On 7/22/2014 8:00 PM, Kerry Raymond wrote:
I think it's new-ness bias and a related content bias and a
popularity bias rather than primarily a gender bias. There's loads
of new work published all the time. Lots of it will not merit a
Wikipedia article, just as many novels by the male
On 7/23/2014 11:56 AM, Carol Moore dc wrote:
On 7/22/2014 8:00 PM, Kerry Raymond wrote:
I think it's new-ness bias and a related content bias and a
popularity bias rather than primarily a gender bias. There's loads
of new work published all the time. Lots of it will not merit a
Wikipedia
I'm sure you are right. The rules are not applied evenly across articles at
all. It's a myth, or common misconception, that Wikipedia is a system
that functions as we are used to institutional systems functioning. The
vast ruleset is just a toolbox, with tools that different people pick up
and use
also discussed on the talk page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:October_(novel)
-Jeremy
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Thank you. But I do not believe these Guidelines are used fairly when it
comes to author's gender. Again..why would every novel by Clive Cussler get
its own page but there be a notability query about one by Zoë Wicomb??
This seems to me pure gender bias.
Interestingly, in the process of
I think its new-ness bias and a related content bias and a popularity
bias rather than primarily a gender bias. Theres loads of new work
published all the time. Lots of it will not merit a Wikipedia article, just
as many novels by the male contemporaries of Clive Cussler dont get
