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