I would be interested in the following:
As we all know, the rules on sourcing and against original research on Wikipedia make it difficult to write about topics that are not widely covered; furthermore, regarding academic topics, the rules encourage seeking scholarly sources. Thus, it is difficult to write on topics not well-covered by scholarly sources.
I would therefore like to know whether there exist studies on how well traditional reference works, reference libraries etc. cover the kind of "female" topics for which Wikipedia lacks coverage.
This could help identify to which extent the problem is created by the Wikipedia authors, as opposed to simply reflecting the situation of current scholarly literature. That is, I would like to distinguish the effects of the Wikipedia writing process and the demographics of contributors from those of available reference sources and general scholarly outlook.
(I find it very relevant that the email title talks of "perpetuating gender bias". The rules on citation etc. in Wikipedia are designed so that Wikipedia reflects available knowledge, habits and so on; there are actually rules against using Wikipedia as a broadcast media for newly coined words, not widely accepted theories, etc. It seems to me quite likely that such a system would perpetuate existing biases.)