"On March 7, 2014, a biography for #DonnaStrickland, the physicist who invented a technology used by all the high-powered lasers in the world, was created on #Wikipedia. In less than six minutes, it was flagged for a “speedy deletion” and shortly thereafter erased from the site.1 This decision is part of the reason Dr. Strickland did not have an active Wikipedia page when she was honored with the Nobel Prize in Physics four years later."
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/14614448211023772
#Gender #Inequality
/via @tk
The story was a bit more nuanced and I think it had more to do with how Wikipedia generally filters new articles, rather than with gender bias https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2018/10/04/donna-strickland-wikipedia/
@kravietz "It’s worth emphasizing this. Academics may be writing many of the sources volunteer Wikipedia editors use to verify the information on Wikipedia, but they are only infrequently the subject of those same sources. And when it does occur, they usually feature men from developed nations—not women or other under-represented groups."
"But there are known, real, entrenched barriers keeping women in academia from rising to notable positions like full professor, or dean, or president of a professional organization, or keynote speaker at a prestigious conference. So even someone like Donna Strickland doesn’t seem notable enough, on paper, until she actually wins a Nobel Prize."
Bit more complex, yeah. It's not Wikipedia's editors that are sexist, it's just the system! Meanwhile the folks at wikipedia are just following orders, and thus absolved of any blame in this. Not their fault they wrote the rules like this; they got to be followed now, no exceptions! 
@xuv @tk
@kravietz @tk read your reference. It's definitely about gender bias.