Hi, as some of you may know, the Wikipedia gender indicator [1] tells us how many articles are biographies about women x language/country/culture.
In order to compare these numbers...Does anyone knows if there is an existing comparison with gender balance in classical encyclopedias? (Britannica, Larousse...) or, if not, could someone prepare a WD query about it?
I think it could be a good argument for us to use: e.g "at cawiki 12% of bios are about women, compared to 5% in GEC, Our most famous encyclopedia".
We could compare it also for temathic encyclopedias or other databases existing in projects like Mix and match.
Can someone help? thanks in advance
Àlex Hinojo User:Kippelboy Amical Wikimedia Programme manager
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 12:39 AM, alexhinojo@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, as some of you may know, the Wikipedia gender indicator [1] tells us how many articles are biographies about women x language/country/culture.
In order to compare these numbers...Does anyone knows if there is an existing comparison with gender balance in classical encyclopedias? (Britannica, Larousse...) or, if not, could someone prepare a WD query about it?
I think it could be a good argument for us to use: e.g "at cawiki 12% of bios are about women, compared to 5% in GEC, Our most famous encyclopedia".
We could compare it also for temathic encyclopedias or other databases existing in projects like Mix and match.
Can someone help? thanks in advance
Àlex Hinojo User:Kippelboy Amical Wikimedia Programme manager
Interesting question. There may be more suitable venues for it, e.g. the research mailing list (CCed). Anyway, to start with two examples:
http://reagle.org/joseph/pelican/social/gender-bias-in-wikipedia-and-britann...
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Newsletter/2015/May#Notable_women_.... Comparison of Wikipedia with, among other sources, "Human Accomplishment", a 2003 "ranking of geniuses throughout the ages and around the world based on their prominence in contemporary encyclopedias" (NYT)
I have often thought we should go through at least one volume of the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica for this purpose. The cawiki is great though. I always check the %female factor in all completed lists I have, so I also checked cawiki in my TED speakers list, even though ca is not one of the languages in the TED translation team. See the overall table of results here: https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/TED_conferences
As usual, the Swedes score the best of all the European languages, but cawiki still beats nlwiki by quite a bit.
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 12:39 AM, alexhinojo@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, as some of you may know, the Wikipedia gender indicator [1] tells us
how many articles are biographies about women x language/country/culture.
In order to compare these numbers...Does anyone knows if there is an
existing comparison with gender balance in classical encyclopedias? (Britannica, Larousse...) or, if not, could someone prepare a WD query about it?
I think it could be a good argument for us to use: e.g "at cawiki 12% of
bios are about women, compared to 5% in GEC, Our most famous encyclopedia".
We could compare it also for temathic encyclopedias or other databases
existing in projects like Mix and match.
Can someone help? thanks in advance
Àlex Hinojo User:Kippelboy Amical Wikimedia Programme manager
Interesting question. There may be more suitable venues for it, e.g. the research mailing list (CCed). Anyway, to start with two examples:
http://reagle.org/joseph/pelican/social/gender-bias-in-wikipedia-and-britann...
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Newsletter/2015/May#Notable_women_.... Comparison of Wikipedia with, among other sources, "Human Accomplishment", a 2003 "ranking of geniuses throughout the ages and around the world based on their prominence in contemporary encyclopedias" (NYT)
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Hi Alex,
I compiled some numbers for the Oxford DNB a while ago. After the most recent update, they have 6630 female, 53260 male, so 9% female. (This omits any group/family entries). I haven't crosschecked this against the Wikidata figures but they should be broadly comparable.
Britannica (and most other resources we're linking to) can't easily be done in Wikidata as we don't have comprehensive matching yet. However, there's an older study which is probably relevant: http://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/viewArticle/777
Andrew.
On 20 April 2016 at 08:39, alexhinojo@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, as some of you may know, the Wikipedia gender indicator [1] tells us how many articles are biographies about women x language/country/culture.
In order to compare these numbers...Does anyone knows if there is an existing comparison with gender balance in classical encyclopedias? (Britannica, Larousse...) or, if not, could someone prepare a WD query about it?
I think it could be a good argument for us to use: e.g "at cawiki 12% of bios are about women, compared to 5% in GEC, Our most famous encyclopedia".
We could compare it also for temathic encyclopedias or other databases existing in projects like Mix and match.
Can someone help? thanks in advance
Àlex Hinojo User:Kippelboy Amical Wikimedia Programme manager _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
A comparison against classical sports biographical works, focused on Australian sportspeople.
http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:301142 On 20 Apr 2016 14:39, alexhinojo@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, as some of you may know, the Wikipedia gender indicator [1] tells us how many articles are biographies about women x language/country/culture.
In order to compare these numbers...Does anyone knows if there is an existing comparison with gender balance in classical encyclopedias? (Britannica, Larousse...) or, if not, could someone prepare a WD query about it?
I think it could be a good argument for us to use: e.g "at cawiki 12% of bios are about women, compared to 5% in GEC, Our most famous encyclopedia".
We could compare it also for temathic encyclopedias or other databases existing in projects like Mix and match.
Can someone help? thanks in advance
Àlex Hinojo User:Kippelboy Amical Wikimedia Programme manager _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hoi, Given the existing number of articles and the gender gap in them, it is unlikely that activities make much of a difference. I think that it makes more sense to compare the new articles and see if the percentages are different in those. Did anyone look at it in this way? Thanks, GerardM
On 20 April 2016 at 09:39, alexhinojo@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, as some of you may know, the Wikipedia gender indicator [1] tells us how many articles are biographies about women x language/country/culture.
In order to compare these numbers...Does anyone knows if there is an existing comparison with gender balance in classical encyclopedias? (Britannica, Larousse...) or, if not, could someone prepare a WD query about it?
I think it could be a good argument for us to use: e.g "at cawiki 12% of bios are about women, compared to 5% in GEC, Our most famous encyclopedia".
We could compare it also for temathic encyclopedias or other databases existing in projects like Mix and match.
Can someone help? thanks in advance
Àlex Hinojo User:Kippelboy Amical Wikimedia Programme manager _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Yes. That is SOP for studies about biographies and literature in general. On 20 Apr 2016 18:04, "Gerard Meijssen" gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, Given the existing number of articles and the gender gap in them, it is unlikely that activities make much of a difference. I think that it makes more sense to compare the new articles and see if the percentages are different in those. Did anyone look at it in this way? Thanks, GerardM
On 20 April 2016 at 09:39, alexhinojo@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, as some of you may know, the Wikipedia gender indicator [1] tells us how many articles are biographies about women x language/country/culture.
In order to compare these numbers...Does anyone knows if there is an existing comparison with gender balance in classical encyclopedias? (Britannica, Larousse...) or, if not, could someone prepare a WD query about it?
I think it could be a good argument for us to use: e.g "at cawiki 12% of bios are about women, compared to 5% in GEC, Our most famous
encyclopedia".
We could compare it also for temathic encyclopedias or other databases existing in projects like Mix and match.
Can someone help? thanks in advance
Àlex Hinojo User:Kippelboy Amical Wikimedia Programme manager _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Thank you all for your considerations, URLs and comments. very useful!
2016-04-20 13:11 GMT+02:00 John Mark Vandenberg jayvdb@gmail.com:
Yes. That is SOP for studies about biographies and literature in general. On 20 Apr 2016 18:04, "Gerard Meijssen" gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, Given the existing number of articles and the gender gap in them, it is unlikely that activities make much of a difference. I think that it makes more sense to compare the new articles and see if the percentages are different in those. Did anyone look at it in this way? Thanks, GerardM
On 20 April 2016 at 09:39, alexhinojo@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, as some of you may know, the Wikipedia gender indicator [1] tells
us
how many articles are biographies about women x
language/country/culture.
In order to compare these numbers...Does anyone knows if there is an existing comparison with gender balance in classical encyclopedias? (Britannica, Larousse...) or, if not, could someone prepare a WD query about it?
I think it could be a good argument for us to use: e.g "at cawiki 12%
of
bios are about women, compared to 5% in GEC, Our most famous
encyclopedia".
We could compare it also for temathic encyclopedias or other databases existing in projects like Mix and match.
Can someone help? thanks in advance
Àlex Hinojo User:Kippelboy Amical Wikimedia Programme manager _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hoi, When it is "SOP", why is it that you hear so little about the effects of policies framed in terms of the rates we had or the rates we had in a previous year.
The argument that there is a gender gap is getting tired when the argument why it is a problem is only framed in the existence of the gap. It is necessary that we learn how and what improvements are made and maybe how it has an impact on the reader numbers. When there is a demand for articles about women, it could result in more readers for articles about women..
I do welcome a different tack on this issue. The arguments so far are getting stale. Thanks, GerardM
On 20 April 2016 at 13:11, John Mark Vandenberg jayvdb@gmail.com wrote:
Yes. That is SOP for studies about biographies and literature in general. On 20 Apr 2016 18:04, "Gerard Meijssen" gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, Given the existing number of articles and the gender gap in them, it is unlikely that activities make much of a difference. I think that it makes more sense to compare the new articles and see if the percentages are different in those. Did anyone look at it in this way? Thanks, GerardM
On 20 April 2016 at 09:39, alexhinojo@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, as some of you may know, the Wikipedia gender indicator [1] tells
us
how many articles are biographies about women x
language/country/culture.
In order to compare these numbers...Does anyone knows if there is an existing comparison with gender balance in classical encyclopedias? (Britannica, Larousse...) or, if not, could someone prepare a WD query about it?
I think it could be a good argument for us to use: e.g "at cawiki 12%
of
bios are about women, compared to 5% in GEC, Our most famous
encyclopedia".
We could compare it also for temathic encyclopedias or other databases existing in projects like Mix and match.
Can someone help? thanks in advance
Àlex Hinojo User:Kippelboy Amical Wikimedia Programme manager _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
The argument that there is no demand for such articles is itself a stale one, used to frequently justify gender disparities in all sorts of fields and media. There is a clear demand for such articles. The media reaction to Emily Temple-Wood's campaign to write articles about female scientists is only the most recent and prominent example illustrating that the audience is there. Readers want to close the gap, the media wants to close the gap, academia wants to close the gap, the WMF wants to close the gap, the only people who don't want to close the gap are stubborn volunteer encyclopedia editors.
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, When it is "SOP", why is it that you hear so little about the effects of policies framed in terms of the rates we had or the rates we had in a previous year.
The argument that there is a gender gap is getting tired when the argument why it is a problem is only framed in the existence of the gap. It is necessary that we learn how and what improvements are made and maybe how it has an impact on the reader numbers. When there is a demand for articles about women, it could result in more readers for articles about women..
I do welcome a different tack on this issue. The arguments so far are getting stale. Thanks, GerardM
On 20 April 2016 at 13:11, John Mark Vandenberg jayvdb@gmail.com wrote:
Yes. That is SOP for studies about biographies and literature in general. On 20 Apr 2016 18:04, "Gerard Meijssen" gerard.meijssen@gmail.com
wrote:
Hoi, Given the existing number of articles and the gender gap in them, it is unlikely that activities make much of a difference. I think that it
makes
more sense to compare the new articles and see if the percentages are different in those. Did anyone look at it in this way? Thanks, GerardM
On 20 April 2016 at 09:39, alexhinojo@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, as some of you may know, the Wikipedia gender indicator [1] tells
us
how many articles are biographies about women x
language/country/culture.
In order to compare these numbers...Does anyone knows if there is an existing comparison with gender balance in classical encyclopedias? (Britannica, Larousse...) or, if not, could someone prepare a WD
query
about it?
I think it could be a good argument for us to use: e.g "at cawiki 12%
of
bios are about women, compared to 5% in GEC, Our most famous
encyclopedia".
We could compare it also for temathic encyclopedias or other
databases
existing in projects like Mix and match.
Can someone help? thanks in advance
Àlex Hinojo User:Kippelboy Amical Wikimedia Programme manager _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Actually I would say that is not true. The success of the english Wikipedia's "Women in Red" project shows that editors are overwhelmingly willing to close the gap, and only need to be pointed to the proper resources to do so. When you say "closing the gap" I assume you mean closing the content gap, because the participation gap is much more tricky to solve.
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Robert Fernandez wikigamaliel@gmail.com wrote:
The argument that there is no demand for such articles is itself a stale one, used to frequently justify gender disparities in all sorts of fields and media. There is a clear demand for such articles. The media reaction to Emily Temple-Wood's campaign to write articles about female scientists is only the most recent and prominent example illustrating that the audience is there. Readers want to close the gap, the media wants to close the gap, academia wants to close the gap, the WMF wants to close the gap, the only people who don't want to close the gap are stubborn volunteer encyclopedia editors.
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Gerard Meijssen < gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
Hoi, When it is "SOP", why is it that you hear so little about the effects of policies framed in terms of the rates we had or the rates we had in a previous year.
The argument that there is a gender gap is getting tired when the
argument
why it is a problem is only framed in the existence of the gap. It is necessary that we learn how and what improvements are made and maybe how
it
has an impact on the reader numbers. When there is a demand for articles about women, it could result in more readers for articles about women..
I do welcome a different tack on this issue. The arguments so far are getting stale. Thanks, GerardM
On 20 April 2016 at 13:11, John Mark Vandenberg jayvdb@gmail.com
wrote:
Yes. That is SOP for studies about biographies and literature in
general.
On 20 Apr 2016 18:04, "Gerard Meijssen" gerard.meijssen@gmail.com
wrote:
Hoi, Given the existing number of articles and the gender gap in them, it
is
unlikely that activities make much of a difference. I think that it
makes
more sense to compare the new articles and see if the percentages are different in those. Did anyone look at it in this way? Thanks, GerardM
On 20 April 2016 at 09:39, alexhinojo@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, as some of you may know, the Wikipedia gender indicator [1]
tells
us
how many articles are biographies about women x
language/country/culture.
In order to compare these numbers...Does anyone knows if there is
an
existing comparison with gender balance in classical encyclopedias? (Britannica, Larousse...) or, if not, could someone prepare a WD
query
about it?
I think it could be a good argument for us to use: e.g "at cawiki
12%
of
bios are about women, compared to 5% in GEC, Our most famous
encyclopedia".
We could compare it also for temathic encyclopedias or other
databases
existing in projects like Mix and match.
Can someone help? thanks in advance
Àlex Hinojo User:Kippelboy Amical Wikimedia Programme manager _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Robert Fernandez wrote:
The argument that there is no demand for such articles is itself a stale one, used to frequently justify gender disparities in all sorts of fields and media. There is a clear demand for such articles. The media reaction to Emily Temple-Wood's campaign to write articles about female scientists is only the most recent and prominent example illustrating that the audience is there.
This is somewhat tangential, but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Temple-Wood exists now. I personally find this to be both unfortunate and potentially ominous.
MZMcBride
Hoi, EEK women EEK ... I think we should accept that our heroes deserve attention. Calling Emily a hero as in an achiever is not a problem. Emily is certainly notable and she is more than a figurehead.
I do not have a problem with celebrating our own notable people. When we do, WE have a problem.
Thanks, GerardM
On 21 April 2016 at 05:35, MZMcBride z@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Robert Fernandez wrote:
The argument that there is no demand for such articles is itself a stale one, used to frequently justify gender disparities in all sorts of fields and media. There is a clear demand for such articles. The media reaction to Emily Temple-Wood's campaign to write articles about female scientists is only the most recent and prominent example illustrating that the audience is there.
This is somewhat tangential, but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Temple-Wood exists now. I personally find this to be both unfortunate and potentially ominous.
MZMcBride
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
I wrote about gender coverage on Wikipedia and Wikidata, including ODNB comparison: http://magnusmanske.de/wordpress/?p=250
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 8:39 AM alexhinojo@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, as some of you may know, the Wikipedia gender indicator [1] tells us how many articles are biographies about women x language/country/culture.
In order to compare these numbers...Does anyone knows if there is an existing comparison with gender balance in classical encyclopedias? (Britannica, Larousse...) or, if not, could someone prepare a WD query about it?
I think it could be a good argument for us to use: e.g "at cawiki 12% of bios are about women, compared to 5% in GEC, Our most famous encyclopedia".
We could compare it also for temathic encyclopedias or other databases existing in projects like Mix and match.
Can someone help? thanks in advance
Àlex Hinojo User:Kippelboy Amical Wikimedia Programme manager _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
I forgot about that one and it is still interesting, so thanks for reposting! Out of curiosity I also made some queries about the delta factor caused by the English Wikipedia's "Women-in-Red" initiative as opposed to our own Gendergap-in-nlwiki initiative in the Netherlands. I wrote some findings here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Archiv...
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Magnus Manske magnusmanske@googlemail.com wrote:
I wrote about gender coverage on Wikipedia and Wikidata, including ODNB comparison: http://magnusmanske.de/wordpress/?p=250
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 8:39 AM alexhinojo@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, as some of you may know, the Wikipedia gender indicator [1] tells us how many articles are biographies about women x language/country/culture.
In order to compare these numbers...Does anyone knows if there is an existing comparison with gender balance in classical encyclopedias? (Britannica, Larousse...) or, if not, could someone prepare a WD query about it?
I think it could be a good argument for us to use: e.g "at cawiki 12% of bios are about women, compared to 5% in GEC, Our most famous
encyclopedia".
We could compare it also for temathic encyclopedias or other databases existing in projects like Mix and match.
Can someone help? thanks in advance
Àlex Hinojo User:Kippelboy Amical Wikimedia Programme manager _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hello
Sorry for highjacking your thread, but reading your message, I wanted to share with you a small page I made a few days ago, to quantify the double gap Gender/Africa.
http://www.wikiloveswomen.org/about-the-project/mind-the-gap/
If anyone has additional links or studies that could be useful to further illustrate that double gap... I am interested.
Also, if anyone is interested in further exploring this data-wise, please raise your hand ;)
Florence
Le 20/04/16 09:39, alexhinojo@gmail.com a écrit :
Hi, as some of you may know, the Wikipedia gender indicator [1] tells us how many articles are biographies about women x language/country/culture.
In order to compare these numbers...Does anyone knows if there is an existing comparison with gender balance in classical encyclopedias? (Britannica, Larousse...) or, if not, could someone prepare a WD query about it?
I think it could be a good argument for us to use: e.g "at cawiki 12% of bios are about women, compared to 5% in GEC, Our most famous encyclopedia".
We could compare it also for temathic encyclopedias or other databases existing in projects like Mix and match.
Can someone help? thanks in advance
Àlex Hinojo User:Kippelboy Amical Wikimedia Programme manager _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Our traditional way of creating article is based on the interests of the contributors. This produces skewed total result, and this becomes more evident on a smaller version like svwp, then on bigger. We have long come to the conclusion that we will never be able to fill categories like towns in Mali and basketballplayer in Brazil, where we have had something like less then 10% of entries then the same categories on enwp (or frwp)
Wikidata can be of help evening out, but on svwp we have (also since long) said we must work and have a more systematic and deliberate approach to fill out "empty spaces"
We therefore love Lsjbot which now generates several million good and comprehensive articles on geographical entities all over the world from the most complete database that exists, and where areas like Africa is getting exactly the same attention like a Nordic country. It is completely unrealistic to think that the few contributors on svwp would ever create the now existing 250000 article on entities on Canada or 16500 entries in Antartica. But the bias in the source means Djibuti only gets 4000 and Camerun 9000 but it is none the less a huge improvement.
For articles on woman/men project are being run by wmse and it now exist a group of dedicated contributors generating articles on women. I am all fascinated of sources being used, specially to get entries of women from middle of 19-th century. All famous ballet dancers in Copenhagen in 1850. All women who had local fame in Finland around 1860, including local healers etc. They have now created many thousands articles and getting the rate of articles up to 20% of total (25% of the number for men)
So I believe skewness is becoming an important issue and that we need to adress oit even if it means to let go the "holy rule" only manual created article are "real" articles, it is the need of our readers who should have priority.
Anders
[1] list of article generated by country this far: https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kategori:Robotskapade_geografiartiklar [2] latest article generated just now a river in Fiji https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mbau_Creek_%28vattendrag,_lat_-16,50,_long_179...
Den 2016-04-20 kl. 23:30, skrev Florence Devouard:
Hello
Sorry for highjacking your thread, but reading your message, I wanted to share with you a small page I made a few days ago, to quantify the double gap Gender/Africa.
http://www.wikiloveswomen.org/about-the-project/mind-the-gap/
If anyone has additional links or studies that could be useful to further illustrate that double gap... I am interested.
Also, if anyone is interested in further exploring this data-wise, please raise your hand ;)
Florence
Le 20/04/16 09:39, alexhinojo@gmail.com a écrit :
Hi, as some of you may know, the Wikipedia gender indicator [1] tells us how many articles are biographies about women x language/country/culture.
In order to compare these numbers...Does anyone knows if there is an existing comparison with gender balance in classical encyclopedias? (Britannica, Larousse...) or, if not, could someone prepare a WD query about it?
I think it could be a good argument for us to use: e.g "at cawiki 12% of bios are about women, compared to 5% in GEC, Our most famous encyclopedia".
We could compare it also for temathic encyclopedias or other databases existing in projects like Mix and match.
Can someone help? thanks in advance
Àlex Hinojo User:Kippelboy Amical Wikimedia Programme manager _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hoi,
Anders, have you looked into the ArticlePlaceholder? Could it serve you well instead of adding articles using the bot? Thanks, GerardM
On 21 April 2016 at 07:48, Anders Wennersten mail@anderswennersten.se wrote:
Our traditional way of creating article is based on the interests of the contributors. This produces skewed total result, and this becomes more evident on a smaller version like svwp, then on bigger. We have long come to the conclusion that we will never be able to fill categories like towns in Mali and basketballplayer in Brazil, where we have had something like less then 10% of entries then the same categories on enwp (or frwp)
Wikidata can be of help evening out, but on svwp we have (also since long) said we must work and have a more systematic and deliberate approach to fill out "empty spaces"
We therefore love Lsjbot which now generates several million good and comprehensive articles on geographical entities all over the world from the most complete database that exists, and where areas like Africa is getting exactly the same attention like a Nordic country. It is completely unrealistic to think that the few contributors on svwp would ever create the now existing 250000 article on entities on Canada or 16500 entries in Antartica. But the bias in the source means Djibuti only gets 4000 and Camerun 9000 but it is none the less a huge improvement.
For articles on woman/men project are being run by wmse and it now exist a group of dedicated contributors generating articles on women. I am all fascinated of sources being used, specially to get entries of women from middle of 19-th century. All famous ballet dancers in Copenhagen in 1850. All women who had local fame in Finland around 1860, including local healers etc. They have now created many thousands articles and getting the rate of articles up to 20% of total (25% of the number for men)
So I believe skewness is becoming an important issue and that we need to adress oit even if it means to let go the "holy rule" only manual created article are "real" articles, it is the need of our readers who should have priority.
Anders
[1] list of article generated by country this far: https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kategori:Robotskapade_geografiartiklar [2] latest article generated just now a river in Fiji https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mbau_Creek_%28vattendrag,_lat_-16,50,_long_179...
Den 2016-04-20 kl. 23:30, skrev Florence Devouard:
Hello
Sorry for highjacking your thread, but reading your message, I wanted to share with you a small page I made a few days ago, to quantify the double gap Gender/Africa.
http://www.wikiloveswomen.org/about-the-project/mind-the-gap/
If anyone has additional links or studies that could be useful to further illustrate that double gap... I am interested.
Also, if anyone is interested in further exploring this data-wise, please raise your hand ;)
Florence
Le 20/04/16 09:39, alexhinojo@gmail.com a écrit :
Hi, as some of you may know, the Wikipedia gender indicator [1] tells us how many articles are biographies about women x language/country/culture.
In order to compare these numbers...Does anyone knows if there is an existing comparison with gender balance in classical encyclopedias? (Britannica, Larousse...) or, if not, could someone prepare a WD query about it?
I think it could be a good argument for us to use: e.g "at cawiki 12% of bios are about women, compared to 5% in GEC, Our most famous encyclopedia".
We could compare it also for temathic encyclopedias or other databases existing in projects like Mix and match.
Can someone help? thanks in advance
Àlex Hinojo User:Kippelboy Amical Wikimedia Programme manager _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Den 2016-04-21 kl. 08:21, skrev Gerard Meijssen:
Hoi,
Anders, have you looked into the ArticlePlaceholder? Could it serve you well instead of adding articles using the bot? Thanks, GerardM
I do not know, as I am not directly involved. What I do know is that Sverker, Lsjbot creator is one of the most clever persons I ever met, and that he knows well of Wikidata and that all expertise on Wikidata on svwp has been involved in the design
I would suggest you ask Sverker directly (and offlist) I think you clever guys on Wikidata can learn a lot from his insights
Anders
On 21 April 2016 at 07:48, Anders Wennersten mail@anderswennersten.se wrote:
Our traditional way of creating article is based on the interests of the contributors. This produces skewed total result, and this becomes more evident on a smaller version like svwp, then on bigger. We have long come to the conclusion that we will never be able to fill categories like towns in Mali and basketballplayer in Brazil, where we have had something like less then 10% of entries then the same categories on enwp (or frwp)
Wikidata can be of help evening out, but on svwp we have (also since long) said we must work and have a more systematic and deliberate approach to fill out "empty spaces"
We therefore love Lsjbot which now generates several million good and comprehensive articles on geographical entities all over the world from the most complete database that exists, and where areas like Africa is getting exactly the same attention like a Nordic country. It is completely unrealistic to think that the few contributors on svwp would ever create the now existing 250000 article on entities on Canada or 16500 entries in Antartica. But the bias in the source means Djibuti only gets 4000 and Camerun 9000 but it is none the less a huge improvement.
For articles on woman/men project are being run by wmse and it now exist a group of dedicated contributors generating articles on women. I am all fascinated of sources being used, specially to get entries of women from middle of 19-th century. All famous ballet dancers in Copenhagen in 1850. All women who had local fame in Finland around 1860, including local healers etc. They have now created many thousands articles and getting the rate of articles up to 20% of total (25% of the number for men)
So I believe skewness is becoming an important issue and that we need to adress oit even if it means to let go the "holy rule" only manual created article are "real" articles, it is the need of our readers who should have priority.
Anders
[1] list of article generated by country this far: https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kategori:Robotskapade_geografiartiklar [2] latest article generated just now a river in Fiji https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mbau_Creek_%28vattendrag,_lat_-16,50,_long_179...
Den 2016-04-20 kl. 23:30, skrev Florence Devouard:
Hello
Sorry for highjacking your thread, but reading your message, I wanted to share with you a small page I made a few days ago, to quantify the double gap Gender/Africa.
http://www.wikiloveswomen.org/about-the-project/mind-the-gap/
If anyone has additional links or studies that could be useful to further illustrate that double gap... I am interested.
Also, if anyone is interested in further exploring this data-wise, please raise your hand ;)
Florence
Le 20/04/16 09:39, alexhinojo@gmail.com a écrit :
Hi, as some of you may know, the Wikipedia gender indicator [1] tells us how many articles are biographies about women x language/country/culture.
In order to compare these numbers...Does anyone knows if there is an existing comparison with gender balance in classical encyclopedias? (Britannica, Larousse...) or, if not, could someone prepare a WD query about it?
I think it could be a good argument for us to use: e.g "at cawiki 12% of bios are about women, compared to 5% in GEC, Our most famous encyclopedia".
We could compare it also for temathic encyclopedias or other databases existing in projects like Mix and match.
Can someone help? thanks in advance
Àlex Hinojo User:Kippelboy Amical Wikimedia Programme manager _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hoi, I would very much like an open conversation about Lsjbot and the ArticlePlaceHolder. In my opinion the use of approaches like bots and article place holders are a taboo subject for many. This taboo is the result of strong and loud opinions particularly in big Wikipedias like German and English.
The result is that much information is not available in many languages. This is what Lsjbot and potentially ArticlePlaceHolder remedy.
I am strongly in favour on having readable information on any subject in any language. Having it is well possible as Lsjbot proves. It just needs sufficient TLC. When we are truly interested in serving our public, we would know what they are looking for and particularly what they are looking for that is missing. At this stage we are clueless. When our search strategy has a way of linking negative results to a workflow where labels in a language are added to Wikidata it would help. It would be a boon when new items can easily be created as a result particularly when they aid in disambiguation. To do that we have to think in terms of what is Wikidata good for and not have as its primary answer "it is to support Wikipedia" because that is awful.
PS does anyone know how Mr Leng Ouch https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?&q=23888152 name is written in Cambodian? He is the recipient of a major award and he should fit in lists of the award..
Thanks, GerardM
On 21 April 2016 at 08:45, Anders Wennersten mail@anderswennersten.se wrote:
Den 2016-04-21 kl. 08:21, skrev Gerard Meijssen:
Hoi,
Anders, have you looked into the ArticlePlaceholder? Could it serve you well instead of adding articles using the bot? Thanks, GerardM
I do not know, as I am not directly involved. What I do know is that Sverker, Lsjbot creator is one of the most clever persons I ever met, and that he knows well of Wikidata and that all expertise on Wikidata on svwp has been involved in the design
I would suggest you ask Sverker directly (and offlist) I think you clever guys on Wikidata can learn a lot from his insights
Anders
On 21 April 2016 at 07:48, Anders Wennersten mail@anderswennersten.se
wrote:
Our traditional way of creating article is based on the interests of the
contributors. This produces skewed total result, and this becomes more evident on a smaller version like svwp, then on bigger. We have long come to the conclusion that we will never be able to fill categories like towns in Mali and basketballplayer in Brazil, where we have had something like less then 10% of entries then the same categories on enwp (or frwp)
Wikidata can be of help evening out, but on svwp we have (also since long) said we must work and have a more systematic and deliberate approach to fill out "empty spaces"
We therefore love Lsjbot which now generates several million good and comprehensive articles on geographical entities all over the world from the most complete database that exists, and where areas like Africa is getting exactly the same attention like a Nordic country. It is completely unrealistic to think that the few contributors on svwp would ever create the now existing 250000 article on entities on Canada or 16500 entries in Antartica. But the bias in the source means Djibuti only gets 4000 and Camerun 9000 but it is none the less a huge improvement.
For articles on woman/men project are being run by wmse and it now exist a group of dedicated contributors generating articles on women. I am all fascinated of sources being used, specially to get entries of women from middle of 19-th century. All famous ballet dancers in Copenhagen in 1850. All women who had local fame in Finland around 1860, including local healers etc. They have now created many thousands articles and getting the rate of articles up to 20% of total (25% of the number for men)
So I believe skewness is becoming an important issue and that we need to adress oit even if it means to let go the "holy rule" only manual created article are "real" articles, it is the need of our readers who should have priority.
Anders
[1] list of article generated by country this far: https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kategori:Robotskapade_geografiartiklar [2] latest article generated just now a river in Fiji
https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mbau_Creek_%28vattendrag,_lat_-16,50,_long_179...
Den 2016-04-20 kl. 23:30, skrev Florence Devouard:
Hello
Sorry for highjacking your thread, but reading your message, I wanted to share with you a small page I made a few days ago, to quantify the double gap Gender/Africa.
http://www.wikiloveswomen.org/about-the-project/mind-the-gap/
If anyone has additional links or studies that could be useful to further illustrate that double gap... I am interested.
Also, if anyone is interested in further exploring this data-wise, please raise your hand ;)
Florence
Le 20/04/16 09:39, alexhinojo@gmail.com a écrit :
Hi, as some of you may know, the Wikipedia gender indicator [1] tells us
how many articles are biographies about women x language/country/culture.
In order to compare these numbers...Does anyone knows if there is an existing comparison with gender balance in classical encyclopedias? (Britannica, Larousse...) or, if not, could someone prepare a WD query about it?
I think it could be a good argument for us to use: e.g "at cawiki 12% of bios are about women, compared to 5% in GEC, Our most famous encyclopedia".
We could compare it also for temathic encyclopedias or other databases existing in projects like Mix and match.
Can someone help? thanks in advance
Àlex Hinojo User:Kippelboy Amical Wikimedia Programme manager _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org