3 ms·

Right now, there are something around 20 article on the front page of Wikipedia, about half of them connected to recent news or anniversaries (birthdays, histor

by cafard 8y ago

Right now, there are something around 20 article on the front page of Wikipedia, about half of them connected to recent news or anniversaries (birthdays, historic events, etc.) There are about 5.6 million articles in Wikipedia, it says. So how far would a Wikipedia page about Donna Strickland have contributed to her fame among those of us who are not physicists? And would the physicists among us have needed Wikipedia to learn about her?

wil_wheat_on 8y ago
the other two winners, male, had pages https://twitter.com/clancynewyork/status/1047098079097380864 https://twitter.com/clancynewyork/status/1047098079097380864, there's a broader argument about bias here
- basic1 8y ago
  I'd be curious who made those two or if it was themselves.
- yorwba 8y ago
  I think the strongest bias in this case is favoring advisors over the students who do the work, even if they get first authorship. For example, the Alex of AlexNet [1] fame would be Alex Krizhevsky, if he were actually famous. He doesn't have a Wikipedia page, but his advisor Geoffrey Hinton does (and is famous for the AlexNet breakthrough). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlexNet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlexNet
- booleandilemma 8y ago
  How can an encyclopedia that anyone can edit be biased? Anyone could have added her page, no one did, until now.
  - cpeterso 8y ago
    Someone created a wiki page for her back in May, but it was deleted because a Wikipedia editor decided she wasn't "notable". Anyone can edit Wikipedia, but it still has the bias of the most recent editor. https://twitter.com/resolvingdust/status/1047135142978801664 https://twitter.com/resolvingdust/status/1047135142978801664
  - dbcooper71 8y ago
    The editors didn’t think she was notable enough. This is an editing problem not a submission problem.
  - tda 8y ago
    Actually she had a page, but it was deleted. And then someone recreated the page, and it was rejected in review. QED

by cafard 8y ago

wil_wheat_on 8y ago

the other two winners, male, had pages https://twitter.com/clancynewyork/status/1047098079097380864 https://twitter.com/clancynewyork/status/1047098079097380864, there's a broader argument about bias here

basic1 8y ago
I'd be curious who made those two or if it was themselves.
yorwba 8y ago
I think the strongest bias in this case is favoring advisors over the students who do the work, even if they get first authorship. For example, the Alex of AlexNet [1] fame would be Alex Krizhevsky, if he were actually famous. He doesn't have a Wikipedia page, but his advisor Geoffrey Hinton does (and is famous for the AlexNet breakthrough). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlexNet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlexNet
booleandilemma 8y ago
How can an encyclopedia that anyone can edit be biased? Anyone could have added her page, no one did, until now.
- cpeterso 8y ago
  Someone created a wiki page for her back in May, but it was deleted because a Wikipedia editor decided she wasn't "notable". Anyone can edit Wikipedia, but it still has the bias of the most recent editor. https://twitter.com/resolvingdust/status/1047135142978801664 https://twitter.com/resolvingdust/status/1047135142978801664
- dbcooper71 8y ago
  The editors didn’t think she was notable enough. This is an editing problem not a submission problem.
- tda 8y ago
  Actually she had a page, but it was deleted. And then someone recreated the page, and it was rejected in review. QED