Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Wikipedia Stats

Why Women Have No Time For Wikipedia 579

Posted by timothy
from the busy-doing-real-stuff dept.
Andreas Kolbe writes Wikipedia is well known to have a very large gender imbalance, with survey-based estimates of women contributors ranging from 8.5% to around 16%. This is a more extreme gender imbalance than even that of Reddit, the most male-dominated major social media platform, and it has a palpable effect on Wikipedia content. Moreover, Wikipedia editor survey data indicate that only 1 in 50 respondents is a mother – a good proportion of female contributors are in fact minors, with women in their twenties less likely to contribute to Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation efforts to address this "gender gap" have so far remained fruitless. Wikipedia's demographic pattern stands in marked contrast to female-dominated social media sites like Facebook and Pinterest, where women aged 18 to 34 are particularly strongly represented. It indicates that it isn't lack of time or family commitments that keep women from contributing to Wikipedia – women simply find other sites more attractive. Wikipedia's user interface and its culture of anonymity may be among the factors leading women to spend their online time elsewhere.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Why Women Have No Time For Wikipedia

Comments Filter:
  • by frovingslosh (582462) on Thursday August 28, 2014 @11:26PM (#47781709)
    They are too busy complaining about the gender gap.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 28, 2014 @11:28PM (#47781711)

    Well the genders are identical so it must be some social factor that the patriarchy is responsible for creating.

  • by amiga3D (567632) on Thursday August 28, 2014 @11:30PM (#47781715)

    With good reason. It's obvious by this that Wikipedia isn't doing enough to attract women to contribute. Such a small representation among women is shameful and certainly something must be done to address this glaring example of gender bias.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 28, 2014 @11:33PM (#47781741)

    Women more interested in inane social bullshit than actually learning about world history, politics, technology, industry, the arts and sciences?

    Color me shocked!

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 28, 2014 @11:40PM (#47781765)

    Agreed. Emphases should be on feeling instead of facts. A big problem on Wikipedia is that most edit hurt feelings, especially when you write a lengthy article about your favourite celebrity and someone come behind you and rape all your work with facts. Such senseless rigour are symptom of the patriarchy.

    It is difficult for women to compete with men, because of this men should make place for more diversity. Wikipedia should empower women to express themselves free or peer judgement, divergent opinion or fact check.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 28, 2014 @11:55PM (#47781823)

    Absolutely. For one, articles about persons should feature more about their spouses. The UI needs an overhaul - more pictures and a text cap would help. Every article should also feature a video as a requirement. Article texts should be prose, heavy use of internal monologues is always popular. Females like to read about females - there should be more articles about important historic females; a fixed ratio should help - requiring at least 40% about women is the least we can demand. Lastly, historic events and articles about persons should be required to examine the emotions accompanying the events of interest - we know too little about how for instance Einstein felt when imposing the speed of light or what was going on with Stalin when he found out Hitler was double crossing him. Mao Zedongs marriage is only mentioned twice in his Wikipedia article and Mrs. Zedongs side of the story isn't mentioned at all!

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 29, 2014 @12:06AM (#47781875)
    Check your privilege!
  • by fullback (968784) on Friday August 29, 2014 @12:12AM (#47781891)

    Try having a fact-based discussion with a woman and see where it gets you.

    On second thought, that doesn't work with men either . . .

  • by AK Marc (707885) on Friday August 29, 2014 @12:55AM (#47782023)

    If women don't like it, maybe they should make their own wikipedia,

    Chickipedia?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 29, 2014 @12:57AM (#47782033)

    I mean, face it, men are just more willing to be the trolls and make life miserable for each other.

    I resent this sexist statement

The reason why worry kills more people than work is that more people worry than work.

Working...