5 ms·

Yes. Isn't it silly to ask a stupid question for the sake of making a rhetorical point?

aw3c2 14y ago
I am interested in what others think, so no, it was not stupid to ask a question. clarification: Yes, honestly. I don't get most of the sexism debates.
- saraid216 14y ago
  > I don't get most of the sexism debates. I could tell. If you'd like to explain where you're coming from, that might invite a less snarky reply since you'd become a human being with a unique background and the potential for critical thought. Perhaps someone will even help explain to you what you "don't get". You might even have the chance to find out what others think. As it is, the only thought I have is that you asked a stupid and inflammatory question. I shared that thought with you. Are you actually interested? Because walking into a bar fight and punching someone in the nose is not the right way to find out how it started.
irahul 14y ago
> Isn't it silly to ask a stupid question for the sake of making a rhetorical point? silly, stupid, rhetorical. Three insults in one reply - I am impressed. /s How is your reply any more relevant than his comment?
- saraid216 14y ago
  > How is your reply any more relevant than his comment? Gadzooks, you're right! His comment wasn't just silly; it was irrelevant, too! I missed that. Thanks for catching it!
qxcv 14y ago
Yes and no. To be honest the article strikes me as a fluff piece attempting to meaning into something what is really a pair of fairly trivial problems - those being deletionism and and the fact that the majority of editors are American males[0]. > ...the site remains a boys’ club. This is a somewhat unfair characterisation since the gender of an editor is usually unknown to other editors or irrelevant to the topic at hand. > "We have over 100 articles on different Linux distributions, some of them quite obscure … and [they have] virtually no impact on the broader culture, but we think that’s perfectly fine." [Jimbo Wales] Claiming that Wikipedia editors are "perfectly fine" with having hundreds of articles on non-notable topics like minor Linux distributions is a bit of a stretch. Sub-par articles on minor technical things like programming languages and F/OSS projects are constantly being flagged for deletion or merging[1] and to be honest I'm not particularly surprised that what was, on 29 April 2011[2] a stub on a wedding dress was nominated for merging. Of course, the article has since grown into a useful and well referenced piece, but I don't think its fair to claim this incident represents Wikipedia's "woman problem" unless one is also willing to discuss Wikipedia's "Lisp problem"[1] or Wikipedia's "Linux problem"[3]. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pseudomonas/IP_editors_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pseudomonas/IP_editors_by... [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Arc_(programming_language) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Arc_(programming_language... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wedding_dress_of_Kate_Middleton&oldid=426548936 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wedding_dress_of_... [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:SliTaz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:SliTaz
- saraid216 14y ago
  Of course it's a fluff piece; I'm not sure I've ever read an article about Wikipedia that wasn't. Journalistic depth is rarely something anyone bothers with when discussing Wikipedia, nevermind scientific depth that actually usefully tracks things like the other problems you mention.
- ks 14y ago
  "to be honest I'm not particularly surprised that what was, on 29 April 2011[2] a stub on a wedding dress was nominated for merging." The article was flagged only 16 minutes after it was created, so it didn't have time to evolve.
nosse 14y ago
I liked that point. Didn't really think about how much the article handled stuff as "girls things" and "boys things" until this comment.

aw3c2 14y ago

I am interested in what others think, so no, it was not stupid to ask a question. clarification: Yes, honestly. I don't get most of the sexism debates.

saraid216 14y ago
> I don't get most of the sexism debates. I could tell. If you'd like to explain where you're coming from, that might invite a less snarky reply since you'd become a human being with a unique background and the potential for critical thought. Perhaps someone will even help explain to you what you "don't get". You might even have the chance to find out what others think. As it is, the only thought I have is that you asked a stupid and inflammatory question. I shared that thought with you. Are you actually interested? Because walking into a bar fight and punching someone in the nose is not the right way to find out how it started.

irahul 14y ago

> Isn't it silly to ask a stupid question for the sake of making a rhetorical point? silly, stupid, rhetorical. Three insults in one reply - I am impressed. /s How is your reply any more relevant than his comment?

saraid216 14y ago
> How is your reply any more relevant than his comment? Gadzooks, you're right! His comment wasn't just silly; it was irrelevant, too! I missed that. Thanks for catching it!

qxcv 14y ago

Yes and no. To be honest the article strikes me as a fluff piece attempting to meaning into something what is really a pair of fairly trivial problems - those being deletionism and and the fact that the majority of editors are American males[0]. > ...the site remains a boys’ club. This is a somewhat unfair characterisation since the gender of an editor is usually unknown to other editors or irrelevant to the topic at hand. > "We have over 100 articles on different Linux distributions, some of them quite obscure … and [they have] virtually no impact on the broader culture, but we think that’s perfectly fine." [Jimbo Wales] Claiming that Wikipedia editors are "perfectly fine" with having hundreds of articles on non-notable topics like minor Linux distributions is a bit of a stretch. Sub-par articles on minor technical things like programming languages and F/OSS projects are constantly being flagged for deletion or merging[1] and to be honest I'm not particularly surprised that what was, on 29 April 2011[2] a stub on a wedding dress was nominated for merging. Of course, the article has since grown into a useful and well referenced piece, but I don't think its fair to claim this incident represents Wikipedia's "woman problem" unless one is also willing to discuss Wikipedia's "Lisp problem"[1] or Wikipedia's "Linux problem"[3]. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pseudomonas/IP_editors_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pseudomonas/IP_editors_by... [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Arc_(programming_language) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Arc_(programming_language... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wedding_dress_of_Kate_Middleton&oldid=426548936 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wedding_dress_of_... [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:SliTaz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:SliTaz

saraid216 14y ago
Of course it's a fluff piece; I'm not sure I've ever read an article about Wikipedia that wasn't. Journalistic depth is rarely something anyone bothers with when discussing Wikipedia, nevermind scientific depth that actually usefully tracks things like the other problems you mention.
ks 14y ago
"to be honest I'm not particularly surprised that what was, on 29 April 2011[2] a stub on a wedding dress was nominated for merging." The article was flagged only 16 minutes after it was created, so it didn't have time to evolve.

nosse 14y ago

I liked that point. Didn't really think about how much the article handled stuff as "girls things" and "boys things" until this comment.