Wikipedia editor Adrianne Wadewitz, 37, Dead

angelburst29

The Living Force
Remembering Wikipedia editor Adrianne Wadewitz, 37
_https://shine.yahoo.com/healthy-living/adrianne-wadewitz-died-rock-climbing-200336364.html

Sad news. Wikipedia editor Adrianne Wadewitz, 37, died on April 8 from injuries she sustained from a rock climbing accident in Joshua Tree National Park, according to the New York Times.

Wadewitz’s fans on Twitter celebrated the late scholar, calling her "influential," “prolific,” and "brilliant."

The Omaha native earned her PhD from Indiana University in 2011 and was serving as a postdoctoral fellow at the Center for Digital Learning and Research at Occidental College in Los Angeles at the time of her death. She had also recently accepted a full-time job in the digital humanities department at nearby Whittier College. According to a memorial blog on the website Humanties, Arts, Science and Technology Alliance and Collaboratory (HASTAC), of which Wadewitz was a former scholar, upon accepting the job, she said, "I'm extremely happy! I have a job I'm going to love in a city I adore. Life doesn't get better than this."

Wadewitz, dubbed “Wikiwoman” on the Internet, had become interested in rock climbing two years ago and had joined an indoor climbing class to learn the basics of the sport. However, she was also fueled by a desire to better understand her own students. Wadewitz wrote on her blog last August, “Teachers frequently talk about moments in which they became students again and how much that made them better teachers. For me, there has been no better way to improve my teaching, specifically my teaching in the composition classroom, than to take up a subject at which I am abysmal.”

Although she jokingly called herself the “worst student in the class,” it soon became a serious hobby, and she filled her Facebook page with photos of herself rock climbing. "For me, one of the most empowering outcomes of my year of climbing has been the new narrative I can tell about myself," she also shared on her blog. "I am no longer 'Adrianne: scholar, book lover, pianist, and Wikipedian'. I am now 'Adrianne: scholar, book lover, pianist, Wikipedian, and rock climber'. This was brought home most vividly to me one day when I was climbing outdoors here in Los Angeles and people on the beach were marveling at those of us climbing. Suddenly I realized, I used to be the person saying how crazy or impossible such feats were and now I was the one doing them. I had radically switched subject positions in a way I did not think possible for myself."

Wadewitz's admirers have set up a memorial on her Wikipedia talk page, where many are sharing memories of the late editor. She is survived by her partner, Peter B. James, and her parents, Nathan R. Wadewitz and Betty M. Wadewitz.
 
And we are concerned about this for what reason?
 
In April 2013, Wikipedia faced another controverversy, this time "Sexism Toward Female Novelists" by Amanda Filipacchi who wrote an op-ed for the New York Times. A few days after the op-ed, Filipacchi wrote in the New York Times Sunday Review about the reaction to it, which included edits to the Wikipedia article about her that she suggested were retaliatory.

Shortly after this controversy and accusation that Wikipedia was predominately male-oriented, Adrianne Wadewitz began forming Workshop's entitled - Wikipedia 101 for Women’s History (and Other Underrepresented Subjects) Writing Women in the Digital Age. The Workshops have since expanded to Art and Artist's.

List of Wikipedia controversies
_Writing Women in the Digital Age

Amanda Filipacchi wrote an op-ed for the New York Times on April 24, 2013, titled "Wikipedia's Sexism Toward Female Novelists", in which she noted that "editors have begun the process of moving women, one by one, alphabetically, from the 'American Novelists' category to the 'American Women Novelists' subcategory." She suggested the reason for the move might be to create a male-only list of 'American Novelists' on Wikipedia.[224] The story was picked up by many other newspapers and websites and feminists said in response that they were disappointed and shocked by the action.[225] Wikipedia editors initiated various responses soon after Filipacchi's article appeared, including the creation of a category for 'American men novelists' along with an immediate proposal to merge both categories back into the original 'American novelists' category.[226] The 'American men novelists' category was criticized because the two categories together would have the effect of emptying the 'American novelists' category of all but genderless writers.[227] When the 'American men novelists' category was first created, its only entries were Orson Scott Card and P. D. Cacek (who is female).[228] A few days after the op-ed, Filipacchi wrote in the New York Times Sunday Review about the reaction to it, which included edits to the Wikipedia article about her that she suggested were retaliatory.[229] In an article in The Atlantic responding to accounts that the edits she had initially complained of were the work of one rogue editor, Filipacchi detailed edit histories identifying seven other editors who had individually or collectively performed the same actions.[230] Andrew Leonard, reporting for salon.com, found that Filipacchi's articles were followed by what he called "revenge editing" on her article and articles related to her, including that of her father, Daniel Filipacchi. Leonard quoted extensively from talk page comments of Wikipedia editor Qworty, who, e.g., wrote on the talk page of Filipacchi's article: "Oh, by all means, let’s be intimidated by the Holy New York Times. Because when the New York Times tells you to shut up, you have to shut up. Because that’s the way 'freedom' works, and the NYT is all about promoting freedom all over the world, which is why they employed Judith Miller.


Wikipedia 101: NCWHS at NCPH
_http://www.ncwhs.org/index.php/component/content/article/136-news/249-wikipedia-101-ncwhs-at-ncph

This March 24, 2014, article by UMass Department of History PhD student Erica Fagen, cross-posted from the department blog Past@Present, reflects on the workshop Wikipedia 101 for Women’s History (and Other Underrepresented Subjects) that NCWHS planned for the 2014 annual meeting. Building on our successful ad hoc gathering at the 2013 NCPH in Ottawa, this time we engaged the tremendous skill of longtime wikipedian Adrianne Wadewitz, together with UMass faculty member Marla Miller and graduate student Erica Fagan as co-facilitators, to introduce participants to the encyclopedia, the policies that govern it, and the basics of editing.

Writing Women in the Digital Age

Last week I had the great opportunity to facilitate a workshop entitled “Wikipedia 101 for Women’s History” at the annual National Council for Public History conference in Monterey, California. The main question of this session was the following: how is women’s history written on Wikipedia? The age of Web 2.0 provides an array of platforms to share, post, and tweet information on a variety of topics. What is unique about Wikipedia, and how can we as historians influence what people read? With only 13% to 15% of the English-language Wikipedia editors being women, there are evidently great strides to be made on how women and minority groups are represented on this massive encyclopaedic site.

The workshop was co-led by Marla Miller and Adrianne Wadewitz, with Adrianne having worked on Wikipedia for almost ten years. Adrienne showed the workshop participants how to become “Wikipedians” – people signed up for accounts, learned how to incorporate links and images, and what kind of text to include in the edited entries. We discussed how famous women like Harriet Tubman are portrayed on Wikipedia. In addition, Wadewitz pointed out that ethnic groups are severely underrepresented, and used the entry “Los Angeles” as an example. Wadewitz told all of us that as historians we should and can make a significant impact on how information is disseminated on the Web. In order for more women to be represented, we need more feminists to edit entries. We also need established scholars to edit entries on women like Harriet Tubman. As a graduate student, I could not agree more. We need more feminists, graduate students, young professors, and tenured faculty to edit these entries. Only with a collective effort can we truly have an impact on Wikipedia.

Writing women’s history on Wikipedia has its challenges. As entries can be edited over and over again, there is no guarantee that our edits will be preserved. There is also the larger problem of writing women’s history online – as the recent controversy with Veronica Strong-Boag, a highly-respected historian of women, and the Canadian Museum of Human Rights showed (See Veronica Strong-Boag, “International Women’s Day (IWD) and Human Rights 2014, ActiveHistory.ca, March 7, 2014, http://activehistory.ca/2014/03/international-womens-day-iwd-and-human-rights-2014/.)


101 Women Artists Who Got Wikipedia Pages This Week - 02/06/14
The Art+Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-thon was an international initiative to bring women's voices to the online encyclopedia--as editors and as subjects
_http://www.artnews.com/2014/02/06/art-and-feminism-wikipedia-editathon-creates-pages-for-women-artists/

Last Saturday, about 600 volunteers in 31 venues around the globe engaged in a collective effort to change the world, one Wikipedia entry at a time.

In the United States, Canada, Australia, Italy, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom, in nonprofits and art schools, in museums and universities, these people—mostly women—set out to write entries, uncredited and unpaid, for the fast-growing crowd-sourced online encyclopedia.

They had answered a call for the Art+Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-Thon, a massive multinational effort to correct a persistent bias in Wikipedia, which is disproportionally written by and about men.

The event, whose epicenter was the New York art and technology center Eyebeam, is part of a larger movement, only now reaching the art world, to upload content to Wikipedia in a proactive manner.

“The event seemed like a new kind of consciousness raising that was very goal-oriented,” says Casamento, a masters student in American literature at Brooklyn College. “It was aimed at writing women into history in a new way for the digital age—by giving more women the awareness and tools to take matters in their own hands.”
 
Hmm, while it's perhaps worth noting that Ms Wadewitz recently met an untimely death and that she will be missed because she was an accomplished academic and influential Wikipedia editor, there does not seem to be any suspicion that it was anything other than a rock climbing accident. Condolences to her friends, students, academic colleagues and family, but this doesn't seem to have been a sinister event.

Apparently she'd become involved in gender politics within the Wikipedia culture, which is byzantine. It is a world unto itself, and Wikipedia's many internal turmoils are endlessly multiple, simultaneous and overlapping, and they're practically incomprehensible to outsiders, so they're not of real interest here.
 
griffin said:
Hmm, while it's perhaps worth noting that Ms Wadewitz recently met an untimely death and ......... she was an accomplished academic and influential Wikipedia editor, there does not seem to be any suspicion that it was anything other than a rock climbing accident.........
this doesn't seem to have been a sinister event.

Apparently she'd become involved in gender politics within the Wikipedia culture, which is byzantine. It is a world unto itself, and Wikipedia's many internal turmoils are endlessly multiple, simultaneous and overlapping, and they're practically incomprehensible to outsiders, so they're not of real interest here.

True, untimely deaths and serious accidents happen and in this case, there's no noted suspicion of a sinister event involved. Plus, Rock Climbing isn't exactly - a walk in the park - it can be a dangerous sport. Sounds like a rap-up/case closed. Problem is, I feel something is missing? Description and details of her injuries, means of rescue and if she was climbing alone, or with a companion are lacking?

She was serving as a postdoctoral fellow at the Center for Digital Learning and Research at Occidental College and had also recently accepted a full-time job in the digital humanities department at nearby Whittier College. Inbetween, she was setting up workshops for "Wikipedia 101 for Women’s History" which began after a controversy that happened - a Year to the Month - earlier.

So who was Amanda Filipacchi and what influence did she carry to get Wikipedia Editor's and Staff to react by forming workshops to counter and minimize the controversy? Looking at her biography, nothing seems to suggest, she's a heavy weight of any kind.

_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amanda_Filipacchi
Filipacchi was born in Paris, and was educated in France (attending the American School of Paris in St. Cloud[3]) and in the U.S. She has been writing since the age of thirteen and completed three unpublished novels in her teenage years.[4] She has been living in New York since she was 17.[5] She attended Hamilton College, from which she graduated with a BA in Creative Writing. At age 20 she tried her hand at non-fiction writing with a brief and unsatisfying stint at Rolling Stone magazine.[3] In 1990, Filipacchi enrolled in Columbia University's MFA fiction writing program, where she wrote a master's thesis which she later turned into her first published novel, Nude Men.[1]

Impressive but nothing to scare the pants off Wikipedia. Amanda also cited Wikipedia for altering her father's articles. So who's her Father?

_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Filipacchi
Daniel Filipacchi (born 12 January 1928) is the Chairman Emeritus of Hachette Filipacchi Médias and a renowned collector of surrealist art.

Filipacchi wrote and worked as a photographer[1] for Paris Match from its founding in 1949 by Jean Prouvost.[2] While working at Paris Match and as a photographer for another of Prouvost's titles, Marie Claire—he promoted jazz concerts and ran a record label.[4] In the early 1960s, at a time when jazz was not played on government-owned French radio stations, Filipacchi (a widely-acknowledged jazz expert[3]) and Frank Ténot hosted an immensely popular show on Europe 1 called Pour ceux qui aiment le jazz ("For those who love jazz").[5]

In the 1960s, he presented a rock and roll radio show modeled after Dick Clark's American Bandstand called Salut les copains which launched the musical genre of yé-yé. The show's success led to his creation of a magazine of the same name,[6] eventually renamed Salut!, which built a circulation of one million copies. Filipacchi played American and French rock music on this radio show[7] beginning in the early 1960s. The show and Filipacchi himself played an important role in the formation of a 1960s youth culture in France.[8]

Filipacchi acquired the venerable Cahiers du cinéma in 1964.[9] Cahiers was in serious financial trouble and its owners convinced Filipacchi to buy a majority share in order to save it from ruin. Filipacchi hired a number of his own people and redesigned the journal to look more modern, zippy, and youth-appealing.[10] After the revolutionary May 1968 events in France and the subsequent evolution of Cahiers into a more political forum[11] under the influence of the Maoist director Jean-Luc Godard[11] and others, Filipacchi wanted out of the magazine and sold his share in 1969.[11]

He started more magazines and acquired many others, such as Paris Match in 1976.[2] Some were for teenage girls (such as Mademoiselle Age Tendre) and others for men (such as Lui,[12] which Filipacchi founded in 1963 along with Jacques Lanzmann,[13] Newlook, and French editions of Playboy and Penthouse[14][15]). In February 1979 Filipacchi bought the then-defunct Look. He hired Jann Wenner to run it in May 1979[16] but the revival was a failure and Filipacchi fired the entire staff in July 1979.[17]

ARTnews has repeatedly listed Filipacchi among the world's top art collectors.[18] Art from Filipacchi's collection formed part of the 1996 exhibit Private Passions at the Musée d'Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris.[19] His collection (along with that of his best friend, the record producer Nesuhi Ertegün) was exhibited at the Guggenheim in New York in 1999 in Surrealism: Two Private Eyes, the Nesuhi Ertegun and Daniel Filipacchi Collections - an event described by The New York Times as a "powerful exhibition", large enough to "pack the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum from ceiling to lobby".[20]

Although Filipacchi sued the Paris gallery which sold him a fake "Max Ernst" painting in 2006 for US $7 million, he called its notorious forger Wolfgang Beltracchi (currently serving a six-year prison sentence) a "genius" in a 2012 interview.[21]


In reviewing Amanda's Father's history and accomplishments, he might be the impetus that prompted Wikipedia to initiate Workshop's facilitated and promoted by Adrianne Wadewitz? Adrianne's efforts seem to have been very successful with a Feb. (2014) Art+Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-Thon and a March 24, (2014) 101 for Women’s History, days before her death, both submitting hundreds of additional entries into Wikipedia.

There's also a thought, if Adrianne Wadewitz was serving "two master's?" Wikipedia owner's on one end - to help mitigate an accusation of Sexism and Daniel Filipacchi on the other end, mirroring his interests in literature and art?

Quote from: Griffin
"It is a world unto itself, and Wikipedia's many internal turmoils are endlessly multiple, simultaneous and overlapping, and they're practically incomprehensible to outsiders, so they're not of real interest here."

Consider this possibility - What better premeditated conditions (endlessly multiple, simultaneous and overlapping internal turmoils) to use Wikipedia as a tool, to rewrite and edit History in "Real Time" that encompasses a wide spectrum of venues across the board, in every area that affects the Human condition, by multiple entities of unknown origin - who can subtract, add or completely alter the information, while giving immediate access across the Globe?

Practically incomprehensible? Not of real interest?
 
angelburst29 said:
griffin said:
Hmm, while it's perhaps worth noting that Ms Wadewitz recently met an untimely death and ......... she was an accomplished academic and influential Wikipedia editor, there does not seem to be any suspicion that it was anything other than a rock climbing accident.........
this doesn't seem to have been a sinister event.

Apparently she'd become involved in gender politics within the Wikipedia culture, which is byzantine. It is a world unto itself, and Wikipedia's many internal turmoils are endlessly multiple, simultaneous and overlapping, and they're practically incomprehensible to outsiders, so they're not of real interest here.

True, untimely deaths and serious accidents happen and in this case, there's no noted suspicion of a sinister event involved. Plus, Rock Climbing isn't exactly - a walk in the park - it can be a dangerous sport. Sounds like a rap-up/case closed. Problem is, I feel something is missing? Description and details of her injuries, means of rescue and if she was climbing alone, or with a companion are lacking?

She was serving as a postdoctoral fellow at the Center for Digital Learning and Research at Occidental College and had also recently accepted a full-time job in the digital humanities department at nearby Whittier College. Inbetween, she was setting up workshops for "Wikipedia 101 for Women’s History" which began after a controversy that happened - a Year to the Month - earlier.

So who was Amanda Filipacchi and what influence did she carry to get Wikipedia Editor's and Staff to react by forming workshops to counter and minimize the controversy? Looking at her biography, nothing seems to suggest, she's a heavy weight of any kind.

_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amanda_Filipacchi
Filipacchi was born in Paris, and was educated in France (attending the American School of Paris in St. Cloud[3]) and in the U.S. She has been writing since the age of thirteen and completed three unpublished novels in her teenage years.[4] She has been living in New York since she was 17.[5] She attended Hamilton College, from which she graduated with a BA in Creative Writing. At age 20 she tried her hand at non-fiction writing with a brief and unsatisfying stint at Rolling Stone magazine.[3] In 1990, Filipacchi enrolled in Columbia University's MFA fiction writing program, where she wrote a master's thesis which she later turned into her first published novel, Nude Men.[1]

Impressive but nothing to scare the pants off Wikipedia. Amanda also cited Wikipedia for altering her father's articles. So who's her Father?

_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Filipacchi
Daniel Filipacchi (born 12 January 1928) is the Chairman Emeritus of Hachette Filipacchi Médias and a renowned collector of surrealist art.

Filipacchi wrote and worked as a photographer[1] for Paris Match from its founding in 1949 by Jean Prouvost.[2] While working at Paris Match and as a photographer for another of Prouvost's titles, Marie Claire—he promoted jazz concerts and ran a record label.[4] In the early 1960s, at a time when jazz was not played on government-owned French radio stations, Filipacchi (a widely-acknowledged jazz expert[3]) and Frank Ténot hosted an immensely popular show on Europe 1 called Pour ceux qui aiment le jazz ("For those who love jazz").[5]

In the 1960s, he presented a rock and roll radio show modeled after Dick Clark's American Bandstand called Salut les copains which launched the musical genre of yé-yé. The show's success led to his creation of a magazine of the same name,[6] eventually renamed Salut!, which built a circulation of one million copies. Filipacchi played American and French rock music on this radio show[7] beginning in the early 1960s. The show and Filipacchi himself played an important role in the formation of a 1960s youth culture in France.[8]

Filipacchi acquired the venerable Cahiers du cinéma in 1964.[9] Cahiers was in serious financial trouble and its owners convinced Filipacchi to buy a majority share in order to save it from ruin. Filipacchi hired a number of his own people and redesigned the journal to look more modern, zippy, and youth-appealing.[10] After the revolutionary May 1968 events in France and the subsequent evolution of Cahiers into a more political forum[11] under the influence of the Maoist director Jean-Luc Godard[11] and others, Filipacchi wanted out of the magazine and sold his share in 1969.[11]

He started more magazines and acquired many others, such as Paris Match in 1976.[2] Some were for teenage girls (such as Mademoiselle Age Tendre) and others for men (such as Lui,[12] which Filipacchi founded in 1963 along with Jacques Lanzmann,[13] Newlook, and French editions of Playboy and Penthouse[14][15]). In February 1979 Filipacchi bought the then-defunct Look. He hired Jann Wenner to run it in May 1979[16] but the revival was a failure and Filipacchi fired the entire staff in July 1979.[17]

ARTnews has repeatedly listed Filipacchi among the world's top art collectors.[18] Art from Filipacchi's collection formed part of the 1996 exhibit Private Passions at the Musée d'Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris.[19] His collection (along with that of his best friend, the record producer Nesuhi Ertegün) was exhibited at the Guggenheim in New York in 1999 in Surrealism: Two Private Eyes, the Nesuhi Ertegun and Daniel Filipacchi Collections - an event described by The New York Times as a "powerful exhibition", large enough to "pack the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum from ceiling to lobby".[20]

Although Filipacchi sued the Paris gallery which sold him a fake "Max Ernst" painting in 2006 for US $7 million, he called its notorious forger Wolfgang Beltracchi (currently serving a six-year prison sentence) a "genius" in a 2012 interview.[21]


In reviewing Amanda's Father's history and accomplishments, he might be the impetus that prompted Wikipedia to initiate Workshop's facilitated and promoted by Adrianne Wadewitz? Adrianne's efforts seem to have been very successful with a Feb. (2014) Art+Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-Thon and a March 24, (2014) 101 for Women’s History, days before her death, both submitting hundreds of additional entries into Wikipedia.

There's also a thought, if Adrianne Wadewitz was serving "two master's?" Wikipedia owner's on one end - to help mitigate an accusation of Sexism and Daniel Filipacchi on the other end, mirroring his interests in literature and art?

Quote from: Griffin
"It is a world unto itself, and Wikipedia's many internal turmoils are endlessly multiple, simultaneous and overlapping, and they're practically incomprehensible to outsiders, so they're not of real interest here."

Consider this possibility - What better premeditated conditions (endlessly multiple, simultaneous and overlapping internal turmoils) to use Wikipedia as a tool, to rewrite and edit History in "Real Time" that encompasses a wide spectrum of venues across the board, in every area that affects the Human condition, by multiple entities of unknown origin - who can subtract, add or completely alter the information, while giving immediate access across the Globe?

Practically incomprehensible? Not of real interest?

Wikipedia has become the oracle. Even we cite it on the forum as credible (otherwise we wouldn't cite it.) A great tool to be used by the PTB for control of information. So it is possible that Wadewitz had perhaps turned against an STD agenda and was terminated because of it.
 
Back
Top Bottom