Thanks to Gerard Meissen who just updated her Wikidata item with a bunch of references, so who knows that may help. Getting back on topic, the Kaplan fellow has a Wikipedia article while the Schulte woman doesn't. Can we blame him then for feeling irritated that she wasn't notable enough to cite? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Kaplan_(journalist) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=Stephanie+Ricker+Schulte&title=Special%3ASearch&go=Go
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Jane Darnell <[email protected]> wrote: > ...meanwhile, in daily life on Wikipedia, the effects of non-citation > regarding female academics is immediately reflected in the difficulties of > reaching Wikipedia notability status for said female academics: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nitasha_Kaul > > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 1:14 PM, Joe Corneli <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> On Tue, Feb 23 2016, Heather Ford wrote: >> >> > There's an interesting discussion going on right now on the Association >> of >> > Internet Researchers mailing list about the citing of women (and women >> of >> > colour) in academia that I thought might be interesting. The comments >> are >> > also really (as Gabriella Coleman noted) 'lively' so they're worth a >> read >> > too. I'd be curious to learn more about how we as a Wikipedia research >> > community fare here too... >> > >> > >> https://merylalper.com/2016/02/22/please-read-the-article-please-cite-women-academics/ >> >> Heather, from my perspective that discussion looks mostly like people >> talking past each other. >> >> To recap what I learned: It seems that Fred Kaplan didn't notice a book >> that might have been relevant to his research and therefor didn't cite >> it (this is what he claims anyway). When Meryl Alper pointed out the >> missing citation, he was dismissive rather than appreciative. But she >> wasn't exactly diplomatic; contact seems to have been initiated from her >> side as follows: >> >> "how come no mention of this claim made prior by @frauricker: >> http://nyupress.org/books/9780814708675/ …? shame on @nytimes @fmkaplan" >> - https://twitter.com/merylalper/status/701027695400976384 >> >> So it's perhaps not a total surprise that Kaplan was defensive. >> >> The bigger picture -- women authors (not) being cited proportionately, >> or even being actively "erased", as well as broader online sexist >> behaviour[fn1] -- would be well worth discussing but to me the Frek >> Kaplan / Meryl Alper debate looks like it is only tangentially connected >> with the deeper issues. >> >> A counterfactual thought experiment: if Stephanie R. Schulte >> (frauricker) had in fact been male, how would that have changed the >> situation? >> >> I'd suggest we zoom to the "big picture" to get some more context. >> >> E.g. >> >> «We find that in the most productive countries, all articles with women >> in dominant author positions receive fewer citations than those with men >> in the same positions. And this citation disadvantage is accentuated by >> the fact that women's publication portfolios are more domestic than >> their male colleagues — they profit less from the extra citations that >> international collaborations accrue.» >> >> http://www.nature.com/news/bibliometrics-global-gender-disparities-in-science-1.14321 >> >> With regards, >> >> Joe >> >> [fn1]: just watched this related lecture yesterday, >> http://boingboing.net/2016/02/22/sarah-jeongs-harvard-lecture.html >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
