User:Socccc

= Inactive. =

"The editor responsible for the tag ... apparently could not wait longer than 12 seconds to nominate it for deletion. Look more deeply into his contributions, and we find out that this particular editor specializes in this kind of work; he spends a lot of time specifically looking for new articles that might qualify for removal.

...

We cannot afford to invite novice student-editors into the community and reward them for their efforts with what amounts to hasty and inconsiderate erasure of both their identities as contributors and the already marginalized content of their contributions. With help from instructors, this student was able to contest the deletion, and to finish the article contribution, but we must wonder how likely it is that this student will want to make additional contributions after this negative first experience."

"According to research by the sports brand (adidas), only 3.5% of football-related biographies are about female players. The much-anticipated FIFA Women’s Football World Cup starts tomorrow (6 June). Ahead of the event, which will run for a month until 7 July, Adidas has partnered with Wikipedia to improve representation of women in football online.

...

“We’re delighted to be partnering with adidas for this project, to shine a light on women footballers and their achievements,” said Lucy Crompton-Reid, CEO of Wikimedia UK.

“As the UK charity for the global Wikimedia movement we are well aware of the gender gap online – which reflects systemic bias and historical inequalities – and are working with a wide range of partners to increase the representation of women on Wikipedia.”"

"Wikipedians who organized the event understood their frustrations and were concerned new recruits would not keep tabs on the articles they created during the edit-a-thons. To help ensure that content would “stick around,” Wikipedians would add articles they helped mentor to their own “watchlist.” When I asked Wikipedians why they felt the need to watch over new articles, I learned from Janet—an academic in her mid-50s that encourages classroom participation to improve women’s biographies—that it was common for “women being added at these events to be immediately flagged for deletion, or even sent to AfD where they would experience further sexism.”

The observation Janet noted was also confirmed by editors I interviewed who are affiliated with Women in Red (WiR). WiR is a group of editors committed to improving systemic bias on Wikipedia and closing the gender gap by focusing on creating content regarding women’s biographies, women’s work, and women’s issues. Their name derives from the practice of turning “red links” (pages that do not yet exist on Wikipedia) into blue (an active page). Since 2015, WiR has increased the percentage of women’s biographies to 18.93%, but members are routinely aggravated by their efforts being undermined. During interviews, multiple WiR editors explained that they must “double-back” on their efforts because articles WiR add are constantly being flagged as non-notable and nominated for deletion.

...

Despite her professional accomplishments, (Lois K. Alexander) Lane did not have a Wikipedia page until eight years after her death. Through data matching, I found that Lane’s biography was created during an edit-a-thon designed to increase coverage of African-American women on Wikipedia. According to edit history, her biography was pushed out of the main space by a Wikipedian who deemed Lane “a person not yet shown to meet notability guidelines.” Analyzing the state of the original article through the page’s revision history, it is clear the preliminary entry included basic biographical and professional information as well as links to seven credible sources independent of the subject, including The Washington Post and the Smithsonian. Editors can evaluate wiki-notability using what Wikipedians refer to as the “Search engine test” (WP:GTEST). As an act of good faith, editors should search for the topic and attempt to find reliable sources before deciding on whether an article is notable enough for inclusion. Yet most of the information I learned about Lane was through a simple Google search of her name.

During interviews with established Wikipedians outside of edit-a-thons, frustrations regarding misclassification were palpable. Not only were they volunteering their weekends to organize and attend events designed to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia, but they also had to devote a substantial amount of time to make sure the article would survive. Margaret, a passionate female editor in her 20s who regularly organizes edit-a-thons for improving coverage about women, described in an interview how an article she created about a feminist activist was categorized as “non-notable” and pushed into AfD only a few hours after she published the biography.

...

Examples like Donna Strickland and Lois K. Alexander Lane further complicate the notion that women are “vanishing” from our historical memory (Luo et al., 2018). Future research must test the extent to which notable women are not just disappearing into thin air, but rather, are actively being erased."

"We have found that components of Wikipedia's notability criteria are not applied consistently across race and gender for biographies of academics. While an online presence score was an accurate predictor of whether a white male academic has their page kept on Wikipedia, our findings indicate that not all subjects are being adequately “searched” before they are nominated for deletion. Because online presence is not an accurate predictor, these findings indicate that white women and BIPOC academics face a greater uphill battle when it comes to getting their pages to stick because even those with high online presence scores are still just as likely to be perceived as nonnotable subjects."

" Read and understand these policies and guidelines:
 * 1) The Wikipedia deletion policy, which explains valid grounds for deletion as well as alternatives to deletion and the various deletion processes."

"Because abandoned drafts are deleted after six months, moving articles to draft space should generally be done only for newly created articles (typically as part of new page review) or as the result of a deletion discussion."