198:
putting people in the most-specific-ethnic/gender cats, then trying to de-ghettoize up the tree, but that is a bad approach - it's much easier to basically classify them multiple times, each time adding more and more facets - that way, you start with a fully de-ghettoized/generic person, and then you're just adding facets along the way, so if you screw up, the result is less specific than it should be (which is ok), instead of ghettoizing (which is not). It's just harder, as you have to initially think of the person as not having any of the facets that they have. Also, on another note, I hope you'll consider my randomization solution for the vegetarians page. cheers! --
274:- now that that's fixed, the press is likely (hopefully?) going to go away. But the problem is not solved, not even by a long-shot. There are probably 10s of thousands of bios of women, men, african americans, LGBT people, or whatever else, that are "ghettozied", eg present in a gendered/ethnic category but not also present in a generic category of the same type. Whether you consider this situation "sexism" or "racism" or not (which, for the record, I don't really, I just see it as laziness and the result of a generally broken category system -
870:- or you can think, ok, we do bubble up, but then we get diffused afterwards, say to a state-specific category for example. When you intersect multiple non-diffusing facets, like African-American + women, then you need to bubble up to all of the adjectives individually, in a way - that's why she's in so many poets cats. Tricky, right? What are the chances that your average editor will get this right? OTOH, if these gendered/ethnic/sexuality cats
35:
171:- I am hoping to put categories here that need to be de-ghettoized, so members of the task force can start chipping away at them if interested. I also added an algorithm for correct categorization without ghettoization that I think will work and is relatively simply to apply - please read and provide feedback. If you think this should all be moved somewhere else, like a sub-page, that is fine too - just let me know. thanks! --
101:
914:- but the specifics of the non-sexist/non-racist algorithm I laid out have not, IMHO, been elaborated before in such detail - which is why I developed that in the first place - to illustrate how hard it actually is. But that's an extreme example - I've just been deghettoizing the "women mathematicians" tree, it wasn't that bad, probably took me an hour to do 30 bios or so. --
565:
639:
RfCs and RfAs will start again, with most WP editors staying on their sidelines to keep their discipline records clean. Further, there is a known vocal and well-organized group of
Chinese nationalist editors here on WP, so, ironically, we will inevitably see a common cause alliance of convenience between the US techs and the Chinese nationalists.
289:(which says you should never have ethnicity/gender/etc as the last-rung in a category tree), but I've had mixed success so far - there are far fewer participants in CFD than on April 24th, and some people are arguing to keep categories which are clearly on contravention of our guidelines - take a look here and give your thoughts if you like
638:
entry, which is an entry dealing with a totalitarian, Communist nation with an entire state-controlled media. Upon entry creation, once again, of course, we will have US-based editors claiming, "Look! The
Communist Youth Daily claims there is no gender bias in China!", and the whole cycle of AfDs and
197:
Ok - plz read through the algorithm, and let me know if it makes sense - otherwise, let's fix the description until it does make sense. The only way this ghettoization will stop is if people understand how to categorize without ghettoizing. I realized I'd been doing it the wrong way all along - first
622:
as if anybody is claiming that women are currently in positions of power, political, corporate or economical, in SK. The problem is unfortunately complicated by the South Korean media pratice of requiring junior reporters to serve as gofers for politicians for 2-3 years before they are permitted to
453:
When I looked at several other countries they seemed to be ghettoized, but I may not have looked carefully enough. In any case, I think we're now actually close on a category intersection solution that make all of this deghettoization work not worth it anymore, so I'm going to focus on that for
627:'s work in Japan and Korea--resulting in SK and J mass media often parroting government announcements and major scandals such as the recent Korean diplomatic affair being broken by 'citizen media.' US-based editors are claiming, "the mainstream media denies there is a problem,
857:
Welcome to the world of non-diffusing categories. All of those cats, since they are gender/ethnic cats, are non-diffusing - which means, membership in them should not preclude membership in the parent. The trick is, what if the parent is fully diffused?
83:
75:
70:
278:), our guidance says this is wrong, so it's really a question of following that guidance (and, potentially, refining that guidance). The problem is, fixing these bios one by one takes a lot of time, and it's rather hard, as you'll see if you take my
813:. American writers right now is a mess, and the general way in which people are diffused out of it, and into which subcats, is not really resolved, so you're also seeing greater confusion in the tree as it stands right now. If you look at
21:
614:. A number of male editors are asking for article deletion, and failing that, have proposed (and then initiated, even during AfD proceedings) to a 56.9% reduction in article content including removal of some 3 references in a
279:
168:
117:
530:
642:
As I noted on the AfD for Sexism in South Korea, there are over 500 mainspace articles fitting the pattern 'Racism in ' and it's time we deal with the well-known and decades-long gender bias issue here on WP.
569:
892:
Where, in
Azathoth's name, is this unspeakable nightmare explained? Please link to it prominently in the algorithm section. I can't believe I'm the only one that would be confused by this. --
306:
302:
298:
294:
290:
701:
page is chock-full of reliable sources, including newspapers, academic studies, books and other media which can be relied on to provide even-handed, accurate information. That is why
186:
Thanks for posting that, and this is a good place for it. I'm not sure I follow what's needed, mind you. Whenever I've tried to work with categories, I've mostly been beaten back. :)
51:
17:
577:
354:
350:
346:
342:
338:
334:
330:
326:
322:
318:
314:
310:
431:
969:
962:
985:
955:
923:
901:
887:
852:
826:
799:
771:
752:
721:
680:
600:
553:
518:
499:
463:
447:
416:
380:
366:
257:
243:
229:
207:
192:
180:
157:
435:
906:
No - in fact, most people are, so what they do is, they just diffuse. It's easier. And then, NY times articles get written. The basics are laid out in
690:- you cited a Blogspot, an American online celebrity tabloid and a pornographic site. I have no objection to a well-sourced, encyclopedic article on
285:
Another (simpler) approach I've been taking is spotting and trying to kill categories which by their nature ghettoize, and which are in violation of
129:
533:
recently, which was the interest for this TF but in 2008, now preserved for (our) historical interest. Has some useful ideas worth considering.
810:
694:, which is, no doubt, a real thing. I do have an objection to an obviously-POV, highly-polemic and terribly-sourced essay in the encyclopedia.
863:
840:
759:
712:
to you on the article Talk page, and I am willing to work with you to improve the article. But it starts with finding reliable sources.
939:
275:
271:
619:
479:
404:
263:
836:
506:
483:
806:
735:. I'm more convinced about the utility of this project given this editor's recent changes from "humanity" to "mankind"/"man"
867:
859:
832:
814:
717:
671:, of course, that will ultimately decide whether we're all running terrified like rabbits or commited to WP core values.-
267:
911:
266:
for a representative list of media coverage). Unfortunately, the press has focused mostly on women being moved from
594:
547:
151:
42:
875:
787:
713:
783:
668:
919:
883:
822:
459:
362:
239:
203:
176:
691:
687:
644:
611:
427:
946:
664:
631:
there is no problem, delete on sight," but that is applying US media standards to a closed country.
220:
Has there been some sort of more detailed discussion about 'ghettoization' somewhere? Just curious.
514:
132:
for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.
981:
763:
744:
676:
659:
in India (a country which burned widows and demands bridal dowrys, that continually engages in
915:
879:
818:
455:
358:
235:
199:
172:
907:
430:
the 'ghettoization' problem seems to be minimal. Of all the random entries I've looked at in
286:
897:
848:
795:
767:
748:
950:
698:
652:
648:
635:
495:
443:
412:
376:
253:
225:
187:
709:
705:
is attempting to argue against that page or to delete it. It is perfectly encyclopedic.
624:
589:
542:
510:
146:
874:
non-diffusing, then NY times articles get written. Quite the catch-22 if you ask me...
977:
831:
But isn't she similarly in several diffusing subcats of
American poets? Specifically
733:
672:
973:
817:
that's a bit of a better example, as that tree has been fully diffused already. --
438:, for example, they seem to be in a general mayoral category too. Minor problem?
893:
844:
791:
660:
50:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
976:'s characters, and the subject of a film and an upcoming fictional biography.
615:
491:
439:
408:
372:
249:
221:
582:
535:
139:
118:
Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject
Countering systemic bias/Gender bias task force
531:
Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Gender
Studies/Countering Systemic Gender Bias
805:
Because she's in several diffusing subcats of
American writers - such as
655:
with its article start as a long screed against discrimination against
248:
You're saying the press have told
Knowledge (XXG) to 'de-ghettoize'?
234:
check the NY Times, Huffington Post, NY Review of books, etc... --
910:(around non-diffusing, but it's poorly explained), and some in
782:
I'm not sure I understand the algorithm. Why should Sue be in
610:
I wish to draw group members' attention to the current AfD on
95:
29:
618:
dominated country. The latest proposal is a article move to
634:
Part II of the problem is that I ultimately hope to create
972:
was the
Mexican farmworker girlfriend who inspired one of
559:"Proposed change: consistency in article title gendering"
18:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject
Countering systemic bias
742:
740:
738:
736:
651:
will be a nightmare but ultimately a progressive step.
487:
475:
125:
121:
112:
107:
432:
Category:Women mayors of places in the United States
509:for my response. Apologies for any inconvenience.
124:on 04:41, 8 May 2013 (UTC). The former page's
862:is again an example - just because you're in
8:
371:Great, that makes it a lot clearer, thanks!
710:Knowledge (XXG)'s reliable sourcing policy
578:proposed change on article title gendering
436:Category:Women mayors of places in England
99:
92:Attribution for borrowed text from WP:BIAS
949:that may be of interest to this project.
106:Text and/or other creative content from
807:Category:Writers from Chicago, Illinois
760:Knowledge (XXG):Gender-neutral language
811:Category:21st-century American writers
48:Do not edit the contents of this page.
864:Category:African-American politicians
841:Category:African-American women poets
7:
686:You didn't cite "citizen media" for
647:is just a first and necessary step.
474:I've noticed an editor starting to '
940:Sarah Brown (wife of Gordon Brown)
758:Just noticed the already existing
732:APA style could help this project
623:question them--something noted in
28:
272:Category:American women novelists
620:Gender inequality in South Korea
563:
480:Category:English women comedians
405:Category:American women painters
264:Category_talk:American_novelists
262:In effect, yes. (see the top of
33:
843:? What makes the difference? --
837:Category:African-American poets
728:Avoiding sexist bias in writing
525:WikiProject Gender Studies CSGB
484:Category:English male comedians
866:doesn't mean you bubble up to
570:women novelist categorization
276:read here for more on my views
1:
868:Category:American politicians
860:Category:American politicians
833:Category:American women poets
815:Category:American politicians
113:Knowledge (XXG):Systemic bias
986:00:00, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
708:I have attempted to explain
663:) defies even outrage. It's
268:Category:American novelists
1001:
167:I started a category list
788:Category:American writers
778:Deghettoization algorithm
116:was copied or moved into
956:23:32, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
924:22:27, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
902:22:13, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
888:20:37, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
876:We Didn't Start the Fire
853:18:54, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
827:18:26, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
800:18:24, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
772:22:13, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
753:21:58, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
722:07:46, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
681:05:57, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
601:02:52, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
580:for your consideration.
554:06:11, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
519:16:59, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
500:16:33, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
464:15:33, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
448:15:24, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
417:14:22, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
945:Hi, there is an RM/RfC
784:Category:American poets
399:American women painters
381:21:36, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
367:21:01, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
258:20:50, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
244:20:37, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
230:20:28, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
208:02:46, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
193:02:38, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
181:02:05, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
158:07:27, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
669:Sexism in Saudi Arabia
692:Sexism in South Korea
688:Sexism in South Korea
645:Sexism in South Korea
612:Sexism in South Korea
428:Category:Women mayors
426:Having had a look in
403:I've made a start on
46:of past discussions.
22:Gender gap task force
490:on their Talk page.
878:comes to mind... --
714:NorthBySouthBaranof
568:In response to the
130:provide attribution
839:, and, of course,
954:
912:WP:Categorization
470:English comedians
191:
136:
135:
89:
88:
58:
57:
52:current talk page
992:
953:
938:RfC on title of
665:Sexism in Turkey
599:
597:
592:
587:
567:
566:
552:
550:
545:
540:
529:I happened upon
190:
156:
154:
149:
144:
115:
103:
102:
96:
67:
60:
59:
37:
36:
30:
1000:
999:
995:
994:
993:
991:
990:
989:
970:Beatrice Kozera
967:
963:Beatrice Kozera
943:
780:
730:
699:Sexism in India
653:Sexism in India
649:Sexism in China
636:Sexism in China
608:
595:
590:
583:
581:
564:
561:
548:
543:
536:
534:
527:
472:
424:
401:
165:
152:
147:
140:
138:
111:
100:
94:
63:
34:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
998:
996:
966:
961:Nomination of
959:
942:
936:
935:
934:
933:
932:
931:
930:
929:
928:
927:
926:
916:Obi-Wan Kenobi
880:Obi-Wan Kenobi
819:Obi-Wan Kenobi
779:
776:
775:
774:
729:
726:
725:
724:
706:
697:Note that the
695:
625:Jake Adelstein
607:
604:
560:
557:
526:
523:
522:
521:
488:left a message
471:
468:
467:
466:
456:Obi-Wan Kenobi
423:
420:
400:
397:
396:
395:
394:
393:
392:
391:
390:
389:
388:
387:
386:
385:
384:
383:
359:Obi-Wan Kenobi
283:
236:Obi-Wan Kenobi
213:
212:
211:
210:
200:Obi-Wan Kenobi
173:Obi-Wan Kenobi
164:
161:
134:
133:
128:now serves to
104:
93:
90:
87:
86:
81:
78:
73:
68:
56:
55:
38:
27:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
997:
988:
987:
983:
979:
975:
971:
964:
960:
958:
957:
952:
948:
941:
937:
925:
921:
917:
913:
909:
905:
904:
903:
899:
895:
891:
890:
889:
885:
881:
877:
873:
869:
865:
861:
856:
855:
854:
850:
846:
842:
838:
834:
830:
829:
828:
824:
820:
816:
812:
808:
804:
803:
802:
801:
797:
793:
789:
785:
777:
773:
769:
765:
761:
757:
756:
755:
754:
750:
746:
743:
741:
739:
737:
734:
727:
723:
719:
715:
711:
707:
704:
700:
696:
693:
689:
685:
684:
683:
682:
678:
674:
670:
666:
662:
658:
654:
650:
646:
640:
637:
632:
630:
626:
621:
617:
613:
605:
603:
602:
598:
593:
588:
586:
579:
576:, there is a
575:
573:
558:
556:
555:
551:
546:
541:
539:
532:
524:
520:
516:
512:
508:
504:
503:
502:
501:
497:
493:
489:
485:
481:
477:
469:
465:
461:
457:
452:
451:
450:
449:
445:
441:
437:
433:
429:
421:
419:
418:
414:
410:
406:
398:
382:
378:
374:
370:
369:
368:
364:
360:
356:
352:
348:
344:
340:
336:
332:
328:
324:
320:
316:
312:
308:
304:
300:
296:
292:
288:
284:
281:
277:
273:
269:
265:
261:
260:
259:
255:
251:
247:
246:
245:
241:
237:
233:
232:
231:
227:
223:
219:
218:
217:
216:
215:
214:
209:
205:
201:
196:
195:
194:
189:
185:
184:
183:
182:
178:
174:
170:
163:Category list
162:
160:
159:
155:
150:
145:
143:
131:
127:
123:
119:
114:
109:
105:
98:
97:
91:
85:
82:
79:
77:
74:
72:
69:
66:
62:
61:
53:
49:
45:
44:
39:
32:
31:
23:
19:
974:Jack Kerouac
968:
965:for deletion
944:
871:
781:
731:
702:
656:
641:
633:
628:
609:
584:
571:
562:
537:
528:
473:
425:
422:Women mayors
402:
166:
141:
137:
108:this version
64:
47:
41:
786:but not in
661:eve-teasing
40:This is an
951:SlimVirgin
616:press club
188:SlimVirgin
511:Mathonius
476:ghettoize
122:this edit
84:Archive 5
76:Archive 3
71:Archive 2
65:Archive 1
978:Djembayz
673:Samsara9
606:Proposal
572:Signpost
20: |
908:WP:EGRS
486:. I've
287:WP:EGRS
126:history
43:archive
894:GRuban
872:aren't
845:GRuban
792:GRuban
764:Cavann
745:Cavann
703:nobody
454:now.--
574:piece
492:Sionk
440:Sionk
409:Sionk
373:Sionk
250:Sionk
222:Sionk
120:with
16:<
982:talk
947:here
920:talk
898:talk
884:talk
849:talk
823:talk
809:and
796:talk
790:? --
768:talk
749:talk
718:talk
677:talk
629:ergo
585:czar
538:czar
515:talk
507:here
505:See
496:talk
482:and
460:talk
444:talk
434:and
413:talk
377:talk
363:talk
280:quiz
254:talk
240:talk
226:talk
204:talk
177:talk
169:here
142:czar
667:or
657:men
270:to
110:of
984:)
922:)
900:)
886:)
851:)
835:,
825:)
798:)
770:)
762:.
751:)
720:)
679:)
517:)
498:)
478:'
462:)
446:)
415:)
407:.
379:)
365:)
357:--
355:17
351:16
347:15
343:14
339:13
335:12
331:11
327:10
256:)
242:)
228:)
206:)
179:)
80:→
980:(
918:(
896:(
882:(
847:(
821:(
794:(
766:(
747:(
716:(
675:(
596:·
591:·
549:·
544:·
513:(
494:(
458:(
442:(
411:(
375:(
361:(
353:,
349:,
345:,
341:,
337:,
333:,
329:,
325:,
323:9
321:,
319:8
317:,
315:7
313:,
311:6
309:,
307:5
305:,
303:4
301:,
299:3
297:,
295:2
293:,
291:1
282:.
252:(
238:(
224:(
202:(
175:(
153:·
148:·
54:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.