Are The Editors Of Wikipedia Correct To Segregate Authors?

[AB Editor]

It's quite shocking actually:

"Many female novelists, like Harper Lee, Anne Rice, Amy Tan, Donna Tartt and some 300 others, had been relegated to the ranks of “American Women Novelists” only, and no longer appeared in the category “American Novelists.”"

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/opinion/sunday/wikipedias-sexism.html?_r=3&

"It appeared that, gradually, over time, the volunteer editors who create the site had begun moving women, one by one, from the “American Novelists” category to the “American Women Novelists” subcategory."

Is there an inherent bias in Wikipedia's editors which makes it more difficult for female writers to gain acceptance?

What would the Bronte's say?

[woofgang]

That's mad.....all that extra work for nothing....

[naomi24]

What?!!!! Splutter!!

[jomifl]

How do they know they are women?

[Sharingan]

I think Emily Bronte would have sent Heathcliff round to sort em out :( that is disgraceful.
Why don't we all just put em back? Anyone can update wiki?

[Wharton]

I was nearly 50 before I discovered that Richmal Crompton was a woman and I'd read every one of her Billy Bunter books, so perhaps there's some merit in it. I think I'll nip down to the library now and get another one out and not look at any replies to this :-)

[mushroom25]

wharton, billy bunter was created by charles hamilton, writing as frank richards. richmal crompton wrote "just william".

[LazyGun]

@Wharton Just a minor point - but Richmal Crompton was the Author of the "Just William" series of books..

The Fat Owl of the Remove, Billy Bunter, was a Frank Richards creation :)

[Wharton]

Just so mushroom25, who wrote those incidentally?

[emmie]

I think it's wrong, surely a writer is a writer, no matter the gender. I would think that they would have had a fair bit to say on the matter.

[mushroom25]

plus, neither frank richards (aka hamilton) nor richmal crompton were scottish, so it's not within wharton's gift to choose that they wrote each other's works.....

:-D

[Wharton]

LazyGun - Frank Richards also created me :-)

[AB Editor]

In the article the lady scribbler (she probably has a name, but what's the point of pretending her work is of any merit when she is clearly in the possession of ovaries) goes on to explain how her page was aggressively whittled down after the Op Ed was published:

"But there was more. Much more. As soon as the Op-Ed article appeared, unhappy Wikipedia editors pounced on my Wikipedia page and started making alterations to it, erasing as much as they possibly could without (I assume) technically breaking the rules. They removed the links to outside sources, like interviews of me and reviews of my novels. Not surprisingly, they also removed the link to the Op-Ed article. At the same time, they put up a banner at the top of my page saying the page needed “additional citations for verifications.” Too bad they’d just taken out the useful sources."

This is more or less bullying in my opinion

Does this make you reconsider the validity of Wikipedia at all? I know we all take it with a pinch of salt and accept it mostly as a "gist" - but what about when they create a list of "American Authors" which removes women from the list?

Personally I'm glad I didn't donate when they were begging last time.

[LazyGun]

@Wharton - Heh, Harry Wharton? Sheesh, I had forgotten most of the characters - been so long since I read the books...

[Wharton]

Ed - Did you see the wee dig that mushroom25 got in there? :-)

[LazyGun]

That kind of editorial re-writes of someones wiik page does sound like mysogynistic bullying, and characterises the worst element of the wiki project.

In general though,certainly for those articles i have researched, i think wiki offers a reasonably balanced viewpoint - but it is always worth getting more than one source, especially for matters controversial...

[Sharingan]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Contact_us_-_Readers

People who are suitably outraged ( like me) can edit and there is also an email to post any grievances to.

[jackthehat]

I think it can depend upon how Wiki considers its users access the information it provides.
On the one hand, creating a sub-section which means that you don't have to munch your way through thousands of names before finding the one you want seems like a sensible idea.
On the other, Wiki could have divided the American Authors list into separate Female and Male sub-sections, giving equal weight to each.
As it is, it seems to have been carried out in a rather dismissive manner, and the subsequent treatment of Amanda Filipacchi seems very shabby indeed.

[ChuckFickens]

Has anyone actually looked at the pages?

As far as I can see all the people listed on the "American Woman novelists" page is also on the "American Novelists" page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_women_novelists

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_novelists

[LazyGun]

The list you see now of american novelists is the list now that the american women writers have been put back :)

[magsmay]

I knew the Ed was female lol!