Greg,
Thanks for worrying. This is a known problem and yes, Wikipedia contributes
to the Gendergap in citations and no, it's not an easy fix, since it is the
fault of systemic bias in academia. So fewer women are head author on
scientific publications, and it is generally only the head author that gets
cited on Wikipedia. This is not just a problem with written works in the
field of politics. I spend most of my time working on paintings and their
documented catalogs, so generally I only notice and fix this problem in art
catalogs. Women rarely appear as lead author mentioned. I will always add
them in to descriptions when I add items for their works on Wikidata, but I
can not always find them! Sometimes I can't even create items for them
because all I have is a name and a work and nothing else available online
anywhere. You see this most often with women who spent entire careers
working at a single institution and the institution doesn't bother to
promote their work or even list them in exhibition catalogs. With luck
there might be a local obituary, but not always. If you have suggestions
how to set up a Wikiproject to tackle this it would be a good idea. In my
onwiki experience the Women-in-Red community can be very positive in their
response to gendergap-related issues for women writers.
Jane
On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 6:17 AM Greg <thenatureprogram(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks, WSC. All very interesting.
I've been thinking about Wiklpedia citations less in terms of kudos and
more in terms of a feedback loop. The cited sources get a significant
amount of attention (1 click per 200 pageviews is the number I saw
recently). When I imagine total Wikipedia traffic, that's huge. How many
students are finding sources this way? How many academics? And how many of
these citations are finding their way back into academic publications via
this mechanism?
Assuming this is happening to some degree, the gender imbalance of the
citations is also reflected. If the Wikipedia imbalance is the same as the
one in academia, that's one thing; if it is better on Wikipedia than it is
in academia, that's reason to celebrate; if the balance is worse, that's
concerning. In fact, if the gender imbalance conforms to my fears instead
of my hopes, and is magnified by the massive website traffic, I imagine it
could even explain the growth in the citation disparity researchers note in
their study of political science texts. (I link to that study in a previous
post; it was mentioned in the Washington Post recently)
There is a very real possibility that Wikipedia is making the citation
gender gap worse. I think we need to understand what is happening and take
immediate action if the news is not good.
Greg
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l