From The Huffington Post
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/24/women-novelists-wikipedia-female-au...
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_3131794.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.
The New York Times also has an article about this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/opinion/sunday/wikipedias-sexism-toward-fe...
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-au...
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
Salon has also picked this up - http://www.salon.com/2013/04/25/wikipedia_moves_women_to_american_women_nove...
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 4:13 AM, María Sefidari kewlshrink@yahoo.es wrote:
The New York Times also has an article about this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/opinion/sunday/wikipedias-sexism-toward-fe...
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-au...
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
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
For what it's worth, this issue is apparently discussed in the categorisation guidelines, which recommend "Both male and female [subjects] should continue to be filed in the appropriate gender-neutral role category..." in cases where we only have one gender-specific category; they should only be moved out of the main category if we're doing a complete gender subdivision (as is the case with, eg, most sporting topics)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categorization/Ethnicity,_gender,_rel...
Of course, guidelines do not always govern actual practice on the ground!
A.
On 25 April 2013 15:52, Leslie Carr lcarr@wikimedia.org wrote:
Salon has also picked this up - http://www.salon.com/2013/04/25/wikipedia_moves_women_to_american_women_nove...
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 4:13 AM, María Sefidari kewlshrink@yahoo.es wrote:
The New York Times also has an article about this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/opinion/sunday/wikipedias-sexism-toward-fe...
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-au...
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
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
-- Leslie Carr Wikimedia Foundation AS 14907, 43821 http://as14907.peeringdb.com/
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Funny, I had no clue a "forced migration" was taking place - just shows you how much happens in the one Wikipedia without others knowing (who are highly active).
I'm glad to see the artists categories are still ok. We have American women artists, but, I believe they are also listed in American artists (or their respective type of art). I wonder what other categories have this issue?
-Sarah
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 7:52 AM, Leslie Carr lcarr@wikimedia.org wrote:
Salon has also picked this up -
http://www.salon.com/2013/04/25/wikipedia_moves_women_to_american_women_nove...
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 4:13 AM, María Sefidari kewlshrink@yahoo.es wrote:
The New York Times also has an article about this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/opinion/sunday/wikipedias-sexism-toward-fe...
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-au...
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
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
-- Leslie Carr Wikimedia Foundation AS 14907, 43821 http://as14907.peeringdb.com/
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap