Revision as of 19:39, 19 August 2018 edit 142.160.89.97 (talk) CE ← Previous edit		Revision as of 02:37, 3 July 2021 edit undo Clovermoss (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Administrators 34,474 edits m →More articles on female porn actresses than female poets: spacing Next edit →
Line 73: * 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] * Verdict: False then and false now * Reason: There are (at the time of writing) 987 female pornographic actresses, compared with 2,828 female poets, according to [http://tools.wmflabs.org/catscan2/catscan2.php Catscan]. * Commentary: Like the item below, this fails to take into account female poets who were (only) categorised as poets. Moreover, it was possibly a throw-away remark by the editor in question, maybe half remembering the "porn actresses/chemists" claim. ** Gleick also makes poorly researched (or poorly expressed) statements like: "A typical hidden category is “[[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion]],” containing thousands of pages of logged discussions about the suitabilities of various categories."

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