Topic
Notability
About: Notability is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 47 publications have been published within this topic receiving 781 citations. The topic is also known as: notable & significant.
Papers
TL;DR: This work sets out to assess potential gender inequalities in Wikipedia articles along different dimensions: notability, topical focus, linguistic bias, structural properties, and meta-data presentation, and finds that women in Wikipedia are more notable than men.
Abstract: Contributing to the writing of history has never been as easy as it is today thanks to Wikipedia, a community-created encyclopedia that aims to document the world’s knowledge from a neutral point of view. Though everyone can participate it is well known that the editor community has a narrow diversity, with a majority of white male editors. While this participatory gender gap has been studied extensively in the literature, this work sets out to assess potential gender inequalities in Wikipedia articles along different dimensions: notability, topical focus, linguistic bias, structural properties, and meta-data presentation. We find that (i) women in Wikipedia are more notable than men, which we interpret as the outcome of a subtle glass ceiling effect; (ii) family-, gender-, and relationship-related topics are more present in biographies about women; (iii) linguistic bias manifests in Wikipedia since abstract terms tend to be used to describe positive aspects in the biographies of men and negative aspects in the biographies of women; and (iv) there are structural differences in terms of meta-data and hyperlinks, which have consequences for information-seeking activities. While some differences are expected, due to historical and social contexts, other differences are attributable to Wikipedia editors. The implications of such differences are discussed having Wikipedia contribution policies in mind. We hope that the present work will contribute to increased awareness about, first, gender issues in the content of Wikipedia, and second, the different levels on which gender biases can manifest on the Web.
152 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examined 400 biographical Wikipedia articles on academics from four scientific fields to test if being featured in the world's largest online encyclopedia is correlated with higher academic notability (assessed through citation counts).
Abstract: Activity of modern scholarship creates online footprints galore. Along with traditional metrics of research quality, such as citation counts, online images of researchers and institutions increasingly matter in evaluating academic impact, decisions about grant allocation, and promotion. We examined 400 biographical Wikipedia articles on academics from four scientific fields to test if being featured in the world’s largest online encyclopedia is correlated with higher academic notability (assessed through citation counts). We found no statistically significant correlation between Wikipedia articles metrics (length, number of edits, number of incoming links from other articles, etc.) and academic notability of the mentioned researchers. We also did not find any evidence that the scientists with better WP representation are necessarily more prominent in their fields. In addition, we inspected the Wikipedia coverage of notable scientists sampled from Thomson Reuters list of ‘highly cited researchers’. In each of the examined fields, Wikipedia failed in covering notable scholars properly. Both findings imply that Wikipedia might be producing an inaccurate image of academics on the front end of science. By shedding light on how public perception of academic progress is formed, this study alerts that a subjective element might have been introduced into the hitherto structured system of academic evaluation.
129 citations
TL;DR: In this article, a methodology for comparing the characterizations of men and women in biographies in three aspects: meta-data, language, and network structure is presented. But the analysis of gender bias is not about participation and representation only, but also about characterization of women.
Abstract: Contributing to history has never been as easy as it is today. Anyone with access to the Web is able to play a part on Wikipedia, an open and free encyclopedia. Wikipedia, available in many languages, is one of the most visited websites in the world and arguably one of the primary sources of knowledge on the Web. However, not everyone is contributing to Wikipedia from a diversity point of view; several groups are severely underrepresented. One of those groups is women, who make up approximately 16% of the current contributor community, meaning that most of the content is written by men. In addition, although there are specific guidelines of verifiability, notability, and neutral point of view that must be adhered by Wikipedia content, these guidelines are supervised and enforced by men.
In this paper, we propose that gender bias is not about participation and representation only, but also about characterization of women. We approach the analysis of gender bias by defining a methodology for comparing the characterizations of men and women in biographies in three aspects: meta-data, language, and network structure. Our results show that, indeed, there are differences in characterization and structure. Some of these differences are reflected from the off-line world documented by Wikipedia, but other differences can be attributed to gender bias in Wikipedia content. We contextualize these differences in feminist theory and discuss their implications for Wikipedia policy.
87 citations
TL;DR: Gender inequality is one of the most pervasive and insidious forms of inequality. as mentioned in this paper pointed out that Wikipedia contains more than 1.5 million biographies about notable writers, inventors, and acade...
Abstract: Gender is one of the most pervasive and insidious forms of inequality. For example, English-language Wikipedia contains more than 1.5 million biographies about notable writers, inventors, and acade...
85 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors compare the Western philosophy of language with the political discourse practices of the Xavante Indians of central Brazil, focusing on the relationships among discourse, the individual, and the collectivity.
Abstract: What are the discourse presuppositions of the Habermasian public sphere? The present article explores this question by comparing the Western philosophy of language with the political discourse practices of the Xavante Indians of central Brazil. Specifically, it focuses on the relationships among discourse, the individual, and the collectivity. Discursive practices in Xavante men's council meetings pragmatically represent discourse as an emergent intersubjective production. Elaborate co-performances that incorporate both participant commentary and the discourse of previous meetings oppose the principle of negativity to that of notability. Speech performances effectively detach individuals from the content of their speech, counteracting Xavante factionalism and promoting social cohesiveness as well as egalitarian relations among senior males. Simultaneously, speech practices recreate and reinforce age- and gender-based relations of dominance. [discourse, co-performance, factional politics, principles of negativity and notability, philosophy of language, Brazilian Indians]
62 citations
Related Topics (5)
Performance Metrics
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2021 | 3 |
| 2019 | 4 |
| 2018 | 3 |
| 2017 | 4 |
| 2016 | 3 |
| 2015 | 5 |