• Email Us: [email protected]
  • Contact Us: +1 718 874 1545
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Medical Market Report

  • Home
  • All Reports
  • About Us
  • Contact Us

This Physicist Has Written Over 1,750 Wikipedia Articles To Help Fix Sexism In STEM

October 21, 2022 by Deborah Bloomfield

There are more than 1.5 million biographical articles on Wikipedia, covering the lives of some of history’s most notable scientists, inventors, politicians, artists, and so on. It’s undeniably a vast number – but out of those 1.5 million, less than 285,000 are about women. Even fewer are estimated to be about non-white people. And even those who do manage to squeeze in among the hordes of white Western men aren’t guaranteed a permanent spot in Wikipedia’s repository: articles about women and people of color are less likely to be added to and improved, less likely to be read, and notably more likely to be deleted when they don’t link to other pages.

That’s why Jessica Wade, a British physicist specializing in Raman spectroscopy of polymer-based organic light-emitting diodes, has taken things into her own hands – literally. She’s personally written more than 1,750 articles for the online encyclopedia, in a singularly impressive attempt to redress the biographical balance for female and minority scientists and engineers.

Advertisement

“[Wikipedia is] used by pretty much everyone,” Wade told the Washington Post earlier this week. “[But] despite it being this incredibly important resource, it… suffer[s] from a lack of content, particularly about women, but also about people of color.”

It’s a big job, and often a thankless one: Wade has had dozens of articles deleted or flagged as failing the website’s longstanding “notability” criteria.

@Wikipedia editor who spent their wednesday night tagging the recent biographies i’ve started for #WomenInSTEM as not notable enough to be included in the encyclopaedia. it’s really constructive and helpful work. 🤬😭 pic.twitter.com/dHPOWTRdLO— Dr Jess Wade 👩🏻‍🔬 (@jesswade)

Yet, as others have pointed out, the definition of “notable” seems to be somewhat laxer for men than for other genders. Take Clarice Phelps, the nuclear chemist recognized as the first Black woman to be involved with the discovery of a chemical element: her profile was marked for deletion within a few months of Wade creating it.

Advertisement

And even more notorious, though not one of Wade’s creations, was the case of Donna Strickland, a literal Nobel Prize winning physicist who was deemed not notable enough for a Wikipedia article right up until an hour and a half after her Prize was awarded.

Many more, though, are Wikipedia success stories. Wade’s biographies include climatologist Kim Cobb; mathematician and Air Force Space and Missile Pioneers Hall of Fame inductee Gladys West; physicist June Lindsey, who was influential in the discovery of DNA; Ijeoma Uchegbu, a pioneer in pharmaceutical nanoscience; and vaccinologist Sarah Gilbert, who helped develop the Oxford–AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine.

“The process is finding people first – usually it’s an award holder, someone who’s been given a fellowship, someone who’s published a really great paper, or somebody who’s done a recent really good talk. Every morning, I go on Twitter and I’ll look,” Wade told the New York Times in 2019.

Advertisement

“Then I check if they meet the notability criteria on Wikipedia,” she explained. “And then I do a bunch of research, and I write as I go. So I’ll have like 20 tabs open with all different aspects of their career and then start to stitch together a biography from that.”

But even here, there can be problems. The gender and racial bias among Wikipedia articles isn’t just a Wikipedia issue, Wade explains: Phelps, for example, played a crucial part in the discovery of tennessine, but was left out of official announcements and publicity about the result. 

“Without these crucial pieces of recognition, her biography was quickly deemed not appropriate for Wikipedia,” Wade and molecular biologist Maryam Zaringhalam wrote in 2019.

Advertisement

Despite these stumbling blocks, the road ahead looks hopeful. With initiatives like Women in Red, AfroCROWD, and edit-a-thons focused on female and minority figures, the number of biographies of previously-overlooked scientists is slowly but surely ticking upwards.

“Through the efforts of Dr. Jess Wade and other volunteer contributors, real progress is being made,” Anusha Alikhan, vice president of communications at the nonprofit Wikimedia Foundation, which hosts Wikipedia, told the Washington Post. “In the past three years the percentage of biographies on English Wikipedia that are about women has increased from 15 to 19 percent.” 

“That may seem like a small change,” Alikhan said, “yet it represents more than 75,000 new biographies about women.”

Advertisement

As for Wade – she’s still writing those biographies. “I truly love seeing people being recognized and honored,” she told the Post. And in a particularly meta twist, she’s now a member of the very group she’s been working to promote: as of February 2018, she is a female scientist with her own Wikipedia page. 

She hasn’t let it go to her head, though. “I’m a tiny fish in a massive sea,” she told the Post. “I’ll keep doing everything I can to make science a more accessible and inclusive place to be.”

Deborah Bloomfield
Deborah Bloomfield

Related posts:

  1. U.S. trade chief sees ‘difficult logistical challenges’ for WTO summit
  2. Alpha Medical closes $24M Series B round to expand women’s telehealth – without the video calls
  3. Mexico’s Kavak drives away with $700M in new funding, doubling its valuation to $8.7B
  4. How to claim a student discount for TechCrunch+

Source Link: This Physicist Has Written Over 1,750 Wikipedia Articles To Help Fix Sexism In STEM

Filed Under: News

Primary Sidebar

  • We Could See A Black Hole Explode Within 10 Years – Unlocking The Secrets Of The Universe
  • Denisovan DNA May Make Some People Resistant To Malaria
  • Beware The Kellas Cat? This “Cryptid” Turned Out To Be Real, But It Wasn’t What People Thought
  • “They Simply Have A Taste For The Hedonists Among Us”: Festival Mosquito Study Has Some Bad News
  • What Is The Purpose Of Those Lines On Your Towels?
  • The Invisible World Around Us: How Can We Capture And Clean The Air We Breathe?
  • 85-Million-Year-Old Dinosaur Eggs Dated Using “Atomic Clock For Fossils” For The First Time
  • Why Shouldn’t You Kiss Babies? New Study Shows Even Healthy Newborns Can Become Severely Ill With RSV
  • Earth Has A New Quasi-Moon – And It Has Probably Been Around For Decades
  • Want To Kill Your Prey? Do It Feather-Legged Lace Weaver Spider Style And Vomit All Over Them
  • IFLScience The Big Questions: Are We In The Anthropocene?
  • The Wildfire Paradox Affecting 440 Million People Has As Worrying A Solution As You’d Expect
  • AI May Infringe On Your Rights And Insult Your Dignity (Unless We Do Something Soon)
  • How Do You Study Cryptic Species? We’re Finally Lifting The Lid On The World’s Least Understood Mammals
  • Once-In-A-Decade Close Encounter With Hazardous Asteroid 2025 FA22 Approaches
  • With 229 Pairs, This Beautiful Animal Has The Highest Number Of Chromosomes Of Any Animal
  • “An Unimaginable Breakthrough”: Loudest-Ever Gravitational Wave Collision Proves Stephen Hawking Correct
  • Exciting Martian Mudstone Has Features That Might Be Considered Biosignatures
  • How Long Did Dinosaurs Live? “It’s A Big Surprise To People That Work On Them”
  • NASA’s Mysterious Announcement: “Clearest Sign Of Life That We’ve Ever Found On Mars”
  • Business
  • Health
  • News
  • Science
  • Technology
  • +1 718 874 1545
  • +91 78878 22626
  • [email protected]
Office Address
Prudour Pvt. Ltd. 420 Lexington Avenue Suite 300 New York City, NY 10170.

Powered by Prudour Network

Copyrights © 2025 · Medical Market Report. All Rights Reserved.

Go to mobile version