Feminist science and technology scholar Leigh Star did research on how the same taxidermy specimens might be used differently by different kinds of users. For example, museum visitors, amateur ornithologists, and professional scientists might work with the specimens in very different ways. She defined "boundary objects" as having "different meanings in different social worlds” despite the fact of sharing a structure “common enough to more than one world to make them recognizable, a means of translation” for “developing and maintaining coherence across intersecting social worlds." Theories of boundary objects have also been important in developing pedagogical materials, such as the dialogue videos, for FemTechNet courses, because we assume that different classes will use the materials differently.
Sometimes differences between groups using the same boundary object can create conflicts. For example, the list of ten items in our Feminism 101 includes things that Wikipedia editors tend to like, such as collective labor and anonymous production, and things that they don't tend to like, such as refusing objectivity or neutrality or using indirect rhetorics or a personal voice. In this class, you can take advantage of projects already underway, such as the Wikipedia WikiProject Women's History, WikiProject Women Artists, and WikiProject Women Scientists. These projects all have to-do lists and are seeking volunteers to do specific tasks. Don't feel that you have to take on an entire article. As Professor Cartwright points out, better illustrations and citations in existing articles can be important for improving the public record. For more ideas for small fixes and how to use library resources, you can visit this interview with Adrianne Wadewitz. Our guest, Antoinette LaFarge will also have suggestions.
And -- if you are feeling confused about the feminist science and technology studies work that we are beginning this week, go back to the four basic principles about affect, embodiment, labor, and materiality that we keep coming back to.
After talking with Professor Cartwright, I began to resume a trail of thought I began when I was taking her class, COMM 100B. When we had a similar assignment in that class, I choose to concentrate on TV shows with strong female lead, because on Wikipedia, most shows with strong female leads lacked descriptive pages, compared to other shows which showcase strong male leads and provide entertainment towards male audience, like Mad Men. Where a page like Mad Men had a long and descriptive overview of the show, list of awards it has been nominated and won, details of every episode of seasons on the page, and much more, other shows like The Mindy Project, which centers around a woman, lacked everything Mad Men Wikipedia page possessed. Of course, Mad Men is more popular and well- known in our social worlds than the other, but can that be because Mad Men has a strong male lead, and women are supporting characters? Mad Men appeals more dominant male audience, so since Wikipedia editors are mostly male, automatically, more appealing male topics get more attention?
ReplyDeleteTherefore, for my project, for some part, I decided to pay attention to TV shows, The Mindy Project and Trophy Wife. These two have strong female leads, and didn't have much descriptive pages. I wanted to, as a female editor, show attention to these pages, and elaborate on some parts and write sentences where more descriptions were needed. I felt like I was crossing different realms of social worlds, because while I was editing these show pages, I realized that these shows have strong female leads, with story lines centered around them, and the men in these shows were the supporting roles.
In addition, I contributed to two more pages in Wikipedia on the two scientists, Maria Sibylla Merian and Aspasia. Merian was a leading entomologist of her time and contributed greatly to the field of entomology. Aspasia was a second century Greco- Roman who wrote many articles on surgery, OB/ GYN, and contributed greatly to medical writings during her time.
Hopefully, these contributions brought more insight and light into these female concentrated topics.
I like the fact that you contributed material in a number of different domains that sparked your curiosity, from TV leading women to female scientists, but I would reiterate the importance of good citation practices. If you look at the Aspasia addition that was deleted for supposed lack of "relevance," I think you might have been more likely to have it "stick" if you indicated the source of your information (preferably from a reputable print volume, which is still a format valued by Wikipedia editors). Because you had a source for the Maria Sibylla Merian article, your alteration not only "stuck," but also another Wikipedia came in after you to provide more citations.
DeleteMy wikipedia editor name is M1Solano. So I had trouble figuring out exactly what I wanted to edit in the first place. From my experience with wikipedia taking Professer Cartwrights 100 series class I knew that I couldn't just make any edits that I wanted to (all the posts I made for the class were removed because of citation issues). So this time around I decided that I would just try to be a wiki-gnome and just try to edit pages that were related to the task but I had trouble finding anything that I could edit, other people must have beat me to it. I then looked at the Wiki-Project on Women History project page to try and get ideas of things to do and found the "how can I help" section of the page and was directed to a section with different ideas of how to contribute to the project. There was a section with different pages that needed to be translated to english and decided I would work on trying to translate one of the pages in spanish.
ReplyDeleteThe project page didn't really have any instructions about what to do to the page other than translate it, so that's what I did. I translated the page María Ángela Astorch, a spanish mystic. The page was rather long so I've only translated a couple of sections thus far but I plan on changing the rest later. One thing that I found interesting while I was working was that none of the information that I was changing to english seemed to be cited. On the original page all the information was just there without having any actual citations; the page has only 3 cited sources and just a few different references while still being pretty lengthy. It made me wonder if there was some kind of difference in the number of sources required for articles written in spanish, or if there was policing of pages in spanish. It also made me worry that my changes were going to be taken down because I also didn't have any citation for the things I was writing, I was just translating the original page. Another thing that I thought was interesting was that the project had chosen this particular page to be translated; Astorch was a spanish mystic who was famous for coming back to life after being poisoned. I couldn't really figure out what her significance was for the project, but I feel like that might be because of an unclear understanding of her history from her page; for all I know she has a significant cultural influence in Spain and her Wikipedia page just doesn't reflect that.
After monitoring my edits to see if anyone had taken them down, I was pleasantly surprised to find that they were still there. I was even more surprised to find that someone had thanked me for making the translations. It was a big difference from my previous experience where all the changes and edit I had made to a page were just taken down. I can’t screenshot on the computer I’m using now but I’ll try to post some later.
This is a really great success story in which your role as a wiki-gnome was clearly appreciated. It sounds like you also learned about how Wikipedia in other languages might not have as many editors devoted to ensuring that sources are properly cited. Perhaps you can track down some of the sources that seem to be missing. Although it might not have initially been your research area, these kinds of experiences can suggest new avenues for detective work.
DeleteMy focus while working in this class is on disabilities within a body. I went to the Senses of Care opening event that got me thinking about ways that people with disabilities are seen and represented in society. In Lisa Cartwrights Comm100B class last quarter, we briefly discussed the International Symbol of Access and its faults in the construction of the image. The current image is very immobile, passive, and creates a depiction of those with disabilities looking stiff and focuses on the chair mainly. What is ironic to me is that this symbol is used for all sorts of disabilities and people that aren't even in chairs. You can break a leg, and receive a handicap or "International Symbol of Access" pass to place in your car so you can park closer; this doesn't mean you are stiff in a chair like the picture depicts. I chose to add the picture of the new and improved symbol that is trying to be incorporated in the U.S. instead of the old one. The new one enables a sense of mobility, independence, and movement throughout the body. I added the picture that points out each element that was improved in order to be more suitable for our society. It gives a sense of engagement with more than just the chair.
ReplyDeleteI think that this movement trying to push the new symbol is amazing and I thought that only having two pictures on the wiki page wasn't enough. I think that the act of even spray painting it over the old one is clever and shows the improvements and corrections of the passive one we live by now. If we as a society could redo and incorporate the new symbol around the U.S. or even globally, I think it could truly be a positive effect for people with and without disabilities. Many people believe or represent people with impairments as unable or dependent on others and I think that the new symbol could be a step in the right direction in changing the false image that the current blue and white symbol represents.
Although you don't provide screen shots here, you do a good job explaining what you did in the revision history of the actual page itself, and so far your edits have persisted. Adding images is always tricky because of the site's copyright concerns. It looks like the main image that you added may be under review. That said, I think explaining the different aspects of the visual presentation of the modified ISA is great, particularly for non-sighted people interested in the content.
DeleteFemale Directors in Hollywood
ReplyDeleteJust like many others, I had a difficult time figuring out just exactly what page I wanted to edit doing this project. After going back and forth between a few different pages, I decided to edit the very small page of Jennifer Lee, who is currently getting a lot of media attention for being the first female director of an animated feature film at the Walt Disney Company, and the first writer at any studio to become a major feature film director.
One thing I noticed about many articles on male directors, is that they are entirely removed from any mention of personal opinion. For a while, I was concerned that I would have to make my information as objective and scholarly as possible. Then, I decided to still take on a scholarly stance, but involve more of her voice in the article, because as we spoke of in class, the objective voice is more male-centered than female centered. I was able to add a filmography box, and made some additions to her work on the film Frozen and Wreck-It Ralph, also adding in one of her past works in live-action. One thing I’m excited about is that this page will only grow as her repertoire of success grows. On another note, one of the things I found increasingly in my research was interviewers obsession with her being a female director, and asking her stereotypically female oriented questions (ie. “What’s 3 things you can’t live without?”).
Here are some screen shots from the process. I had a lot of fun creating the filmography box that I know will only grow, and also linking key terms throughout Wikipedia.
Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Lee_(filmmaker)
User name: Diana gee
Tackling an entry involving the director of such a popular film can be tricky, but it looks like your addition about "A Thousand Words" is still part of the entry weeks later. (I don't seem to be able to see your screenshots, but I reviewed the history to see the changes you made.)
DeleteUpon doing my wikipedia assignment on the film "Bridesmaids", I was reminded of our skype chat with writer John Brancato. He had briefly talked about how recently, we've been seeing a lot of female protagonists in successful big budget films. Film studios follow trends, and especially after the popularity of the Hunger Games franchise starring Jennifer Lawrence, it seems females are more than capable of garnering success. Seeing strong female characters on film are uplifting, and I think it is definitely a trend these days. I can't help but wonder if the success of the all-female cast "Bridesmaids" helped influenced this trend. Even on the very popular show Game of Thrones, we see very strong female characters all throughout, and something that this show has in common with these recent new franchises (i.e. Hunger Games, Divergent, etc.) is that they are book adaptations.
ReplyDeleteIn an internship for a film studio, my supervisor had told me that these major film studios look to acquire big book adaptations to put on screen. I suppose then that in this regard, we can thank the authors of these books for promoting strong images of women. And perhaps, people in general are learning to accept that women can succeed in tv/film in all sorts of genres.
Interesting point about how movies with strong female characters often depends on the studios acquiring books as intellectual property with the same features.
Delete