Wikipedia:Wikipedia has more...: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 01:03, 19 January 2022

Revision as of 17:36, 24 May 2024

Line 16:

Apart from the logical fallacy (assuming that because X is better covered than Y, Y is badly covered), these claims are often – as I like to say – ''plain wrong''.

==Wikipedia has more information on ''Pokémon'' than on the Bible.==

* Source: Common meme

* Verdict: Not true.

Line 26:

* Reason: The claimant simply compared the number of chemists on a list page with the number of porn stars in a category. Comparing ''all'' chemists categories with ''all'' porn star categories we have substantially more chemists.

==Wikipedia has four pages on [[Megatron]] and only one on [[Dylan Thomas]].==

* Source: Comment on Guardian blog

* Verdict: Not true. But certainly more on Dylan Thomas would be welcome.

Line 36:

* Reason: Of the 4000 articles in the pornography project, most are stubs or very short start class articles. Even the one featured article – an actress who crossed over into the mainstream is only 80k, approximately comparing with the three lead geography articles in [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Basque|WikiProject Basque]].

==Wikipedia has more information on [[Britney Spears]] than [[Socrates]].==

* Source: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:B2B Socrates vs Britney Spears]

Line 44:

Note we have 22 top-level articles in [[:Category:Socrates]] and we have 19 articles in [[:Category:Britney Spears]].

==Wikipedia has more articles on [[:Category:The Simpsons characters|''The Simpsons'' characters]] than on [[:Category:Mexican feminist writers|Mexican feminist authors]].==

* Source: [http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/31/business/media/31link.html?_r=1&hp=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1402278002-VnQc7BHJc54ytGL3s4L2SA ''The New York Times'']

* Verdict: Apparently true at the time (January 2011), not true now.

Line 62:

Same as the above except now we are comparing a '''category''' with a '''list'''.

==AsWikipedia has as much on "memes" as "Immanuel Kant".==

"[T]he entry for "[[memes]]" is as long as the entry for [[Immanuel Kant]]. (Needless to say, there's no entry for [[Mary Midgley]]. We could go on, but you get the general idea)."

Line 69:

* Reason: Immanuel Kant at 122k is more than twice the size of [[Meme]] at 53k ([[memes]] has been a redirect since 2002). Moreover, we have 34 pages in the category Immanuel Kant, not counting 29 pages on Kantianism and 49 pages on Kantian philosophers. Even in July 2004 Immanuel Kant was a longer article, if not by as large a ratio – and significantly many of the subsidiary articles existed. However, for a period of some weeks ending 9 June 2004, when a substantial chunk of text was deleted from the meme article, the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Meme&oldid=3999843 meme article] (19k prose size, 3,081 words) was indeed longer than the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Immanuel_Kant&oldid=4088905 Kant biography] (14k prose size, 2,222 words).

==MoreWikipedia has more articles on female porn actresses than female poets.==

"[T]hat there are less Wikipedia articles on women poets than pornographic actresses, a depressing statistic."

* Source: [[James Gleick]], "Wikipedia’s Women Problem", ''New York Review of Books'', attributed to a Wikipedia editor.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_April_24&diff=prev&oldid=552203555]

Line 80:

}}

==MoreWikipedia has more articles on American female porn actresses than American female poets.==

"However, the claim holds true for American biography subjects: Category:American female pornographic film actors contains 667 biographies, while Category:American women poets and its subcategories contain 416 biographies."

* Source: Collida and Kolbe (29 April 2013) [http://wikipediocracy.com/2013/04/29/wikipedias-culture-of-sexism-its-not-just-for-novelists/ Wikipedia's Culture of Sexism- It's Not Just for Novelists] Wikipediocracy

Line 86:

* Reason: Collida and Kolbe only looked at the ''categories'' – in an article covering the dispute about mainstream "female" subcategories – and covering the early stage of populating them, the authors neglected to consider American female poets still (only) categorised in [[:Category:American poets]]. There are currently {{PAGESINCATEGORY:American women poets}} American women poets compared with {{PAGESINCATEGORY:American pornographic film actresses}} American female pornographic film actors.

==More articles on ''Lord of the Rings'' than on Sub-Saharan Africa.==

"More articles on ''Lord of the Rings'' than on Sub-Saharan Africa"{{Break}}

or

Line 97:

* Commentary: KingCantona says it best at [http://www.rollonfriday.com/Discussion/MainDiscussion/tabid/79/Id/10382711/currentPage/0/Default.aspx Rollonfriday.com] "[[One does not simply walk into Mordor|One does not simply]] write an article about Sub-Saharan Africa".

==AWikipedia has a zillion times more articles on 21st century porn stars than on 21st century women writers.==

"[R]ight now, I suspect articles on 21st century porn stars outnumber those on 21st century women writers by a factor of a zillion to one" {{Break}}

* Source: [[Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gender_Gap_Task_Force/Evidence]] – [[User:Montanabw]]