Comments on: Wikipedia’s gender gap http://blog.wikimedia.org/2011/02/01/wikipedias-gender-gap/ News from the Wikimedia Foundation and about the Wikimedia movement Fri, 24 May 2013 22:56:42 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.6-beta2-24176 By: Week in Review: Jan. 31 – Feb. 4 « The Gender Report http://blog.wikimedia.org/2011/02/01/wikipedias-gender-gap/comment-page-1/#comment-6621 Week in Review: Jan. 31 – Feb. 4 « The Gender Report Sat, 05 Feb 2011 22:05:34 +0000 http://blog.wikimedia.org/?p=2860#comment-6621 [...] study released this week showed that after 10 years, Wikipedia’s contributor base consisted of less [...]

]]> By: tusuzu http://blog.wikimedia.org/2011/02/01/wikipedias-gender-gap/comment-page-1/#comment-6587 tusuzu Fri, 04 Feb 2011 00:48:07 +0000 http://blog.wikimedia.org/?p=2860#comment-6587 Yes, that’s how real things live and grow. They start small, then get big over time. Not many true and real things arrive fully-grown like Venus popping out of a clam shell – see, she’s not real.

]]> By: Sage Ross http://blog.wikimedia.org/2011/02/01/wikipedias-gender-gap/comment-page-1/#comment-6557 Sage Ross Thu, 03 Feb 2011 00:40:48 +0000 http://blog.wikimedia.org/?p=2860#comment-6557 Yeah, it’s interesting that it becomes a big story only now. Noam Cohen actually wrote about it briefly in a 2009 piece, but that wasn’t on page 1.

]]> By: Darkoneko http://blog.wikimedia.org/2011/02/01/wikipedias-gender-gap/comment-page-1/#comment-6543 Darkoneko Wed, 02 Feb 2011 14:30:38 +0000 http://blog.wikimedia.org/?p=2860#comment-6543 err, wait.

All this surge of interest are from a 3 years old survey ? and everyone acts as if nothing could have elvolved since ? (in the right or the wrong way)

]]>