Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
History of Feminism
Related: About this forumFighting the Wikipedia boys’ club
Looking into the Wiki matter further, I found this interesting article.
Artist Doris Porter Caesar chose sculpture for her medium because its big and fights against you all the time. She could have been talking about the patriarchal presence on allegedly unbiased knowledge source, Wikipedia. The mid-century sculptors own presence on the worlds most-visited encyclopaedia only came into being a year ago; before 1 February, 2014, her female nudes were mere blips waving at art history from under university archives and phonebook entries. That day, around 100 female artists got new Wikipedia entries. The intruders behind the takeover were feminist group Art+Feminism, whose global Edit-a-thon saw sessions across six countries involving more than 600 participants.
One year later, and Wikipedias highest court has ruled this week on the actions of feminist editors during the GamerGate controversy: the result is that five editors have been banned from editing articles on gender or sexuality altogether. The ruling has dealt a fresh blow in the battle to gender neutralise the wiki world, with Wiki editor Mark Bernstein dubbing the result as a blunder that threatens to disgrace the internet. In a year that has seen a series of all-woman Edit-a-thons put finger to keypad, whether we are any closer to infiltrating the Wikipedia boys club still hangs in the balance. Instagram photo edits notwithstanding, should editing history be high on the feminist agenda in 2015?
Wikipedias troubled record on gender bias is an open secret. A 2011 survey from the Wikimedia Foundation demonstrated that less than 10 per cent of the sites contributors identify as female. More troubling still, another paper in the same year found evidence of an editing culture actively resistant to female participation, with women more likely to experience adversity in the peer review process. This is contrary to participation in other social media sites, where the gender balance is pretty much equal, or even skewed feminine.
Art+Feminism is the go-at-em girl gang that hopes to change all that. The group, headed up by Sian Evans, Jacqueline Mabey, Dorothy Howard, and Michael Mandiberg, believe that theres been some improvement since their own Edit-a-thon and the activities of other gender gap projects since. But, equally, its not enough. Wikipedia is the Lodestar of the digital commons, not only for its authority on knowledge, but, as the group points out, because it is also where the APIs of many other popular sites pull their content: Absences there are ones that really matter
One year later, and Wikipedias highest court has ruled this week on the actions of feminist editors during the GamerGate controversy: the result is that five editors have been banned from editing articles on gender or sexuality altogether. The ruling has dealt a fresh blow in the battle to gender neutralise the wiki world, with Wiki editor Mark Bernstein dubbing the result as a blunder that threatens to disgrace the internet. In a year that has seen a series of all-woman Edit-a-thons put finger to keypad, whether we are any closer to infiltrating the Wikipedia boys club still hangs in the balance. Instagram photo edits notwithstanding, should editing history be high on the feminist agenda in 2015?
Wikipedias troubled record on gender bias is an open secret. A 2011 survey from the Wikimedia Foundation demonstrated that less than 10 per cent of the sites contributors identify as female. More troubling still, another paper in the same year found evidence of an editing culture actively resistant to female participation, with women more likely to experience adversity in the peer review process. This is contrary to participation in other social media sites, where the gender balance is pretty much equal, or even skewed feminine.
Art+Feminism is the go-at-em girl gang that hopes to change all that. The group, headed up by Sian Evans, Jacqueline Mabey, Dorothy Howard, and Michael Mandiberg, believe that theres been some improvement since their own Edit-a-thon and the activities of other gender gap projects since. But, equally, its not enough. Wikipedia is the Lodestar of the digital commons, not only for its authority on knowledge, but, as the group points out, because it is also where the APIs of many other popular sites pull their content: Absences there are ones that really matter
http://www.dazeddigital.com/artsandculture/article/23426/1/fighting-the-wikipedia-boys-club
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Fighting the Wikipedia boys’ club (Original Post)
ismnotwasm
Jan 2015
OP
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)1. That's an interesting article - thanks for sharing.
A lot of men believe that the way they look at things is the correct way to look at things; when they are presented with additional facts or accounts that challenge their worldview they brush them aside. While I am sensitive to the suggestion that Wikipedia should be just about laying out facts, not presenting arguments, in some cases what you choose as your facts reveals a personal bias.
Bryant
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)2. I said this in the GD discussion as well:
Fuck GamerGate.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)4. FUCK GAMERGATE!
There, got that out of my system...
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)3. “a blunder that threatens to disgrace the internet.”
Indeed.