Hi all,
The English Wikipedia categorises biographies by gender in some
circumstances (eg athletes), but not systematically in the way that
German does - there are no supercategories of Men, Women, etc,
designed to list all members of those groups, and plenty of biography
articles have no
On 18 July 2012 10:47, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
Hi all,
The English Wikipedia categorises biographies by gender in some
circumstances (eg athletes), but not systematically in the way that
German does - there are no supercategories of Men, Women, etc,
designed to list all
On 18 July 2012 10:47, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
I remember it being referred to many years ago as long-standing
practice, but I've dug around a bit in the discussion archives and
can't seem to pin it down. It's probably pre-2004, maybe even pre-2003
- anyone remember?
As
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 11:04 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 July 2012 10:47, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
I remember it being referred to many years ago as long-standing
practice, but I've dug around a bit in the discussion archives and
can't seem to pin it
On 7/18/12, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 July 2012 10:47, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
I remember it being referred to many years ago as long-standing
practice, but I've dug around a bit in the discussion archives and
can't seem to pin it down. It's probably
Actress is certainly not obsolescent in common usage, and I would suggest it
is not the role of Wikipedia to redefine the English language.
At least until the Academy changes the name of its award for performance by an
actress in a leading role...
On 18 Jul 2012, at 12:13, Charles Matthews
On 18 July 2012 12:32, james.far...@gmail.com wrote:
Actress is certainly not obsolescent in common usage, and I would suggest
it is not the role of Wikipedia to redefine the English language.
The point here is whether occupation is gendered, though, in this
case. Cf. firefighter, seafarer
On 18 July 2012 13:03, Charles Matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.comwrote:
On 18 July 2012 12:32, james.far...@gmail.com wrote:
Actress is certainly not obsolescent in common usage, and I would
suggest it is not the role of Wikipedia to redefine the English language.
The point here is
On 7/18/12 11:47 AM, Andrew Gray wrote:
The English Wikipedia categorises biographies by gender in some
circumstances (eg athletes), but not systematically in the way that
German does - there are no supercategories of Men, Women, etc,
designed to list all members of those groups, and plenty of
On Wednesday, 18 July 2012 at 13:18, Delirium wrote:
I'm not sure if that's the best way to do it, but I think that asymmetry
in interest and navigational usefulness is why we have some asymmetries
in the category structure. As for changing it, I think it'll have to be
looked at on an
On 7/18/12, Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org wrote:
Funny you should mention DBpedia. DBpedia can only work based on the things
in Wikipedia and given that we don't include gender in Wikipedia info boxes
or category structures, there won't be anything in DBpedia.
But, DBpedia links into
11 matches
Mail list logo
