Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gender gap on "classical" encyclopedias

[Gerard Meijssen]

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  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
>  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,
> 
>
___
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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gender gap on "classical" encyclopedias

[MZMcBride]

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
 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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gender gap on "classical" encyclopedias

[Jane Darnell]

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 
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.meijs...@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 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Yes. That is SOP for studies about biographies and literature in
> general.
> > > On 20 Apr 2016 18:04, "Gerard Meijssen" 
> > 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,  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
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]http://wigi.wmflabs.org/
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 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,
> > > > >  ?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,
> > > > 
> > > ___
> > > 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,
> > > 
> > >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gender gap on "classical" encyclopedias

[Jane Darnell]

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/Archive_9#Some_results

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Magnus Manske 
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  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
> >
> >
> > [1]http://wigi.wmflabs.org/
> >
> >
> > 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,
> > 
> ___
> 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,
> 
___
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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gender gap on "classical" encyclopedias

[Magnus Manske]

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  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
>
>
> [1]http://wigi.wmflabs.org/
>
>
> 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,
> 
___
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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gender gap on "classical" encyclopedias

[Gerard Meijssen]

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  wrote:

> Yes. That is SOP for studies about biographies and literature in general.
> On 20 Apr 2016 18:04, "Gerard Meijssen"  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,  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
> > >
> > >
> > > [1]http://wigi.wmflabs.org/
> > >
> > >
> > > 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,
> > > 
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
> ___
> 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,
> 
>
___
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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gender gap on "classical" encyclopedias

[Àlex Hinojo]

Thank you all for your considerations, URLs and comments. very useful!

2016-04-20 13:11 GMT+02:00 John Mark Vandenberg :

> Yes. That is SOP for studies about biographies and literature in general.
> On 20 Apr 2016 18:04, "Gerard Meijssen"  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,  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
> > >
> > >
> > > [1]http://wigi.wmflabs.org/
> > >
> > >
> > > 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,
> > > 
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
> ___
> 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,
> 
>



-- 
--
Àlex Hinojo / Kippelboy
Programme Manager / Director de projectes
Amical Wikimedia
www.wikimedia.cat
@kippelboy / @Kippelboy_cat / @AmicalWikimedia
--
___
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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gender gap on "classical" encyclopedias

[John Mark Vandenberg]

Yes. That is SOP for studies about biographies and literature in general.
On 20 Apr 2016 18:04, "Gerard Meijssen"  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,  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
> >
> >
> > [1]http://wigi.wmflabs.org/
> >
> >
> > 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,
> > 
> ___
> 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,
> 
___
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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gender gap on "classical" encyclopedias

[Gerard Meijssen]

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,  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
>
>
> [1]http://wigi.wmflabs.org/
>
>
> 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,
> 
___
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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gender gap on "classical" encyclopedias

[John Mark Vandenberg]

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,  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
>
>
> [1]http://wigi.wmflabs.org/
>
>
> 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,
> 
___
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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gender gap on "classical" encyclopedias

[Andrew Gray]

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,   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
>
>
> [1]http://wigi.wmflabs.org/
>
>
> 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, 
> 



-- 
- Andrew Gray
  andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk

___
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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gender gap on "classical" encyclopedias

[Tilman Bayer]

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 12:39 AM,   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
>
>
> [1]http://wigi.wmflabs.org/
>
>
> 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-britannica.html

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Newsletter/2015/May#Notable_women_.22slightly_overrepresented.22_.28not_underrepresented.29_on_Wikipedia.2C_but_the_Smurfette_principle_still_holds
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

___
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, 

[Wikimedia-l] Gender gap on "classical" encyclopedias

[alexhinojo]

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 


[1]http://wigi.wmflabs.org/


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,