Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Yes and no. To be honest the article strikes me as a fluff piece attempting to meaning into something what is really a pair of fairly trivial problems - those being deletionism and and the fact that the majority of editors are American males[0].

> ...the site remains a boys’ club.

This is a somewhat unfair characterisation since the gender of an editor is usually unknown to other editors or irrelevant to the topic at hand.

> "We have over 100 articles on different Linux distributions, some of them quite obscure … and [they have] virtually no impact on the broader culture, but we think that’s perfectly fine." [Jimbo Wales]

Claiming that Wikipedia editors are "perfectly fine" with having hundreds of articles on non-notable topics like minor Linux distributions is a bit of a stretch. Sub-par articles on minor technical things like programming languages and F/OSS projects are constantly being flagged for deletion or merging[1] and to be honest I'm not particularly surprised that what was, on 29 April 2011[2] a stub on a wedding dress was nominated for merging. Of course, the article has since grown into a useful and well referenced piece, but I don't think its fair to claim this incident represents Wikipedia's "woman problem" unless one is also willing to discuss Wikipedia's "Lisp problem"[1] or Wikipedia's "Linux problem"[3].

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pseudomonas/IP_editors_by... [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Arc_(programming_language... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wedding_dress_of_... [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:SliTaz



"to be honest I'm not particularly surprised that what was, on 29 April 2011[2] a stub on a wedding dress was nominated for merging."

The article was flagged only 16 minutes after it was created, so it didn't have time to evolve.


Of course it's a fluff piece; I'm not sure I've ever read an article about Wikipedia that wasn't. Journalistic depth is rarely something anyone bothers with when discussing Wikipedia, nevermind scientific depth that actually usefully tracks things like the other problems you mention.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: