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.)