4 ms·

Women make up only 13% of Wikipedia contributors

8 points by jhust 17y ago

jhust 17y ago
It's gotta just be that weird social mores make men feel more comfortable than women spending time and participating actively on the internet...
ivanstojic 17y ago
That's hardly surprising. Actual people make up only 26% of Wikipedia editors, the rest are rabid deletionist AIs.
- roundsquare 17y ago
  According to the WSJ article: http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2009/08/31/only-13-of-wikipedia-contributors-are-women-study-says/ http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2009/08/31/only-13-of-wikipedia-... This was a survey, so this is 13% of people, not AIs.
  - chaosmachine 17y ago
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke
    - roundsquare 17y ago
      Blah, sorry. Thats the result of not having enough caffeine. I'll leave my comment though so people can laugh at me if they so desire.
Ras_ 17y ago
How much do they make up of programmers?
- newsdog 17y ago
  Someone said there's more transsexual programmers than female ones.
  - yummyfajitas 17y ago
    I believe that was in someone's list of the top 100 programmers, not programmers in general.
- ZeroGravitas 17y ago
  It's about 2-6% in FLOSS communities. It can get up to about 30% percent in the computing industry generally but the number varies if you (don't) count managers, web developers, testers etc.
d64 17y ago
Yet another thing women are just too smart to get into.
kqr2 17y ago
To me, it would be more interesting to see what % of Wikipedia's content was created by women since not everyone contributes equally. According to this post, 50% of Wikipedia's edits are done by just 0.7% of users: http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/whowriteswikipedia http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/whowriteswikipedia
- roundsquare 17y ago
  I'd also be interested in hours spent. E.g. are women spending more time in order to create a better article (better written, more research, etc..)?
onreact-com 17y ago
That's a shame. Wikipedia has to take some steps to counteract the male dominance. The average "women don't do tech" excuse doesn't work here as women are often even better or more prolific writers.
- tsally 17y ago
  In what way do you feel that it is Wikipedia's fault that women do not edit it as often as men? I don't think Wikipedia needs to take steps to counteract anything in this regard because it's not doing anything to hamper women from participating. Also, the %'s don't really matter as long as the content is good. It's not like women are at a disadvantage because they don't have enough Wikipedia editors.
  - onreact-com 17y ago
    Wow, I'm speechless. You sound like the archetypal defender of male dominance. It's actually time travel. 100 years ago men were saying using the same arguments about the right to vote for women.. Contributing to Wikipedia is a constant fight, that's why women don't participate. You contribute something and almost immediately your stuff gets deleted unless you engage in some tedious "discussion" why it shouldn't get deleted. No wonder women don't contribute in such a hostile atmosphere. Are you a regular Wikipedia contributor? Why do I ask? You sound like one. It's exactly this type of hostility I mean.
    - tsally 17y ago
      I wasn't confrontational, I just asked in what way you felt that Wikipedia was preventing women from contributing. I also pointed out that Wikipedia editors are not people of large influence and not having enough women editors is unlikely to have a societal impact. And now suddenly we're talking about male dominance, women's suffrage, and archetypes. That's a pretty big leap. I'm actually a feminist. But people like you are just as problematic as misogynistic males. Let me just give you a brief list of things to think about. * We don't need a 50/50 split of women and men in everything. * Men and women are different and not inherently equal in every which way (this goes both directions). * Making ridiculous claims and accusations just hurts the cause. Note how quick you were to accuse me. * Picking your battles is important and Wikipedia editing is probably not an important battle. I have a hard enough time arguing for women without irrational behavior making it harder. If my comment made you "speechless" you're probably going more harm to feminism than good. You're making it hard for the average person to take seriously. And no, for the record I have never made an edit on Wikipedia.
jongraehl 17y ago
The two proposed causes ("men spend more time on the Internet"; "men are more aggressive") are plausible, but perhaps there are also fewer women who feel capable of editing the average Wikipedia page.

8 points by jhust 17y ago

jhust 17y ago

It's gotta just be that weird social mores make men feel more comfortable than women spending time and participating actively on the internet...

ivanstojic 17y ago

That's hardly surprising. Actual people make up only 26% of Wikipedia editors, the rest are rabid deletionist AIs.

roundsquare 17y ago
According to the WSJ article: http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2009/08/31/only-13-of-wikipedia-contributors-are-women-study-says/ http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2009/08/31/only-13-of-wikipedia-... This was a survey, so this is 13% of people, not AIs.
- chaosmachine 17y ago
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke
  - roundsquare 17y ago
    Blah, sorry. Thats the result of not having enough caffeine. I'll leave my comment though so people can laugh at me if they so desire.

Ras_ 17y ago

How much do they make up of programmers?

newsdog 17y ago
Someone said there's more transsexual programmers than female ones.
- yummyfajitas 17y ago
  I believe that was in someone's list of the top 100 programmers, not programmers in general.
ZeroGravitas 17y ago
It's about 2-6% in FLOSS communities. It can get up to about 30% percent in the computing industry generally but the number varies if you (don't) count managers, web developers, testers etc.

d64 17y ago

Yet another thing women are just too smart to get into.

kqr2 17y ago

To me, it would be more interesting to see what % of Wikipedia's content was created by women since not everyone contributes equally. According to this post, 50% of Wikipedia's edits are done by just 0.7% of users: http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/whowriteswikipedia http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/whowriteswikipedia

roundsquare 17y ago
I'd also be interested in hours spent. E.g. are women spending more time in order to create a better article (better written, more research, etc..)?

onreact-com 17y ago

That's a shame. Wikipedia has to take some steps to counteract the male dominance. The average "women don't do tech" excuse doesn't work here as women are often even better or more prolific writers.

tsally 17y ago
In what way do you feel that it is Wikipedia's fault that women do not edit it as often as men? I don't think Wikipedia needs to take steps to counteract anything in this regard because it's not doing anything to hamper women from participating. Also, the %'s don't really matter as long as the content is good. It's not like women are at a disadvantage because they don't have enough Wikipedia editors.
- onreact-com 17y ago
  Wow, I'm speechless. You sound like the archetypal defender of male dominance. It's actually time travel. 100 years ago men were saying using the same arguments about the right to vote for women.. Contributing to Wikipedia is a constant fight, that's why women don't participate. You contribute something and almost immediately your stuff gets deleted unless you engage in some tedious "discussion" why it shouldn't get deleted. No wonder women don't contribute in such a hostile atmosphere. Are you a regular Wikipedia contributor? Why do I ask? You sound like one. It's exactly this type of hostility I mean.
  - tsally 17y ago
    I wasn't confrontational, I just asked in what way you felt that Wikipedia was preventing women from contributing. I also pointed out that Wikipedia editors are not people of large influence and not having enough women editors is unlikely to have a societal impact. And now suddenly we're talking about male dominance, women's suffrage, and archetypes. That's a pretty big leap. I'm actually a feminist. But people like you are just as problematic as misogynistic males. Let me just give you a brief list of things to think about. * We don't need a 50/50 split of women and men in everything. * Men and women are different and not inherently equal in every which way (this goes both directions). * Making ridiculous claims and accusations just hurts the cause. Note how quick you were to accuse me. * Picking your battles is important and Wikipedia editing is probably not an important battle. I have a hard enough time arguing for women without irrational behavior making it harder. If my comment made you "speechless" you're probably going more harm to feminism than good. You're making it hard for the average person to take seriously. And no, for the record I have never made an edit on Wikipedia.

jongraehl 17y ago

The two proposed causes ("men spend more time on the Internet"; "men are more aggressive") are plausible, but perhaps there are also fewer women who feel capable of editing the average Wikipedia page.