I believe it would be easier to stick to the group of celebrities, so for
example do a study of articles on films, especially romance categories that
would usually have noteworthy subjects for both the lead man and the lead
woman. It would be interesting to see if the bio coverage of both the male
& the female leads was about the same per country. As far as Asian
celebrities goes, did you look into Manga characters? I know most are
fictional but many are based on real people, and especially the ones based
on foreign real people could skew the results. Presumably someone writing a
Wikipedia article about a manga based on real person would also go ahead
and create a stub on the real person.
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 12:36 PM, Piotr Konieczny <piokon(a)post.pl> wrote:
Dear h,
I think your "male gaze" hypothesis is very interesting. It's of course
possible to report on the number of female politicians or such using
Wikipedia/Wikidata, but comparisons to other indices are, well,
problematic. World Forum Gender Gap index reports a ratio of politicians
(female to male ratio is reported as Table E12: Women in parliament and
Table E13: Women in ministerial positions in
http://www3.weforum.org/docs/GGGR14/GGGR_CompleteReport_2014.pdf) .
Unfortunately, those are high level positions and I'd expect that all but
the smallest wikis would score well on coverage of those individuals for
their own language. What we would need would be a count of, let's say,
politicians by gender in general for those countries, and I don't recall
any studies doing that in general, particularly on a
internationally-comparative basis. GGI also has Table E4: Legislators,
senior officials and managers, but it compounds politicians with
bureaucrats and managers; through I guess it would be the best comparison
we can do here (count the instances of word politician, official and
manager in our data, compare it with the GGI indicator). Another way of
doing so could involve seeing if there are differences in how A-language
wiki reports on celebrities vs. politicians/officials/managers for
different language, ex. would Japanese Wikipedia show any bias in covering
Korean celebrities vs. Korean politicians/officials/managers or even Korean
parliament members/ministers. Through some of that may be, as you suggest,
material for separate paper(s). We will see if we can report on any of
those differences. If you know of any better data to compare ours too,
please don't hesitate to suggest it!
--
Piotr Konieczny,
PhDhttp://hanyang.academia.edu/PiotrKoniecznyhttp://scholar.google.com/cita…
On 1/11/2015 23:23, h wrote:
Hello Piotr and Gerard,
I think a competing hypothesis would be "male gaze". That is to say,
the more female representation is not about a culture (defined as national,
ethnic, linguistic or regional, not macho/feminine), but rather a
gender-interest bias. Thus the more female representation could mean more
male dominant culture, which is against the theoretical assumption of
Piotr's research.
Note that East Asian Wikipedians that I know, especially those who
edit Chinese Wikipedia, are predominantly very young. Some of them can be
highly interested in opposite sex.
Check the following category pages as examples:
(1a) Female actresses of every countries in the world
http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:%E5%90%84%E5%9C%8B%E5%A5%B3%E6%BC%94%…
(1b) Male actresses of every countries in the world
http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:%E5%90%84%E5%9B%BD%E7%94%B7%E6%BC%94%…
(2a) Female Japanese AV (i.e. porn) actresses
http://zh.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%ACAV%E5%…
(2b) Male Japanese AV (i.e. porn) actresses
http://zh.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%ACAV%E7%…
It is quiet clear that the male gaze hypothesis seems to apply here.
More female presentation simply because they are there to be consumed by
men or boys.
So one of my suggestions for research is to select a few
professional categories that are of interest (say, politicians, poets,
entertainers, etc.) to do some cross-tab analysis.
Thus, I will be extremely cautious against using the current
metrics/methods as viable "gender inequality index".
As a proponent of "data normalization" and "geographic
normalization" method myself, I would distinguish two sets of comparisons:
one is cross-country or cross-language version absolute value comparison,
another is cross-country or cross-language version "normalized" value
comparison. By geographic normalization, I mean that researchers must
gather another set of cross-country or cross-language datasets that
captures some aspects of realities "external" to Wikipedia. In this case, I
would say the Wikipedia represented politicians' gender ratio against the
offline gender ratio of politicians. In other words, "data normalization"
allows researchers to compare which language version are more or less (and
how much) equal than the corresponding offline societies.
BTW, the methods you develop to extract gender from biography
articles for large-scale analysis may also be re-purpose to study other
dimensions. One dimension that will interest me would be nationality. It
will be interesting to see the coverage, focus or bias of a language
version on people based on nationalities. Age might be another one.
Best,
han-teng liao
2015-01-11 19:01 GMT+02:00 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>om>:
Hoi,
Having read it, I find it is still very much a Wikipedia oriented.It
makes use of the toolset by Markus. That is fine. the notion of diversity
and notability is also very much culturally defined. It would be nice to
know how the different wikipedias accept notability of people from other
cultures and if it impacts the diversity of their own articles.
I have found that many people do not have an article in the languages of
their own cultures. Often it has to do with an interest in a domain that is
more of relevance to the other culture.
Diversity is very much part of a domain; in Roman Catholicism male
dominance is obvious. I am curious if diversity in gender is affected by
such considerations and if items with a single article are more in line
with what is the norm for a culture, a domain.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 10 January 2015 at 11:51, Piotr Konieczny <piokon(a)post.pl> wrote:
Here (
http://notconfusing.com/preliminary-results-from-wigi-the-wikipedia-gender-…)
are some early findings from a research project I am involved in (together
with Maximilian Klein). (To find out more about the project, see
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_Gender_Inequality_Index
and it's talk page). We are very curious what you think (don't hesitate to
be critical). What we would really appreciate would be any alternative
hypotheses (to the one presented) that could try to explain why post-1950s
Confucian and South Asian clusters seem so much more inclusive of female
biographies than others (including the "Western" clusters). Are we seeing a
data error, or something else - and if so, what?
--
Piotr Konieczny, PhD
http://hanyang.academia.edu/PiotrKonieczny
http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=gdV8_AEAAAAJ
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Piotrus
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing
listWiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l