Updated blog with ODNB (49,419 men, 5,581 women) plot. On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 1:31 PM Jane Darnell <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes you have a point there, and it is this "systemic interweb gender bias" > which is interesting. Due to our need for "reliable sources" to solve > gendergap issues, it would be nice to be able to expose these "interweb" > imbalances with graphs like yours for all databases. What does the ODNB > look like? That one is completely matched now. I measured 10% women over > all. > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 2:17 PM, Magnus Manske < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Google image search for properly licensed images didn't give me an image >> of her, neither did Commons. Maybe I just overlooked it, but maybe there is >> no image of her in the article because there is no free image of her? In >> that case, it would not be bias of Wikipedia, but again bias of the >> interwebs. >> >> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 1:07 PM Jane Darnell <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Exactly! However, I do think this example woman shows a Wikipedia gender >>> bias towards men in that her husband's article has an image and hers doesn't >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Magnus Manske < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 12:46 PM Jane Darnell <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Well here you get into a problem with data in the databases. Often the >>>>> records for men are more fleshed out than for women. >>>>> >>>>> Here are two records in the RKD for male and female based on a >>>>> US-based husband & wife duo never active in the Netherlands, but who were >>>>> made popular (with articles on 4 or more language wikis) by a 2014 movie >>>>> about them: >>>>> https://rkd.nl/explore/artists/296853 >>>>> https://rkd.nl/explore/artists/296851 >>>>> >>>>> The ULAN only has one record >>>>> >>>>> http://www.getty.edu/vow/ULANFullDisplay?find=&role=&nation=&subjectid=500333900 >>>>> >>>>> One could argue that there is not enough in any of these records to >>>>> make a Wikidata entry, let alone a Wikipedia article in any language. So >>>>> just having the record in the ULAN or the RKDartists will not help any >>>>> language-pedia. The English Wikipedia includes of course articles for >>>>> both, >>>>> though they are not sourced to these databases at all. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Which only shows that RKD/ULAN are not the basis for Wikipedia >>>> articles. Your "example woman" has 13 references: >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Keane >>>> >>>> But, the argument could be made that general coverage on the web is >>>> biased towards men, and Wikipedia reflects that trend, if only for a lack >>>> of sources. >>>> >>>> >>>>> In comparison, here is a US male artist without any Wikipedia article, >>>>> born the same year as Mrs. Keane, whose entry in the RKD is well fleshed >>>>> out, because this person was active in Amsterdam >>>>> https://rkd.nl/explore/artists/55977 >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Magnus Manske < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Well, a "local bias" would push the total coverage in a certain >>>>>> language, as evidences by high nl.wp coverage for RKD but not for ULAN. >>>>>> But >>>>>> how would that affect the gender bias? No matter how popular RKDartists >>>>>> are >>>>>> on a Wikipedia, unbiased coverage should always put them on the line in >>>>>> my >>>>>> plots. However, only the almost-complete Wikipedias come near that line. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 11:27 AM Jane Darnell <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Magnus, >>>>>>> That is very cool! I also noticed the same trend, which indeed does >>>>>>> at first glance appear to be a male bias in the language wikis. However, >>>>>>> drilling down into the actual data it's really not so bad. What you >>>>>>> actually see is a strong bias from the ULAN for artists who have been >>>>>>> active in the US for whatever reason (artworks in US museum, >>>>>>> exhibition, or >>>>>>> public art). The RKD has a similar strong bias for artists who have been >>>>>>> active in the Northern & Southern Netherlands and adjoining countries >>>>>>> (nl, >>>>>>> fr + de). We should offset this by looking at other databases, and also >>>>>>> looking at the same cross-wiki data for all biographies with >>>>>>> occupation=artist. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jane >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Magnus Manske < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://magnusmanske.de/wordpress/?p=278 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 8:48 AM Jane Darnell <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>> I am compiling some stats regarding the work done on the Art & >>>>>>>>> Feminism edit-a-thons for my local chapter and while checking the >>>>>>>>> state of >>>>>>>>> the wikis regarding female artists I noticed that there are huge local >>>>>>>>> differences per language wiki regarding "who is notable". One of the >>>>>>>>> things >>>>>>>>> I love about Mix-and-Match is the way you can easily check the >>>>>>>>> sitelinks >>>>>>>>> per wiki. You can also download the data with autolist to see which >>>>>>>>> biographies are popular across different languages. I noticed that in >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> case of women this seems to be way different than for men. Women >>>>>>>>> artists >>>>>>>>> are more likely to be notable in one or two languages only, possibly >>>>>>>>> because they travel less, making their art known more locally than >>>>>>>>> otherwise - who knows? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> In any case, here is something to chew on: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Women_vs_Men_per_external_db_using_Mix-n-Match.jpg >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I wish we had more databases from more countries that only contain >>>>>>>>> artists that we could load into Mix-and-Match! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Jane >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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
