User:Lquilter/WPdrafts/CRScategories

On categorization using gender, race/ethnicity, sexuality, and other identities:

Notice: I am always available (unless on break) to consult on questions of categorization of race, gender, sexuality, and other identities that might be applied to biographical articles or articles relating to identities -- e.g., "Books by people of color"; "Women pool players"; "African American scientists". Unfortunately there will be times when the category, if created, will be likely to be deleted. Identity-based categories face two significant, related challenges on Wikipedia:
 * Basic categorization principles mean that categories are not tags, and not all relevant categories can or should be added, in order for a categorization scheme to work. This is a software feature. It will ultimately be resolved by the use of intersectioning functionality -- being able to search, for example, on "American women" and "Writers". In the meantime, all so-called "intersecting categories" other than nationality must pass the WP:CATGRS test, which specifies that an intersection category must be able to have a topic article written about it.
 * Wikipedia is a disproportionately US, white, male culture. Thus, guidelines will be written, explained, justified, and applied in ways that range from outright bias to the cluelessness that leads to systemic bias, e.g., colorblindness. In particular Wikipedia editors frequently exhibit hostility to categories relating to women and to American ethnic identities (e.g., African American; Asian American).

These two facts mean that oftentimes an editor will identify a gap in categorization of articles about people of color, women, or other members of a minority or disempowered identity or culture. Editors of good faith will then seek to amend that gap by creating a category, e.g., Category:African American scientists, Category:Women writers, Category:African American social scientists, Category:Books by people of color. Frequently these categories will be marked for deletion (or discussion) by another editor. The categories are either posted on a "speedy deletion" list or posted for a 5-day discussion on the WP:CFD list.

Discussions that occur on the WP:CFD group exhibit exactly what one would expect from a group dominated by a cross-section of white American young men between the ages of 15 and 45. Consequently categories will often be deleted, ostensibly at least in part on the grounds of (1) but almost always with significant bias and confusion from (2).

'''What can an editor who attempts to create or defend such a category expect? '''
 * Yes, you will hear charges of "reverse racism" or simply "racism" or "sexism" when you seek to create or defend a category that gathers together articles for people of color, a specific ethnic group, women, or all kinds of other identities.
 * Yes, you will have to explain very basic concepts of antiracism, feminism, sexism, and discrimination to the other editors.
 * Yes, people who do argue on your side will also sometimes argue that way for stupid or offensive reasons.
 * And yes, the category may end up getting deleted.

What can I do if an important category is about to be deleted?
 * Contact me. (Offline, google "Laura Quilter" and put "wikipedia CFD" in the subject line; or here on my talk page.)
 * If the category was inappropriately placed on a "speedy" CFD, I can take it off of "speedy deletion" and get it to WP:CFD where a more thorough airing of the issues will happen.
 * I am happy to look at the category and give you my seasoned opinion about the likely outcome at CFD, and the best ways to justify, defend, and explain how the category is appropriate or necessary.
 * If the category is deleted or likely to be deleted, then I can help strategize how to ensure that the information and access are kept. (Categories are not always the best way to do something--we may be able to accomplish the same goals better with a list or infobox template.)
 * If the category was deleted, I can help you work on the appeal process. Yes, there is an appeals process, although it can be daunting. It is difficult to overturn a deleted category but it can be done. It was, with great effort, for Category:Women writers.
 * What I can't do: Promise to "vote" a particular way; use my administrator powers on a substantive matter; lobby or canvas others.
 * Familiarize yourself with the general guidelines for categorization (WP:CAT, WP:CATFAQ, WP:CLS) and with the specific guideline for categorizing according to race/ethnicity, gender, and sexuality (WP:CATGRS). Feel free to engage on the talk pages for those guidelines about problems in application that you observe.
 * WP:CSB (the Countering Systemic Bias project) recognizes the Wikipedia contributor bias (white, male, American, 15-45yo, middle/professional class, able-bodied) and seeks to address ways to write an encyclopedia accurately and without bias, despite that bias. This includes recognizing and remedying such bias. It often requires a long-term project that works to develop content and/or guidelines to support particular topics.
 * Collect information pertaining specifically to your category. For example,
 * Uses of your category as a topic in major databases;
 * Books and articles that are primarily about your category;
 * Professional societies and conferences that pertain to your category;
 * Academic programs, classes, and faculty positions about your category;
 * Other encyclopedias with articles on this topic--especially Encyclopedia Britannica. 

Why shouldn't I just write Wikipedia off?
 * It is becoming the "encyclopedia of record", and it has significant Google juice. No, this is not the biggest or most important fight against racism, sexism, and other forms of discrimination. However, a lot of fourth-graders writing reports are going to come to Wikipedia first.  I believe the project of ensuring that they have access to information that is not solely from the perspective of a privileged minority is worthwhile.

Why is this one of your issues?
 * As a librarian I have chosen to spend time here at Wikipedia working with categories, participating in category discussions, and helping to shape category guidelines; and
 * as a feminist, antiracist, person I am working to counter my own biases, to raise awareness of bias, and to counter systemic (and outright) bias here on Wikipedia;
 * and as an information activist who believes in open access, open content projects, I want to make Wikipedia a better encyclopedia, more representative and unbiased.