On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Stuart A. Yeates syeates@gmail.com wrote:
Speaking as the editor in third place with 25%, I'd like to say that my count is only so high because I created articles based on the [[Dictionary of New Zealand Biography]], a source which has already be professionally balanced for gender and ethnicity.
From my point of view, one of the significant barriers to this kind of work is the consensus not to categorise all people by gender, religion and race (see [[Wikipedia:Categorization/Ethnicity, gender, religion and sexuality]]), alas there are good reasons for that consensus.
Why do you want categories rather than structured data about gender, religion, and race? We should be moving towards replacing our entire category system with a better implementation of structured data. Categories, while broadly useful, are an incomplete, arbitrary, and arbitrarily heirarchical subset of structured data.
Almost none of the arguments against 'categorization' apply to gathering this data, structuring it, and making it easily searchable and filterable.
Sam.