be referred to. For the benefit of the conference, it would be useful to know statistically our spread of genders and sexual orientations in the LGBT+ sense and this could be an optional question at the application stage too, just to give an idea if the only applications we get are all gay cis men; in which case we might revisit our call for applications.
I'll pick up some of these points in the text when I have some time unless someone else works on it first! -- (talk) 18:29, 21 November 2019 (UTC)Reply
Another point, would special requirements cover allergy, handicap, more ? If someone is booking tickets, some could be important (dietary restriction, etc), but at the same time, some may not (like allergy to cats). And some could be restricted, some may not. But what is clear from this discussion is that there is at least 2 sets of informations, so this might be used for 2 forms, with differents people having access. Some for a potential travel booking, and some for more information about the person. I would say that allergy is something that could matter to the person in charge (safety warden, not sure how that's called in that context), so maybe there is 3 types of informations ? (also, wouldn't health related information be somehow protected by law ? I am not a specialist, but there is likely something equivalent to HIPAA in Austria, and allergies would maybe under that purview).
And the gender case is quite interesting too, cause we do not ask for sexual orientation nor cis/trans-ness, so if we get only men, we can't know much unless we ask more. Not sure if we should, I can see how that would make people unhappy, but if we do not ask, we can't really deduce much from that answer alone.
Also, what about asking for pronouns, just so people can use them when discussing about the scholarship ? --Misc (talk) 22:02, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Social media post and Press release text[edit]

Hello everyone--please give your approval or feedback on the social media post and press release text for the conference by the end of Fri 22 Nov 2019 so that we can start promoting the conference--thank you! RachelWex (talk) 21:10, 21 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

Social Media Blast Text[edit]

The QUEERING WIKIPEDIA 2020 Conference: Diversifying and Empowering LGBTIQ+ Presences in Wikimedia Projects to be held in Linz, Austria (22-24 May 2020) is the first LGBTIQ+ centered Wikimedia conference! Follow our conference page for more information, call for proposals and scholarships, as well as the ways to support us! [[1]]

Press Release[edit]

The Queering Wikipedia Conference will be in Linz, Austria Fri 22 May - Sun 24 May, 2020. It is the first LGBTIQ+-centered conference in the history of Wikimedia events. This international conference supported by Wikimedia LGBT+ and Wikimedia Austria will seek proposals for presentations, panel discussions, capacity building workshops, strategy meetings, and team building sessions centering LGBTIQ+ information, participation, identity, and safety within Wikimedia projects.

For more information about the conference, the call for proposals, and a scholarship application, please visit our Meta Wiki page: [[2]]

Diversity targets[edit]

At the meeting today in notes at Queering_Wikipedia/notes_2019-11-21 the topic came up about diversity targets.

The situation is that this and all Wikimedia conferences want diverse representation from our global multicultural Wikimedia community. The ongoing challenge is that there is no standard procedure which anyone can apply to resolve this problem. We are a small volunteer-organized conference and this is a big issue.

One suggestion that someone had was for 10% as a starting point for diversity discussions. The thought was that the most active demographic in the Wikimedia LGBT+ space is white Western English speaking CIS gay/bi men. We do not have a demographic survey of our community and do not know what kind of participation is possible, but to start the conversation, we could set a goal of 10% other than this. So 10% trans, 10% non-English speaking, etc. We all hope that we get more than this, but we do not have a good way to manage data or know what is going to happen. We also cannot expect any staff administrative support for anything like this, so it might happen that there is a challenge in reporting the diversity of the people who do show up.

Does anyone have thoughts on what diversity targets we have, how we should measure them, and an estimate of how much volunteer labor it would take to manage any particular diversity plan? Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:37, 21 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

Friendly space policy for events[edit]

I propose that this event adopt the default Friendly space policy.

If anyone wants to discuss, please speak out at Talk:Wikimedia_LGBT+#Friendly_space_policy_for_events. Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:55, 12 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

Make proposals more public?[edit]

Right now this conference is accepting proposals through an online form. The norm for most Wikipedia events is to accept proposals on the wiki in public so that people can comment and collaborate. For this conference, there were some asks for privacy and discretion for attendees. I appreciate that because I recognize the context that many LGBT globally face discrimination. I also recognize that setting up multiple proposal channels is a challenge. I personally do not know how to set up conference submission templates, even though I know they exist such as at this example presentation generated from this template at the WikiConference, not meta, project space. I do not know if meta has template options set up, or how to bring templates into meta.

I did my best and drafted my own conference submissions here on meta. I wanted to share them because I would prefer to collaborate with others on these submissions, and would change my own idea to better fit with anyone having a similar idea. Here are my proposals, made public:

  1. Queering Wikipedia/Code of conduct - let's present the state of conduct policies and develop a conduct policy for Wiki LGBT+
  2. Queering Wikipedia/gender tagging - let's review the current practice of tagging gender, sex, and sexuality on biographies and develop a thoughtful best practice
  3. Queering Wikipedia/Wiki99 and the LGBT canon - let's talk about which articles we should develop for global translation

If anyone would join me edit any of these proposals to include yourself and change the focus to suit you.

Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:38, 10 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

I think this is a valuable area to discuss, and am glad you are beginning this conversation, opening it up to additional ideas, and bringing the overall review process back to Wiki. I may just want to join you on one of these. --- FULBERT (talk) 13:54, 12 January 2020 (UTC)Reply
In this same line, here is my conference presentation proposal available to view publicly: Queering Wikipedia/Non-discrimination policy. (talk) 17:39, 15 February 2020 (UTC)Reply
I talked things over with . I think that his idea for presentation is more developed and relevant now. I am not submitting a code of conduct talk because I think that concept is too general and too complicated. Ɱ has a model for change which can work quickly, in practice, with less controversy. Also a non-discrimination policy would be a great foundation for later other policy development. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:52, 15 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

Expert presentation- suicide response[edit]

I made a proposal at

for a 2-hour talk at this conference on suicide response.

I have mentioned this in previous online Wikimedia LGBT+ and Queering Wikipedia conference talks. The situation is that we have an offer from the Samaritans (Q7408851), a nonprofit organization, to have a presentation with discussion about Wikipedia's process for responding to people who are suicidal and for presenting media about suicide. My understanding of this organization is that they are stable, about 70 years old, well known in the UK and some parts of the British Commonwealth, and have expertise and respect in the area of response to suicide and media about suicide. They have a speaker who is ready to speak at this conference on the topic of suicide in the LGBT+ community as part of the general presentation.

Pros of including this presentation in this conference is that we have an expert partner organization who is willing to put themselves out there to discuss a Wikipedia collaboration with Wikimedia LGBT+, and they would attend our conference, and they are only asking for a 2-hour slot and not additional labor or preparation from us, and this is a topic which is serious and comes up in LGBT+ community organization. Challenges of including this presentation is that suicide is not a happy topic and some conference attendees may wish to skip the presentation for a breakout session elsewhere, and that we ourselves have little past discussion or experience in this, and coming up with a global response for all of the Wikimedia community is going to be a major challenge. Also, ideally, I would like to partner with an organization which also has an experienced Wikipedia editor and a history of Wikipedia collaboration, but after searching the world for some years, there seems to be no such organization in the space of reporting crisis. I can overlook that because the speaker at this organization has talked with the Wikimedia Foundation legal team and the Trust and Safety team to seek to understand how Wikipedia works, and they are reaching out now to the LGBT+ community if we would host them.

What do others think about including this talk? Would anyone sign-on as a co-organizer of this talk to present the speaker? Is anyone willing to speak out with an objection to including this presentation? Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:02, 12 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hello Blue Rasberry (talk) -- as individual RachelWex I am supportive of the Samaritans group. The Programming Committee will be discussing invited speakers / organizations on Monday January 27, as we also have invited the WMF Trust and Safety Team, and there was an ask to invite Access Now. I think we have to be very clear with these speakers / organizations (if the committee approves and if all of them confirm that they will be presenting) about what we want them to present to us, and that no matter what they must be presenting their topic in an LGBTQ+ context.
I have added Samaritans to the list of invited proposers, with you as the contact, if that is OK. I hope to have more information for you soon. RachelWex (talk) 20:24, 22 January 2020 (UTC)Reply
Thanks, yes, LGBT+ focus is essential. Thanks for considering this proposal. Yes I can be contact for this. Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:46, 22 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Your suggestions for collegiate workshops and panels[edit]

The QW2020 programme has capacity for group events, which may be group training events (like practical anti-harassment techniques), workshops (like creating resolutions for the LGBT+ User Group) or booking expert panels to address critical questions. Please promote this thread to encourage discussion about potential or proposed events. -- (talk) 16:06, 26 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Creating a recommended policy for using gender-inclusive language[edit]

This has been a hot topic for multiple projects, often with limited progress. The English Wikipedia has gradually improved article policies for how to write about living people using non-binary terminology but rejected a proposal to apply non-binary language in its internal policies. Wikimedia Commons has a gender-neutral language policy for policies, resulting in rewriting and removing unnecessarily gendered language in English and recommending similar steps are taken where reasonable in non-English translations.

Discussions or debates about how to adopt gender-neutral or more inclusive language, have occurred in French, Spanish and German Wikipedias, and it is thought that other language Wikipedias have limited interest in changing or the majority view would be hostile to proposals.

An expert panel and discussion may help to both share external or existing best practice recommendations for our most active Wikipedia projects, and help draw the queer/LGBT+ community to agree a strategic approach to educate the wider community on why this is an issue and establish whether a centralized best practice for our projects is an achievable goal. -- (talk) 16:06, 26 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Registration is open![edit]

Registration for the conference is now open! :) see Queering Wikipedia/Registration --Shikeishu (talk) 11:57, 18 February 2020 (UTC)Reply


Hi, I am making a pause from some telegram group. Will follow up by mail and here. Sorry for any inconveniences. Nattes à chat (talk) 22:11, 4 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

Coronavirus postponement of the conference?[edit]

I have no understanding of coronavirus whatsoever.

I was wondering when and how conference organizers should make a decision about whether this conference will be postponed. The context is that other conference organizers around the world are cancelling or postponing conferences due to the spread of coronavirus. So far as I know, no one has good information on how to respond to this disease, but cancelling gatherings of large crowds is something that people are doing.

Here is what is happening in the wiki world.

Has the time come to post a notice about delaying travel booking and plans? Various travel sources seem to say that booking air travel 5-8 weeks in advance is reasonable. 8 weeks before 20 May is 25 March, which I suppose could be an approximate deadline for a decision on postponing the conference. Should we advise people to delay booking travel for 1, 2 or 3 weeks?

I am a researcher at a large school in the United States which is considering cancelling May 2020 travel and events. I am just thinking about this. Blue Rasberry (talk) 00:58, 5 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

I urge the organizers not to cancel or even postpone. From what I've read on the issue, for most people this isn't deadly or something to be scared about contracting, unless you are immunocompromised. If any attendees are, remote participation is possible and should be explored further. As well, you're no more at risk in Austria than in the U.S. or most anywhere else the virus has already spread to. The conventional advice is to carry on as normal, but follow precautions of washing hands frequently and thoroughly, avoiding contact with the sick, and not touching your face with unwashed hands. (talk) 01:46, 5 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
Here are the CDC's travel recommendations; under For Travelers, navigate to Austria. The agency recommends personal safety measures but nothing more at this time. (talk) 01:55, 5 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
I think Ɱ is right on all points. What I see here is supporting evidence from the United States government's top level health organization saying no notices in effect for Austria. Having remote participation options as Ɱ suggested seems like a nice thing to offer irrespective of any travel restrictions, so maybe a good proactive step would be arranging for that. Blue Rasberry (talk) 02:41, 5 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
I just published some information about the COVID-19 situation in Austria: Queering Wikipedia/Travel#COVID-2019 situation. The current situation indicates to continue organizing - but we will inform you ASAP if there are any changes! --Annemarie Buchmann (WMAT) (talk) 10:07, 5 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for creating the help page, which makes it easier to link to the official position for the conference and provides some reassurance for participants. It may be worth mentioning a tip for people booking their own travel is to use a credit card as well as considering buying travel insurance now rather than later.
In the UK the airline Flybe has gone into administration, because of the high unexpected impact that reduced and cancelled flights has made. People who booked with a credit card can claim full refunds now, without waiting for several months and probably only getting a fraction of their money back.
The reason for buying personal travel insurance now, is that insurance companies may well change the terms of their insurance in order to remove possible claims due to travel restrictions or costs resulting from mandatory quarantine. In the example of U.S. travellers who had return flights arranged by their government, and having no real choice but to take those flights, they still had to pay the additional costs at commercial rates. -- (talk) 16:13, 5 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

Bluerasberry, risk management for the ongoing impact of the covid19 epidemic was discussed at some length in yesterday's coordination call. The intent is to provide accurate information and be transparent about how the risk is being managed, including keeping the decision to proceed with the current dates and location under review. Anyone interested should consider joining the next one or adding to the agenda when it becomes available. See https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/QW_Coordination_Call_4_March_2020 for the notes. -- (talk) 16:13, 5 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

Today (10.03.2020) the Austrian government suggested to avoid gatherings and too many social contacts, universities will adapt to e-learning. They have cancelled inside events with more than 100 participants until the beginning of April. Currently there are 36 registered participants for Queering Wikipedia and we have maximum capacity of 80 people, so this new regulation won’t affect us immediately. We will continue organizing our conference and will check in with you as things develop in the next 3 weeks. --Annemarie Buchmann (WMAT) (talk) 13:51, 10 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Annemarie Buchmann (WMAT): Thanks for the update. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:03, 10 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
Yes, thanks for the update. I'm sorry to share with others that I've let Annemarie know I'm uncomfortable booking airfare to attend this conference at this time, given the ongoing outbreak and disruptions to the travel industry. I'm so disappointed because I've waited for a conference like this to happen for such a long time. :( Perhaps things will blow over and I'm making the wrong decision, but this is what I feel I must do at this time. -Another Believer (talk) 16:58, 10 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

Things to update on the page:[edit]

(think few things should be updated and archived)

  1. add info on plans for 2021 and 2022
  2. update contact information beyond email
  3. review the info present and clear
  4. put up notice that it is an archive
  5. put up notice of 2021 page
  6. ...(please add or comment of above)

Zblace (talk) 08:44, 13 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

Move "Queering Wikipedia" to "Queering Wikipedia 2020"?[edit]

This page is currently titled "Queering Wikipedia" and it refers to the 2020 proposed conference which COVID cancelled.

For 2021 there is QW2021, which is the annual Queering Wikipedia event for 2021. Organizers anticipate a 2022 event.

It is problematic to leave the 2020 conference perpetually at the title "Queering Wikipedia" because for 2021 and beyond, the event is less relevant but still the most common landing page.

I see two obvious wiki-solutions:

  1. The current event is always named "Queering Wikipedia", and we archive past events by moving from "Queering Wikipedia" to "Queering Wikipedia (year)"
  2. "Queering Wikipedia is a perpetual landing page, and from the start we name each event "Queering Wikipedia (year)", then link to it from the landing page

In my view, the first option takes a bit more work because we have to request file moving for the page and subpages as well as any translations. This usually is not a problem, but is something to request.

The second option takes no moving, as it would mean only creating pages where they will be permanently.

I propose that we

  1. move "Queering Wikipedia" to "Queering Wikipedia 2020"
  2. establish a simple landing page at the then blank "Queering Wikipedia" page, and link to 2020 and 2021 events from there

Does anyone have alternative proposals? Otherwise, can anyone support this scheme to move content?

Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:38, 5 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Bluerasberry I have been decoupling these things a bit across Wikimedia projects (Wikidata and Commons primarily) and will do more with consultation of others in next weeks as part of QW2023 preparations. --Zblace (talk) 13:27, 1 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
Yes onward! Bluerasberry (talk) 14:21, 1 November 2022 (UTC)Reply