>I don't think it is helpful to assign gender based systemic bias every time an
>edit is questioned on women related topic.
To put it in perspective, this was the article as it existed just before the
{{notability}} tag was applied—three days after it was created, and two days
after the {{unreviewed}} tag was removed:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=October_%28novel%29&oldid=617753940
There is a summary of the novel, a list of characters, a statement of who the
author is and where she teaches, and two references—one to what seems to be a
review in The New Statesman (OK as far as RS goes), the other to what seems to
be a website which may or may not be considered a reliable source. There’s
nothing about the award, which would probably have kept the {{notability}} tag
at bay.
>Plenty of people have similar frustration about notability tags being placed
>on their newly created articles especially on >niche topics.
Of course, that happens a lot less when you get to be patrol-exempt.
But even still, on the occasions (and there still are some) when I create an
article and for whatever reason can’t put refs in it right away, I’m looking
over my virtual shoulder until I can (Once I had to wait an hour, and was
absolutely paranoid that someone would tag it or—God forbid—nominate it for
speedy deletion in the meantime). Yes, even me.
I don’t how routinely we advise newer editors to do this, but the fact is that
when you create a new article, especially on a niche topic, you shouldn’t go
live in mainspace with it until you’ve got sourced assertion of notability in
it, and probably at least a few other sources as well. That’s what the newpage
patrollers are looking for.
Daniel Case_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
