Re: [Wiki-research-l] Women on Wikidata
Gerard, Actually historically speaking, there will be fewer Harvard alumni as women because they graduated from Radcliffe, not Harvard, no? Anyway, how about a trade - I will send you all of my male-female data with Wikipedia entity names, and you send me back the Q numbers? Or can you only accept data with Q numbers as a field? Jane 2014-04-21 7:58 GMT+02:00, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com: Hoi, I blogged about the issue of sex ratios on Wikidata [1]. The experiment I did with Harvard alumni was to get some idea about the number of humans who were not yet known as human. I added a substantial number of them to have an item for each entry in the category on the English Wikipedia. I assume that as a group they are relatively well covered; they are ivy league and some of the best and brightest studied there. When you look at the sex ratio for the Harvard educated, you will find that it is worse than for the general population. I suppose it is an indication of the amount of items that still need to be identified as human. Thanks, Gerard [1] http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/04/wikidata-its-sex-ratio.html On 21 April 2014 00:53, Stuart A. Yeates syea...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: To be blunt, Wikidata gains the quantitative quality I am looking for when only male and female is added where applicable. Transgender issues with respect are edge cases. Transgender issues are primarily raised because they're vitally important for people today, but they're not the only issues. Far more numerically superior are the issues of people writing under other-gendered pseudonyms; that's a systemic problem, in the GND data for example. Lord Charles Albert Florian Wellesley and Currer Bell were only outed as pseudonyms of Charlotte Brontë once she achieved a certain level of fame. Modern analysis suggests that there are probably thousands if not tens of thousands of other writers who never achieved that level of fame and never had their pseudonyms revealed. GND and similar library data commonly base their gender data on nothing more than the apparent gender of the name on the cover page (librarianship practice, unlike archival practise, takes such things at face value). To take that librarianship practise out of context and assert that that those thousands or tens of thousands of authors were men (rather than just publishing under male or ambiguous names) isn't going to get you sued, but that doesn't mean it's not the white-washing of generations of women writers. cheers stuart ___ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l ___ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
[Wiki-research-l] The Economist: Wikipeaks? The popular online encyclopedia must work out what is next
Here's a recent article from The Economist. Some of the reader comments about the article were interesting, especially considering the population that is likely to be reading and commenting about an article in The Economist. http://www.economist.com/news/international/21597959-popular-online-encyclopedia-must-work-out-what-next-wikipeaks Pine ___ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Re: [Wiki-research-l] Women on Wikidata
Stuart, we also know that there were women in the arts working in the Renaissance and I wonder how many Master of name artists were women. In fact, I once spent a long time trying to see if there was any evidence that Geertgen tot Sint Jans was a man, because certain aspects of his life seem quite confusing, but would make sense if he was actually a she. (I have since learned he was recorded in his lifetime as a he) This is what makes Wikipedia valuable though - we can improve our knowledge of history by updating such biographies as reliable sources become available. What Gerard is asking is that we bring Wikidata up to speed with the rest of the projects on the gender field for biographies. Wikidata is just a reflection of Wikipedia: it is still a wiki and it's OK to have mistakes, as long as we can keep on correcting them. I would rather have the existing data to query than no data at all, because otherwise how can I see the mistakes so I can correct them? Article tracking through Wikidata will become a whole lot easier than article tracking on Wikipedia through categories I think. Jane 2014-04-21 0:53 GMT+02:00, Stuart A. Yeates syea...@gmail.com: On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: To be blunt, Wikidata gains the quantitative quality I am looking for when only male and female is added where applicable. Transgender issues with respect are edge cases. Transgender issues are primarily raised because they're vitally important for people today, but they're not the only issues. Far more numerically superior are the issues of people writing under other-gendered pseudonyms; that's a systemic problem, in the GND data for example. Lord Charles Albert Florian Wellesley and Currer Bell were only outed as pseudonyms of Charlotte Brontë once she achieved a certain level of fame. Modern analysis suggests that there are probably thousands if not tens of thousands of other writers who never achieved that level of fame and never had their pseudonyms revealed. GND and similar library data commonly base their gender data on nothing more than the apparent gender of the name on the cover page (librarianship practice, unlike archival practise, takes such things at face value). To take that librarianship practise out of context and assert that that those thousands or tens of thousands of authors were men (rather than just publishing under male or ambiguous names) isn't going to get you sued, but that doesn't mean it's not the white-washing of generations of women writers. cheers stuart ___ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l ___ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Re: [Wiki-research-l] Women on Wikidata
Hoi, There are only 264 people identified as Radcliffe alumni. Someone did a job on adding this fact to Wikidata so I started off with some 250 already. I completed the list. The category information on Wikidata includes a query that shows you the current number.. There is a similar query on the Harvars alumni category by the way. http://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=8618565 As to your proposal to have a list and idenfity the Wikidata items from them.. Given that ToolScript does JavaScript, it should be doable. I would ask Magnus to write an example that I could copy and change.. Thanks, GerardM On 21 April 2014 08:28, Jane Darnell jane...@gmail.com wrote: Gerard, Actually historically speaking, there will be fewer Harvard alumni as women because they graduated from Radcliffe, not Harvard, no? Anyway, how about a trade - I will send you all of my male-female data with Wikipedia entity names, and you send me back the Q numbers? Or can you only accept data with Q numbers as a field? Jane 2014-04-21 7:58 GMT+02:00, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com: Hoi, I blogged about the issue of sex ratios on Wikidata [1]. The experiment I did with Harvard alumni was to get some idea about the number of humans who were not yet known as human. I added a substantial number of them to have an item for each entry in the category on the English Wikipedia. I assume that as a group they are relatively well covered; they are ivy league and some of the best and brightest studied there. When you look at the sex ratio for the Harvard educated, you will find that it is worse than for the general population. I suppose it is an indication of the amount of items that still need to be identified as human. Thanks, Gerard [1] http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/04/wikidata-its-sex-ratio.html On 21 April 2014 00:53, Stuart A. Yeates syea...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: To be blunt, Wikidata gains the quantitative quality I am looking for when only male and female is added where applicable. Transgender issues with respect are edge cases. Transgender issues are primarily raised because they're vitally important for people today, but they're not the only issues. Far more numerically superior are the issues of people writing under other-gendered pseudonyms; that's a systemic problem, in the GND data for example. Lord Charles Albert Florian Wellesley and Currer Bell were only outed as pseudonyms of Charlotte Brontë once she achieved a certain level of fame. Modern analysis suggests that there are probably thousands if not tens of thousands of other writers who never achieved that level of fame and never had their pseudonyms revealed. GND and similar library data commonly base their gender data on nothing more than the apparent gender of the name on the cover page (librarianship practice, unlike archival practise, takes such things at face value). To take that librarianship practise out of context and assert that that those thousands or tens of thousands of authors were men (rather than just publishing under male or ambiguous names) isn't going to get you sued, but that doesn't mean it's not the white-washing of generations of women writers. cheers stuart ___ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l ___ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l ___ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Re: [Wiki-research-l] Women on Wikidata
I don't work for the Foundation. This is my opinion, and I do not require any lawyers to sign off on it. What a sad world that would be. On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 2:06 AM, Stuart A. Yeates syea...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 7:10 AM, Magnus Manske magnusman...@googlemail.com wrote: The success of Wikidata is tightly coupled to the re-use of its wealth of data, both in Wikimedia projects and by third parties. Completeness of data is very much a factor here; for some research purposes, completeness may even be more important than 100% accuracy. As we have seen on Wikipedia, accuracy will improve over time, if a critical mass of contributors can be achieved. I'm surprised that the WMF lawyers signed off on this. Deliberately getting the sex of living people wrong seems like the kind of thing litigation is made of. But then again, I'm not a lawyer. cheers stuart ___ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l -- undefined ___ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Re: [Wiki-research-l] The Economist: Wikipeaks? The popular online encyclopedia must work out what is next
thanks! Richard At 12:37 AM 4/21/2014, you wrote: Here's a recent article from The Economist. Some of the reader comments about the article were interesting, especially considering the population that is likely to be reading and commenting about an article in The Economist. http://www.economist.com/news/international/21597959-popular-online-encyclopedia-must-work-out-what-next-wikipeakshttp://www.economist.com/news/international/21597959-popular-online-encyclopedia-must-work-out-what-next-wikipeaks Pine ___ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l ___ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
