Feminist SF Wiki:Wikipedia

The feministSF wiki is not Wikipedia nor is it an attempt to replace it or to ghettoize feminist SF. Instead, we are using the MediaWiki software tool to develop a new, thoroughly detailed reference resource and to experiment with the community and process-oriented approach of Wikipedia.

Aside from that, we have a secret feminist conspiracy.

So what's the relationship between Wikipedia and the feministSF wiki (fsfwiki)?

1. The feministSF wiki uses the free & open source mediawiki software developed by, for and in conjunction with Wikipedia, but we use it for our own ends.
2. Wikipedia encourages spin-off projects and has developed a standard for interwiki references. So when we feel it's appropriate and we're ready to do so, we can add the interwiki language protocols and reference directly to Wikipedia. In the meantime it is perfectly appropriate to do so using URLs. For more info see Meta-Wiki.
3. FeministSF is one of many independent spin-off projects making use of Wikipedia's wiki software. In the SF/F field, for example, there are wiki projects covering science fiction generally, the Harry Potter, "Star Trek" and at least one for Tolkien.

What are the differences between Wikipedia & the fsfwiki?

1. The fsfwiki is not written from a "neutral POV". While the definition of what this means does vary, Wikipedia or (in general) a reference encyclopedia will generally adopt the policy that articles should be written from a neutral point of view. At feministSF wiki, the assumption is that articles will be written from a feminist point of view. We want to understand and accurately describe other perspectives but as feminists we also want to critique and deconstruct hierarchies of oppression, stereotyped thinking, problems that skew along axes of gender, sexuality, ethnicity, class, age, marital status or relational affiliation, language and other forms of privilege or hierarchy. We break the Fourth Wall between the creators of this wiki, the content, and the audience, by integrating pages about you (a feminist sf fan, scholar, creator, and/or future FSFwikian) and us (feminist sf fans, scholars, creators, and/or current FSFwikians).
2. The fsfwiki includes material that is notable for feminist SF. Being specialized, feministSF wiki can dig a lot deeper into feminist SF than a general encyclopedia like WikiPedia might. The feministSF wiki is a reference resource like Wikipedia, but it can delve into the field of feminist science fiction much more thoroughly than a general encyclopedia (even the world's best) would intend. For instance, while Wikipedia purports to include entries only about people or events of general significance, the feministSF wiki will include things of general significance to feminist SF, which is already a good deal more specific and detailed than a general encyclopedia could be. Because of this focus, feministSF wiki can also be an archival resource and community document. Moreover, we can also include information which might never make it into most encyclopedias or even the feminist SF website. This is because while every single fan and writer might not be of interest or relevance in an encyclopedia or bibliography, they may indeed be of interest and relevance to a project striving to capture, document and archive a feminist SF community.
3. The fsfwiki is organized for feminist SF. With tagging, categories and search we can structure information in such a way as to make it easy to find book authors, new authors, fans, wanna-be filmmakers and so on. We can draw connections that are made by political insights, and not simply by general encyclopedic organizational principles. For instance, we don't need to mandate and create a separation which can be, in the feminist SF community, rather artificial. We all know that our writers are also fans, that fans are creators and that creativity includes writing along with jewelry-making, beading, software coding, graphic design, feminist processes and organizing perfectly organized pocket programs for conferences (to name only a few examples). Other examples: We may be able to include categories that classify authors according to relationships to one another, organize works by productive communities, categorize characters, themes, plots by critical connections not made in wikipedia.
4. Original research and personal observations are encouraged at fsfwiki. Wikipedia's policy is that statements of fact should be referenced by published literature. Because of the different focuses of FSFwiki and Wikipedia, FSFwiki also does not adopt the other two principle policies of Wikipedia: "No original research" and "Verifiability". These policies, in conjunction with the "Neutral POV" policy (above) are critical to Wikipedia because Wikipedia is intended to be a general purpose encyclopedia. But the FSFwiki is not merely a general purpose encyclopedia on a specific topic. The FSF wiki is a literary critical project, so the domain is different from Wikipedia. FSF wiki does not traffic in "facts", but in critical interpretations of works from a feminist perspective. Moreover, part of the feminist project is to encourage consciousness-raising and the validation of feminist and feminist-compatible perspectives which are silenced by patriarchal and racist culture. So, expressing one's own reading of or reaction to a characterization or a plot twist is a perfectly legitimate thing to do at FSFwiki. Such reactions should be properly attributed; the individual voice is itself powerful, but it should not be conflated with nor used to describe a universal truth. Because individual research and observations can be included, the Wikipedia Verifiability policy is also not quite right for the FSFwiki. While research should be replicable and ultimately verifiable, it need not be included in "reliable, published sources". It can be included on FSFwiki in more elaborated entries. It can be included on blogs. Etc.
5. The feministSF wiki is also an experiment in feminist process and community-building. Could it become a 24/7 feminist think tank? An online version of WisCon or a workshop in which everyone works madly together, not just for 75 minutes but at any moment, coming together asynchronously through the discussion pages and other community aspects of mediaWiki software? What kinds of connections can we document thru this wiki, which wouldn't be relevant or appropriate in a general encyclopedia? References, homages, influences, connections (family sexual affectional and otherwise)? How can we create this "web" of connections? Were particular stories inspired by experiences at WisCon or reactions to a fannish event of some sort? How can we connect the online community with real-world, offline, in-person, meat communities?

Is this a critique of Wikipedia?

It's important to separate the wiki from the Wikipedia.

The people who installed this wiki, made it available for you, and wrote this page do indeed love the notion of Wikipedia (and many of us love Wikipedia). We particularly love the kinds of open collaborations that Wiki software makes possible, along with the potential for doing things Wikipedia doesn't do.

However, we've sometimes been frustrated with the Wikipedia experience.

1. In 2004 there was a great article on feminist science fiction and the beginnings of an article on women in science fiction. By 2006, Wikipedia contributors had merged them and redirected searches for "feminist science fiction" to "women in science fiction" even though these are distinct concepts. While anyone could get involved with the Wikipedia community and make comments or get rid of the redirect and explain what's going on (and we have), if it became a "discussion" or a controversy, the lone feminist might be outnumbered.
2. We see continuous instances of sexist or biased language in Wikipedia, which we dutifully correct and neutralize.
3. Some of us feel that Wikipedia's leadership often seems more focused on traffic and branding than scholarship.
4. The generic wiki process and software allows for great things like open public debate on the significance of say, feminist online community theorist danah boyd. It allows the possibility for truly geeking out obsessively on issues of interest to any of the participants, but in a fundamentally sexist culture dominated by boys who maybe haven't all had their share of consciousness raising moments, this can provoke odd events like a debate about the relevance of danah boyd and no debate about the relevance of a detailed entry for each and every single Playmate of the Month or Playmate of the Year. The only solution is to loft an entire fleet of feminists, infiltrating and ruthlessly subverting the dominant paradigms. Now this is not to say that Wikipedia should remove the Playmates. There might be any number of analyses congruent with feminism which would support including them: Their wide cultural influence, their participation in the sex work industry, sex positive third wave feminism and so on. But it seems clear that there is an overwhelming gender (boy) based dynamic at Wikipedia which is evidenced by the fact that popular objectifications of male desire are obsessively catalogued in Wikipedia with nary a comment or discussion about their social significance. This is an example of systemic bias, which can be rectified in part by infiltrating the system. See meta.wikimedia.org and Wikipedia: Replies to common objections and below section on feminist conspiracies.

Any one of us as individuals could take on those issues in Wikipedia and be promptly blown out of the process by its demographically skewed policy of consensus. In effect, if lots of women got involved we could skew the perspective towards our own, so feministSF wiki is partly a recruiting tool to train and give feminists the skills to contribute their perspectives to any wiki and ultimately be more effective (which is to say, louder) voices in online communities. This will make Wikipedia better too, first because more people contributing can only improve it and second, feminist contributions will do so unquestionably since, objectively speaking from any neutral point of view, we're right.

Is there a feminist conspiracy behind the fsfwiki?

Yes. We have three goals and we will achieve them by any means necessary.

1. We will use the feministSF wiki to deconstruct our social programming in a wiki of our own. As an analogy, wikis feature sandboxes which are places for individuals to play with formatting to see if they can get it right. In a sense they're safe places where people can learn to do things without fear of being castigated for screwing up, or fear of actually screwing up someone else's work or hurting the wiki (though you couldn't for long because someone else would catch and fix it... that's the beauty of the wiki!). So in a sense, the feministSF is a sandbox for social processes, a place for anyone to deconstruct their social programming, particularly women who have been socialized not to correct others, to be polite, to avoid claiming much space in public places, to not argue or engage in debates or to skirt around robust public discussion. People who have not had a lot of experience with technology may feel shy or inexperienced with wiki software. They could find this wiki is a place to learn it and to get comfortable with "geeking out." The feministSF wiki is a place for all those folks to explore and experiment with the technology, get proficient with it, then take their skills out in the world to use with their own collaborative software, even engaging in Wikipedia's editing and byzantine processes and bringing more feminist presences and perspectives to wikis, ultimately to other tech-based communities everywhere.
2. We will explore and push the technology options offered by mediawiki software as a collaborative medium in the way only feminists dedicated to process can.
3. Of course, ultimately we will take over Wikipedia (see above).