The proportion of female authors is minimal Wikipedia - the wisdom of the crowd lacks diversity. This will change the Wikimedia Foundation, now it is completely unclear what it actually discourages women to enjoy the world you know and how that affects the quality. There are simple questions to which it - if any - are very complex answers.
For example: "Is there God?" Or: "Is there a Higgs boson?" More surprising is that even a very mundane question fits into that category: how many women actually write with the Wikipedia? And equally surprising is the fact that not even a knowledge platform on the size of Wikipedia's has an answer.
This question has most recently the Director of the Wikimedia Foundation found. Sue Gardner told the New York Times, an important goal of the Foundation is to increase the proportion of female volunteers in 2015 to 25 percent. Accordingly, today less than a quarter of Wikipedians is female.
But how many are there exactly? If the ratio is similar in Germany? The search for more detailed information as a "surplus of men" for the first time out just how miserable the data quality - is a fact but as fully documented digital project such as Wikipedia - with regard to some details.
The wiki software logs while the changes to take registered users, pages and has made it or - in case of anonymous change - from which IP addresses they came from. But whether men or women writing, must specify not registered authors. A rough idea of the gender distribution of Wikipedians to launch studies that consider only a subset of all users and authors.
In such a study also supports Sue Gardner to accept the stark men surplus. 2008 surveyed researchers at the University of Maastricht good 170,000 users and authors of different language versions of Wikipedia a call on the sides. Some of the results: a good 68 percent of respondents said they would only read the Wikipedia, not actively involved as authors of these readers are almost 69 percent of men by the authors are good 87 percent of men.
A problem of this study is the self-selection - maybe some people even fill out an online questionnaire rather than others. The result: This group is then correspondingly in the sample over-represented in reality is not. But even if there is such a systematic bias: Despite of the respondents are more active than men authors.
Six percent of women with assets in the German Wikipedia German Wikipedia trials to describe an even more glaring discrepancies. For a survey of researchers at the TU Ilmenau in June 2009 in the German-registered 564 random Wikipedia, active authors invited to fill out an online questionnaire.
One result: just six percent of contributors were women. In 2005, determined researchers at the University of Würzburg in a survey of active Wikipedians (only 106, however) a woman of 10 percent. Research on women is not perfect. That at least is better than the participation of minorities - which did not exist.
The coarse image certainly seems to agree: Women are in various positions in Wikipedia underrepresented crass. But why? Why write women so rare? Perhaps women disproportionately deterred from strong, which prevents many Wikipedia users also on the cooperation of: The entry is complicated, there are many rules, the demands on new articles are high, there are few topics that are not completely plowed.
The Wikipedia is suffering from a decline in the total entrants to the assets. The Frankfurt sociologist Christian Stegbauer identified in 2007 a study of 15,000 author profiles, that 56 percent of people who register (and there are very few) then edit a single article. Bridge builder conclusion: "Many authors write very little, few write very much." Is it because of the many rules? Is it the sometimes confusing user interface for beginners? Is it the tone? Lack of studies, it is impossible to designate as a reason.
Sociologist Stegbauer plays through an example: ". It would be conceivable even that the sometimes harsh tone, but discourages women: To be deterred, must cooperate for the first time women yes - we do not know if this happens." One category of female super heroes? Unnecessary! There are only individual cases that illustrate where a problem might lie.
For example, the story of a law student who collects comic books and wanted to create a category on the English Wikipedia for female superheroes. You registered, created the category, and used an article. Then it came to vote on that category, she was found to be unnecessary and deleted.
The opponents argued that the category had taken "too far", the supporters were, however, it is narrower than the existing "Super Heroes" category, also did the family of the comic figures, a cultural significance. The opponents won the vote, the author recalls in her blog: "The fact that I, as a newcomer to have a good idea and could engage me for that possibility did not exist." It maintains its collection of materials on the subject since the open Wikipedia-member counterpart.
The deletion debate, in which case a special tastes from (author defends an article about sexism in pop culture against the deletion requests predominantly male users), but this type of fire-fighting actions should frighten every new user, regardless of gender and topic. The wisdom of diversity as the lack of diversity affects the authors on the contents of Wikipedia, one has to investigate yet.
Guido Hertel, Professor of Organizational and Business Psychology at the University of Münster, describes possible analysis approaches: One can compare Wikipedia articles and texts from traditional encyclopedias on subjects in which discrimination is possible. Or, analyze the revisions of Wikipedia articles.
Extensively researched all of this has been no one. The Wikimedia Director Sue Garner has a nice picture but it found, how could benefit the interactive encyclopedia: "Everyone has his knowledge crumbs brings to the table if he is not sitting at the table, we do not benefit from its crumbs.." 
For example: "Is there God?" Or: "Is there a Higgs boson?" More surprising is that even a very mundane question fits into that category: how many women actually write with the Wikipedia? And equally surprising is the fact that not even a knowledge platform on the size of Wikipedia's has an answer.
This question has most recently the Director of the Wikimedia Foundation found. Sue Gardner told the New York Times, an important goal of the Foundation is to increase the proportion of female volunteers in 2015 to 25 percent. Accordingly, today less than a quarter of Wikipedians is female.
But how many are there exactly? If the ratio is similar in Germany? The search for more detailed information as a "surplus of men" for the first time out just how miserable the data quality - is a fact but as fully documented digital project such as Wikipedia - with regard to some details.
The wiki software logs while the changes to take registered users, pages and has made it or - in case of anonymous change - from which IP addresses they came from. But whether men or women writing, must specify not registered authors. A rough idea of the gender distribution of Wikipedians to launch studies that consider only a subset of all users and authors.
In such a study also supports Sue Gardner to accept the stark men surplus. 2008 surveyed researchers at the University of Maastricht good 170,000 users and authors of different language versions of Wikipedia a call on the sides. Some of the results: a good 68 percent of respondents said they would only read the Wikipedia, not actively involved as authors of these readers are almost 69 percent of men by the authors are good 87 percent of men.
A problem of this study is the self-selection - maybe some people even fill out an online questionnaire rather than others. The result: This group is then correspondingly in the sample over-represented in reality is not. But even if there is such a systematic bias: Despite of the respondents are more active than men authors.
Six percent of women with assets in the German Wikipedia German Wikipedia trials to describe an even more glaring discrepancies. For a survey of researchers at the TU Ilmenau in June 2009 in the German-registered 564 random Wikipedia, active authors invited to fill out an online questionnaire.
One result: just six percent of contributors were women. In 2005, determined researchers at the University of Würzburg in a survey of active Wikipedians (only 106, however) a woman of 10 percent. Research on women is not perfect. That at least is better than the participation of minorities - which did not exist.
The coarse image certainly seems to agree: Women are in various positions in Wikipedia underrepresented crass. But why? Why write women so rare? Perhaps women disproportionately deterred from strong, which prevents many Wikipedia users also on the cooperation of: The entry is complicated, there are many rules, the demands on new articles are high, there are few topics that are not completely plowed.
The Wikipedia is suffering from a decline in the total entrants to the assets. The Frankfurt sociologist Christian Stegbauer identified in 2007 a study of 15,000 author profiles, that 56 percent of people who register (and there are very few) then edit a single article. Bridge builder conclusion: "Many authors write very little, few write very much." Is it because of the many rules? Is it the sometimes confusing user interface for beginners? Is it the tone? Lack of studies, it is impossible to designate as a reason.
Sociologist Stegbauer plays through an example: ". It would be conceivable even that the sometimes harsh tone, but discourages women: To be deterred, must cooperate for the first time women yes - we do not know if this happens." One category of female super heroes? Unnecessary! There are only individual cases that illustrate where a problem might lie.
For example, the story of a law student who collects comic books and wanted to create a category on the English Wikipedia for female superheroes. You registered, created the category, and used an article. Then it came to vote on that category, she was found to be unnecessary and deleted.
The opponents argued that the category had taken "too far", the supporters were, however, it is narrower than the existing "Super Heroes" category, also did the family of the comic figures, a cultural significance. The opponents won the vote, the author recalls in her blog: "The fact that I, as a newcomer to have a good idea and could engage me for that possibility did not exist." It maintains its collection of materials on the subject since the open Wikipedia-member counterpart.
The deletion debate, in which case a special tastes from (author defends an article about sexism in pop culture against the deletion requests predominantly male users), but this type of fire-fighting actions should frighten every new user, regardless of gender and topic. The wisdom of diversity as the lack of diversity affects the authors on the contents of Wikipedia, one has to investigate yet.
Guido Hertel, Professor of Organizational and Business Psychology at the University of Münster, describes possible analysis approaches: One can compare Wikipedia articles and texts from traditional encyclopedias on subjects in which discrimination is possible. Or, analyze the revisions of Wikipedia articles.
Extensively researched all of this has been no one. The Wikimedia Director Sue Garner has a nice picture but it found, how could benefit the interactive encyclopedia: "Everyone has his knowledge crumbs brings to the table if he is not sitting at the table, we do not benefit from its crumbs.."
No comments:
Post a Comment