Hi everyone, I have been checking how we are doing on closing the gendergap on biographies of women artists for a while. Part of the problem is collecting the data, and Wikidata is a great help. Unfortunately there are still lots of women artists with Wikidata items without any statements at all, but since this is also true for male artists, looking at the stats is useful. What I did was to collect data for all female artists and all male artist and came up with percentages for painters versus various matched data bases in Mix-n-Match.
Thanks to our push on Art & Feminism, the score is better (12.5%) on Wikimedia projects than for the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (10.1%). The ODNB is currently the only database that is completely matched. The other databases are still being matched, but still, it's interesting to see how we currently stand with those. Here are the scores:
Wikidata painters - 12.5%: 45016 male, 6430 female RKD - 11.4%: 21809 male, 2795 female United List of Artist Names - 8.6%: 32993 male, 3091 female BBC Your Paintings - 7.7%: 6535 male, 545 female Oxford Dictionary of National Biography - 10.1%: 49419 male, 5581 female
http://tools.wmflabs.org/mix-n-match/
These stats were gathered this morning using Autolist: http://tools.wmflabs.org/autolist/autolist1.html
Hi Jane, great investigation.
I like this idea of looking at the gender gap by-profession, and seeing if it is closing at any rate by sampling it over time. In fact, I put in a project for the "inspire campaign" to automate recording these statistics over time for all professions. It'd be great to have your endorsement, and if the project is funded we can compare how painters fair against other professions.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/WIGI:_Wikipedia_Gender_Index_...
Make a great day, Max Klein ‽ http://notconfusing.com/
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 4:51 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone, I have been checking how we are doing on closing the gendergap on biographies of women artists for a while. Part of the problem is collecting the data, and Wikidata is a great help. Unfortunately there are still lots of women artists with Wikidata items without any statements at all, but since this is also true for male artists, looking at the stats is useful. What I did was to collect data for all female artists and all male artist and came up with percentages for painters versus various matched data bases in Mix-n-Match.
Thanks to our push on Art & Feminism, the score is better (12.5%) on Wikimedia projects than for the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (10.1%). The ODNB is currently the only database that is completely matched. The other databases are still being matched, but still, it's interesting to see how we currently stand with those. Here are the scores:
Wikidata painters - 12.5%: 45016 male, 6430 female RKD - 11.4%: 21809 male, 2795 female United List of Artist Names - 8.6%: 32993 male, 3091 female BBC Your Paintings - 7.7%: 6535 male, 545 female Oxford Dictionary of National Biography - 10.1%: 49419 male, 5581 female
http://tools.wmflabs.org/mix-n-match/
These stats were gathered this morning using Autolist: http://tools.wmflabs.org/autolist/autolist1.html
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Max, Hmm, interesting proposal! I am not sure whether it can be very useful as it reads now. I have thought a lot about this and have looked at the concept "painter" pretty carefully. Yes there is a gendergap in the data as it is generated on a daily basis, but no, I am not convinced this is related to the Wikipedia gendergap in the sense of "you need women to write biographies of women". In fact, some of the most thoughtful biographies of women are written by men and you could maybe say that our biographies of men may improve if we get more women on board editing. There is however, a tipping point when it comes to writing about women on Wikipedia. In my work on female stub creation I have seen lots of examples where the stub existed and was deleted due to notability concerns. Lots of experienced editors (myself included) will only bother to write an article, even if it's just a stub, when the likelihood of having the article stick is judged to be at some mysterious level. I think we need some policy guidelines and some stats about how many articles about women were previously deleted. This may help us determine what the "academic bias barrier" is in accumulating female biographies in general.
When I think of what I would like in terms of "Wikipedia Gender Index Tools", I would like to see, per country of birth or per occupation or per external database, how the percentage of female vs male is across language Wikipedias. Already I am finding that the Swedish Wikipedia has the highest percentage of female vs male across the board in any arts field, followed by the Russian Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia is somewhere in the middle and the Italians are the biggest loser (but maybe also with the longest history of art historical terms that are documented, which could lead to a higher percentage of men across the arts born before 1800, but perhaps higher after 1850 - who knows?).
Once you start drilling down into the data you find all sorts of really weird conundrums! Jane
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Maximilian Klein isalix@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Jane, great investigation.
I like this idea of looking at the gender gap by-profession, and seeing if it is closing at any rate by sampling it over time. In fact, I put in a project for the "inspire campaign" to automate recording these statistics over time for all professions. It'd be great to have your endorsement, and if the project is funded we can compare how painters fair against other professions.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/WIGI:_Wikipedia_Gender_Index_...
Make a great day, Max Klein ‽ http://notconfusing.com/
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 4:51 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone, I have been checking how we are doing on closing the gendergap on biographies of women artists for a while. Part of the problem is collecting the data, and Wikidata is a great help. Unfortunately there are still lots of women artists with Wikidata items without any statements at all, but since this is also true for male artists, looking at the stats is useful. What I did was to collect data for all female artists and all male artist and came up with percentages for painters versus various matched data bases in Mix-n-Match.
Thanks to our push on Art & Feminism, the score is better (12.5%) on Wikimedia projects than for the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (10.1%). The ODNB is currently the only database that is completely matched. The other databases are still being matched, but still, it's interesting to see how we currently stand with those. Here are the scores:
Wikidata painters - 12.5%: 45016 male, 6430 female RKD - 11.4%: 21809 male, 2795 female United List of Artist Names - 8.6%: 32993 male, 3091 female BBC Your Paintings - 7.7%: 6535 male, 545 female Oxford Dictionary of National Biography - 10.1%: 49419 male, 5581 female
http://tools.wmflabs.org/mix-n-match/
These stats were gathered this morning using Autolist: http://tools.wmflabs.org/autolist/autolist1.html
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Jane,
Thanks for your thoughtful response. I agree completely that mixing up editor and biography gender biases is dangerous and maybe not true. On the statistics side its really intriguing to read about your much closer analyses of different Wikipedias. I would like have computers help humans make more of these types of discoveries. Thanks for all your effort and feedback.
Make a great day, Max Klein ‽ http://notconfusing.com/
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 6:09 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Max, Hmm, interesting proposal! I am not sure whether it can be very useful as it reads now. I have thought a lot about this and have looked at the concept "painter" pretty carefully. Yes there is a gendergap in the data as it is generated on a daily basis, but no, I am not convinced this is related to the Wikipedia gendergap in the sense of "you need women to write biographies of women". In fact, some of the most thoughtful biographies of women are written by men and you could maybe say that our biographies of men may improve if we get more women on board editing. There is however, a tipping point when it comes to writing about women on Wikipedia. In my work on female stub creation I have seen lots of examples where the stub existed and was deleted due to notability concerns. Lots of experienced editors (myself included) will only bother to write an article, even if it's just a stub, when the likelihood of having the article stick is judged to be at some mysterious level. I think we need some policy guidelines and some stats about how many articles about women were previously deleted. This may help us determine what the "academic bias barrier" is in accumulating female biographies in general.
When I think of what I would like in terms of "Wikipedia Gender Index Tools", I would like to see, per country of birth or per occupation or per external database, how the percentage of female vs male is across language Wikipedias. Already I am finding that the Swedish Wikipedia has the highest percentage of female vs male across the board in any arts field, followed by the Russian Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia is somewhere in the middle and the Italians are the biggest loser (but maybe also with the longest history of art historical terms that are documented, which could lead to a higher percentage of men across the arts born before 1800, but perhaps higher after 1850 - who knows?).
Once you start drilling down into the data you find all sorts of really weird conundrums! Jane
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Maximilian Klein isalix@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Jane, great investigation.
I like this idea of looking at the gender gap by-profession, and seeing if it is closing at any rate by sampling it over time. In fact, I put in a project for the "inspire campaign" to automate recording these statistics over time for all professions. It'd be great to have your endorsement, and if the project is funded we can compare how painters fair against other professions.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/WIGI:_Wikipedia_Gender_Index_...
Make a great day, Max Klein ‽ http://notconfusing.com/
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 4:51 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone, I have been checking how we are doing on closing the gendergap on biographies of women artists for a while. Part of the problem is collecting the data, and Wikidata is a great help. Unfortunately there are still lots of women artists with Wikidata items without any statements at all, but since this is also true for male artists, looking at the stats is useful. What I did was to collect data for all female artists and all male artist and came up with percentages for painters versus various matched data bases in Mix-n-Match.
Thanks to our push on Art & Feminism, the score is better (12.5%) on Wikimedia projects than for the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (10.1%). The ODNB is currently the only database that is completely matched. The other databases are still being matched, but still, it's interesting to see how we currently stand with those. Here are the scores:
Wikidata painters - 12.5%: 45016 male, 6430 female RKD - 11.4%: 21809 male, 2795 female United List of Artist Names - 8.6%: 32993 male, 3091 female BBC Your Paintings - 7.7%: 6535 male, 545 female Oxford Dictionary of National Biography - 10.1%: 49419 male, 5581 female
http://tools.wmflabs.org/mix-n-match/
These stats were gathered this morning using Autolist: http://tools.wmflabs.org/autolist/autolist1.html
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Hello,
It made me very proud to read this:
"Already I am finding that the Swedish Wikipedia has the highest percentage of female vs male across the board in any arts field, followed by the Russian Wikipedia."
But where do these figures come from and can you be more exact? Thanks in advance.
Also, this thread is very interesting. I am following it closely.
Best wishes,
Lennart Guldbrandsson
070 - 207 80 05 http://www.elementx.se Skriv som ett proffs - min senaste bok Få regelbundna skrivtips direkt till din inkorg
@aliasHannibal - på Twitter
"Tänk dig en värld där varje människa på den här planeten får fri tillgång till världens samlade kunskap. Det är vårt mål."
Jimmy Wales
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2015 19:17:49 -0700 From: isalix@gmail.com To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Closing the gendergap in biographies on Wikipedia
Jane,
Thanks for your thoughtful response. I agree completely that mixing up editor and biography gender biases is dangerous and maybe not true. On the statistics side its really intriguing to read about your much closer analyses of different Wikipedias. I would like have computers help humans make more of these types of discoveries. Thanks for all your effort and feedback. Make a great day, Max Klein ‽ http://notconfusing.com/
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 6:09 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote: Max,Hmm, interesting proposal! I am not sure whether it can be very useful as it reads now. I have thought a lot about this and have looked at the concept "painter" pretty carefully. Yes there is a gendergap in the data as it is generated on a daily basis, but no, I am not convinced this is related to the Wikipedia gendergap in the sense of "you need women to write biographies of women". In fact, some of the most thoughtful biographies of women are written by men and you could maybe say that our biographies of men may improve if we get more women on board editing. There is however, a tipping point when it comes to writing about women on Wikipedia. In my work on female stub creation I have seen lots of examples where the stub existed and was deleted due to notability concerns. Lots of experienced editors (myself included) will only bother to write an article, even if it's just a stub, when the likelihood of having the article stick is judged to be at some mysterious level. I think we need some policy guidelines and some stats about how many articles about women were previously deleted. This may help us determine what the "academic bias barrier" is in accumulating female biographies in general. When I think of what I would like in terms of "Wikipedia Gender Index Tools", I would like to see, per country of birth or per occupation or per external database, how the percentage of female vs male is across language Wikipedias. Already I am finding that the Swedish Wikipedia has the highest percentage of female vs male across the board in any arts field, followed by the Russian Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia is somewhere in the middle and the Italians are the biggest loser (but maybe also with the longest history of art historical terms that are documented, which could lead to a higher percentage of men across the arts born before 1800, but perhaps higher after 1850 - who knows?). Once you start drilling down into the data you find all sorts of really weird conundrums!Jane On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Maximilian Klein isalix@gmail.com wrote: Hi Jane, great investigation.
I like this idea of looking at the gender gap by-profession, and seeing if it is closing at any rate by sampling it over time. In fact, I put in a project for the "inspire campaign" to automate recording these statistics over time for all professions. It'd be great to have your endorsement, and if the project is funded we can compare how painters fair against other professions.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/WIGI:_Wikipedia_Gender_Index_... Make a great day, Max Klein ‽ http://notconfusing.com/
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 4:51 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote: Hi everyone, I have been checking how we are doing on closing the gendergap on biographies of women artists for a while. Part of the problem is collecting the data, and Wikidata is a great help. Unfortunately there are still lots of women artists with Wikidata items without any statements at all, but since this is also true for male artists, looking at the stats is useful. What I did was to collect data for all female artists and all male artist and came up with percentages for painters versus various matched data bases in Mix-n-Match. Thanks to our push on Art & Feminism, the score is better (12.5%) on Wikimedia projects than for the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (10.1%). The ODNB is currently the only database that is completely matched. The other databases are still being matched, but still, it's interesting to see how we currently stand with those. Here are the scores: Wikidata painters - 12.5%: 45016 male, 6430 femaleRKD - 11.4%: 21809 male, 2795 femaleUnited List of Artist Names - 8.6%: 32993 male, 3091 femaleBBC Your Paintings - 7.7%: 6535 male, 545 femaleOxford Dictionary of National Biography - 10.1%: 49419 male, 5581 female http://tools.wmflabs.org/mix-n-match/
These stats were gathered this morning using Autolist:http://tools.wmflabs.org/autolist/autolist1.html
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Lennart, You have every reason to be proud and I honestly don't know why, I can only report the "what". It takes a bit of handwork, but after downloading all of the matched databases from Mix-n-Match, you can then take dumps from Wikidata using autolist per language that include sitelinks to those languages. My suspicion is that at the end of the day, if you are playing the numbers game, the English Wikipedia wins at having the most women. However, those are mostly women who were active in the US. Even Britain is missing huge sweeps of notable women in the English Wikipedia (and see the work for the scientists as an example). What the Swedes have I believe, that other language wikis lack for some reason, is a goal for coverage of notable topics regardless of priority, and then, as an extra step, the desire to cover these at some basic minimum in Wikidata. Otherwise I can't explain it. Perhaps svwiki has successfully absorbed complete versions of various international dictionaries of national biography for other nations?
To be clear, when I say "percentage of women", I mean "percentage measurable with autolist from Wikidata of female biographies in any arts field as a percentage of total human biographies in that field of artists on that Wikipedia". Wikidata is far from complete, and not all biographies have been fleshed out with 4+ statements on Wikidata.
Jane
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Lennart Guldbrandsson < l_guldbrandsson@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
It made me very proud to read this:
"Already I am finding that the Swedish Wikipedia has the highest percentage of female vs male across the board in any arts field, followed by the Russian Wikipedia."
But where do these figures come from and can you be more exact? Thanks in advance.
Also, this thread is very interesting. I am following it closely.
Best wishes,
Lennart Guldbrandsson
070 - 207 80 05 http://www.*elementx*.se http://www.elementx.se *Skriv som ett proffs http://www.elementx.se/skriv-som-ett-proffs/* - min senaste bok Få regelbundna skrivtips direkt till din inkorg http://elementx.us7.list-manage1.com/subscribe?u=ab2080465c6cd11b5b253f940&id=8a2b974a62
@aliasHannibal http://twitter.com/AliasHannibal - på Twitter
"*Tänk dig en värld där varje människa på den här planeten får fri tillgång till **världens samlade kunskap* http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Huvudsida*. Det är vårt mål.*" Jimmy Wales
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2015 19:17:49 -0700 From: isalix@gmail.com To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Closing the gendergap in biographies on Wikipedia
Jane,
Thanks for your thoughtful response. I agree completely that mixing up editor and biography gender biases is dangerous and maybe not true. On the statistics side its really intriguing to read about your much closer analyses of different Wikipedias. I would like have computers help humans make more of these types of discoveries. Thanks for all your effort and feedback.
Make a great day, Max Klein ‽ http://notconfusing.com/
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 6:09 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Max, Hmm, interesting proposal! I am not sure whether it can be very useful as it reads now. I have thought a lot about this and have looked at the concept "painter" pretty carefully. Yes there is a gendergap in the data as it is generated on a daily basis, but no, I am not convinced this is related to the Wikipedia gendergap in the sense of "you need women to write biographies of women". In fact, some of the most thoughtful biographies of women are written by men and you could maybe say that our biographies of men may improve if we get more women on board editing. There is however, a tipping point when it comes to writing about women on Wikipedia. In my work on female stub creation I have seen lots of examples where the stub existed and was deleted due to notability concerns. Lots of experienced editors (myself included) will only bother to write an article, even if it's just a stub, when the likelihood of having the article stick is judged to be at some mysterious level. I think we need some policy guidelines and some stats about how many articles about women were previously deleted. This may help us determine what the "academic bias barrier" is in accumulating female biographies in general.
When I think of what I would like in terms of "Wikipedia Gender Index Tools", I would like to see, per country of birth or per occupation or per external database, how the percentage of female vs male is across language Wikipedias. Already I am finding that the Swedish Wikipedia has the highest percentage of female vs male across the board in any arts field, followed by the Russian Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia is somewhere in the middle and the Italians are the biggest loser (but maybe also with the longest history of art historical terms that are documented, which could lead to a higher percentage of men across the arts born before 1800, but perhaps higher after 1850 - who knows?).
Once you start drilling down into the data you find all sorts of really weird conundrums! Jane
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Maximilian Klein isalix@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Jane, great investigation.
I like this idea of looking at the gender gap by-profession, and seeing if it is closing at any rate by sampling it over time. In fact, I put in a project for the "inspire campaign" to automate recording these statistics over time for all professions. It'd be great to have your endorsement, and if the project is funded we can compare how painters fair against other professions.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/WIGI:_Wikipedia_Gender_Index_...
Make a great day, Max Klein ‽ http://notconfusing.com/
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 4:51 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone, I have been checking how we are doing on closing the gendergap on biographies of women artists for a while. Part of the problem is collecting the data, and Wikidata is a great help. Unfortunately there are still lots of women artists with Wikidata items without any statements at all, but since this is also true for male artists, looking at the stats is useful. What I did was to collect data for all female artists and all male artist and came up with percentages for painters versus various matched data bases in Mix-n-Match.
Thanks to our push on Art & Feminism, the score is better (12.5%) on Wikimedia projects than for the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (10.1%). The ODNB is currently the only database that is completely matched. The other databases are still being matched, but still, it's interesting to see how we currently stand with those. Here are the scores:
Wikidata painters - 12.5%: 45016 male, 6430 female RKD - 11.4%: 21809 male, 2795 female United List of Artist Names - 8.6%: 32993 male, 3091 female BBC Your Paintings - 7.7%: 6535 male, 545 female Oxford Dictionary of National Biography - 10.1%: 49419 male, 5581 female
http://tools.wmflabs.org/mix-n-match/
These stats were gathered this morning using Autolist: http://tools.wmflabs.org/autolist/autolist1.html
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Ah, thanks. That explains it a little bit further. Well, the why is always more complex than what or how. Perhaps it's svwiki's early adopters and bot policies that skew the numbers somewhat. I really appreciate you doing this number crunching.
Best wishes,
Lennart Guldbrandsson
070 - 207 80 05 http://www.elementx.se Skriv som ett proffs - min senaste bok Få regelbundna skrivtips direkt till din inkorg
@aliasHannibal - på Twitter
"Tänk dig en värld där varje människa på den här planeten får fri tillgång till världens samlade kunskap. Det är vårt mål."
Jimmy Wales
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 12:48:00 +0200 From: jane023@gmail.com To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Closing the gendergap in biographies on Wikipedia
Lennart,You have every reason to be proud and I honestly don't know why, I can only report the "what". It takes a bit of handwork, but after downloading all of the matched databases from Mix-n-Match, you can then take dumps from Wikidata using autolist per language that include sitelinks to those languages. My suspicion is that at the end of the day, if you are playing the numbers game, the English Wikipedia wins at having the most women. However, those are mostly women who were active in the US. Even Britain is missing huge sweeps of notable women in the English Wikipedia (and see the work for the scientists as an example). What the Swedes have I believe, that other language wikis lack for some reason, is a goal for coverage of notable topics regardless of priority, and then, as an extra step, the desire to cover these at some basic minimum in Wikidata. Otherwise I can't explain it. Perhaps svwiki has successfully absorbed complete versions of various international dictionaries of national biography for other nations? To be clear, when I say "percentage of women", I mean "percentage measurable with autolist from Wikidata of female biographies in any arts field as a percentage of total human biographies in that field of artists on that Wikipedia". Wikidata is far from complete, and not all biographies have been fleshed out with 4+ statements on Wikidata. Jane On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Lennart Guldbrandsson l_guldbrandsson@hotmail.com wrote:
Hello,
It made me very proud to read this:
"Already I am finding that the Swedish Wikipedia has the highest percentage of female vs male across the board in any arts field, followed by the Russian Wikipedia."
But where do these figures come from and can you be more exact? Thanks in advance.
Also, this thread is very interesting. I am following it closely.
Best wishes,
Lennart Guldbrandsson
070 - 207 80 05 http://www.elementx.se Skriv som ett proffs - min senaste bok Få regelbundna skrivtips direkt till din inkorg
@aliasHannibal - på Twitter
"Tänk dig en värld där varje människa på den här planeten får fri tillgång till världens samlade kunskap. Det är vårt mål."
Jimmy Wales
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2015 19:17:49 -0700 From: isalix@gmail.com To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Closing the gendergap in biographies on Wikipedia
Jane,
Thanks for your thoughtful response. I agree completely that mixing up editor and biography gender biases is dangerous and maybe not true. On the statistics side its really intriguing to read about your much closer analyses of different Wikipedias. I would like have computers help humans make more of these types of discoveries. Thanks for all your effort and feedback. Make a great day, Max Klein ‽ http://notconfusing.com/
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 6:09 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote: Max,Hmm, interesting proposal! I am not sure whether it can be very useful as it reads now. I have thought a lot about this and have looked at the concept "painter" pretty carefully. Yes there is a gendergap in the data as it is generated on a daily basis, but no, I am not convinced this is related to the Wikipedia gendergap in the sense of "you need women to write biographies of women". In fact, some of the most thoughtful biographies of women are written by men and you could maybe say that our biographies of men may improve if we get more women on board editing. There is however, a tipping point when it comes to writing about women on Wikipedia. In my work on female stub creation I have seen lots of examples where the stub existed and was deleted due to notability concerns. Lots of experienced editors (myself included) will only bother to write an article, even if it's just a stub, when the likelihood of having the article stick is judged to be at some mysterious level. I think we need some policy guidelines and some stats about how many articles about women were previously deleted. This may help us determine what the "academic bias barrier" is in accumulating female biographies in general. When I think of what I would like in terms of "Wikipedia Gender Index Tools", I would like to see, per country of birth or per occupation or per external database, how the percentage of female vs male is across language Wikipedias. Already I am finding that the Swedish Wikipedia has the highest percentage of female vs male across the board in any arts field, followed by the Russian Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia is somewhere in the middle and the Italians are the biggest loser (but maybe also with the longest history of art historical terms that are documented, which could lead to a higher percentage of men across the arts born before 1800, but perhaps higher after 1850 - who knows?). Once you start drilling down into the data you find all sorts of really weird conundrums!Jane On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Maximilian Klein isalix@gmail.com wrote: Hi Jane, great investigation.
I like this idea of looking at the gender gap by-profession, and seeing if it is closing at any rate by sampling it over time. In fact, I put in a project for the "inspire campaign" to automate recording these statistics over time for all professions. It'd be great to have your endorsement, and if the project is funded we can compare how painters fair against other professions.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/WIGI:_Wikipedia_Gender_Index_... Make a great day, Max Klein ‽ http://notconfusing.com/
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 4:51 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote: Hi everyone, I have been checking how we are doing on closing the gendergap on biographies of women artists for a while. Part of the problem is collecting the data, and Wikidata is a great help. Unfortunately there are still lots of women artists with Wikidata items without any statements at all, but since this is also true for male artists, looking at the stats is useful. What I did was to collect data for all female artists and all male artist and came up with percentages for painters versus various matched data bases in Mix-n-Match. Thanks to our push on Art & Feminism, the score is better (12.5%) on Wikimedia projects than for the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (10.1%). The ODNB is currently the only database that is completely matched. The other databases are still being matched, but still, it's interesting to see how we currently stand with those. Here are the scores: Wikidata painters - 12.5%: 45016 male, 6430 femaleRKD - 11.4%: 21809 male, 2795 femaleUnited List of Artist Names - 8.6%: 32993 male, 3091 femaleBBC Your Paintings - 7.7%: 6535 male, 545 femaleOxford Dictionary of National Biography - 10.1%: 49419 male, 5581 female http://tools.wmflabs.org/mix-n-match/
These stats were gathered this morning using Autolist:http://tools.wmflabs.org/autolist/autolist1.html
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Hi all,
What we should do is to create a top 100 or top 500 list of women important or much known for each country in the world.
Such list would invite people to write more about them.
If we create an overview, it is more likely that the missing articles and wikidata items will be created.
Romaine
Op dinsdag 31 maart 2015 heeft Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com het volgende geschreven:
Lennart, You have every reason to be proud and I honestly don't know why, I can
only report the "what". It takes a bit of handwork, but after downloading all of the matched databases from Mix-n-Match, you can then take dumps from Wikidata using autolist per language that include sitelinks to those languages. My suspicion is that at the end of the day, if you are playing the numbers game, the English Wikipedia wins at having the most women. However, those are mostly women who were active in the US. Even Britain is missing huge sweeps of notable women in the English Wikipedia (and see the work for the scientists as an example). What the Swedes have I believe, that other language wikis lack for some reason, is a goal for coverage of notable topics regardless of priority, and then, as an extra step, the desire to cover these at some basic minimum in Wikidata. Otherwise I can't explain it. Perhaps svwiki has successfully absorbed complete versions of various international dictionaries of national biography for other nations?
To be clear, when I say "percentage of women", I mean "percentage
measurable with autolist from Wikidata of female biographies in any arts field as a percentage of total human biographies in that field of artists on that Wikipedia". Wikidata is far from complete, and not all biographies have been fleshed out with 4+ statements on Wikidata.
Jane On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Lennart Guldbrandsson <
l_guldbrandsson@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
It made me very proud to read this:
"Already I am finding that the Swedish Wikipedia has the highest
percentage of female vs male across the board in any arts field, followed by the Russian Wikipedia."
But where do these figures come from and can you be more exact? Thanks
in advance.
Also, this thread is very interesting. I am following it closely.
Best wishes,
Lennart Guldbrandsson
070 - 207 80 05 http://www.elementx.se Skriv som ett proffs - min senaste bok Få regelbundna skrivtips direkt till din inkorg
@aliasHannibal - på Twitter
"Tänk dig en värld där varje människa på den här planeten får fri
tillgång till världens samlade kunskap. Det är vårt mål."
Jimmy Wales
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2015 19:17:49 -0700 From: isalix@gmail.com To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Closing the gendergap in biographies on
Wikipedia
Jane,
Thanks for your thoughtful response. I agree completely that mixing up
editor and biography gender biases is dangerous and maybe not true. On the statistics side its really intriguing to read about your much closer analyses of different Wikipedias. I would like have computers help humans make more of these types of discoveries. Thanks for all your effort and feedback.
Make a great day, Max Klein ‽ http://notconfusing.com/
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 6:09 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Max, Hmm, interesting proposal! I am not sure whether it can be very useful
as it reads now. I have thought a lot about this and have looked at the concept "painter" pretty carefully. Yes there is a gendergap in the data as it is generated on a daily basis, but no, I am not convinced this is related to the Wikipedia gendergap in the sense of "you need women to write biographies of women". In fact, some of the most thoughtful biographies of women are written by men and you could maybe say that our biographies of men may improve if we get more women on board editing. There is however, a tipping point when it comes to writing about women on Wikipedia. In my work on female stub creation I have seen lots of examples where the stub existed and was deleted due to notability concerns. Lots of experienced editors (myself included) will only bother to write an article, even if it's just a stub, when the likelihood of having the article stick is judged to be at some mysterious level. I think we need some policy guidelines and some stats about how many articles about women were previously deleted. This may help us determine what the "academic bias barrier" is in accumulating female biographies in general.
When I think of what I would like in terms of "Wikipedia Gender Index
Tools", I would like to see, per country of birth or per occupation or per external database, how the percentage of female vs male is across language Wikipedias. Already I am finding that the Swedish Wikipedia has the highest percentage of female vs male across the board in any arts field, followed by the Russian Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia is somewhere in the middle and the Italians are the biggest loser (but maybe also with the longest history of art historical terms that are documented, which could lead to a higher percentage of men across the arts born before 1800, but perhaps higher after 1850 - who knows?).
Once you start drilling down into the data you find all sorts of really
weird conundrums!
Jane On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Maximilian Klein isalix@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Jane, great investigation.
I like this idea of looking at the gender gap by-profession, and seeing
if it is closing at any rate by sampling it over time. In fact, I put in a project for the "inspire campaign" to automate recording these statistics over time for all professions. It'd be great to have your endorsement, and if the project is funded we can compare how painters fair against other professions.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/WIGI:_Wikipedia_Gender_Index_...
Make a great day, Max Klein ‽ http://notconfusing.com/
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 4:51 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone, I have been checking how we are doing on closing the
gendergap on biographies of women artists for a while. Part of the problem is collecting the data, and Wikidata is a great help. Unfortunately there are still lots of women artists with Wikidata items without any statements at all, but since this is also true for male artists, looking at the stats is useful. What I did was to collect data for all female artists and all male artist and came up with percentages for painters versus various matched data bases in Mix-n-Match.
Thanks to our push on Art & Feminism, the score is better (12.5%) on
Wikimedia projects than for the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (10.1%). The ODNB is currently the only database that is completely matched. The other databases are still being matched, but still, it's interesting to see how we currently stand with those. Here are the scores:
Wikidata painters - 12.5%: 45016 male, 6430 female RKD - 11.4%: 21809 male, 2795 female United List of Artist Names - 8.6%: 32993 male, 3091 female BBC Your Paintings - 7.7%: 6535 male, 545 female Oxford Dictionary of National Biography - 10.1%: 49419 male, 5581 female http://tools.wmflabs.org/mix-n-match/
These stats were gathered this morning using Autolist: http://tools.wmflabs.org/autolist/autolist1.html
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
visit:
Romaine, Yes, I totally agree - we all love lists! Unfortunately it is pretty hard to do this well. I did create some "red link lists" for artists to use in the Art & Feminism edit-a-thons last year and this year that were based on female artists from cities where there were going to be edit-a-thons. Since there is so much data on Wikidata, I also queried all female artists without sitelinks to the English Wikiepedia and just picked the items with the lowest numbers, as those are generally the oldest articles with the most interlinked entries. In that list however, there are at least two items that were previously deleted on the English Wikipedia due to non-notability and also a few fictional characters.
Next I tried a different tack and queried for female artists with articles sitelinked from Wikidata in all three of the French, the German, and the Polish Wikipedia's but with no sitelink to the English Wikipedia. That query only came up with three names though. You might try it for the Dutch Wikipedia using this query "CLAIM[21:6581072] and claim[106:(TREE[483501][][279])]" and rerunning it for each language you want to test the sitelinks on.
On the other hand, the Dutch Wikipedia may want to follow the example set by the Swedish Wikipedia, which appears to be stubbing up lots of important lists of females in general, including the Dutch Digitaal Vrouwenlexicon. I suppose it's probably a good idea to make short stubs for all women indexed in National Biography indexes if this is somehow possible.
Jane
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Romaine Wiki romaine.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
What we should do is to create a top 100 or top 500 list of women important or much known for each country in the world.
Such list would invite people to write more about them.
If we create an overview, it is more likely that the missing articles and wikidata items will be created.
Romaine
Op dinsdag 31 maart 2015 heeft Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com het volgende geschreven:
Lennart, You have every reason to be proud and I honestly don't know why, I can
only report the "what". It takes a bit of handwork, but after downloading all of the matched databases from Mix-n-Match, you can then take dumps from Wikidata using autolist per language that include sitelinks to those languages. My suspicion is that at the end of the day, if you are playing the numbers game, the English Wikipedia wins at having the most women. However, those are mostly women who were active in the US. Even Britain is missing huge sweeps of notable women in the English Wikipedia (and see the work for the scientists as an example). What the Swedes have I believe, that other language wikis lack for some reason, is a goal for coverage of notable topics regardless of priority, and then, as an extra step, the desire to cover these at some basic minimum in Wikidata. Otherwise I can't explain it. Perhaps svwiki has successfully absorbed complete versions of various international dictionaries of national biography for other nations?
To be clear, when I say "percentage of women", I mean "percentage
measurable with autolist from Wikidata of female biographies in any arts field as a percentage of total human biographies in that field of artists on that Wikipedia". Wikidata is far from complete, and not all biographies have been fleshed out with 4+ statements on Wikidata.
Jane On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Lennart Guldbrandsson <
l_guldbrandsson@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
It made me very proud to read this:
"Already I am finding that the Swedish Wikipedia has the highest
percentage of female vs male across the board in any arts field, followed by the Russian Wikipedia."
But where do these figures come from and can you be more exact? Thanks
in advance.
Also, this thread is very interesting. I am following it closely.
Best wishes,
Lennart Guldbrandsson
070 - 207 80 05 http://www.elementx.se Skriv som ett proffs - min senaste bok Få regelbundna skrivtips direkt till din inkorg
@aliasHannibal - på Twitter
"Tänk dig en värld där varje människa på den här planeten får fri
tillgång till världens samlade kunskap. Det är vårt mål."
Jimmy Wales
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2015 19:17:49 -0700 From: isalix@gmail.com To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Closing the gendergap in biographies on
Wikipedia
Jane,
Thanks for your thoughtful response. I agree completely that mixing up
editor and biography gender biases is dangerous and maybe not true. On the statistics side its really intriguing to read about your much closer analyses of different Wikipedias. I would like have computers help humans make more of these types of discoveries. Thanks for all your effort and feedback.
Make a great day, Max Klein ‽ http://notconfusing.com/
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 6:09 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com
wrote:
Max, Hmm, interesting proposal! I am not sure whether it can be very useful
as it reads now. I have thought a lot about this and have looked at the concept "painter" pretty carefully. Yes there is a gendergap in the data as it is generated on a daily basis, but no, I am not convinced this is related to the Wikipedia gendergap in the sense of "you need women to write biographies of women". In fact, some of the most thoughtful biographies of women are written by men and you could maybe say that our biographies of men may improve if we get more women on board editing. There is however, a tipping point when it comes to writing about women on Wikipedia. In my work on female stub creation I have seen lots of examples where the stub existed and was deleted due to notability concerns. Lots of experienced editors (myself included) will only bother to write an article, even if it's just a stub, when the likelihood of having the article stick is judged to be at some mysterious level. I think we need some policy guidelines and some stats about how many articles about women were previously deleted. This may help us determine what the "academic bias barrier" is in accumulating female biographies in general.
When I think of what I would like in terms of "Wikipedia Gender Index
Tools", I would like to see, per country of birth or per occupation or per external database, how the percentage of female vs male is across language Wikipedias. Already I am finding that the Swedish Wikipedia has the highest percentage of female vs male across the board in any arts field, followed by the Russian Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia is somewhere in the middle and the Italians are the biggest loser (but maybe also with the longest history of art historical terms that are documented, which could lead to a higher percentage of men across the arts born before 1800, but perhaps higher after 1850 - who knows?).
Once you start drilling down into the data you find all sorts of really
weird conundrums!
Jane On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Maximilian Klein isalix@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Jane, great investigation.
I like this idea of looking at the gender gap by-profession, and seeing
if it is closing at any rate by sampling it over time. In fact, I put in a project for the "inspire campaign" to automate recording these statistics over time for all professions. It'd be great to have your endorsement, and if the project is funded we can compare how painters fair against other professions.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/WIGI:_Wikipedia_Gender_Index_...
Make a great day, Max Klein ‽ http://notconfusing.com/
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 4:51 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi everyone, I have been checking how we are doing on closing the
gendergap on biographies of women artists for a while. Part of the problem is collecting the data, and Wikidata is a great help. Unfortunately there are still lots of women artists with Wikidata items without any statements at all, but since this is also true for male artists, looking at the stats is useful. What I did was to collect data for all female artists and all male artist and came up with percentages for painters versus various matched data bases in Mix-n-Match.
Thanks to our push on Art & Feminism, the score is better (12.5%) on
Wikimedia projects than for the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (10.1%). The ODNB is currently the only database that is completely matched. The other databases are still being matched, but still, it's interesting to see how we currently stand with those. Here are the scores:
Wikidata painters - 12.5%: 45016 male, 6430 female RKD - 11.4%: 21809 male, 2795 female United List of Artist Names - 8.6%: 32993 male, 3091 female BBC Your Paintings - 7.7%: 6535 male, 545 female Oxford Dictionary of National Biography - 10.1%: 49419 male, 5581 female http://tools.wmflabs.org/mix-n-match/
These stats were gathered this morning using Autolist: http://tools.wmflabs.org/autolist/autolist1.html
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
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