Hi everybody,
as https://www.python.org/doc/sunset-python-2/ says Python 2 is finally
going EOL on January 1st. We (as Analytics team) have a lot of packages
deployed on stat/notebook/hadoop hosts via puppet that should be removed,
but before doing so we'd need to know if anybody of you is currently using
a Python-2-only environment to work/research/test/etc... If so, please
comment in the following task so we'll discuss your use case and possibly
find a Python-3 solution: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T204737
In the task we are going to add info about common packages that we know
(keras, tensorflow, pytorch, etc..) to help you migrate to Python 3 as
quickly and painlessly as possible, so if you are interested please
subscribe to the task.
Thanks in advance!
Luca (on behalf of the Analytics team)
Hey folks, I'm helping Rebecca Maung (rmaung(a)wikimedia.org) distribute this
request. Her words below:
The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in the annual
Community Insights survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your
work on- and off-wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the
future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future
work of the Wikimedia Foundation.
If you are a volunteer developer, and have contributed code to any pieces
of MediaWiki, gadgets, or tools, please complete the survey. It is
available in various languages and will take between 15 and 25 minutes to
complete.
Follow this link to the survey:
https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_0pSrrkJAKVRXPpj?Target=dev
If you have seen a similar message elsewhere and have already taken the
Community Insights survey, please do not take it twice.
You can find more information about this survey on the project page and see
how your feedback helps the Wikimedia Foundation support contributors like
you. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this
privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find
more information about this survey.
If you need additional help, send an email to surveys(a)wikimedia.org.
Thank you!
//Johan Jönsson
--
Wow, Kerry! Thank you for taking the time to write all these thoughts out.
I'm asking the question because I'm concerned that the gender balance of
the authors being cited on wikipedia is different from the already quite
bad patterns in academia. My fear is that the citation gender imbalance on
Wikipedia is more pronounced. If so, it is not just perpetuating the
problem, but making it worse by surfacing certain authors and ideas even
more frequently, or hardly at all. I would like to know if this is the
case, and if so, how big the effect is.
In my last message, I mention a study about a set of award-winning
political science books (the researchers study the citation gender
imbalance for that set). I just saw this study today, but I began to think
that it/the set of works--or some similar set of titles--could possibly be
a good place to begin, especially if the original researchers were willing
to share the list of titles/authors/gender/etc that they put
together/worked with. Then it seems it would mostly be a matter of figuring
out how to understand how those titles are cited on Wikipedia--through
either the citation dataset or wikicite--to see if/how the citation
patterns differ (i.e., if the works by women/men are cited more
frequently/at the same rate/less frequently on Wikipedia than what the
researchers found in the original study).
This seems like it would be easier to do than what you propose, but perhaps
the idea is not sound. Until very recently, I thought I could find the
answer in an existing paper! I honestly don't know the best way to get the
answer, but I would like to know the answer and think it's important to
look at.
All of the things you bring up--from the gender of the editor, to the type
of editing being done, to the issues around multiple authors/paywalls/year
of publication/field--complicate the inquiry, and in particular a larger
one. I agree with what you say about doing something small first to see
what's there.
Thanks again for all your thoughts.
Greg
On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 9:41 PM <wiki-research-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
wrote:
> Send Wiki-research-l mailing list submissions to
> wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> wiki-research-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> wiki-research-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Wiki-research-l digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: gender balance of wikipedia citations (Greg)
> 2. Re: gender balance of wikipedia citations (Kerry Raymond)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 18:47:48 -0700
> From: Greg <thenatureprogram(a)gmail.com>
> To: wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wiki-research-l] gender balance of wikipedia citations
> Message-ID:
> <
> CAOO9DNvBrw_aLkRUp5kYFLdaLJUEK+ddiz-A09MZwiotAdAmUw(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> Hi Leila,
>
> Thanks for your thoughts.
>
> Having just read Troy Vettese's very powerful essay, Sexism in the Academy
> (
> https://nplusonemag.com/issue-34/essays/sexism-in-the-academy/), I wish
> this were a top priority.
>
> I stumbled upon a study today--it came up in the Washington Post's
> excellent series on gender bias in political science. The authors look at a
> set of award winning political science books and the gender imbalance in
> the citations drawn from google scholar. I'm linking the piece here in
> case anyone on this list is interested now, or in the future, in how the
> patterns on Wikipedia compare.
>
> Washington Post piece: "There’s a gender gap in who wins political science
> book awards – and in how widely they’re cited"
>
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/08/22/theres-gender-gap-who-wi…
> "Just as significantly, women’s award-winning books receive fewer scholarly
> citations than men’s award-winning volumes — and this disparity has grown,
> rather than shrunk, in recent years. Over the entire period, APSA
> award-winning volumes by women averaged 43 percent fewer citations per year
> than those by male authors."
>
> Paper: "Winning awards and gaining recognition: An impact analysis of APSA
> section book prizes"
> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0362331918300867
>
>
> Best,
> Greg
>
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 3:44 PM <
> wiki-research-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Send Wiki-research-l mailing list submissions to
> > wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > wiki-research-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > wiki-research-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of Wiki-research-l digest..."
> >
> >
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> > 1. Re: gender balance of wikipedia citations (Greg)
> > 2. Re: gender balance of wikipedia citations (Leila Zia)
> > 3. Wikimania 2019 disinformation meetup follow-up (Leila Zia)
> > 4. Upcoming Research Newsletter (special issue on gender gap
> > research): New papers open for review (Mohammed Sadat Abdulai)
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 09:57:15 -0700
> > From: Greg <thenatureprogram(a)gmail.com>
> > To: wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Subject: Re: [Wiki-research-l] gender balance of wikipedia citations
> > Message-ID:
> > <CAOO9DNuSYzzaVwcdqiWA7pj671z3N43XOSwv6DtW0SxWg=
> > L8GQ(a)mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> >
> > Hi Kerry,
> > Those are all very interesting ways to look at this. I was thinking
> mostly
> > along the lines of your first bullet point, but I'd be interested in
> > research in any of those areas.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Greg
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 5:00 AM <
> > wiki-research-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Send Wiki-research-l mailing list submissions to
> > > wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > >
> > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > > wiki-research-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > >
> > > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > > wiki-research-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > >
> > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > > than "Re: Contents of Wiki-research-l digest..."
> > >
> > >
> > > Today's Topics:
> > >
> > > 1. gender balance of wikipedia citations (Greg)
> > > 2. Re: gender balance of wikipedia citations (Kerry Raymond)
> > >
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Message: 1
> > > Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 20:19:18 -0700
> > > From: Greg <thenatureprogram(a)gmail.com>
> > > To: wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Subject: [Wiki-research-l] gender balance of wikipedia citations
> > > Message-ID:
> > > <
> > > CAOO9DNtY+oDO5oQrMZeG1NZE-kYNYLWnTD6acHeYTbYeGk8k2Q(a)mail.gmail.com>
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> > >
> > > Greetings!
> > >
> > > I was looking for information about the gender balance of Wikipedia
> > > citations and no one I've asked knows of any work on this topic. Do
> you?
> > >
> > > I think this is an important question.
> > >
> > > Here's what I've learned so far:
> > >
> > > Wikipedia citations are currently in the form of text strings. There is
> > > also an initiative to place citations in an annotated structured
> > repository
> > > (wikicite). I do not know the current status of wikicite or if/when
> this
> > > could be used for this inquiry--either to examine all, or a sensible
> > subset
> > > of the citations.
> > >
> > > My perspective is that understanding the gender balance is necessary
> and
> > > urgent. The balance could be better, the same, or worse than the
> citation
> > > balances we already know, and the scale of the effect is quite large.
> > >
> > > Is this a line of inquiry that the wikimedia/wikicite community is
> > > interested in pursuing? If so, what is the best way to get started?
> Does
> > > the WMF have the resources and interest to look into this matter
> inhouse?
> > >
> > > Thanks for your thoughts.
> > >
> > > Greg
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > > Message: 2
> > > Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:53:45 +1000
> > > From: "Kerry Raymond" <kerry.raymond(a)gmail.com>
> > > To: "'Research into Wikimedia content and communities'"
> > > <wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> > > Subject: Re: [Wiki-research-l] gender balance of wikipedia citations
> > > Message-ID: <00ed01d5589d$33e31ed0$9ba95c70$(a)gmail.com>
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> > >
> > > Could you elaborate a bit more on what you mean by the gender balance
> of
> > > citations?
> > >
> > > Are you talking about:
> > >
> > > * proportion of male vs female authors of the source material used as
> > > citations in arbitrary articles>
> > > * the quality/quantity of citations in biography articles of men vs
> > women?
> > > * the quality/quantity of citations in articles that are gendered by
> some
> > > other criteria (e.g. reader interest, romantic comedy vs action film)?
> > >
> > > Kerry
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Wiki-research-l [mailto:
> > wiki-research-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org]
> > > On Behalf Of Greg
> > > Sent: Thursday, 22 August 2019 1:19 PM
> > > To: wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Subject: [Wiki-research-l] gender balance of wikipedia citations
> > >
> > > Greetings!
> > >
> > > I was looking for information about the gender balance of Wikipedia
> > > citations and no one I've asked knows of any work on this topic. Do
> you?
> > >
> > > I think this is an important question.
> > >
> > > Here's what I've learned so far:
> > >
> > > Wikipedia citations are currently in the form of text strings. There is
> > > also an initiative to place citations in an annotated structured
> > repository
> > > (wikicite). I do not know the current status of wikicite or if/when
> this
> > > could be used for this inquiry--either to examine all, or a sensible
> > subset
> > > of the citations.
> > >
> > > My perspective is that understanding the gender balance is necessary
> and
> > > urgent. The balance could be better, the same, or worse than the
> citation
> > > balances we already know, and the scale of the effect is quite large.
> > >
> > > Is this a line of inquiry that the wikimedia/wikicite community is
> > > interested in pursuing? If so, what is the best way to get started?
> Does
> > > the WMF have the resources and interest to look into this matter
> inhouse?
> > >
> > > Thanks for your thoughts.
> > >
> > > Greg
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > > Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > > Subject: Digest Footer
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > > Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > > End of Wiki-research-l Digest, Vol 168, Issue 11
> > > ************************************************
> > >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:43:51 -0700
> > From: Leila Zia <leila(a)wikimedia.org>
> > To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities
> > <wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> > Subject: Re: [Wiki-research-l] gender balance of wikipedia citations
> > Message-ID:
> > <CAK0Oe2uCo70_=ma2b=2d+fvr4GseEVxOP0sh=
> > ELNOpKdCuUfqA(a)mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> >
> > Hi Greg,
> >
> > A few comments if you're going to go with "proportion of male vs
> > female authors of the source material used as citations in arbitrary
> > articles":
> >
> > * Please differentiate between sex (female, male, ...) and gender
> > (woman, man, ...). My understanding from your initial email is that
> > you want to stay focused on gender, not sex.
> >
> > * Unless you have reliable sources about the gender of an author, I
> > would not recommend trying to predict what the gender is. (As you may
> > know, this is not uncommon in social media studies, for example, to
> > predict the gender of the author based on their image or their name.
> > These approaches introduce biases and social challenges.)
> >
> > * Re your question about whether WMF has resources to look into this
> > question in-house: I can't speak for the whole of WMF, however, I can
> > share more about the Research team's direction. As part of our future
> > work, we would like to "help contributors monitor violations of core
> > content policies and assess information reliability and bias both
> > granularly and at scale". [1] The question you proposed can fall under
> > assessing bias in content (considering citations as part of the
> > content). I expect us to focus first on the piece about violations of
> > core content policies and information reliability and come back to the
> > bias question later. As a result, we won't have bandwidth to do your
> > proposal in-house at the moment. Sorry about that.
> >
> > I hope this helps.
> >
> > Best,
> > Leila
> >
> > [1] Section 2 of our Knowledge Integrity whitepaper:
> >
> >
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9a/Knowledge_Integrity_-_W…
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 9:57 AM Greg <thenatureprogram(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Kerry,
> > > Those are all very interesting ways to look at this. I was thinking
> > mostly
> > > along the lines of your first bullet point, but I'd be interested in
> > > research in any of those areas.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Greg
> > >
> > > On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 5:00 AM <
> > wiki-research-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Send Wiki-research-l mailing list submissions to
> > > > wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > >
> > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> > > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > > > wiki-research-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > >
> > > > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > > > wiki-research-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > >
> > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > > > than "Re: Contents of Wiki-research-l digest..."
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Today's Topics:
> > > >
> > > > 1. gender balance of wikipedia citations (Greg)
> > > > 2. Re: gender balance of wikipedia citations (Kerry Raymond)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > Message: 1
> > > > Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 20:19:18 -0700
> > > > From: Greg <thenatureprogram(a)gmail.com>
> > > > To: wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Subject: [Wiki-research-l] gender balance of wikipedia citations
> > > > Message-ID:
> > > > <
> > > > CAOO9DNtY+oDO5oQrMZeG1NZE-kYNYLWnTD6acHeYTbYeGk8k2Q(a)mail.gmail.com>
> > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> > > >
> > > > Greetings!
> > > >
> > > > I was looking for information about the gender balance of Wikipedia
> > > > citations and no one I've asked knows of any work on this topic. Do
> > you?
> > > >
> > > > I think this is an important question.
> > > >
> > > > Here's what I've learned so far:
> > > >
> > > > Wikipedia citations are currently in the form of text strings. There
> is
> > > > also an initiative to place citations in an annotated structured
> > repository
> > > > (wikicite). I do not know the current status of wikicite or if/when
> > this
> > > > could be used for this inquiry--either to examine all, or a sensible
> > subset
> > > > of the citations.
> > > >
> > > > My perspective is that understanding the gender balance is necessary
> > and
> > > > urgent. The balance could be better, the same, or worse than the
> > citation
> > > > balances we already know, and the scale of the effect is quite large.
> > > >
> > > > Is this a line of inquiry that the wikimedia/wikicite community is
> > > > interested in pursuing? If so, what is the best way to get started?
> > Does
> > > > the WMF have the resources and interest to look into this matter
> > inhouse?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your thoughts.
> > > >
> > > > Greg
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > Message: 2
> > > > Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:53:45 +1000
> > > > From: "Kerry Raymond" <kerry.raymond(a)gmail.com>
> > > > To: "'Research into Wikimedia content and communities'"
> > > > <wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> > > > Subject: Re: [Wiki-research-l] gender balance of wikipedia citations
> > > > Message-ID: <00ed01d5589d$33e31ed0$9ba95c70$(a)gmail.com>
> > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> > > >
> > > > Could you elaborate a bit more on what you mean by the gender balance
> > of
> > > > citations?
> > > >
> > > > Are you talking about:
> > > >
> > > > * proportion of male vs female authors of the source material used as
> > > > citations in arbitrary articles>
> > > > * the quality/quantity of citations in biography articles of men vs
> > women?
> > > > * the quality/quantity of citations in articles that are gendered by
> > some
> > > > other criteria (e.g. reader interest, romantic comedy vs action
> film)?
> > > >
> > > > Kerry
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Wiki-research-l [mailto:
> > wiki-research-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org]
> > > > On Behalf Of Greg
> > > > Sent: Thursday, 22 August 2019 1:19 PM
> > > > To: wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Subject: [Wiki-research-l] gender balance of wikipedia citations
> > > >
> > > > Greetings!
> > > >
> > > > I was looking for information about the gender balance of Wikipedia
> > > > citations and no one I've asked knows of any work on this topic. Do
> > you?
> > > >
> > > > I think this is an important question.
> > > >
> > > > Here's what I've learned so far:
> > > >
> > > > Wikipedia citations are currently in the form of text strings. There
> is
> > > > also an initiative to place citations in an annotated structured
> > repository
> > > > (wikicite). I do not know the current status of wikicite or if/when
> > this
> > > > could be used for this inquiry--either to examine all, or a sensible
> > subset
> > > > of the citations.
> > > >
> > > > My perspective is that understanding the gender balance is necessary
> > and
> > > > urgent. The balance could be better, the same, or worse than the
> > citation
> > > > balances we already know, and the scale of the effect is quite large.
> > > >
> > > > Is this a line of inquiry that the wikimedia/wikicite community is
> > > > interested in pursuing? If so, what is the best way to get started?
> > Does
> > > > the WMF have the resources and interest to look into this matter
> > inhouse?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your thoughts.
> > > >
> > > > Greg
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > > > Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > Subject: Digest Footer
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > > > Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > End of Wiki-research-l Digest, Vol 168, Issue 11
> > > > ************************************************
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > > Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 3
> > Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:36:17 -0700
> > From: Leila Zia <leila(a)wikimedia.org>
> > To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities
> > <wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> > Subject: [Wiki-research-l] Wikimania 2019 disinformation meetup
> > follow-up
> > Message-ID:
> > <CAK0Oe2sodYJpkuhSqgo3dtfDr=
> > NQ5EK1TdH16F6BOkTyFho9Rg(a)mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > This message is for those of you who attended the disinformation
> > meet-up [0] in Wikimania 2019 [1] or others who may be interested.
> >
> > * The notes from our meet-up are now posted in the bottom of the page
> [0].
> >
> > * I was tasked to see if space.wmflabs.org is the place for us to
> > continue conversations about this topic. The answer is yes. Thanks to
> > the help of Elena Lappen, we now have a dedicated subcategory for
> > disinformation:
> > https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/c/research/disinformation . Feel
> > free to subscribe, watch, and/or post new topics if you're involved in
> > this space.
> >
> > * If you are new to this conversation, please read the purpose of the
> > subcategory at
> >
> https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/t/about-the-disinformation-category/949
> > and welcome! :)
> >
> > Best,
> > Leila
> >
> > [0] https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/2019:Meetups/Disinformation
> > [1] https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/2019:Program
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 4
> > Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 22:43:53 +0000 (UTC)
> > From: Mohammed Sadat Abdulai <masssly(a)ymail.com>
> > To: Research Into Wikimedia Content and Communities
> > <wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> > Subject: [Wiki-research-l] Upcoming Research Newsletter (special issue
> > on gender gap research): New papers open for review
> > Message-ID: <1625269943.668598.1566513833343(a)mail.yahoo.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> >
> > Hi everyone,
> > We’re preparing for the August 2019 research newsletter and looking for
> > contributors. Please take a look at
> > https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/WRN201908 and add your name next to any
> > paper you are interested in covering. Our target publication date is on
> 31
> > August 11:59 UTC. As usual, short notes and one-paragraph reviews are
> most
> > welcome.
> > For the August edition, we are planning a special issue focusing mainly
> > on recent gender gap/gender bias research. (Upcoming special issues
> topics
> > may include health and education.) There are about 20 papers from this
> area
> > on our todo list which will all be covered in the August issue, either
> as a
> > mere list item or - with your help - in form of a more informative
> writeup
> > or review. They include:
> > - Analyzing Gender Stereotyping in Bollywood Movies
> >
> > - Breaking the glass ceiling on Wikipedia| journal
> >
> > - Breastfeeding, Authority, and Genre: Women's Ethos in Wikipedia and
> > Blogs
> >
> > - Cyberfeminism on Wikipedia: Visibility and deliberation in feminist
> > Wikiprojects
> >
> > - Gender and deletion on Wikipedia
> >
> > - Gender imbalance and Wikipedia
> >
> > - Gender Markers in Wikipedia Usernames
> >
> > - How do students trust Wikipedia? An examination across genders
> >
> > - Investigating the Gender Pronoun Gap in Wikipedia
> >
> > - It’s Not What You Think: Gender Bias in Information about Fortune
> > 1000 CEOs on Wikipedia
> >
> > - Mapping and Bridging the Gender Gap: An Ethnographic Study of Indian
> > Wikipedians and Their Motivations to Contribute
> >
> > - People Who Can Take It: How Women Wikipedians Negotiate and Navigate
> > Safety
> >
> > - Redressing Gender Inequities on Wikipedia Through an Editathon
> >
> > - Similar Gaps, Different Origins? Women Readers and Editors at Greek
> > Wikipedia
> >
> > - Simulation Experiments on (the Absence of) Ratings Bias in
> Reputation
> > Systems
> >
> > - The Gendered Presentation of Professions on Wikipedia
> >
> > - Who Counts as a Notable Sociologist on Wikipedia? Gender, Race, and
> > the “Professor Test”
> >
> > - Who Wants to Read This?: A Method for Measuring Topical
> > Representativeness in User Generated Content Systems
> >
> > - Women and Wikipedia. Diversifying Editors and Enhancing Content
> > through Library Edit-a-Thons
> >
> > Masssly and Tilman Bayer
> >
> > [1] Research:Newsletter - Meta[2] WikiResearch (@WikiResearch) on Twitter
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Subject: Digest Footer
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > End of Wiki-research-l Digest, Vol 168, Issue 12
> > ************************************************
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 14:41:09 +1000
> From: "Kerry Raymond" <kerry.raymond(a)gmail.com>
> To: "'Research into Wikimedia content and communities'"
> <wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Wiki-research-l] gender balance of wikipedia citations
> Message-ID: <001001d5596c$fe22a100$fa67e300$(a)gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Yes, that was my thought. It would be difficult to know the sex (or the
> gender) of an author name on a paper. There would inevitably be a lot that
> you could not determine. And certainly in the sciences multi-author pages
> are the norm and even where you did know the sex/gender of all, do you
> assign some part-score? E.g. 0 for all male, 1 for all female, 0.6 for 3
> women and 2 men.
>
> But I am curious why you are asking the question? That the
> writing/research of women is under-represented in Wikipedia citations? If
> so, without conducting any research, I'd say "yes it is under-represented".
> But my reason would be because women are under-represented as
> writers/researchers in the first place. And certainly the older the
> source, the more likely it is to be written by a man. So to investigate
> gender bias in citations in Wikipedia, you would have to estimate the
> proportion of men/women (or at least their outputs) over time in a given
> discipline and then ask the question, "taking into account of the time of
> publication of a citation and the proportion of men/women active in this
> discipline at that time, do Wikipedia citations show a sex/gender basis?".
> Hmm ... very tricky.
>
> I'd be inclined to suggest starting with a much simpler task. Pick a
> discipline (preferably one with a professional society who can tell your
> their estimate of current male/female ratio over (say) the past 5 years),
> limit the Wikipedia articles to topics in that discipline, and limit the
> citations to those published within the last 5 years. Indeed, perhaps
> limiting it to publications that are principally from the same country(s)
> as the professional society from which you get the data (as clearly
> men/women's participation in any discipline can vary with different
> countries for cultural reasons). Then you have some way to gauge whether
> Wikipedia is showing more or less gender bias in its citations than the
> discipline itself exhibits through publication. Quite a challenge!
>
> And of course, it is not Wikipedia that adds citations. It is individual
> contributor who add citations. Does the sex/gender of the contributor have
> any correlation to any observed bias? Again, the task is made more
> difficult because a lot of Wikipedians don't identify their sex/gender.
>
> The other thing to be alert to is the difference in how (I believe)
> Wikipedians cite compared to researchers. As a researcher, I will of course
> be reading papers in my field all the time and what I read will influence
> my subsequent work. Therefore when I write about my research, my citations
> are referring to papers that I have already read and whose authors may be
> familiar to me from their other work, having met them at a conferences,
> private correspondence, etc. However as a Wikipedian, I am only partially
> operating that way (mostly when I write new articles or significantly
> expand them, that is, when I am doing the research). A lot of the time I am
> adding citations relating to content other people (often new users) have
> added/changed without citation. These come up on my watchlist all the time.
> What do I do? Of course I could revert saying "no citation provided", but
> that's not the way to encourage new contributors nor to grow the
> encyclopedia, so if the information seems plausible (not obviously
> vandalism), I will attempt to find a citation for it (using tools like
> Google and other topic-specialise search tools). This is what I call "lucky
> dip" mode of citing as obviously I have no idea what the source was for the
> original contributor. The sources I find from my search may not already be
> known to me (frequently they are not). Or to summarise, IMHO, researchers
> (or Wikipedians in "new content mode") cite a source already known to them
> and whose authors may be known to them and could consciously or
> unconsciously engage in some discrimination in citation based on sex/gender
> or other criteria, whereas Wikipedians in "updating mode" are likely to be
> citing a source not previously known to them and may be happy just to have
> found a source and are unlikely to be spending a lot of their time
> researching the authors of that source to be extent they could then
> consciously or unconsciously exercise discrimination on sex/gender. If I
> invest any extra effort in such a situations, it's probably because the
> wording of the source is a close match to the Wikipedia article which begs
> the question of copyright violation (which needs to be dealt with by
> deletion or rewriting) or being a Wikipedia mirror (which is obviously not
> an acceptable citation).
>
> So I suspect whether a citation was added by the same contributor as the
> content it supports or a subsequent contributor probably makes a difference
> to the likelihood of conscious/unconscious discrimination.
>
> Also, finally, often Wikipedia cites web pages and other sources that do
> not have any individual authorship, e.g. government websites. Remember that
> Wikipedia prefers open citations over paywalled citations and a lot of the
> publications behind paywalls are individually authored.
>
> Your proposed research has a lot of interesting challenges and a number of
> limitations. I'm not saying don't do it, but I am saying start very small
> and see if you can find any evidence to support your hypothesis before
> embarking on a larger study. Because contributor behaviour is what you are
> trying to study, you probably need to do both quantitative and qualitative
> experiments. E.g. I have described the two modes of citation I do, but I
> cannot say how typical my behaviour is.
>
> Kerry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wiki-research-l [mailto:wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org]
> On Behalf Of Leila Zia
> Sent: Friday, 23 August 2019 3:44 AM
> To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities <
> wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Wiki-research-l] gender balance of wikipedia citations
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> A few comments if you're going to go with "proportion of male vs female
> authors of the source material used as citations in arbitrary
> articles":
>
> * Please differentiate between sex (female, male, ...) and gender (woman,
> man, ...). My understanding from your initial email is that you want to
> stay focused on gender, not sex.
>
> * Unless you have reliable sources about the gender of an author, I would
> not recommend trying to predict what the gender is. (As you may know, this
> is not uncommon in social media studies, for example, to predict the gender
> of the author based on their image or their name.
> These approaches introduce biases and social challenges.)
>
> * Re your question about whether WMF has resources to look into this
> question in-house: I can't speak for the whole of WMF, however, I can share
> more about the Research team's direction. As part of our future work, we
> would like to "help contributors monitor violations of core content
> policies and assess information reliability and bias both granularly and at
> scale". [1] The question you proposed can fall under assessing bias in
> content (considering citations as part of the content). I expect us to
> focus first on the piece about violations of core content policies and
> information reliability and come back to the bias question later. As a
> result, we won't have bandwidth to do your proposal in-house at the moment.
> Sorry about that.
>
> I hope this helps.
>
> Best,
> Leila
>
> [1] Section 2 of our Knowledge Integrity whitepaper:
>
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9a/Knowledge_Integrity_-_W…
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 9:57 AM Greg <thenatureprogram(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Kerry,
> > Those are all very interesting ways to look at this. I was thinking
> > mostly along the lines of your first bullet point, but I'd be
> > interested in research in any of those areas.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Greg
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 5:00 AM
> > <wiki-research-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Send Wiki-research-l mailing list submissions to
> > > wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > >
> > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > > wiki-research-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > >
> > > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > > wiki-research-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > >
> > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > > than "Re: Contents of Wiki-research-l digest..."
> > >
> > >
> > > Today's Topics:
> > >
> > > 1. gender balance of wikipedia citations (Greg)
> > > 2. Re: gender balance of wikipedia citations (Kerry Raymond)
> > >
> > >
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > --
> > >
> > > Message: 1
> > > Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 20:19:18 -0700
> > > From: Greg <thenatureprogram(a)gmail.com>
> > > To: wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Subject: [Wiki-research-l] gender balance of wikipedia citations
> > > Message-ID:
> > > <
> > > CAOO9DNtY+oDO5oQrMZeG1NZE-kYNYLWnTD6acHeYTbYeGk8k2Q(a)mail.gmail.com>
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> > >
> > > Greetings!
> > >
> > > I was looking for information about the gender balance of Wikipedia
> > > citations and no one I've asked knows of any work on this topic. Do
> you?
> > >
> > > I think this is an important question.
> > >
> > > Here's what I've learned so far:
> > >
> > > Wikipedia citations are currently in the form of text strings. There
> > > is also an initiative to place citations in an annotated structured
> > > repository (wikicite). I do not know the current status of wikicite
> > > or if/when this could be used for this inquiry--either to examine
> > > all, or a sensible subset of the citations.
> > >
> > > My perspective is that understanding the gender balance is
> > > necessary and urgent. The balance could be better, the same, or
> > > worse than the citation balances we already know, and the scale of the
> effect is quite large.
> > >
> > > Is this a line of inquiry that the wikimedia/wikicite community is
> > > interested in pursuing? If so, what is the best way to get started?
> > > Does the WMF have the resources and interest to look into this matter
> inhouse?
> > >
> > > Thanks for your thoughts.
> > >
> > > Greg
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > > Message: 2
> > > Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:53:45 +1000
> > > From: "Kerry Raymond" <kerry.raymond(a)gmail.com>
> > > To: "'Research into Wikimedia content and communities'"
> > > <wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> > > Subject: Re: [Wiki-research-l] gender balance of wikipedia citations
> > > Message-ID: <00ed01d5589d$33e31ed0$9ba95c70$(a)gmail.com>
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> > >
> > > Could you elaborate a bit more on what you mean by the gender
> > > balance of citations?
> > >
> > > Are you talking about:
> > >
> > > * proportion of male vs female authors of the source material used
> > > as citations in arbitrary articles>
> > > * the quality/quantity of citations in biography articles of men vs
> women?
> > > * the quality/quantity of citations in articles that are gendered by
> > > some other criteria (e.g. reader interest, romantic comedy vs action
> film)?
> > >
> > > Kerry
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Wiki-research-l
> > > [mailto:wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org]
> > > On Behalf Of Greg
> > > Sent: Thursday, 22 August 2019 1:19 PM
> > > To: wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Subject: [Wiki-research-l] gender balance of wikipedia citations
> > >
> > > Greetings!
> > >
> > > I was looking for information about the gender balance of Wikipedia
> > > citations and no one I've asked knows of any work on this topic. Do
> you?
> > >
> > > I think this is an important question.
> > >
> > > Here's what I've learned so far:
> > >
> > > Wikipedia citations are currently in the form of text strings. There
> > > is also an initiative to place citations in an annotated structured
> > > repository (wikicite). I do not know the current status of wikicite
> > > or if/when this could be used for this inquiry--either to examine
> > > all, or a sensible subset of the citations.
> > >
> > > My perspective is that understanding the gender balance is
> > > necessary and urgent. The balance could be better, the same, or
> > > worse than the citation balances we already know, and the scale of the
> effect is quite large.
> > >
> > > Is this a line of inquiry that the wikimedia/wikicite community is
> > > interested in pursuing? If so, what is the best way to get started?
> > > Does the WMF have the resources and interest to look into this matter
> inhouse?
> > >
> > > Thanks for your thoughts.
> > >
> > > Greg
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > > Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > > Subject: Digest Footer
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > > Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > > End of Wiki-research-l Digest, Vol 168, Issue 11
> > > ************************************************
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Wiki-research-l Digest, Vol 168, Issue 13
> ************************************************
>