Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countering systemic bias

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Countering systemic bias
WikiProject icon This page is supported by the Countering systemic bias WikiProject, which provides a central location to counter systemic bias on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.

Question book-new.svg

Please read the associated WikiProject Page before posting here. If you notify the project, please be prepared to show how any potential bias could be resulting in a lack of balanced coverage, or some other omission, as described on the WikiProject Page.

Bias preferring USA based LCCN over ISNI[edit]

For template:Authority control I proposed to have ISNI listed before VIAF. Another change I implemented directly, moving ISNI before USA centered LCCN. Due to page protection I could no change every instance and started Template talk:Authority control#USA bias.

With respect to person data, LCCN is just a subsystem that via VIAF contributes to the ISNI data, see or International Standard Name Identifier#Data contributors.

How can that bias be removed? John B. Sullivan (talk) 13:18, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Wow, what a technical issue. I don't know that you'll get a lot of responses, since to most people the concept of ISNI, VIAF, and LCCN is a lot of alphabet soup. Will try, though. --GRuban (talk) 14:31, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
User:GRuban - thanks a lot! John B. Sullivan (talk) 20:10, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
As far as I can tell, you have not shown evidence that there is a bias. This is being discussed at Template talk:Authority control#USA bias. Until that discussion comes to a conclusion, posting here as if you have proven that bias exists is WP:FORUMSHOPPING. --Guy Macon (talk) 15:46, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
Gosh, WP:FORUMSHOPPING for a topic related to cultural bias on a page WT:WikiProject Countering systemic bias. Did you, Guy Macon, misunderstand something at the page you linked to and that is found in " Where multiple issues do exist, then the raising of the individual issues on the correct noticeboards may be reasonable, but in that case it is normally best to give links to show where else you have raised the question." John B. Sullivan (talk) 20:10, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
You sure do bring up the same issue in a lot of different places...
New section at Template talk:Authority control: "ISNI first"[1]
Another new section at Template talk:Authority control: "Valus in Wikidata are false"[2]
Yet another new section at Template talk:Authority control: "Integration with VIAF"[3]
And yet another new section at Template talk:Authority control: "USA bias"[4]
Aaaaand one last new section at Template talk:Authority control: "VIAF linking to English Wikipedia"[5]
New section at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard: "Tango link changes need reverting"[6]
Another new section at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard: "User:Binksternet violating WP:BRD"[7]
New section at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab): "Reducing USA cultural bias"[8]
New section at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countering systemic bias: "Bias preferring USA based LCCN over ISNI"[9]
Looks like WP:FORUMSHOPPING to me. And you still haven't shown evidence that there is a bias. --Guy Macon (talk) 05:14, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

The OP has been blocked per checkuser. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:09, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Improving coverage of areas impacted by Boko Haram violence[edit]

Although the information available on Northeastern Nigeria, and on the refugees in neighboring countries fleeing violence by Boko Haram is somewhat limited, there is still much that could be done to improve the Wikipedia articles about this geographical area. It's rather distressing to see that despite all the tweets about "Bring Back Our Girls", neither Wikipedia nor major news outlets have made it a priority to assemble the basic encyclopedic information about this part of the world. --Djembayz (talk) 02:17, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

This topic appears to be well covered in the following Wikipedia articles:
Some of the above need improvement, and I suspect that someone familiar with the topic could merge some of the above into fewer, better written articles, but I don't see any evidence that Wikipedia has not "made it a priority to assemble the basic encyclopedic information about this part of the world". Djembayz, I suggest that you read WP:SOFIXIT, then jump in and start improving those articles. --Guy Macon (talk) 23:09, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
This isn't a situation where one person can WP:SOFIXIT. Despite what you see at Gwoza, Refugees in Cameroon, or any number of other articles, WP:OWN is not my thing. There's a need for more eyes on this topic, not just mine. Info on current events impacting specific locations isn't always up to date; info on what tribal groups live in each place, what languages are spoken, what crops are grown, etc. is not there in most of the geographical stubs on Adamawa State, Borno State, Bauchi State, Yobe State; Gombe State locations need updating. --Djembayz (talk) 14:01, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Project Talk page template[edit]

Hi folks, at the Gender Gap Task Force talk page, there is a discussion about a template for the project. Since that group is a Task Force versus its own Project, any template would need to be a derivative or version of a master template for this Project. It's been suggested that the Template:WikiProject Christianity would be an appropriate example to follow.

Additional input would be appreciated. Regards, --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 01:54, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live![edit]

WikiProject X icon.svg

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Law firms in Uganda (Birungyi Barata)[edit]

I have recently tried to improve the categorization of Birungyi Barata, a law firm based in Uganda. When I re-visited my edit today I saw that this article has been nominated for deletion. I know little about the topic let alone the country, and since it is not well covered in Wikipedia, I hate to see the little we have removed from this encyclopedia. Any ideas? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 15:51, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

I took a quick look at the AfD, and a significant issue seems to be whether the page promotes a particular non-notable business. Perhaps a solution would be to create a page about law in Uganda, that would concentrate on the subject instead of on a single business. Looking at Category:Ugandan law, there seems to be room for such a page. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:02, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
@Tryptofish: What about the other six articles in the category? Should they all be deleted and Law in Uganda will replace them? If so, who will create this new article? Ottawahitech (talk) 02:23, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
I wasn't suggesting that anything be deleted, just suggesting the addition of a new page. As for who would do it, maybe someone else watching here will get interested and do that, or you might consider posting at WT:WikiProject Africa. Otherwise: (1) not me, and (2) WP:There is no deadline. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:49, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Article which might be worth reading[edit]

I posted this on the suggestion page of The Signpost:

Working Knowledge, the blog of the Harvard Business School, has an entry, Is Wikipedia More Biased Than Encyclopædia Britannica?. It's a summary of a working paper originally published Oct. 10, 2014, Do Experts or Collective Intelligence Write with More Bias? Evidence from Encyclopædia Britannica and Wikipedia. The technique used was to search for key phrases associated with right- or left-leaning convictions. Based on an analysis of that search, they find Wikipedia leans somewhat toward the left. They then qualify that conclusion in two ways: 1) If they take in account that WP is much bigger than Britannica, then the bias is almost the same; and 2) the more edits an article has (they say it has to have at least 2,000), the more likely it will be balanced. (In the comments section I replied why I think the study is faulty.)

I've posted that here because it might be worth reading, allowing members to remember to focus on key phrases or code words which can indicate bias. kosboot (talk) 18:27, 21 January 2015 (UTC)