Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2015-12-09/In the media

El Tecolote seems to be right that we don't have a lot of obvious national minorities as editors on Wikipedia. At least they are not visible as such. This is not to say we don't have lots of diversity across nations here, lots of American and Brits, quite a few Germans, some Canadians, Aussies, Kiwis, and Indians on the English-language Wikipedia. And many other nationalities sprinkled in. But we don't seem to have many African-Americans, American Latinos (I only know of one of each - but both very prominent). I think there are quite a few Asian-Americans, but Native Americans? Arab-Americans? or Muslim-Americans in general? I don't see many of these folks around. I wonder how it works with the Brits as well, are UK-Muslims well represented here? UK-Hindus? UK-Caribbeans?

If anybody has info on these groups in general, maybe you could let us all know, or the WMF could spend a bit of effort finding out about national minorites. Smallbones( smalltalk ) 01:50, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Re" "I don't see many of these folks around." You must be kidding. I suspect it is you who is not around where there folks are. Hint: For Muslims, go anywhere in category:Islam. And not forget Israel-Palestine conflict. Anyway, I don't understand this "racial wikiprofiling" fuss. With women's %% counting it is clear: feminists want to nail down these "male chauvinist pigs". But do we really have problems with "Editing While Muslim"? Or WMF does not know how to spend their monies? - üser:Altenmann >t 03:31, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
 * A homogeneous editor base leads to skewed coverage, systemic biases, and gaps in encyclopedic content. Taking steps to improve the content of the encyclopedia is an excellent use of Foundation funds.   Gamaliel  ( talk ) 03:39, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Wikimedia UK has made some efforts, not always hugely successful, to work with UK minority communities, and those in countries from which they have come. For example, for Tipu's Tiger, an Indian work now in a London museum (V&A; it's now a GA), we hoped to interest British Indians, but in the end there was little response from them but lots of work from India itself. There are lots of editors out there, but I think largely restricted to religious articles or those on the various countries of origin.  Perhaps that's natural. Johnbod (talk) 17:11, 14 December 2015 (UTC)