Reflections on Wikimedia Leadership Bootcamp 2018

Wiki Boot Camp 2018 in DC, with David Ferriero by Andrew Lih CC BY-SA 4.0
Wiki Boot Camp 2018 in DC, with David Ferriero by Andrew Lih CC BY-SA 4.0
Sometimes the best things come as surprises. That sentiment completely applies to the events leading up to what I did in mid-June.In early February, I received an invitation to attend Wikimedia District of Columbia’s summer 2018 Wikimedia Leadership Bootcamp. The Bootcamp was planned to be June 15 – 17 at the National Archives and offered leadership training and engagement with other emerging leaders in the community.

The email caused me a cacophony of emotions. I deal with imposter syndrome (a lot) and I have been rebuilding myself after post-PhD depression. I don’t recognize my accomplishments, and still doubt my knowledge and skills. Getting invited to this Bootcamp surprised me, but validates that what I am doing is good and impactful. I have traveled to San Francisco, Wikimania, Wikimedia Diversity Conference, and Wikipedia Day with Wikimedia NYC. I have done a lot of good in the past year, but it’s hard to remember that when you’re not receiving a paycheck for that work. For the better part of a decade, I have been working “for the greater good” and constantly have to remind myself of my own value. It’s invitations and recognition like this Bootcamp that help me with that process.

Foundation at the Sculpture Garden

A few months after the invitation email, I booked my flight, confirmed my hotel, and I was on my way to Washington D.C. I was so excited because I have never been before. I booked my flights so I could have a few hours before the Bootcamp and after so I could wander around town. I decided to visit the National Museum of American History on the day I arrived. There was no way I could possibly do everything I have on my bucket list and I now find out fall is the time to go – no crowds! I’ll certainly have to plan a follow-up trip.

Now, let’s talk about the Bootcamp itself. First of all, the event taking place in the National Archives was enough to get me there. I was totally geeking out and really wish we had time for an edit party (my new, accessible term for edit-a-thon). The smell of books intoxicated me. Knowing uncounted volumes of information exchange occur because of this institution, it was really overwhelming. If you have a chance to visit and just ask questions, do. The people in these knowledge institutions are the lifeblood of the free knowledge movement. They want to share the information and help people develop meaningful connections with their endless treasure trove.

Everyone at the National Archives was completely accessible, and David Ferriero, Archivist of the United States, spoke to us to tell his story about information sharing and Wikipedia. He is the first librarian to serve as the Archivist of the United States and is doing incredible work to connect the community with content.

The rest of the schedule for day one was packed with keynotes about engaging with community, developing partnerships, safe spaces, and a crash course in Wikidata. Kelly Doyle started the day talking about engaging new audiences. She asked us to think about what we share with the users. She suggested asking questions like, “What can I provide the user?”, “What can the user provide?”, and “What is in it for the user?” These questions will help frame the program development and help enhance the possible effectiveness of the programs. This makes total sense as we need to help the community members identify with the Wikipedia movement in their own ways. Their connections and reasons for participating will all be different, but we need to make them all feel welcome and valued.

Next Ariel Cetrone from WMDC talked about partnerships. Some key pieces that stuck with me were questions she asks herself when developing new partnerships. The major question was, “How would I have liked to have learned about Wikipedia?” This is huge. We all know there are barriers and challenges to finding the information and getting involved on Wikipedia. I know there are some things I would have like to have learned differently. In some ways, getting started on Wikipedia is like water rushing down a hill: you can’t control where it goes and it’s a continuous flow. To the people working to make this process easier and who work with new contributors each day, you’re amazing and keep doing it!

Keeping Events Safe booklet

The next session that really stuck with was Sydney Poore talking about Safe Spaces. I have long reflected on harassment and how bias, social dynamics and gender perception play into interactions in online communities and at in-person events with the people from the online communities. For policies aimed at addressing issues related to harassment, the Wikimedia community uses “friendly spaces” and “safe spaces” synonymously. These phrases have 2 very different meanings to me. I discussed this with another Bootcamp attendee, and they agreed.

A friendly spaces policy would be one to make spaces welcoming. This would be one addressing microaggressions and encouraging active listening. Most people are unaware of how their behavior impacts others and how it might be offensive to others. One example is when men interrupt and talk over women. Unless called out, they might not recognize it. Sadly, it is still socially accepted when a man interrupts or speaks over a woman because it is such a common practice. Friendly spaces would educate attendees about some common behaviors to bring awareness through education, and help create the friendly spaces this movement needs in order to meaningfully close gaps. For now, even though the friendly spaces policy exists, it only serves the purpose of a safe spaces policy. I look forward to a future truly friendly spaces policy.

For a safe spaces policy, this would be one addressing harassment and violence. There is a lot to be said about harassment, so I will just say this: I look forward to the development of tools and practices from the Wikimedia Foundation to address harassment in the community. This is not something we can expect volunteers to handle. Harassment is unacceptable and needs to be made so in the community.

After that heavy conversation, we left for dinner and drinks. Of course, we had to go to the place with a huge barnstar, Hill Country BBQ. Not the most vegetarian friendly menu, so I stuck with the macaroni and cheese and figured I’d grab some fruit and veg from the market later. I ended up grabbing drinks with friends instead. It was a better choice!

On to the second day of the Bootcamp! We talked a lot about community. There was much said about tools to make contributing easier, and ways to change thinking about contribution. Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight spoke about how she started editing after her son attended an edit-a-thon (read: edit party). She emphasized how important providing a positive experience is at events. It is not about the number of edits or new accounts created, but community developed.

We also discussed the value of contribution. Much of the measurement of success in the Wikimedia movement is considered in quantitative measures. I have a problem with this because one cannot measure all things in numbers. One cannot measure the impact an event had on a person by the presence of their body. Nor can one measure the impact an edit party had on a person’s information literacy skills. These “softer” benefits cannot be measured in numbers: number of people, number of edits, number of articles created.

Many of us at the Bootcamp complained about the focus on quantitative measure in grant funding. Simply some of the great work we are doing cannot be plotted on a graph, but the lack of quantitative metrics does not mean it has no value. We need to change the thinking in the Wikimedia movement away from impact measured in numbers to impact measured in value.

Following the community discussion, we presented our lightning talks. The lightning talks were another amazing part of the day. I was just completely overwhelmed by the amazing work my fellow Bootcamp attendees were doing. I was in awe and so inspired. I sincerely wish them well in their work, because it is all so very important. Later I plan to write a post about my lightning talk topic: my open relationship.

After the weekend was over, we discussed what could have changed or stayed the same. Our one biggest complaint was not having enough time together. Many of us, if not all, decided to start a group so we could stay connected and continue our growth. I suggested this Wiki Leadership Bootcamp turn into a year-long cohort where we meet in-person one time, but we could each take turns hosting video chats the rest of the year. There were so many things we wanted to know and learn from each other. This perhaps would allow the time and space for that to happen. Thank you again to the organizers of the Wiki Leadership Bootcamp, WMDC and the National Archives for making this happen. I have some new collaborations and projects to move forward on, and am excited to see what happens with future Bootcamps.

I’m an academic and I use Wikipedia

Ok, friends, let’s talk about the elephant in the room. It’s time to move on. Everybody does it. I’ve seen colleagues do much worse. We all secretly do it, but are sure our colleagues will judge us for it.

I am an academic and I read and contribute to Wikipedia.

No one has unfriended me. I don’t have to wear a scarlet W around campus. I have kept my honors. Heck, I even am a visiting scholar because I contribute to Wikipedia.

Why am I saying this?

Because tonight I read a study about a study completed at two public Spanish universities (Aibar, E., Lladós-Masllorens, J., Meseguer-Artola, A., Minguillón, J., & Lerga, M. (2014). Wikipedia at university: what faculty think and do about it. The Electronic Library. 33(4). 668-683. doi: 10.1108/EL-12-2-2013-0217) – both relatively new and one of them was online only. The faculty used Wikipedia but only for subjects that were not in their primary field. Academics in STEM fields were more comfortable using Wikipedia for their scholarship and teaching. “So-called soft-science academics” were more skeptical.

Oh, my fellow social scientists, own up to it. You use Wikipedia. If you don’t, you should. What does this say about your bias? Go on. Go reflect on your actions and if your actions of judging Wikipedia/cloaking your true feelings are 1. valid and 2. really working toward the Truth we seek on the daily.

Did you know your students could learn in a collaborative environment where you don’t have to force inorganic collaboration? Pedagogical application is receiving mixed reviews in the literature. Why? Because many of those respondents are simply theorizing on how teaching with Wikipedia would be based on their assumptions about what Wikipedia is.

Wikipedia is “a new and powerful channel for the public communication of science.” Isn’t that what we want? Someone to read our work and to further scholarship? What are you waiting for? Give contributing to Wikipedia a chance, and what do you know, you might even let your hair down and teach with it next semester!

I’ll even volunteer to get you started.

I’m a visiting scholar!

img_6024

I am very excited to announce I was selected to be a visiting scholar with San Francisco State University. The goal of my position is to use the library resources available to me through SFSU to improve content on Wikipedia regarding disability. This includes art, culture, history, and so much more. The directors at the Longmore Institute already created a list of potential topics for me to examine.

Here’s the information about the role:

Historian and activist Paul K. Longmore founded the Institute on Disability at SFSU in 1996. When he passed away in 2010, the university created an endowment for the Institute and renamed it in his honor. It undertakes projects that work to challenge prevailing notions and stereotypes of disability by showcasing disabled people’s strength, ingenuity, and originality. Its public education and cultural events connect the Bay Area’s vibrant disability communities and the general public with faculty and students at SF State to fight disability stigma with disability culture.

Already I have so much to add! I am using my old pal, Scrivener, to collect the information before I make edits. I love Scrivener’s functions, which allow me to search my literature research notes, which will ultimately allow me to improve numerous articles with each source I find.

Oh! Did you know you can edit Wikipedia too? It not only helps build and improve the free, quality knowledge available on the Internet, it’s a great free time activity too – addictive, and habit-forming, but [generally] not harmful to your health. 🙂 Feel free to see what I’m up to on Wikipedia.

Locked out by paywalls

As a lifelong university student, I have never been without scholarly articles and quality information. I remember starting college when the World Wide Web was still young and reading articles online for the first time. Forget homework! I had my nose in some research article or op-ed piece about the desperate state of something. I love learning.

But so do many other people. They just don’t have equal access to information as I do…or did. Now I’m locked out. My guilty pleasure of swiftly replacing citations on Wikipedia with more valid sources is now more challenging.

What is the difference between a valid source and what I can find just by googling it? Well, published articles in journals have hefty weight. Most are peer reviewed and some are juried, so the content cannot be too ‘creative’ or far from the ‘truth’. On the other hand, people can say anything on the Internet. I can say I’m a dog, and you’d have to believe me. I could also say I have purple spots and ride a pineapple. Or take some of the election 2016 content. You get the point.

Being that anyone on the Internet can say anything, providing free, quality knowledge to people can be a challenge. This hits me right at my core beliefs: education and equity.

We are insanely privileged. We all may fuss about our clothes, our houses, or our cars, but we have access to quality knowledge. We have books in our homes. We have libraries. We have Internet access. Education is a human right, but only accessible to the privileged.

I am trying to change that. I hope you do too. Instead of just reading Wikipedia from now on, make an edit each time you read. Together we are greater than the sum of our parts. We can provide a free, quality education through Wikipedia.

If you can’t edit, keep me editing! Consider donating to help me purchase remote access to my alma maters’s databases so I can keep updating those citations. I greatly appreciate it!

Mourning a dissertation

No Escape, a work by Judith Carlin, showing how unescapable depression can seem.
No Escape, a work by Judith Carlin, showing how unescapable depression can seem. Licensed under Creative Commons

This is tough to admit. I’m depressed. To many who have experienced this before me, it’s known as the Post-PhD Blues or Post-Doc Slump. Call it what you like, but just like other forms with their own nicknames, this is depression. No one ever told me about that part of a PhD program.

For me, this depression started after I sent my first “final” draft of my complete dissertation. It was so anti-climactic, attaching the very thing that consumed my every free moment, kept me from lazy weekends with my family, and created my distracted existence…to an email. I honestly thought, “Wow. That’s it!?”  I told Chris that I sent my first final draft and he seemed nonplussed. Maybe I was depending on him too much to reassure me of the excitement of the situation; that excitement I lacked. He said he just didn’t want to get my hopes up.

I felt a panic to start the job search. After the spring semester, my job ended. I have no job. At least not one with a paycheck. Chris assured me to not panic and just to focus on my dissertation, because without that there was no PhD, and without that, no academic career.

A couple of days later Kari and I left for Florida. I had a great time and was able to relax. I do admit to checking my email each time we went back to the condo to see if I had yet received revisions. I felt empty when I found none. Eventually, they did come and I felt like I had a purpose again! I stayed up late after she went to bed working on my paper. It was like an addiction, one I didn’t want, but one that gave me meaning and purpose.

After my defense on July 21, I was happy but maybe not as happy as I should have been when my advisor and committee came back in and said, “Congratulations, Doctor.”

Chris had a meeting to go to that afternoon immediately after my defense, so while Chris was in his meeting, I made the changes to my dissertation at a Starbucks. I kept thinking to myself, “Doctor. I couldn’t be a doctor. Not me. What did I do to earn this? I didn’t earn this.”

I still don’t know what I did that was enough to earn my PhD. Am I really smart enough? What do I really know? The saying “the more you know, the more you know you don’t know” is very true. I know nothing.

On August 13, all of my friends and family were really nice to get together with me to celebrate. It’s so kind of them – it made me tear up. I do appreciate them all taking the time to come to dinner to celebrate with me. On the way there, we are about 5 minutes from the restaurant and I tell Chris this is hard for me. I’m a fraud. I tell him I appreciate him organizing this dinner, but I feel like I don’t really deserve it. He gives me a look and I suck it up. I get over myself.

Imposter syndrome is hard to live with. You’re not sure why or how you’re successful and you’re sure you don’t deserve the success you have. This has been me my whole life. I know it seems like I’m ungrateful for the luck I have had in my life, but I’m really not. It’s really “confusing” to me about how I got here.

After earning my PhD, the uncertainty really began. What would I do? What could I do? What jobs can I get that really challenge me while offering the flexibility I need as a parent?

Chris and I are a team, and he told me not to take a job to just have a job. He said I worked too hard for too long just to get a job. I love that I get to be intentional in my job search. For now, while casually searching, I’m enjoying my sabbatical from school and work. I get to enjoy my kids. Go biking and running. I am volunteering for education organizations, which does take a lot of time, but it’s from home and I can do the work whenever in the day I want.

Some days are harder than others – the days when I’m not busy are the hardest. Sometimes I get a pinch in my chest making me feel like I should to be doing something else – editing, reading, writing – working. I feel sad that I’m not working in a traditional job utilizing my PhD, but maybe I can be more outside a traditional job.

I do like the idea of making my own way, researching what I find to be needed, collaborating with colleagues and friends I choose, presenting the research found, and setting my own hours. I feel like I can make a larger impact that way.

It’ll just take time to get comfortable with ambiguity. With not having a consistent paycheck. With being my own cheerleader. I’m getting better at relaxing. I’m getting better at it all…slowly. And some days will still be tough.

I submitted a PechaKucha talk to an upcoming convention. The topic: Post-PhD Blues. Today is a good day. I can objectively talk about it, but, just a couple of days ago. Tuesday was a really bad day. Sometimes depression can feel inescapable, and now I have a small taste of what that is.

Sexual Assault Documentaries

Put this documentary, Audrie and Daisy, on your watch list for this fall. Sexual assault is a painful topic, but one we have to talk about.

If you have not watched, do watch the Hunting Ground.

We cannot let more people become victims. Being a victim is isolating enough. It is the isolation, lack of empathy, and outright hatred by society that hurts too much. Be an advocate. If you can’t be an advocate, be an ally

Wikipedia + Education = Smart for everyone

Last week some new videos were posted about Wikipedia and education. They feature actual faculty members who use Wikipedia in their courses and see great results.

This semester, energize your students with new assignments that give back and help them provide knowledge for the greater good.

Watch the videos to find out more.

Thank you to all the people who worked on these videos and work so hard each day to make education more accessible to all.

Separate St. Louis education is not equal

By Tom Murphy VII (Own work) [GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html), CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/) or CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
Old book bindings at the Merton College library, by Tom Murphy VIILicensed under Creative Commons
The racial division of St. Louis is clearly illustrated by young families in St. Louis. Young families close to having kids leave their brick bungelows in the city for homes nestled in suburban school districts. The usual targets are Lindbergh, Parkway, or Rockwood, the bigger, well-funded of the area. Brentwood, Kirkwood, Ladue, and Webster Groves, smaller, but still well-funded, also make the list.

The house hunt for these families goes something like this: 3 bedroom, maybe 4, 2 bathroom, big backyard for junior, 2 car garage. Older, charming cottage? Oh, yes! But only after we complete the St. Louis County lead-abatement program.

For the families who stay, their children mostly attend private schools or better-funded charter or magnet schools over the neighborhood schools. There are the families who choose to have their kids attend the neighborhood schools. But that’s just it. They have a choice.

Choice is a privilege many people forget they have. Others are acutely aware that they don’t have that privilege.

The other families who have to stay, usually their kids have to attend their neighborhood schools. They have to. There is no choice. They don’t get that privilege.

Why is this a problem? Public schools rely on property taxes for funding. If you live in, say, Ladue, your property taxes are higher than those of Webster Groves, and those are higher than those of Fenton, and those, while lower, generate more income than those property taxes in St. Louis City.

Here are some examples. These are actual property tax figures from 2015. All the homes used were approximately the same size:

Fenton:                   $7572.27
St. Louis City:         $8159.71
Webster Groves:     $9329.12
Ladue:                     $15,961.37

Ladue arguably comes out on top. St. Louis City is near the bottom, but population, household income, etc. affect paid property taxes thus affect school funding.

St. Louis City is pretty small. People usually work there and go home to the suburbs. Our night life isn’t huge. Many properties are vacant, or the families have trouble paying for groceries, so why would they be able to paid their annual taxes? Only property tax funding that gets paid gets paid to the schools.

Read more about how school funding’s reliance on property taxes fails children from NPR and how your own school stacks up. Find out how Brittany Packnett is tackling the education problem here in St. Louis from all angles.

There are children in our community not receiving the education the St. Louis community can afford. We are failing them. We are failing our future.

On top of the lack of funding, the SLPS students are being poisoned with IQ-robbing lead in the drinking water. This is all happening while the children a 20-minute drive away are getting decadence added to their Fiji-water education: the water fountain returns as a metaphor for division in St. Louis.

We treat city and county as separate. They are very unequal. It’s no wonder why education inequality thrives here.

My question is, why wouldn’t the people who can afford to donate to education want to donate somewhere where the funds can make a huge difference? Wouldn’t they want to be that kind of a hero?

Wikipedia is Therapy

Ruf des Phönix Erster Sog, Bild von Magdalena Maya Ben 2007
Ruf des Phönix Erster Sog, Bild von Magdalena Maya Ben 2007Licensed under Creative Commons

Connections between people over the Internet offer a large possibility for anonymity. On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog. Or more likely, no one knows about your gender, race, religion, or disability. For people with disabilities, the Internet is full of havens where they can live without stigma. Wikipedia may just be one of those havens.

I was toying around with the idea of investigating the lived experiences of people with disabilities who contribute to Wikipedia. Now I am even more intrigued after reading the article titled Wikipedia is not Therapy by Andrew McMillen.

I clicked on some of the links in the article, starting with the English Wikipedia essay Wikipedia is not therapy (WP:NOTTHERAPY). Essays on English Wikipedia are written by Wikipedia editors. The information written is usually opinion-based or advice pertaining to Wikipedia. The essays do not require approval, or widespread agreement; this one, however, is used frequently.

This WP:NOTTHERAPY is sometimes referenced in edit disputes or other community discourse about inappropriate behavior. It is to insinuate the receiving party has a mental disability and tell them that Wikipedia is not a place for their inappropriate behavior. It is used to diminish their value and discredit any further discussion of their merits.

Similar to the casual way in which society uses “crazy” and “nuts,” this suggests inappropriate behavior and disability have a causal link in the minds of some in the community.

Let me pause and explain. There are two views of disability: the medial model and the social model.

The medical model frames the disability as a deficiency of the person, which must be cured, and places the emphasis on the perceived disease or deficiency. The medical model offers complications for people with disabilities as it frames them as “abnormal,” “subnormal,” or “special.” The focus on curing or managing their disabilities in order to be more “normal” further communicates to society that a disability is something to be removed and even ashamed of.

The social model of disability views disability as part of the natural environment. The social model focuses on how society is developed around people without disabilities or the “able-bodied.” This model came out of the recognition that society’s practices of discrimination, exclusion of people with disabilities, and inclusion of those without disabilities is a form of oppression. Society has told people who have disabilities “how to be disabled.”

The WP:NOTTHERAPY message, on the whole, is not offensive. Yet it contains language that embodies society’s stigmatized view of disability. The longevity and usefulness of WP:NOTTHERAPY, suggest a great number of people in the community subscribe to the medical model of disability.

Here are a few examples of language in WP:NOTTHERAPY:

These problems may be caused by personal immaturity, an inability to properly apply Wikipedia’s policies, poor social skills, or other reasons.

This sentence, connected with the title, implies that people who cause problems need therapy.

The phrase “Wikipedia is not therapy” should not be taken to imply that editors with mental disorders are incapable of making constructive contributions to Wikipedia…

Why then did the editors who wrote this essay choose this title? There has been discussion on the talk page about the essay title. The self-proclaimed inventor of the concept said, “In its ‘voting is not therapy’ incarnation, it was useful as a sneer, and it was meant as a sneer.” This suggests is it acceptable to use assumptions about one’s state of mental health as a sneer. Just like using the word “retarded” does not make it okay because you didn’t mean “retarded” but just “stupid.”

In short, Wikipedia offers users the chance to practice being sensible, sane, and productive, but one’s psychological state is not an acceptable excuse for disrupting the encyclopedia.

Why does mental health need to be in this conversation? If you can’t make sensible and productive contributions, don’t edit right now. I just said the same thing without being insulting. Punch up, not down.

After reading WP:NOTTHERAPY, in the See also section is an essay titled Wikipedia is not a convalescent center. Included is the text:

Wikipedia is not a convalescent center for people with poor communication skills…It should also be noted that lack of communication skills may be indicative of a deficit in actual functioning, such as a disorder.

This could also be indicative of people who are newbies, young, or non-native English speakers.

Further on in “Wikipedia is not a convalescent center,” there is reference to trolling and “behaviors that are disruptive both for the encyclopedic work and the project’s social community.” Essay titles and content like this damage both the encyclopedic work and the project’s social community.

The title could be: Wikipedia is not a tabloid. Or Wikipedia is not a toilet.

But it isn’t.

The language chosen in both essays is a jab at people with disabilities. People with disabilities are valued contributors to Wikipedia and there are people without disabilities who are destructive to Wikipedia. Having a disability should not be used to diminish contributors, nor should ‘disability’ and similar language be used as insults.

Going back to McMillen’s article…

McMillen’s article makes some great points. People on Wikipedia are valued contributors. Some people may have disabilities, but that does not diminish their value.

…it can reveal some of the worst aspects of human behavior, including abuse, harassment, and threats of physical violence.

Exposing yourself on the Internet can be challenging. Just like any relationship, you’re opening yourself up to all experiences. This could include appreciation for contributions, constructive criticism, or the bile of heinous behavior.

…mental health carries a powerful stigma, and that the more open we are about it, the less it weighs all of us down.

By suggesting people who are destructive or people with whom you are feuding have a mental disability, this only serves to perpetuate the stigmatized perspective of disability held by society. The more open we are about mental disabilities and receiving help for these disabilities, the more acceptable it will become in society, meaning more people will get the therapy they need to live personally fulfilling lives – and others will be more supportive when learning someone has a disability. No empathetic person wants to see their fellow human distressed, so why would anyone want to perpetuate the stigma which only serves to oppress people with disabilities?

I found in my reading for my dissertation people do not always disclose their disabilities. The failure to disclose could indicate people with disabilities do not want to be judged, invoke stigma about disability, or be treated differently than the people without disabilities. People with disabilities would rather risk struggling academically rather than face the stigma, stereotyping, and status loss society places on people with disabilities.

When you get a bunch of passionate people together, emotions can run high and interactions can become less than cordial. This is the time when WP:NOTTHERAPY is used. Unintentionally, this mentality might be serving to only further alienate current and potential contributors.

While McMillen’s article does have the intent to bring more attention to the potentially distressing effects of being an active contributor, I do disagree with one point:

Depending on the reader, its tone might be perceived as just snarky or dismissive enough to rub a distressed editor the wrong way.

I am not distressed or someone with a disability, yet I perceive the WP:NOTTHERAPY as “snarky and dismissive.” It is inappropriate. Maybe this has to do with my overall empathy. Or my hope to not exclude a valuable population of contributors. Or maybe others agree with me and it’s time to take that essay down and decommission its function in disputes.

 This emergency response system was established in 2010 by Philippe Beaudette…

I am glad there is a response system in place to support community members in distress. The fear of invoking stigma can prevent people with disabilities from pursuing support. WP:NOTTHERAPY only helps to further the stigma associated with mental disabilities and seeking therapy. Many people could benefit from therapy, but choose to not seek therapy. This illustrates the personal impact of societal stigmatization of disability.

Having a mental, or an “invisible,” disability does not lessen the effect of stigmatized actions and remarks on the person. Disabilities, both physical and “invisible,” can affect people in various ways. Conflating poor behavior with people with disabilities does not help “write an encyclopedia,” but stifles the much needed diversity in the community.

Wikipedia is therapy…

I argue that contributing to Wikipedia is therapy. No, no activity can replace actual therapy, but there are benefits to contributing. After a stressful day, I feel reinvigorated because I’m having an effect on the available free knowledge. I feel excited immersing myself in solving content puzzles. I laugh, saying, “How’d I get here?” after going down rabbit hole after rabbit hole of interesting content. After a day of fighting the good fight for education equality, this knowledge-nerd is rejuvenated by family, food, and Wikipedia.

I know the benefits for me, but the benefits and reasons for contributing are different for everyone. Veronica Erb wrote about Editing Wikipedia as self-care activism. Emily Temple-Wood’s positive punishment plan. Jake Orlowitz wrote about his Journey of a Wikipedian. I’d love to hear from other active contributors about their journey.

I am actually really curious to find out about the people with disabilities who are contributors on Wikipedia. If you’d like to collaborate on this investigation of the lived experiences of contributors with disabilities on Wikipedia, email me.

Make sure you do you.

If you are experiencing feelings that affect your enjoyment of daily life or negatively affect your daily activities, please do seek counseling. No other activity can replace seeing a qualified counselor. The counselor can provide you with resources and tools so you can enjoy the one life you live.

If you are experiencing thoughts of suicide, know the suicide is preventable and you must get immediate help. Help can be found at suicide.org.