Abstract
Digital platforms produce bias and inequality that have a significant impact on peoples’ sense of self, agency and life chances. Wikipedia has largely evaded the criticism of other algorithmic systems like Google search and training databases like ImageNet, but Wikipedia is a critical source of representation in our current era – not only because it is one of the world's most popular websites, but because its data are being used as training data for the AI systems that are increasingly used for decision-making. We conducted an analysis of Wikipedia biographies in a national context, comparing the temporality and subjects of notability between English Wikipedia and the Australian Honours system in order to understand Wikipedia's unique role in the production of notability over the site's 20-year history. Framing Wikipedia as an active producer (rather than a reflection) of notability, we demonstrate that women are more likely to be awarded a Wikipedia page after the award announcements or not at all if their contribution is for labour relating to the caring professions than if their service is for sports, arts and films, politics or the judiciary. We argue that Wikipedia's inability to recognise gendered care work as noteworthy is mirrored in its own practices.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.