To spam this list as well as Twitter :-) http://magnusmanske.de/wordpress/?p=250
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Maximilian Klein <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > >
_______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
