MIT Technology Review: "Despite well-publicized efforts to promote equality, Wikipedia articles are deeply biased against women, say computer scientists who have analysed six different language versions of the online encyclopedia."
http://www.technologyreview.com/view/534616/computational-linguistics-reveal...
I think this one is worth looking beyond the headline.
There are two specific areas where we fail, in the language we use when we write about women and in the relative lack of links to articles on women.
The two areas where the study indicates we are doing OK are the two where we have put in a lot of work over recent years, covering the men and women in the same ratio as those benchmark sites, and putting women on the main page. Of course those areas are only OK if we accept that our task as a tertiary source is to reflect but not magnify the skews in the secondary sources.
it would be good to know if the relative paucity of links to articles on women was simply down to fewer of the mentions of women being linked, or we had a deeper problem in that women were less likely to be mentioned in other articles. One problem is rather easier to fix than another, as a community we have been looking for new "entry level" tasks for some time, and adding more links to underlined articles could easily be one of them. Especially if we can get lists of "articles with few incoming links but multiple other articles that appear to mention the subject". I think I'll file a bot request for that.
Regards
Jonathan/WereSpielChequers
On 2 Feb 2015, at 22:12, Rob gamaliel8@gmail.com wrote:
MIT Technology Review: "Despite well-publicized efforts to promote equality, Wikipedia articles are deeply biased against women, say computer scientists who have analysed six different language versions of the online encyclopedia."
http://www.technologyreview.com/view/534616/computational-linguistics-reveal...
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Hi, I think that there is a problem of not creating articles about women who are notable in there own right but are mentioned in articles of family members.
It is not uncommon to do use Wikipedias search for a notable woman and find a mention of their name in articles about a family member. It can happen the other way too, but I think there is still more of a a bias towards thinking woman who are notable are daughters or wives of notable men and looking for that link.
So, I encourage everyone to look for the link both ways equally.
Sydney On Feb 4, 2015 7:07 PM, "WereSpielChequers" werespielchequers@gmail.com wrote:
I think this one is worth looking beyond the headline.
There are two specific areas where we fail, in the language we use when we write about women and in the relative lack of links to articles on women.
The two areas where the study indicates we are doing OK are the two where we have put in a lot of work over recent years, covering the men and women in the same ratio as those benchmark sites, and putting women on the main page. Of course those areas are only OK if we accept that our task as a tertiary source is to reflect but not magnify the skews in the secondary sources.
it would be good to know if the relative paucity of links to articles on women was simply down to fewer of the mentions of women being linked, or we had a deeper problem in that women were less likely to be mentioned in other articles. One problem is rather easier to fix than another, as a community we have been looking for new "entry level" tasks for some time, and adding more links to underlined articles could easily be one of them. Especially if we can get lists of "articles with few incoming links but multiple other articles that appear to mention the subject". I think I'll file a bot request for that.
Regards
Jonathan/WereSpielChequers
On 2 Feb 2015, at 22:12, Rob gamaliel8@gmail.com wrote:
MIT Technology Review: "Despite well-publicized efforts to promote equality, Wikipedia articles are deeply biased against women, say computer scientists who have analysed six different language versions of the online encyclopedia."
http://www.technologyreview.com/view/534616/computational-linguistics-reveal...
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
visit:
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap