4 ms·
"Such small discrepancy"? Women's articles are 30% more likely to be nominated than by random chance. That's actually quite a large discrepancy to be explained
by cool_dude85 5y ago
"Such small discrepancy"? Women's articles are 30% more likely to be nominated than by random chance. That's actually quite a large discrepancy to be explained away by handwaving about how editors might be biased in including too many non-notable women. The journal article even claims it's exactly the opposite:
"Studies show that women’s biographies are slightly more notable than men’s (Wagner et al., 2016)"
- jhgb 5y agoTo me, 30% does absolutely not seem like a large discrepancy if there's push for inclusion of more women in Wikipedia and if these efforts are trying to compensate a 4:1 discrepancy in current articles. At that point you'd need several times more women's articles than you currently have so the idea that slightly more poor quality articles may be being deleted is definitely one of the obvious options.