Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #socscifoo
Most recents (1)
Every so often, you end up down a Wikipedia rabbit hole that reminds you how Wikipedia's editorship being 85-90% male creates huge content gaps for certain topics, especially those more typically associated with women
Today's example: Battenberg lace en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battenber…
Today's example: Battenberg lace en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battenber…
How is this article only 5 sentences long?? Where is the exhaustive dive into the history and geography and other sub-topics that I count on from Wikipedia??
(It's not for a lack of material, there are whole books about Battenberg lace:
google.com/search?tbm=bks… )
(It's not for a lack of material, there are whole books about Battenberg lace:
google.com/search?tbm=bks… )
We can tell that this content gap is systematic, because when I click on the internal Wikipedia links within the Battenberg lace article, I also discover very tiny articles about related topics:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissan…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tape_lace
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissan…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tape_lace
