On Jul 18, 2012 8:56 PM, "Carcharoth" <carcharot...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > On 7/18/12, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 18 July 2012 10:47, Andrew Gray <andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk> wrote: > > > >> I remember it being referred to many years ago as long-standing > >> practice, but I've dug around a bit in the discussion archives and > >> can't seem to pin it down. It's probably pre-2004, maybe even pre-2003 > >> - anyone remember? > > > > As with almost all our category system, it's basically ad hoc. I > > suggest if you can propose something not insane to relevant > > wikiprojects and are prepared to do the bot work yourself, you can > > have endless fun clicking "save" in AWB for a few hours. > > For 1,000,000 articles? I think it should be done, but it will take > more than a few hours. I think it could be done very quickly, if lots > of people got involved.
Laura and I did it for Australian sports people. It is time consuming as category structures need to be created. > And I don't think the cases where it is > unclear or a matter of privacy (a vanishingly small number) should > preclude the obvious cases being done. It doesn't seem quite right > that the potential for arguments over edge cases and how to handle > them sensitively, would preclude being able to search by gender. When used in category intersections, its really useful info for gender studies. -- JV
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap