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

Revision as of 02:37, 3 July 2021

Revision as of 11:34, 29 September 2021

Line 51:

"Is a category with five Mexican feminist writers impressive, or embarrassing when compared with the 45 articles on characters in ''The Simpsons''? "{{Break}}

Note the MFW's now number {{PAGESINCATEGORY|:Mexican feminist writers}}, while the Simps are still at 45. And why not compare American feminist writers at {{PAGESINCATEGORY|:American feminist writers}}. How many notable Mexican feminist writers are there? Who is capable of writing about them, without serious research? Why are those people not contributing – how come we are (implicitly) blaming the people who ''are contributing''?

Pop quiz: name as many Mexican feminist writers as you can. Name as many ''Simpsons'' characters as you can.

Line 84:

* 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

* Verdict: False then and false now.

* 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==