Hoi,
It is trivial when you only consider Wikidata. When you consider that some
"humans" do not have a gender classification from a statistics point of
view it hardly matters. It will be more problematic to consider all
sciences.in
When you are interested in the development in the gender gap, you can use
multiple dumps. This is what interests me most; see if the attention to
female academics makes a difference compared with the norm.
The category of expatriate academics is most likely to be totally
ambiguous. You have to consider the context.. What country is the norm ?
Did they go back, do they travel ... The notion IF someone is an expat can
only be considered when an academic has an organisation as an employer that
is not in the country of birth. This information is far from complete but
so are all these categories. Wikidata has more on this than any Wikipedia.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 28 February 2016 at 15:15, Joe Corneli <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 8:24 AM, Jane Darnell <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Oddly, there appears to be no solidarity among female Wikipedians that
> take
> > this into account, because I assume we have lots of female academic
> > Wikipedians who could easily write about other female academics in
> academic
> > articles (or on Wikipedia) if they wanted to and don't.
>
> I have a very basic question, to do with navigating Wikipedia's
> categories. Is there a sensible way to query the category system (or
> extracts, e.g. to DBPedia) to produce a side-by-side comparison of how
> many pages on♀vs ♂ [might as well add: vs ⚧, i.e. nonbinary] academics
> there are in existence on Wikipedia?
>
> I should say that as a user I've often found the category system
> confusing, no less in this case.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Academics -> 36 persons, 14
> subcategories
>
> of which one subcategory is:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Women_academics -> 33 persons,
> 3 subcategories
>
> of which one subcategory is:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Women_academics_by_nationality
>
> To take an example: Daniela Müller is on the list of Academics, but
> not the list of Women Academics; neither is she listed on these
> various subcategory pages:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Women_historians -> 120 pages,
> 6 subcategories
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:German_women_academics -> 69 pages
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Dutch_women_academics -> 6 pages
>
> Nor, coming at this from another angle, is she listed on:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Expatriate_academics -> 6
> pages, 9 subcategories
>
> ... although her bio page says that she is a "German theologian and
> church historian, who works in the Netherlands since 2007 and who
> holds the chair of Church History/History of Christianity."
>
> narrative: I don't for a moment question that representation is very
> unequal (and we could re-do this exercise along other dimensions as
> you suggest Jane -- as evidenced by the German women vs Dutch women
> comparison, combining dimensions produces revealing results)... but I
> wish I knew just HOW unequal things are. At the moment it seems very
> difficult to know the answer to that question -- but, again, this may
> be because I'm naive about the art of wiki querying.
>
> I know that some researchers have managed to get good data out about
> this sort of thing, e.g.
>
> «More information on Wikipedia deals with Europe than all of the
> locations outside of Europe.»
>
> GRAHAM , M., HOGAN , B., STRAUMANN , R. K., AND MEDHAT , A. 2014.
> Uneven geographies of user-generated information: patterns of
> increasing informational poverty. Annals of the Association of
> American Geographers 104, 4, 746–764.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
