Wikipedia Ponders Its Gender-Skewed Contributions

nytimes.com:

In 10 short years, Wikipedia has accomplished some remarkable goals. More than 3.5 million articles in English? Done. More than 250 languages? Sure.

But another number has proved to be an intractable obstacle for the online encyclopedia: surveys suggest that less than 15 percent of its hundreds of thousands of contributors are women

Read the whole story: nytimes.com

Comments

[JonAwbrey]

01:06 AM on 02/18/2011

Update. There are now several threads at The Wikipedia Review on this and related topics:

1. Wiki-Women — http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=33052
2. GenderGap — http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=33040
3. Wiki-Porn — http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=33021
4. Comment — http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=32897
5. Media — http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=32780

[xtiangodloki]

09:51 PM on 02/01/2011

Sounds like women are not into edit wars as much as the men. The hive mind is not for everyone.

[Capt Kirk]

05:31 PM on 02/01/2011

So, given equal access to the Wikipedia editing interface, most women choose not to contribute. So what? I bet you'll find a similar disparity in the opposite direction elsewhere (e.g., forums for parenting, blogs and comments on sites that focus on the female perspecive, perhaps even Huffington Post). Should Wikipedia make some kind of extraordinary effort to reach out to women and even up the numbers? I'm not sure I see why. Like I said, the access is unfettered and equal, just about anyone with a computer and an Internet connection can contribute - IF THEY WANT TO. So maybe most women just don't want to. That's fine, really it is! Here's a news flash: despite political and social efforts to make the sexes practically identical, men and women are in fact *different*, said dfferences readily apparent at an early age. I for one am extremely glad about it. Let's celebrate those differences, instead of trying to mash everybody into one neutral gender.

[rekso]

07:26 PM on 02/01/2011

Fanned and I agree.
Woman are great at what they do, and man at other things, that makes the world a better place.

[Max Shaw]

04:36 PM on 02/01/2011

Its probably because most of the articles on wikipedia dont have much to do with shoes, knitting or Grey's Anatomy...lol jk.

[WoodsideCraig]

09:24 AM on 02/01/2011

I've learned over the years not to trust Wikipedia on any controversial topic. There are too many contributors who have a kind of propogandistic My-View-Must-Prevail mentality that prevents fair articles.

There are situations where scientists, who presumably know something about their field of study, cannot get past dogmatic types.

[reasonshouldrule]

07:40 PM on 01/31/2011

We shouldn't read too much into this so-called gender-gap. I'm a woman academic, and I rarely choose to get my information from Wikipedia because in terms of real research, it simply isn't reliable. That's not to diminish its value; I do look at it from time to time, but I have not chosen to check entries concerning my special knowledge and add to or correct them.

It certainly isn't "correlated," as one poster on another thread claimed, with a lack of scholarship and knowledge by women in general.

[shthar]

04:05 PM on 01/31/2011

Women have better things to do then get in pissing contests with wiki-nazi editors.

[cvharquail]

11:05 AM on 01/31/2011

Here's one strategy for getting more women to contribute to Wikipedia-- the Women's Wikipedia Hackathon. Do it on your own, or with friends. Here's how: http://bit.ly/g4dyrc

[Invisibro]

11:02 AM on 01/31/2011

asked for login; didnt read.

[rekso]

10:25 AM on 01/31/2011

Still and high number for the inventions or discoveries of woman, not trying to be sexist, but women do not have even 1% of great inventions or discoveries in the world.

[Julia Bailey]

10:51 AM on 01/31/2011

What on earth does the number of historic discoveries done by women and whether or not women are currently helping wikipedia have to do with each other?
I'm thinking you're one of those guys who kept women down, not letting them own property or vote because you're not very smart and don't want to admit it.

[rekso]

11:06 AM on 01/31/2011

Has to do with the interest of women with the advancement of science. And yes I'm one of the guys that "didnt let woman own property or vote" since I'm 150 years old. You are a great example of my point!!!

[James Schauer]

11:34 AM on 01/31/2011

They are highly correlated, if you can't figure that out ... well then maybe it's because you are a woman ... sorry - that was sexist.

You are a fool to blame women's lack of assertion in so many fields on men. I was raised to treat everyone equally, but since the beginning of my professional life, I've found that women suck really hard at a lot of things.

The professional women that I know are arguably better communicators overall, but in terms of engineering, business planning, research, driving new ideas and vision, focus, work-ethic, confidence, leadership (classical) - they suck.

Any time you go into an area wherein you are dealing with 'the best' - there are very few women around.

I'm not trying to say why that is other than it is NOT men repressing you - the companies that I have worked for a have strived for diversity and are constantly scrambling to find women and minorities to fill roles.

You have every opportunity to contribute as a gender, but like the Wikipedia articles - you are choosing not to.

Stop blaming on others and take responsibility for yourself and your gender.

[shthar]

04:05 PM on 01/31/2011

That's because they have to spend so much time picking up after you!

Would it kill you to even get them NEAR the hamper?

[rekso]

09:22 PM on 01/31/2011

You are 100% right, the modern woman arent as good as they use to be, but I always say that women is like the Offensive line in football, without then nothing happens, but the others on the team get all the stats; O-linemen dont even have stats, and are never talked about; but the make the running lanes and protect the QB; neither could do their job without the line.