The paper examines that hypothesis and rejects it, noting that while Wikipedia's coverage of certain topics is very good, especially when it comes to math and t

The paper examines that hypothesis and rejects it, noting that while Wikipedia's coverage of certain topics is very good, especially when it comes to math and the sciences, Wikipedia's articles on subjects in the humanities tend to be both quite a bit shorter and have fewer edits than those in the "hard" sciences. There is still plenty of low-hanging fruit left, as shown by Emily Temple-Wood's cataloging of women scientists [1]. [1]: http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-35787730 http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-35787730