Yes. That is SOP for studies about biographies and literature in general. On 20 Apr 2016 18:04, "Gerard Meijssen" &lt;gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: us language/country/culture. of _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Hoi, When it is "SOP", why is it that you hear so little about the effects of policies framed in terms of the rates we had or the rates we had in a previous year. The argument that there is a gender gap is getting tired when the argument why it is a problem is only framed in the existence of the gap. It is necessary that we learn how and what improvements are made and maybe how it has an impact on the reader numbers. When there is a demand for articles about women, it could result in more readers for articles about women.. I do welcome a different tack on this issue. The arguments so far are getting stale. Thanks, GerardM On 20 April 2016 at 13:11, John Mark Vandenberg &lt;jayvdb(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: wrote: makes query databases https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

The argument that there is no demand for such articles is itself a stale one, used to frequently justify gender disparities in all sorts of fields and media. There is a clear demand for such articles. The media reaction to Emily Temple-Wood's campaign to write articles about female scientists is only the most recent and prominent example illustrating that the audience is there.

Our traditional way of creating article is based on the interests of the contributors. This produces skewed total result, and this becomes more evident on a smaller version like svwp, then on bigger. We have long come to the conclusion that we will never be able to fill categories like towns in Mali and basketballplayer in Brazil, where we have had something like less then 10% of entries then the same categories on enwp (or frwp) Wikidata can be of help evening out, but on svwp we have (also since long) said we must work and have a more systematic and deliberate approach to fill out "empty spaces" We therefore love Lsjbot which now generates several million good and comprehensive articles on geographical entities all over the world from the most complete database that exists, and where areas like Africa is getting exactly the same attention like a Nordic country. It is completely unrealistic to think that the few contributors on svwp would ever create the now existing 250000 article on entities on Canada or 16500 entries in Antartica. But the bias in the source means Djibuti only gets 4000 and Camerun 9000 but it is none the less a huge improvement. For articles on woman/men project are being run by wmse and it now exist a group of dedicated contributors generating articles on women. I am all fascinated of sources being used, specially to get entries of women from middle of 19-th century. All famous ballet dancers in Copenhagen in 1850. All women who had local fame in Finland around 1860, including local healers etc. They have now created many thousands articles and getting the rate of articles up to 20% of total (25% of the number for men) So I believe skewness is becoming an important issue and that we need to adress oit even if it means to let go the "holy rule" only manual created article are "real" articles, it is the need of our readers who should have priority. Anders [1] list of article generated by country this far: https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kategori:Robotskapade_geografiartiklar [2] latest article generated just now a river in Fiji https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mbau_Creek_%28vattendrag,_lat_-16,50,_long_17… Den 2016-04-20 kl. 23:30, skrev Florence Devouard: _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Den 2016-04-21 kl. 08:21, skrev Gerard Meijssen: I do not know, as I am not directly involved. What I do know is that Sverker, Lsjbot creator is one of the most clever persons I ever met, and that he knows well of Wikidata and that all expertise on Wikidata on svwp has been involved in the design I would suggest you ask Sverker directly (and offlist) I think you clever guys on Wikidata can learn a lot from his insights Anders On 21 April 2016 at 07:48, Anders Wennersten &lt;mail(a)anderswennersten.se&gt; _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>