This is to do with categorisation (the article refers to categories, but then refers to pages when those 'pages' are in fact dynamic listings generated on the fly).
One place to raise this would be: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Categorization It is also worth reading this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categorization The issue of whether to categorise by gender or not has been debated for a long time on Wikipedia. This is not some recent thing. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categorization/Gender,_race_and_sexuality That is a whole page devoted to how to categorise (or not) by gender, race and sexuality. It is also possible there was a recent discussion on this somewhere here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion Indeed, there is discussion here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_April_24#Category:American_women_novelists Carcharoth On 4/25/13, Kathleen McCook <[email protected]> wrote: > Wikipedia's overwhelmingly male user-editors began the bizarre forced > gender migration on Tuesday > > > The New York Times:: >> >> > http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/opinion/sunday/wikipedias-sexism-toward-female-novelists.html >> > > > http://www.salon.com/2013/04/25/wikipedia_moves_women_to_american_women_novelists_category_leaves_men_in_american_novelists/ > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
