The Postcolonial Digital Humanities tumbler did a great comic on this:
http://dhpoco.tumblr.com/post/48828130277/were-full-maybe-you-should-join-t
he-american
All best,
Melanie
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Melanie Kill
Asst Professor of English
University of Maryland
2119 Tawes Hall
College Park, MD 20742
mkill@umd.edu | @melaniekill
>Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:21:36 -0700
>From: Sarah Stierch <sarah.stierch@gmail.com>
>To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
> <gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>
>Subject: [Gendergap] [PRESS] Women Novelists Wikipedia: Female Authors
> Absent From Site's 'American Novelists' Page?
>Message-ID: <51786900.50904@gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
>
>
> From The Huffington Post
>
>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/24/women-novelists-wikipedia-female-
>authors-american_n_3149345.html
>
>Attention female authors: you may be being segregated from your male
>peers on Wikipedia. On the online encyclopedia's "American Novelists"
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_novelists> page, women
>authors are hard to find. Instead they have been filed primarily under
>"American Women Novelists."
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_women_novelists>
>
>/Vanity Fair/ contributing editor Elissa Schappell
><https://twitter.com/ElissaSchappell> made this observation and posted
>on Facebook Wednesday:
>
> Women Writers take heed, you are being erased on Wikipedia. It would
> appear that in order to make room for male writers, women novelists
> (such as Amy Tan, Harper Lee, Donna Tartt and 300 others) have been
> moved off the "American Novelists" page and into the "American Women
> Novelists" category. Not the back of the bus, or the kiddie table
> exactly--except of course--when you google "American Novelists" the
> list that appears is almost exclusively men (3,387 men). The
> explanation on the pages is that the list of American Novelists is
> too long, therefore sub-categories are necessary.
> Idea: What about, "American Novelists with Penises" "American
> Novelists Who Are Vastly Over-Rated and Over-Paid" or "American
> Novelists Who Aren't Being Read But Should Be" (Here you'd find a
> lot of women, people of color...)
>
> Want to see where you're sitting for eternity? Take a peek.
>
>A disclaimer at the top of the American Novelists page reads, "This
>category may require frequent maintenance to avoid becoming too large.
>It should directly contain very few, if any, articles and should mainly
>contain subcategories." Schappell suggests that Wikipedia dealt with
>this space issue by moving the female authors off the page.
>
>The Huffington Post reached out to Wikipedia for a response to
>Schappell's claims but so far has not heard back.
>
>This is far from the first time that someone has expressed ire over the
>"second-class" treatment of female authors. VIDA, an organization
>dedicated to women in literary arts, pointed out that in 2011 the New
>York Times Book Review <http://www.vidaweb.org/the-2011-count> printed
>reviews of 520 male authors' books and only 273 books written by women.
>
>In a recent blog post on The Huffington Post, author Liza Palmer wrote
>about thedouble standard that exists
><http://www.huffingtonpost.com/liza-palmer/all-books-are-equal-but-s_b_313
>1794.html> in
>the literary world:
>
> All too often, when a woman writes a book about family and
> relationships the reader will sigh that she felt the narrator's
> inner monologues were "whiny" whereas when a male writer
> contemplates these same topics he is being "introspective." If a
> female writer uses humor in her dialogue she will be dismissed as
> "snarky", whereas if a male writer uses humor, he has a "biting
> wit." So called chick-lit writers get pinned with "predictable"
> endings, while male writers writing about the same topics have
> endings that are "satisfying."
>
>Perhaps it's time that Wikipedia realized that both men and women are
>great American novelists and should show up when you search for them.
>
>
>--
>/Sarah Stierch/*
>Wikimedia Foundation Program Evaluation Community Coordinator
>*Donate
><http://wikimediafoundation.org/w/index.php?title=Donate/en&utm_source=&ut
>m_medium=&utm_campaign=&language=en&uselang=en&country=US&referrer=http%3A
>%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Furl%3Fsa%3Dt%26rct%3Dj%26q%3D%26esrc%3Ds%26source%3
>Dweb%26cd%3D1%26ved%3D0CDMQFjAA%26url%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fdonate.wikipedi
>a.org%252F%26ei%3DYpsET93HN6isiQLIoJjSDg%26usg%3DAFQjCNG-7hzT9rkEvAjlNqBIO
>Q1ZDIpdYA>
>today and keep it free!
>
>Visit me on Wikipedia <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch>!
>
>
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL:
><http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20130424/dc717
>beb/attachment-0001.html>
>-------------- next part --------------
>_______________________________________________
>Wmfcc-l mailing list
>Wmfcc-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wmfcc-l
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 3
>Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 13:13:00 +0200
>From: María Sefidari <kewlshrink@yahoo.es>
>To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
> <gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>
>Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [PRESS] Women Novelists Wikipedia: Female
> Authors Absent From Site's 'American Novelists' Page?
>Message-ID: <2FCB679A-C6D9-4DFC-A9B9-BE7793D5990B@yahoo.es>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>The New York Times also has an article about this:
>
>http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/opinion/sunday/wikipedias-sexism-toward-
>female-novelists.html
>
>Kind regards,
>
>María
>
>Enviado desde mi dispositivo móvil
>
>El 25/04/2013, a las 01:21, Sarah Stierch <sarah.stierch@gmail.com>
>escribió:
>
>>
>> From The Huffington Post
>>
>>
>>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/24/women-novelists-wikipedia-female
>>-authors-american_n_3149345.html
>>
>> Attention female authors: you may be being segregated from your male
>>peers on Wikipedia. On the online encyclopedia's "American Novelists"
>>page, women authors are hard to find. Instead they have been filed
>>primarily under "American Women Novelists."
>>
>> Vanity Fair contributing editor Elissa Schappell made this observation
>>and posted on Facebook Wednesday:
>> Women Writers take heed, you are being erased on Wikipedia. It would
>>appear that in order to make room for male writers, women novelists
>>(such as Amy Tan, Harper Lee, Donna Tartt and 300 others) have been
>>moved off the "American Novelists" page and into the "American Women
>>Novelists" category. Not the back of the bus, or the kiddie table
>>exactly--except of course--when you google "American Novelists" the list
>>that appears is almost exclusively men (3,387 men). The explanation on
>>the pages is that the list of American Novelists is too long, therefore
>>sub-categories are necessary.
>> Idea: What about, "American Novelists with Penises" "American Novelists
>>Who Are Vastly Over-Rated and Over-Paid" or "American Novelists Who
>>Aren't Being Read But Should Be" (Here you'd find a lot of women, people
>>of color...)
>> Want to see where you're sitting for eternity? Take a peek.
>>
>> A disclaimer at the top of the American Novelists page reads, "This
>>category may require frequent maintenance to avoid becoming too large.
>>It should directly contain very few, if any, articles and should mainly
>>contain subcategories." Schappell suggests that Wikipedia dealt with
>>this space issue by moving the female authors off the page.
>>
>> The Huffington Post reached out to Wikipedia for a response to
>>Schappell's claims but so far has not heard back.
>>
>> This is far from the first time that someone has expressed ire over the
>>"second-class" treatment of female authors. VIDA, an organization
>>dedicated to women in literary arts, pointed out that in 2011 the New
>>York Times Book Review printed reviews of 520 male authors' books and
>>only 273 books written by women.
>>
>> In a recent blog post on The Huffington Post, author Liza Palmer wrote
>>about thedouble standard that exists in the literary world:
>> All too often, when a woman writes a book about family and
>>relationships the reader will sigh that she felt the narrator's inner
>>monologues were "whiny" whereas when a male writer contemplates these
>>same topics he is being "introspective." If a female writer uses humor
>>in her dialogue she will be dismissed as "snarky", whereas if a male
>>writer uses humor, he has a "biting wit." So called chick-lit writers
>>get pinned with "predictable" endings, while male writers writing about
>>the same topics have endings that are "satisfying."
>> Perhaps it's time that Wikipedia realized that both men and women are
>>great American novelists and should show up when you search for them.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sarah Stierch
>> Wikimedia Foundation Program Evaluation Community Coordinator
>> Donate today and keep it free!
>>
>> Visit me on Wikipedia!
>>
>>
>> <Attached Message Part>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL:
><http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20130425/34856
>8d6/attachment.html>
>
>------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Gendergap mailing list
>Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
>
>End of Gendergap Digest, Vol 27, Issue 18
>*****************************************
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap