Hi all, What we should do is to create a top 100 or top 500 list of women important or much known for each country in the world.
Such list would invite people to write more about them. If we create an overview, it is more likely that the missing articles and wikidata items will be created. Romaine Op dinsdag 31 maart 2015 heeft Jane Darnell <jane...@gmail.com> het volgende geschreven: > Lennart, > You have every reason to be proud and I honestly don't know why, I can only report the "what". It takes a bit of handwork, but after downloading all of the matched databases from Mix-n-Match, you can then take dumps from Wikidata using autolist per language that include sitelinks to those languages. My suspicion is that at the end of the day, if you are playing the numbers game, the English Wikipedia wins at having the most women. However, those are mostly women who were active in the US. Even Britain is missing huge sweeps of notable women in the English Wikipedia (and see the work for the scientists as an example). What the Swedes have I believe, that other language wikis lack for some reason, is a goal for coverage of notable topics regardless of priority, and then, as an extra step, the desire to cover these at some basic minimum in Wikidata. Otherwise I can't explain it. Perhaps svwiki has successfully absorbed complete versions of various international dictionaries of national biography for other nations? > To be clear, when I say "percentage of women", I mean "percentage measurable with autolist from Wikidata of female biographies in any arts field as a percentage of total human biographies in that field of artists on that Wikipedia". Wikidata is far from complete, and not all biographies have been fleshed out with 4+ statements on Wikidata. > Jane > On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Lennart Guldbrandsson < l_guldbrands...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> It made me very proud to read this: >> >> "Already I am finding that the Swedish Wikipedia has the highest percentage of female vs male across the board in any arts field, followed by the Russian Wikipedia." >> >> But where do these figures come from and can you be more exact? Thanks in advance. >> >> Also, this thread is very interesting. I am following it closely. >> >> >> Best wishes, >> >> Lennart Guldbrandsson >> >> 070 - 207 80 05 >> http://www.elementx.se >> Skriv som ett proffs - min senaste bok >> Få regelbundna skrivtips direkt till din inkorg >> >> @aliasHannibal - på Twitter >> >> "Tänk dig en värld där varje människa på den här planeten får fri tillgång till världens samlade kunskap. Det är vårt mål." >> Jimmy Wales >> >> ________________________________ >> Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2015 19:17:49 -0700 >> From: isa...@gmail.com >> To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Closing the gendergap in biographies on Wikipedia >> >> Jane, >> >> Thanks for your thoughtful response. I agree completely that mixing up editor and biography gender biases is dangerous and maybe not true. On the statistics side its really intriguing to read about your much closer analyses of different Wikipedias. I would like have computers help humans make more of these types of discoveries. Thanks for all your effort and feedback. >> >> Make a great day, >> Max Klein ‽ http://notconfusing.com/ >> >> On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 6:09 AM, Jane Darnell <jane...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Max, >> Hmm, interesting proposal! I am not sure whether it can be very useful as it reads now. I have thought a lot about this and have looked at the concept "painter" pretty carefully. Yes there is a gendergap in the data as it is generated on a daily basis, but no, I am not convinced this is related to the Wikipedia gendergap in the sense of "you need women to write biographies of women". In fact, some of the most thoughtful biographies of women are written by men and you could maybe say that our biographies of men may improve if we get more women on board editing. There is however, a tipping point when it comes to writing about women on Wikipedia. In my work on female stub creation I have seen lots of examples where the stub existed and was deleted due to notability concerns. Lots of experienced editors (myself included) will only bother to write an article, even if it's just a stub, when the likelihood of having the article stick is judged to be at some mysterious level. I think we need some policy guidelines and some stats about how many articles about women were previously deleted. This may help us determine what the "academic bias barrier" is in accumulating female biographies in general. >> When I think of what I would like in terms of "Wikipedia Gender Index Tools", I would like to see, per country of birth or per occupation or per external database, how the percentage of female vs male is across language Wikipedias. Already I am finding that the Swedish Wikipedia has the highest percentage of female vs male across the board in any arts field, followed by the Russian Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia is somewhere in the middle and the Italians are the biggest loser (but maybe also with the longest history of art historical terms that are documented, which could lead to a higher percentage of men across the arts born before 1800, but perhaps higher after 1850 - who knows?). >> Once you start drilling down into the data you find all sorts of really weird conundrums! >> Jane >> On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Maximilian Klein <isa...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Jane, great investigation. >> >> I like this idea of looking at the gender gap by-profession, and seeing if it is closing at any rate by sampling it over time. In fact, I put in a project for the "inspire campaign" to automate recording these statistics over time for all professions. It'd be great to have your endorsement, and if the project is funded we can compare how painters fair against other professions. >> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/WIGI:_Wikipedia_Gender_Index_Tools#Endorsements >> >> Make a great day, >> Max Klein ‽ http://notconfusing.com/ >> >> On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 4:51 AM, Jane Darnell <jane...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi everyone, I have been checking how we are doing on closing the gendergap on biographies of women artists for a while. Part of the problem is collecting the data, and Wikidata is a great help. Unfortunately there are still lots of women artists with Wikidata items without any statements at all, but since this is also true for male artists, looking at the stats is useful. What I did was to collect data for all female artists and all male artist and came up with percentages for painters versus various matched data bases in Mix-n-Match. >> Thanks to our push on Art & Feminism, the score is better (12.5%) on Wikimedia projects than for the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (10.1%). The ODNB is currently the only database that is completely matched. The other databases are still being matched, but still, it's interesting to see how we currently stand with those. Here are the scores: >> Wikidata painters - 12.5%: 45016 male, 6430 female >> RKD - 11.4%: 21809 male, 2795 female >> United List of Artist Names - 8.6%: 32993 male, 3091 female >> BBC Your Paintings - 7.7%: 6535 male, 545 female >> Oxford Dictionary of National Biography - 10.1%: 49419 male, 5581 female >> http://tools.wmflabs.org/mix-n-match/ >> >> These stats were gathered this morning using Autolist: >> http://tools.wmflabs.org/autolist/autolist1.html >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gendergap mailing list >> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gendergap mailing list >> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gendergap mailing list >> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >> >> >> _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >> _______________________________________________ >> Gendergap mailing list >> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap > >
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
