Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Woman ( Donna Strickland) who won Nobel Physics prize not important enough for Wiki

41 replies

BigChocFrenzy · 03/10/2018 23:44

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/oct/03/donna-strickland-nobel-physics-prize-wikipedia-denied

When the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences in Stockholm announced the Nobel prize for physics this week, anyone wanting to find out more about one of the three winners would have drawn a blank on Wikipedia.
....
Until around an hour and a half after the award was announced on Tuesday, the Canadian physicist Donna Strickland was not deemed significant enough to merit her own page on the user-edited encyclopedia.

The oversight has once again highlighted the marginalization of women in science and gender bias at Wikipedia.

Strickland is an associate professor of physics and astronomy at the University of Waterloo and former president of the Optical Society,
but when a Wikipedia user attempted to create a profile for her in March, the page was denied by a moderator.

“This submission’s references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article,” said the moderator.

Soon after Tuesday’s announcement, however, the Wikipedia community scrambled to build up a profile, completing sections on her research, biography and – most critically – her awards.

But the belated recognition contrasted with that afforded to Strickland’s colleague Gérard Mourou – with whom she shared the award – who had a Wikipedia page in 2005.
....
She is the first woman to win the award since it went to Maria Goeppert-Mayer in 1963.

OP posts:
RealGhouls · 04/10/2018 09:53

The Guardian article is shit, so here's some more detail:

An article was created about her in 2014, however it was a copy+paste from here www.osa.org/en-us/history/biographies/donna-t-strickland/

So it was speedily deleted
en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Donna_Strickland&offset=&limit=500&action=history

A new article was created as a draft: en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Donna_Strickland&oldid=832784757

This was reviewed by someone calling himself Bradv

en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Donna_Strickland&diff=842614385&oldid=832784757

on the grounds that there were insufficient secondary sources.

DisrespectfulAdultFemale · 04/10/2018 09:51

The way to tell she's a woman, not a transwoman

...is to see if she has written about being transgender and working in physics.

DisrespectfulAdultFemale · 04/10/2018 09:49

Sex (not gender) bias is one of the reasons I won't donate to Wikipedia.

Original poster
BigChocFrenzy · 04/10/2018 09:39

repeal The way to tell she's a woman, not a transwoman:

Her brilliant achievement was not trumpeted as the most important ever

OP posts:
RepealtheGRA · 04/10/2018 08:46

Well that answers the question I’d been wanting to ask about if she was an actual woman Hmm (the article I read didn’t have a photo and these days it’s so hard to tell without one)

Littlemouseroar · 04/10/2018 08:35

Just hsd a message from the stemettes saying they are dedicating a day for a group to go in and sort out wikipedia and its gender imbalance.

BernardBlacksWineIcelolly · 04/10/2018 06:29

and it's not fucking gender bias Guardian

those women didn't identify into being discriminated against

they couldn't identify out of it if only they wanted to be treated equally more than they want to wear skirts and be accommodating

it's bias on the basis of their sex

to imply anything else is just fucking offensive

DuckingGoodPJs · 04/10/2018 06:24

Bad that so many other female notable people are left out, due to decisions like this. Dikipedia is a fairly hostile place for females.

The episode also cast light on Wikipedia’s own gender bias: just 16% of the site’s volunteer editors are female and only 17% of entries dedicated to notable people are for women.

It is also a shame that the Nobel Committee don't acknowledge work posthumously, at least some posthumous 'note' or recognition would be something. Then Vera Rubin and Rosalind Franklin could have been elevated in memory for their work. But women keep getting "overlooked" in their fields.

Original poster
BigChocFrenzy · 04/10/2018 00:28

Yes, I wondered about that, Hop
also this:

One Wikipedia Page Is a Metaphor for the Nobel Prize’s Record With Women

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/10/nobel-prize-physics-donna-strickland-gerard-mourou-arthur-ashkin/571909/

"Donna Strickland is only the third woman in history to win the award in physics—and her research probably deserved attention a lot sooner.__"

OP posts:
Original poster
BigChocFrenzy · 04/10/2018 00:24

oops, wrong thread Blush
Well, anyone on FWR suffering a lurgie

OP posts:
Original poster
BigChocFrenzy · 04/10/2018 00:23

Thanks, red Thanks
I hope you are tucked up in a warm bed, sleeping, to zap that lurgie

OP posts:
Hopoindown31 · 04/10/2018 00:11

Isn't the worse thing that she is only an associate professor? Most male nobel laureates have been full professors for years before their award. What is going on there?

Original poster
BigChocFrenzy · 04/10/2018 00:04

Woman know your place
... which is not to be on Wiki with the real physicists, who have penises

OP posts:
FermatsTheorem · 04/10/2018 00:02

Gaahhhh

Fucking arse-ing, shitty bastarding misogynists. The fact that someone wrote a page and they turned it down.

I mean we've known for a long time that Wikipedia is like the political wing of the gamergate arseholes, but that's still shocking.

WingsofXXSteel · 03/10/2018 23:56
Shock
AssassinatedBeauty · 03/10/2018 23:48

Bloody hell. I'd seen the headlines about there not being a wiki page, but I had naively assumed it was because no one had attempted to make one. That someone did and it was denied by a moderator as not suitable is terrible.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet Log In

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.