From,
Emily

On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 2:56 PM, Jane Darnell <jane023@gmail.com> wrote:

Awesome! Nice article. I think she is OK on the notability front.
Anyone who manages to accumulate more than 4 million *science*
followers on facebook without posting regularly on sexual subjects is
definitely noteworthy enough for Wikipedia. Add to that this strange
development on the swear-word gender miscommunication and you pass on
the basis of "most bizarre gendergap content to be published in 2013".

2013/3/30, Ilona Buchem <buchem@beuth-hochschule.de>:

> Hi Sarah,
>
> I am following this discussion and it's interesting to see that deciding
> about an entry is not straight-forward even to "core insiders". I wonder
> what criteria help decide if something or someone is "worth" an article
> in WP. How do you decide? Or: What makes it worth it or nor?
>
> -Ilona
>
> Am 3/30/13 5:17 PM, schrieb Sarah Stierch:
>> Oh Michael, the bearer of bad news about people who generally want to
>> write new articles on this mailing list.
>>
>> Is there another article where we think this type of coverage or
>> content could be placed? I think we could even build an article about
>> I Fucking Love Science instead.
>>
>> I still question if it's officially not worth an article, I haven't
>> researched it yet. But, at this point I'm a "pro" at making people
>> most declare non-notable rather notable based on research. (Oh the
>> curator in me!)
>>
>> -Sarah
>>
>> On 3/30/13 6:08 AM, Michael J. Lowrey wrote:
>>> It's appalling and depressing; but if somebody were to write a
>>> Wikipedia article about it, at this point, I'd say it fails WP:NOTNEWS.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 2:52 AM, Jane Darnell <jane023@gmail.com

>>> <mailto:jane023@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Did anyone see this? A popular blogger on Science (with more than 4
>>> million followers) is a woman. The woman herself, Elise Andrew,
>>> had no
>>> idea it was a secret, and she was "outed" when she announced her
>>> twitter account featuring a picture of herself. Apparently the bias
>>> occurred because of the swear word on her facebook page which made
>>> readers assume she was a man. Interesting conclusion! This is a
>>> facebook hype that deserves a WP page, no?
>>>
>>> article is here:
>>>
>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/us-news-blog/2013/mar/20/i-love-science-woman-facbook
>>> facebook page here:
>>> http://www.facebook.com/IFeakingLoveScience
>>> The TV interview with Dr. Michio Kaku on CBS morning show is here:
>>> http://cbsn.ws/109mAEL
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gendergap mailing list

>>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>

>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey
>>>
>>> "When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy
>>> food and clothes."
>>> -- Desiderius Erasmus
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>
>>
>> --

>> *Sarah Stierch*
>> */Museumist and open culture advocate/*
>> >>Visit sarahstierch.com <http://sarahstierch.com><<

>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap