Women through the glass ceiling: gender asymmetries in Wikipedia

List overview All Threads
Download

newer

older

BLP and the Wikidata / Wikipedia...

Encyclopedic Writing Guide

Eduardo Testart

22 Sep 2017 22 Sep '17

4:55 p.m.

Hi all, One of the members from Wikimedia Chile, independently from the chapter and before he became a member, was directly involved in the development of the following article, that adress the gender inequality (or gender bias), and which gives the title to the email: *https://epjdatascience.springeropen.com/articles/10.1140/epjds/s13688-016-0066-4 <https://epjdatascience.springeropen.com/articles/10.1140/epjds/s13688-016-0066-4>* It was published almost a year and half ago (March 1, 2016), and from an internal and informal conversation that occurred yesterday in the Chapter, he shared the link to the complete study <https://epjdatascience.springeropen.com/articles/10.1140/epjds/s13688-016-0066-4> (in English). Worth to mention is that he presented preliminary results <https://www.slideshare.net/carnby/wmcl2015-investigando-usando-wikipedia> (in Spanish) about it in the Wikimedia Chile Conference <https://wikimedia.cl/Conferencia_Wikimedia_Chile_2015> from 2015. I read the complete article yesterday, and found it extremely interesting, so I took the liberty to share it here, in case you haven’t had the chance to read it yet. Also, the article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License :) Cheers! -- Eduardo Testart

Show replies by date

James Heilman

22 Sep 22 Sep

5:24 p.m.

New subject: Women through the glass ceiling: gender asymmetries in Wikipedia

An interesting paper. We know that a sizable proportion of articles about people are paid for by the individual themselves or their representative. I just looked at the gender of all articles created by this sock involved in undisclosed paid editing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bri/COIbox61#Jeremy112233 Of the 104 BLPs they wrote 87 (84%) were for males and 17 (16%) were for females. The current proportions may partly reflect that males are more interested / willing to buying articles about themselves than females. James On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Eduardo Testart <etestart(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

-- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

Andy Mabbett

6:22 p.m.

New subject: Women through the glass ceiling: gender asymmetries in Wikipedia

On 22 September 2017 at 18:24, James Heilman <jmh649(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

We know that a sizable proportion of articles about people are paid for by the individual themselves or their representative.

We do? How? And what size is that "sizable proportion"? -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

James Heilman

6:48 p.m.

New subject: Women through the glass ceiling: gender asymmetries in Wikipedia

How do we know? Those who work extensively in this topic area and are good at picking up paid editing make an educated guess. There are well known patterns that represent paid editing. We could likely build a tool that could look at all BLPs and give a numerical value to the percentage that are most likely written for pay. If you look at a random group of new BLPs at WP:NPP you will also get a decent idea. James On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Andy Mabbett <andy(a)pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:

...

On 22 September 2017 at 18:24, James Heilman <jmh649(a)gmail.com> wrote:

We know that a sizable proportion of articles about people are paid for by the individual themselves or their representative.

We do? How? And what size is that "sizable proportion"? -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

-- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

Eduardo Testart

6:53 p.m.

New subject: Women through the glass ceiling: gender asymmetries in Wikipedia

Hi again, I think the article is not related to paid editing, if you wish to discuss that subject, you should probably open another thread. It would be nice if the discussion and comments can be kept on topic :) Cheers, El sept. 22, 2017 3:49 PM, "James Heilman" <jmh649(a)gmail.com> escribió: How do we know? Those who work extensively in this topic area and are good at picking up paid editing make an educated guess. There are well known patterns that represent paid editing. We could likely build a tool that could look at all BLPs and give a numerical value to the percentage that are most likely written for pay. If you look at a random group of new BLPs at WP:NPP you will also get a decent idea. James On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Andy Mabbett <andy(a)pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:

...

On 22 September 2017 at 18:24, James Heilman <jmh649(a)gmail.com> wrote:

We know that a sizable proportion of articles about people are paid for by the individual themselves or their representative.

wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l

...

New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

James Heilman

7:55 p.m.

New subject: Women through the glass ceiling: gender asymmetries in Wikipedia

The article was discussing the proportion of articles about specific gender and possible reasons why this situation exists. What I mentioned was simply one among many potential explanation. James On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Eduardo Testart <etestart(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

On 22 September 2017 at 18:24, James Heilman <jmh649(a)gmail.com> wrote:

We know that a sizable proportion of articles about people are paid for by the individual themselves or their representative.

wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l

New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> -- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

-- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

Jean-Philippe Béland

25 Sep 25 Sep

6:30 p.m.

New subject: Women through the glass ceiling: gender asymmetries in Wikipedia

Good day, This is not related to gender bias, but an observation I made from reading this paper. Table 1 shows the different percentage of overlap between different languistic versions of Wikipedia with the English Wikipedia. Do anybody know if there are studies or reports focussed on that? For example, I notice that the Wikipedia with the less overlap from the above-mentioned table is the Arabic Wikipedia. To me, it seems to indicate another sort of bias on the English Wikipedia and other "Western" language Wikipedias in not necessarily including biographies from those parts of the world. Or maybe there is another "glass ceiling" not based on gender, meaning that somebody from the Middle East for instance needs to be more notable in average to be included on the English Wikipedia comparatively of somebody in North America or Europe. Do we have any analysis of that? Is that a question that is brought up in reflexions about bias? Thank you, JP On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 3:55 PM, James Heilman <jmh649(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

Hi again, I think the article is not related to paid editing, if you wish to

discuss

that subject, you should probably open another thread. It would be nice if the discussion and comments can be kept on topic :) Cheers, El sept. 22, 2017 3:49 PM, "James Heilman" <jmh649(a)gmail.com> escribió: How do we know? Those who work extensively in this topic area and are good at picking up paid editing make an educated guess. There are well known patterns that represent paid editing. We could likely build a tool that could look at all BLPs and give a numerical value to the percentage that are most likely written for pay. If you look at a random group of new BLPs at WP:NPP you will also get a decent idea. James On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Andy Mabbett <andy(a)pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:

On 22 September 2017 at 18:24, James Heilman <jmh649(a)gmail.com> wrote:

We know that a sizable proportion of articles about people are paid for by the individual themselves or their representative.

wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l

New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l

New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

James Salsman

7:31 p.m.

New subject: Women through the glass ceiling: gender asymmetries in Wikipedia

Jean-Philippe, yes, absolutely: http://blogs.oii.ox.ac.uk/policy/how-well-represented-is-the-mena-region-in… As biases go, omitting notable subjects in the global south doesn't have the deleterious real-world consequences that reenforcing erroneous economic hegemony does. On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 7:30 PM, Jean-Philippe Béland <jpbeland(a)wikimedia.ca> wrote:

...

Hi again, I think the article is not related to paid editing, if you wish to

discuss

On 22 September 2017 at 18:24, James Heilman <jmh649(a)gmail.com> wrote: > We know that a sizable proportion of articles > about people are paid for by the individual themselves or their > representative. We do? How? And what size is that "sizable proportion"? -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/

wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l

New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l

New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

-- Jean-Philippe Béland [image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada <https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr>, chapitre national soutenant Wikipédia Vice president — Wikimedia Canada <https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en>, national chapter supporting Wikipedia 535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec) H2L 2P3,jpbeland(a)wikimedia.ca _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Jean-Philippe Béland

26 Sep 26 Sep

1:31 p.m.

New subject: Women through the glass ceiling: gender asymmetries in Wikipedia

"As biases go, omitting notable subjects in the global south doesn't have the deleterious real-world consequences that reenforcing erroneous economic hegemony does." How so? I don't want to go into politics topics, but with what we see recently we clearly see the danger of thinking "less" of those cultures of people... JP On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 3:31 PM, James Salsman <jsalsman(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

Jean-Philippe, yes, absolutely: http://blogs.oii.ox.ac.uk/policy/how-well-represented- is-the-mena-region-in-wikipedia/ As biases go, omitting notable subjects in the global south doesn't have the deleterious real-world consequences that reenforcing erroneous economic hegemony does. On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 7:30 PM, Jean-Philippe Béland <jpbeland(a)wikimedia.ca> wrote:

Good day, This is not related to gender bias, but an observation I made from

reading

this paper. Table 1 shows the different percentage of overlap between different languistic versions of Wikipedia with the English Wikipedia. Do anybody know if there are studies or reports focussed on that? For example, I notice that the Wikipedia with the less overlap from the above-mentioned table is the Arabic Wikipedia. To me, it seems to

indicate

another sort of bias on the English Wikipedia and other "Western"

language

Wikipedias in not necessarily including biographies from those parts of

the

world. Or maybe there is another "glass ceiling" not based on gender, meaning that somebody from the Middle East for instance needs to be more notable in average to be included on the English Wikipedia comparatively

somebody in North America or Europe. Do we have any analysis of that? Is that a question that is brought up in reflexions about bias? Thank you, JP On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 3:55 PM, James Heilman <jmh649(a)gmail.com> wrote: > The article was discussing the proportion of articles about specific > gender and possible reasons why this situation exists. What I > mentioned was simply one among many potential explanation. > > James > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Eduardo Testart <etestart(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hi again, > > > > I think the article is not related to paid editing, if you wish to > discuss > > that subject, you should probably open another thread. > > > > It would be nice if the discussion and comments can be kept on topic

> > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > El sept. 22, 2017 3:49 PM, "James Heilman" <jmh649(a)gmail.com>

escribió:

> > > > How do we know? Those who work extensively in this topic area and are > > good at picking up paid editing make an educated guess. There are well > > known patterns that represent paid editing. We could likely build a > > tool that could look at all BLPs and give a numerical value to the > > percentage that are most likely written for pay. If you look at a > > random group of new BLPs at WP:NPP you will also get a decent idea. > > > > James > > > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Andy Mabbett > > <andy(a)pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote: > >> On 22 September 2017 at 18:24, James Heilman <jmh649(a)gmail.com>

wrote:

> >> > >>> We know that a sizable proportion of articles > >>> about people are paid for by the individual themselves or their > >>> representative. > >> > >> We do? How? And what size is that "sizable proportion"? > >> > >> -- > >> Andy Mabbett > >> @pigsonthewing > >> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/

mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > > > -- > > James Heilman > > MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l

New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

James Salsman

7:25 p.m.

New subject: Women through the glass ceiling: gender asymmetries in Wikipedia

For example, whether or not a notable town in in the global south, for instance, has an article is unlikely to affect the quality of life of its residents as much as whether infrastructure businesses in that town have access to credit. If global finance policy makers believe the typical positions of English Wikipedia economics articles, instead of the WP:MEDRS grade sources on the topic which are not well represented in Wikipedia, such as http://talknicer.com/ehip.pdf or http://talknicer.com/egma.pdf for example, that can do real harm to the likelihood that the global financial system will as readily extend inexpensive credit to the developing world. As we get more and more information about the causation from Wikipedia to real world decisions, I hope that there is some concerted effort to address this specific issue. On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 2:31 PM, Jean-Philippe Béland <jpbeland(a)wikimedia.ca> wrote:

...

Good day, This is not related to gender bias, but an observation I made from

reading

indicate

another sort of bias on the English Wikipedia and other "Western"

language

Wikipedias in not necessarily including biographies from those parts of

the

> > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > El sept. 22, 2017 3:49 PM, "James Heilman" <jmh649(a)gmail.com>

escribió:

wrote:

mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l

New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Jane Darnell

10:56 a.m.

New subject: Women through the glass ceiling: gender asymmetries in Wikipedia

I don't think so, but this has interested me. The problem is how to look at the data in such a way that it is meaningful. I tried to break it down a bit and I have presented about the differences in women's occupations across language wikis and gender here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gendergap_-_female_percentage_per_o… Because of receiving timeouts I couldn't get all the data on the largest wikis to do more work on the dataset, but this year I started tracking the occupations linked to women in Wikidata per sitelinked language wiki using Magnus's Listeria tool here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Jane023/Number_of_women_per_occupation Since I noticed lots of women on Wikidata were either linked to extremely obscure occupations or mostly just still missing any occupation at all, I decided to replicate the listeria list in userspace on some Wikipedias in order to see if that helped, and it did. You can run the same query for any language (I recommend trying it for Japanese or as you suggest, Arabic) After looking at the Asian languages individually I noticed there are just huge differences in the popular womens' occupations. On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 8:30 PM, Jean-Philippe Béland <jpbeland(a)wikimedia.ca

...

wrote:

> Good day, > > This is not related to gender bias, but an observation I made from reading > this paper. Table 1 shows the different percentage of overlap between > different languistic versions of Wikipedia with the English Wikipedia. Do > anybody know if there are studies or reports focussed on that? > > For example, I notice that the Wikipedia with the less overlap from the > above-mentioned table is the Arabic Wikipedia. To me, it seems to indicate > another sort of bias on the English Wikipedia and other "Western" language > Wikipedias in not necessarily including biographies from those parts of the > world. Or maybe there is another "glass ceiling" not based on gender, > meaning that somebody from the Middle East for instance needs to be more > notable in average to be included on the English Wikipedia comparatively of > somebody in North America or Europe. Do we have any analysis of that? Is > that a question that is brought up in reflexions about bias? > > Thank you, > > JP > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 3:55 PM, James Heilman <jmh649(a)gmail.com

...

wrote:

> > > The article was discussing the proportion of articles about specific > > gender and possible reasons why this situation exists. What I > > mentioned was simply one among many potential explanation. > > > > James > > > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Eduardo Testart <etestart(a)gmail.com> >

...

wrote:

> > > Hi again, > > > > > > I think the article is not related to paid editing, if you wish to > > discuss > > > that subject, you should probably open another thread. > > > > > > It would be nice if the discussion and comments can be kept on topic :) > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > El sept. 22, 2017 3:49 PM, "James Heilman" <jmh649(a)gmail.com> > escribió: > > > > > > How do we know? Those who work extensively in this topic area and are > > > good at picking up paid editing make an educated guess. There are well > > > known patterns that represent paid editing. We could likely build a > > > tool that could look at all BLPs and give a numerical value to the > > > percentage that are most likely written for pay. If you look at a > > > random group of new BLPs at WP:NPP you will also get a decent idea. > > > > > > James > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Andy Mabbett > > > <andy(a)pigsonthewing.org.uk

...

wrote:

> > >> On 22 September 2017 at 18:24, James Heilman <jmh649(a)gmail.com>

...

wrote:

> > >> > > >>> We know that a sizable proportion of articles > > >>> about people are paid for by the individual themselves or their > > >>> representative. > > >> > > >> We do? How? And what size is that "sizable proportion"? > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Andy Mabbett > > >> @pigsonthewing > > >> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > , > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > James Heilman > > > MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > > > -- > > James Heilman > > MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > -- > > Jean-Philippe Béland > > [image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada > <https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr>, chapitre national > soutenant Wikipédia > Vice president — Wikimedia Canada > <https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en>, national chapter > supporting Wikipedia > 535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec) H2L 2P3,jpbeland(a)wikimedia.ca > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Jane Darnell

22 Sep 22 Sep

6:14 p.m.

New subject: Women through the glass ceiling: gender asymmetries in Wikipedia

Yes very interesting, if only to illustrate how difficult it is to get this information reliably. It is also interesting to see those charts dating to the days before Wikidata. One problem with using these stats is that pretty much everything is a moving target. Yes there is a larger gap at the local level for women, but what is "local"? Many women who became notable, did it from home (e.g. writers, poets, abbesses, noblewomen). The systemic bias in published pre-1900 sources throughout the world is also a factor, since many encyclopedias focussed on clergy and military. The page rank is not a reliable measure because we have no way of knowing what the gender is of our reader base over time. When you break it down into professions, it is also worth noting that professions that you would expect to be 99% female (beauty pageant queen) turn out not to be. In fact, women score systematically lower across the board, and per profession, need many more "kudos" before becoming notable enough for an article (lots of abbesses, but few theologians, etc) On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 6:55 PM, Eduardo Testart <etestart(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

Hi all, One of the members from Wikimedia Chile, independently from the chapter and before he became a member, was directly involved in the development of the following article, that adress the gender inequality (or gender bias), and which gives the title to the email: *https://epjdatascience.springeropen.com/articles/10. 1140/epjds/s13688-016-0066-4 <https://epjdatascience.springeropen.com/articles/10. 1140/epjds/s13688-016-0066-4>* It was published almost a year and half ago (March 1, 2016), and from an internal and informal conversation that occurred yesterday in the Chapter, he shared the link to the complete study <https://epjdatascience.springeropen.com/articles/10. 1140/epjds/s13688-016-0066-4> (in English). Worth to mention is that he presented preliminary results <https://www.slideshare.net/carnby/wmcl2015-investigando-usando-wikipedia> (in Spanish) about it in the Wikimedia Chile Conference <https://wikimedia.cl/Conferencia_Wikimedia_Chile_2015> from 2015. I read the complete article yesterday, and found it extremely interesting, so I took the liberty to share it here, in case you haven’t had the chance to read it yet. Also, the article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License :) Cheers! -- Eduardo Testart _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

2418

days inactive

2422

days old

wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Manage subscription

11 comments

6 participants

tags (0)

participants (6)

Andy Mabbett
Eduardo Testart
James Heilman
James Salsman
Jane Darnell
Jean-Philippe Béland