My intention was to point out that a series of novels (Cussler's) that don't meet the criteria applied to __October__ have full pages. The two authors are in no way similar. In fact, they are as far apart as they could be. However, the male author has complete coverage of every jot and tittle.
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
I believe what caused the more in-depth examination was the creation of a brand new, otherwise unlinked category for the book, which drew the attention of a very different group of editors than the ones who pay attention to works of fiction. You've got the category-interested editors looking at the article, instead of the fiction-interested editors.
It's just a notability tag, it's already been removed, and I'm sure folks will be able to find some more reviews about October (novel).
I don't think it has anything at all to do with the fact that the author is a woman. As best I can tell, the only person comparing this novel to Cussler books is you.
Risker/Anne
On 22 July 2014 13:39, Kathleen McCook klmccook@gmail.com wrote:
The reason I asked to discuss here is to ascertain whether or not there seems to be a different set of notability standards by gender.
I encourage students to contribute to Wikipedia. But when notability is an editor's decision with so many exceptions...how do you encourage?
Really, I am careful and if a book by a brilliant woman like Zoe Wicomb causes notability queries..how, on earth, can this gender gap be addressed?
Here is Ms. Wicomb's prize announcement at Yale. http://windhamcampbell.org/2013/winner/zo%C3%AB-wicomb
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Pete Forsyth peteforsyth@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case < dancase@frontiernet.net> wrote:
On what basis in Clive Cussler notable?
That he’s a regular denizen of the bestseller lists in many countries who’s had works adapted into major motion pictures (To be honest, I think we should say that “all published works by authors who have their paperbacks displayed prominently in the racks near the front of bookstores at airports are notable [image: Smile]“).
Well, I don't know. I had never heard of Cussler before today (don't spend a lot of time in airport bookshops), but I did look at a couple of his novels' Wikipedia articles, and they didn't indicate significance any better than the October article. (One of them had a single, ephemeral reference; the other had 7 that seemed pretty thin.)
I can see how Kathleen would be frustrated by what surely appears from her perspective to be a double standard.
Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]]
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Kathleen, the point I am trying to make is that your comparison is, well, inherently sexist. There is no basis on which to think that the articles about books written by Cussler exist without challenge because Cussler is a male author, or that [[October (novel)]] was tagged for notability because the author is female.
The October (novel) article is a stub that, at the time it was tagged for notability, didn't give any reason for its notability. It was correctly tagged; when reason for its notability was added, the tag was appropriately removed.
Books that sell hundreds of thousands of copies are generally notable all by themselves, which covers the Cussler books (and the Stephen King books, and the JK Rowling books, and the Agatha Christie books). It's not always about sex.
Risker/Anne
On 22 July 2014 14:06, Kathleen McCook klmccook@gmail.com wrote:
My intention was to point out that a series of novels (Cussler's) that don't meet the criteria applied to __October__ have full pages. The two authors are in no way similar. In fact, they are as far apart as they could be. However, the male author has complete coverage of every jot and tittle.
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
I believe what caused the more in-depth examination was the creation of a brand new, otherwise unlinked category for the book, which drew the attention of a very different group of editors than the ones who pay attention to works of fiction. You've got the category-interested editors looking at the article, instead of the fiction-interested editors.
It's just a notability tag, it's already been removed, and I'm sure folks will be able to find some more reviews about October (novel).
I don't think it has anything at all to do with the fact that the author is a woman. As best I can tell, the only person comparing this novel to Cussler books is you.
Risker/Anne
On 22 July 2014 13:39, Kathleen McCook klmccook@gmail.com wrote:
The reason I asked to discuss here is to ascertain whether or not there seems to be a different set of notability standards by gender.
I encourage students to contribute to Wikipedia. But when notability is an editor's decision with so many exceptions...how do you encourage?
Really, I am careful and if a book by a brilliant woman like Zoe Wicomb causes notability queries..how, on earth, can this gender gap be addressed?
Here is Ms. Wicomb's prize announcement at Yale. http://windhamcampbell.org/2013/winner/zo%C3%AB-wicomb
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Pete Forsyth peteforsyth@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case < dancase@frontiernet.net> wrote:
On what basis in Clive Cussler notable?
That he’s a regular denizen of the bestseller lists in many countries who’s had works adapted into major motion pictures (To be honest, I think we should say that “all published works by authors who have their paperbacks displayed prominently in the racks near the front of bookstores at airports are notable [image: Smile]“).
Well, I don't know. I had never heard of Cussler before today (don't spend a lot of time in airport bookshops), but I did look at a couple of his novels' Wikipedia articles, and they didn't indicate significance any better than the October article. (One of them had a single, ephemeral reference; the other had 7 that seemed pretty thin.)
I can see how Kathleen would be frustrated by what surely appears from her perspective to be a double standard.
Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]]
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
It's funny, I was editing this article on the GF wiki last night:
http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/You%27re_the_sexist
Kathleen is not being sexist to be concerned that in an environment which has historically had a lot of very well established biases towards women, that there might be a gender aspect to what she saw. It is the height of denial to call such a reaction unwarranted.
I'd ask that folks on the list take some time to consider that the volume of defensiveness directed at Kathleen is, in and of itself, part of the problem. I certainly think it is.
-Leigh
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
Kathleen, the point I am trying to make is that your comparison is, well, inherently sexist. There is no basis on which to think that the articles about books written by Cussler exist without challenge because Cussler is a male author, or that [[October (novel)]] was tagged for notability because the author is female.
The October (novel) article is a stub that, at the time it was tagged for notability, didn't give any reason for its notability. It was correctly tagged; when reason for its notability was added, the tag was appropriately removed.
Books that sell hundreds of thousands of copies are generally notable all by themselves, which covers the Cussler books (and the Stephen King books, and the JK Rowling books, and the Agatha Christie books). It's not always about sex.
Risker/Anne
On 22 July 2014 14:06, Kathleen McCook klmccook@gmail.com wrote:
My intention was to point out that a series of novels (Cussler's) that don't meet the criteria applied to __October__ have full pages. The two authors are in no way similar. In fact, they are as far apart as they could be. However, the male author has complete coverage of every jot and tittle.
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
I believe what caused the more in-depth examination was the creation of a brand new, otherwise unlinked category for the book, which drew the attention of a very different group of editors than the ones who pay attention to works of fiction. You've got the category-interested editors looking at the article, instead of the fiction-interested editors.
It's just a notability tag, it's already been removed, and I'm sure folks will be able to find some more reviews about October (novel).
I don't think it has anything at all to do with the fact that the author is a woman. As best I can tell, the only person comparing this novel to Cussler books is you.
Risker/Anne
On 22 July 2014 13:39, Kathleen McCook klmccook@gmail.com wrote:
The reason I asked to discuss here is to ascertain whether or not there seems to be a different set of notability standards by gender.
I encourage students to contribute to Wikipedia. But when notability is an editor's decision with so many exceptions...how do you encourage?
Really, I am careful and if a book by a brilliant woman like Zoe Wicomb causes notability queries..how, on earth, can this gender gap be addressed?
Here is Ms. Wicomb's prize announcement at Yale. http://windhamcampbell.org/2013/winner/zo%C3%AB-wicomb
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Pete Forsyth peteforsyth@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case < dancase@frontiernet.net> wrote:
> On what basis in Clive Cussler notable? > That he’s a regular denizen of the bestseller lists in many countries who’s had works adapted into major motion pictures (To be honest, I think we should say that “all published works by authors who have their paperbacks displayed prominently in the racks near the front of bookstores at airports are notable [image: Smile]“).
Well, I don't know. I had never heard of Cussler before today (don't spend a lot of time in airport bookshops), but I did look at a couple of his novels' Wikipedia articles, and they didn't indicate significance any better than the October article. (One of them had a single, ephemeral reference; the other had 7 that seemed pretty thin.)
I can see how Kathleen would be frustrated by what surely appears from her perspective to be a double standard.
Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]]
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Maybe, it is based on sexism, and maybe it isn't. I think it is fair to point out alternative points of view on this mailing list and to have a discussion about it.
I don't think it is helpful to assign gender based systemic bias every time an edit is questioned on women related topic. Plenty of people have similar frustration about notability tags being placed on their newly created articles especially on niche topics.
It can be really frustrating to have a notability tag added, or even worse when an article is put up for deletion. We need to make sure that women who are making good faith edits on women related topics get the support that they need to put up with the frustration.
Sydney
Sydney Poore User:FloNight Wikipedian in Residence at Cochrane Collaboration
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Leigh Honeywell leigh@hypatia.ca wrote:
It's funny, I was editing this article on the GF wiki last night:
http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/You%27re_the_sexist
Kathleen is not being sexist to be concerned that in an environment which has historically had a lot of very well established biases towards women, that there might be a gender aspect to what she saw. It is the height of denial to call such a reaction unwarranted.
I'd ask that folks on the list take some time to consider that the volume of defensiveness directed at Kathleen is, in and of itself, part of the problem. I certainly think it is.
-Leigh
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
Kathleen, the point I am trying to make is that your comparison is, well, inherently sexist. There is no basis on which to think that the articles about books written by Cussler exist without challenge because Cussler is a male author, or that [[October (novel)]] was tagged for notability because the author is female.
The October (novel) article is a stub that, at the time it was tagged for notability, didn't give any reason for its notability. It was correctly tagged; when reason for its notability was added, the tag was appropriately removed.
Books that sell hundreds of thousands of copies are generally notable all by themselves, which covers the Cussler books (and the Stephen King books, and the JK Rowling books, and the Agatha Christie books). It's not always about sex.
Risker/Anne
On 22 July 2014 14:06, Kathleen McCook klmccook@gmail.com wrote:
My intention was to point out that a series of novels (Cussler's) that don't meet the criteria applied to __October__ have full pages. The two authors are in no way similar. In fact, they are as far apart as they could be. However, the male author has complete coverage of every jot and tittle.
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
I believe what caused the more in-depth examination was the creation of a brand new, otherwise unlinked category for the book, which drew the attention of a very different group of editors than the ones who pay attention to works of fiction. You've got the category-interested editors looking at the article, instead of the fiction-interested editors.
It's just a notability tag, it's already been removed, and I'm sure folks will be able to find some more reviews about October (novel).
I don't think it has anything at all to do with the fact that the author is a woman. As best I can tell, the only person comparing this novel to Cussler books is you.
Risker/Anne
On 22 July 2014 13:39, Kathleen McCook klmccook@gmail.com wrote:
The reason I asked to discuss here is to ascertain whether or not there seems to be a different set of notability standards by gender.
I encourage students to contribute to Wikipedia. But when notability is an editor's decision with so many exceptions...how do you encourage?
Really, I am careful and if a book by a brilliant woman like Zoe Wicomb causes notability queries..how, on earth, can this gender gap be addressed?
Here is Ms. Wicomb's prize announcement at Yale. http://windhamcampbell.org/2013/winner/zo%C3%AB-wicomb
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Pete Forsyth peteforsyth@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case < dancase@frontiernet.net> wrote:
> > >> On what basis in Clive Cussler notable? >> > That he’s a regular denizen of the bestseller lists in many > countries who’s had works adapted into major motion pictures (To be honest, > I think we should say that “all published works by authors who have their > paperbacks displayed prominently in the racks near the front of bookstores > at airports are notable [image: Smile]“). >
Well, I don't know. I had never heard of Cussler before today (don't spend a lot of time in airport bookshops), but I did look at a couple of his novels' Wikipedia articles, and they didn't indicate significance any better than the October article. (One of them had a single, ephemeral reference; the other had 7 that seemed pretty thin.)
I can see how Kathleen would be frustrated by what surely appears from her perspective to be a double standard.
Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]]
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
-- Leigh Honeywell http://hypatia.ca @hypatiadotca
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
I don't think it is helpful to assign gender based systemic bias every time an edit is questioned on women related topic.
To put it in perspective, this was the article as it existed just before the {{notability}} tag was applied—three days after it was created, and two days after the {{unreviewed}} tag was removed: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=October_%28novel%29&oldid=617...
There is a summary of the novel, a list of characters, a statement of who the author is and where she teaches, and two references—one to what seems to be a review in The New Statesman (OK as far as RS goes), the other to what seems to be a website which may or may not be considered a reliable source. There’s nothing about the award, which would probably have kept the {{notability}} tag at bay.
Plenty of people have similar frustration about notability tags being placed on their newly created articles especially on >niche topics.
Of course, that happens a lot less when you get to be patrol-exempt.
But even still, on the occasions (and there still are some) when I create an article and for whatever reason can’t put refs in it right away, I’m looking over my virtual shoulder until I can (Once I had to wait an hour, and was absolutely paranoid that someone would tag it or—God forbid—nominate it for speedy deletion in the meantime). Yes, even me.
I don’t how routinely we advise newer editors to do this, but the fact is that when you create a new article, especially on a niche topic, you shouldn’t go live in mainspace with it until you’ve got sourced assertion of notability in it, and probably at least a few other sources as well. That’s what the newpage patrollers are looking for.
Daniel Case
OK. I apologize for the query..please disregard my asking.
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
Kathleen, the point I am trying to make is that your comparison is, well, inherently sexist. There is no basis on which to think that the articles about books written by Cussler exist without challenge because Cussler is a male author, or that [[October (novel)]] was tagged for notability because the author is female.
The October (novel) article is a stub that, at the time it was tagged for notability, didn't give any reason for its notability. It was correctly tagged; when reason for its notability was added, the tag was appropriately removed.
Books that sell hundreds of thousands of copies are generally notable all by themselves, which covers the Cussler books (and the Stephen King books, and the JK Rowling books, and the Agatha Christie books). It's not always about sex.
Risker/Anne
On 22 July 2014 14:06, Kathleen McCook klmccook@gmail.com wrote:
My intention was to point out that a series of novels (Cussler's) that don't meet the criteria applied to __October__ have full pages. The two authors are in no way similar. In fact, they are as far apart as they could be. However, the male author has complete coverage of every jot and tittle.
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
I believe what caused the more in-depth examination was the creation of a brand new, otherwise unlinked category for the book, which drew the attention of a very different group of editors than the ones who pay attention to works of fiction. You've got the category-interested editors looking at the article, instead of the fiction-interested editors.
It's just a notability tag, it's already been removed, and I'm sure folks will be able to find some more reviews about October (novel).
I don't think it has anything at all to do with the fact that the author is a woman. As best I can tell, the only person comparing this novel to Cussler books is you.
Risker/Anne
On 22 July 2014 13:39, Kathleen McCook klmccook@gmail.com wrote:
The reason I asked to discuss here is to ascertain whether or not there seems to be a different set of notability standards by gender.
I encourage students to contribute to Wikipedia. But when notability is an editor's decision with so many exceptions...how do you encourage?
Really, I am careful and if a book by a brilliant woman like Zoe Wicomb causes notability queries..how, on earth, can this gender gap be addressed?
Here is Ms. Wicomb's prize announcement at Yale. http://windhamcampbell.org/2013/winner/zo%C3%AB-wicomb
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Pete Forsyth peteforsyth@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case < dancase@frontiernet.net> wrote:
> On what basis in Clive Cussler notable? > That he’s a regular denizen of the bestseller lists in many countries who’s had works adapted into major motion pictures (To be honest, I think we should say that “all published works by authors who have their paperbacks displayed prominently in the racks near the front of bookstores at airports are notable [image: Smile]“).
Well, I don't know. I had never heard of Cussler before today (don't spend a lot of time in airport bookshops), but I did look at a couple of his novels' Wikipedia articles, and they didn't indicate significance any better than the October article. (One of them had a single, ephemeral reference; the other had 7 that seemed pretty thin.)
I can see how Kathleen would be frustrated by what surely appears from her perspective to be a double standard.
Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]]
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
