Thank you all for the feedback. I will have taken away quite a few good
ideas for further investigation, to summarize:

Gerard - look at the ratios of those bios of a language, which exist only
in that language.
Han Teng - "male gaze" hypothesis, create a by-profession crosstabular
analysis.
Jane - look at the ratios of leading actors by language, and "fictional
humans" more closely.
Jonathan - perform a filter step, or perhaps a weighting by page-views.

Thanks so much for the advice, what a great list.

Make a great day,
Max Klein ‽ http://notconfusing.com/

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 5:57 AM, WereSpielChequers <
[email protected]> wrote:

> I have spent quite a bit of time at new page patrol over the years. My
> suspicion is that many if not most of the people who create articles on
> newly signed pop stars and actors are from their management agency rather
> than fans, especially if they seem too early in their career to have fans.
> Sportspeople I suggest are more likely to be written about by fans,
> especially if they have been signed by a major team, or more importantly
> for Wikipedia a team with an actively editing fan.
>
> On this theory the quality of articles, the number of edits, and when we
> had the Article Feedback Tool the number of "is hot" type comments would be
> a good indication of interest from the volunteer editing community. But
> article creation is in part a matter of the policy of the relevant talent
> agencies.
>
> Sorry if that sounds overly cynical, perhaps if it were possible one would
> filter out the articles that get scarcely any views and then look at the
> gender balance of articles that are of interest to our audience as well as
> our editors.
>
> Regards
>
> Jonathan Cardy
>
>
> On 11 Jan 2015, at 22:23, h <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hello Piotr and Gerard,
>
>     I think a competing hypothesis would be "male gaze". That is to say,
> the more female representation is not about a culture (defined as national,
> ethnic, linguistic or regional, not macho/feminine), but rather a
> gender-interest bias. Thus the more female representation could mean more
> male dominant culture, which is against the theoretical assumption of
>  Piotr's research.
>
>     Note that East Asian Wikipedians that I know, especially those who
> edit Chinese Wikipedia, are predominantly very young. Some of them can be
> highly interested in opposite sex.
>
>     Check the following category pages as examples:
> (1a) Female actresses of every countries in the world
>
> http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:%E5%90%84%E5%9C%8B%E5%A5%B3%E6%BC%94%E5%93%A1
> (1b) Male actresses of every countries in the world
>
> http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:%E5%90%84%E5%9B%BD%E7%94%B7%E6%BC%94%E5%91%98
>
> (2a) Female Japanese AV (i.e. porn) actresses
>
> http://zh.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%ACAV%E5%A5%B3%E5%84%AA
> (2b) Male Japanese AV (i.e. porn) actresses
>
> http://zh.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%ACAV%E7%94%B7%E5%84%AA
>
>     It is quiet clear that the male gaze hypothesis seems to apply here.
> More female presentation simply because they are there to be consumed by
> men or boys.
>
>     So one of my suggestions for research is to select a few professional
> categories that are of interest (say, politicians, poets, entertainers,
> etc.) to do some cross-tab analysis.
>
>     Thus, I will be extremely cautious against using the current
> metrics/methods as viable "gender inequality index".
>
>     As a proponent of "data normalization" and "geographic normalization"
> method myself, I would distinguish two sets of comparisons: one is
> cross-country or cross-language version absolute value comparison, another
> is cross-country or cross-language version "normalized" value comparison.
> By geographic normalization, I mean that researchers must gather another
> set of cross-country or cross-language datasets that captures some aspects
> of realities "external" to Wikipedia. In this case, I would say the
> Wikipedia represented politicians' gender ratio against the offline gender
> ratio of politicians. In other words, "data normalization" allows
> researchers to compare which language version are more or less (and how
> much) equal than the corresponding offline societies.
>
>     BTW, the methods you develop to extract gender from biography articles
> for large-scale analysis may also be re-purpose to study other dimensions.
> One dimension that will interest me would be nationality. It will be
> interesting to see the coverage, focus or bias of a language version on
> people based on nationalities. Age might be another one.
>
> Best,
> han-teng liao
>
>
>
> 2015-01-11 19:01 GMT+02:00 Gerard Meijssen <[email protected]>:
>
>> Hoi,
>> Having read it, I find it is still very much a Wikipedia oriented.It
>> makes use of the toolset by Markus. That is fine. the notion of diversity
>> and notability is also very much culturally defined. It would be nice to
>> know how the different wikipedias accept notability of people from other
>> cultures and if it impacts the diversity of their own articles.
>>
>> I have found that many people do not have an article in the languages of
>> their own cultures. Often it has to do with an interest in a domain that is
>> more of relevance to the other culture.
>>
>> Diversity is very much part of a domain; in Roman Catholicism male
>> dominance is obvious. I am curious if diversity in gender is affected by
>> such considerations and if items with a single article are more in line
>> with what is the norm for a culture, a domain.
>> Thanks,
>>      GerardM
>>
>> On 10 January 2015 at 11:51, Piotr Konieczny <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Here (http://notconfusing.com/preliminary-results-from-wigi-
>>> the-wikipedia-gender-inequality-index/) are some early findings from a
>>> research project I am involved in (together with Maximilian Klein). (To
>>> find out more about the project, see https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>>> wiki/Research:Wikipedia_Gender_Inequality_Index and it's talk page). We
>>> are very curious what you think (don't hesitate to be critical). What we
>>> would really appreciate would be any alternative hypotheses (to the one
>>> presented) that could try to explain why post-1950s Confucian and South
>>> Asian clusters seem so much more inclusive of female biographies than
>>> others (including the "Western" clusters). Are we seeing a data error, or
>>> something else - and if so, what?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Piotr Konieczny, PhD
>>> http://hanyang.academia.edu/PiotrKonieczny
>>> http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=gdV8_AEAAAAJ
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Piotrus
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wiki-research-l mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wiki-research-l mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Reply via email to