This 33-year-old made more than 1,000 Wikipedia bios for unknown women scientists

Oct 17, 2022 4:21 AM

GravityVT

Views

137892

Likes

3497

Dislikes

51

https://www.today.com/parents/jessica-wade-wikipedia-women-scientists-rcna51628

She’s a badass.

3 years ago | Likes 164 Dislikes 8

Fuckin good on 'er

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Sure, but I write 1,000 wiki bios for women I don't know and I'm a "creep".

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

True hero

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

She and this guy should get together https://i.imgur.com/ltFR3HW.null

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

She heard one too many sci-bros say, "Aw, c'mon. Marie Curie, sure but that's it."

3 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

*female scientists, woman isn't an adjective you can't say "that scientist is woman". Or academic women if you prefer.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 4

How much have you donated to maintain Wiki? I'm at $27 so far this year. $1/reference. Mostly US National Park references

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Wayne Wade ? Niceee

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Good on her! I always enjoy the google banner thing when they bring unkwon female scientists to the front.

3 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 3

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

in here, wikipedia mods are so toxic they don't let you write biography about anyone they don't personally know. "not notable" they say

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

sometimes they don't let you write biographies for people they don't like either.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Rosalyn Franklin? Lise Meitner?

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Editors tried to delete some entries, ridiculous, if look which men have pages. Jess' efforts are amazing and utterly necessary!

3 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 4

They deleted some pages I had created for minor celebrities. They can be quite aggressive

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

And she resisted creating one for Holden McGroin …

3 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 2

prolly just a typo but... its unstoppable force...

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Is someone going to try to pull a 'oh she looks like she would do that' comment like they did with the gentleman?

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

People who produce proper Wikipedia content are the mortar that holds civilization together.

3 years ago | Likes 43 Dislikes 2

Them and the people who keep open source software programmes updated

3 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

Agreed .. and both are locked in to vote for Trump in 24. /s

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

And the people that update forum posts when they find an answer to their question.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Met her irl. Fantastic speaker, very knowledgeable.

3 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

Her Wikipedia entry. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jess_Wade

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The uni i attended had strict plagiarism rules and a lot of my profs corrected historical attribution. It was eye-opening.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Actually had a prof that had us edit poor wikipedia articles regarding the field for bonus marks. Good idea really. Good on this lady!

3 years ago | Likes 131 Dislikes 2

Same here, only with writing a new article. I am the auther of the article for Soil Aggregates in my language! (sorry girls, i'm married)

3 years ago | Likes 52 Dislikes 0

Can't we just learn about soil aggregates without boning? Or is the subject just THAT erotic?

3 years ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 0

Soil aggregates = dirty... So, so dirty.

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Yup. Makes any person who speaks about it basically irresistible. How do you think i got my wife to marry me?

3 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 0

Pretty nifty!

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Bill Nye on Netflix called out Watson and Crick for ignoring Rosalind Franklin's contribution to the double helix of DNA.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

A real life Velma! Way to be, Jessica!

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Get her a statue

3 years ago | Likes 44 Dislikes 7

...for what? Doing exactly what thousands of other wiki writers do? Article is just pandering.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 6

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

actually a great idea, given the contributions they've made to accessible knowledge. Let's replace more racists with 'em

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Great for her! Did she update it on her Wikipedia page?

3 years ago | Likes 457 Dislikes 5

What is her Wikipedia "name"?

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

At least in the olden days you weren't supposed to edit your own Wikipedia page.

3 years ago | Likes 152 Dislikes 0

[citation needed]

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Oh. I learned something new today. Thank you.

3 years ago | Likes 56 Dislikes 1

[edited for accuracy]

3 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

IIRC you can't even be used as a source by someone else asking you directly, sources have to go through a 3rd party.

3 years ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 0

technically that's true everywhere, Wikipedia doesn't allow primary sources

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That was a nice subplot in Newsroom.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I hope she reinstated the erased pages

3 years ago | Likes 44 Dislikes 1

No idea about all of them but she won the Clarice Phelps one and it has stayed up

3 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

doubtful. Wiki has specific rules on who is eligible to get his own article. being member of a team for an obscure discovery doesn't cut it.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 18

If they have a wiki page for a small game nobody liked, they should include people who discover a new element.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

their* own article

3 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

Adding a new entry to the periodic table is obscure? Damn. That makes me sad.

3 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 0

it's not. that's why everyone here already knew about it.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 16

So all pages on subjects you don't know about already should be deleted? Do you have any idea what an Encyclopedia is?

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

There are only 118 elements. How many have you discovered or classified? It is a notable discovery. New elements are incredibly rare

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

What happened to the deleted parts? Did they restore them?

3 years ago | Likes 146 Dislikes 1

Wiki editors have been notoriously misogynistic, often deleting entries for being too short despite shorter articles exist not about women

3 years ago | Likes 27 Dislikes 1

I sure hope so!

3 years ago | Likes 32 Dislikes 0

The article suggests they did.

3 years ago | Likes 26 Dislikes 0

What is her Wikipedia "name"?

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Depends. Sometime, short 3 line article about someone nobody knox have no reason to exist.

3 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 65

Hopefully your obituary has 4 lines then.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Have you ever seen an encyclopedia? Three lines is kind of long for a person.

3 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Actually they do, because I want to learn about things and people I don't yet know.

3 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 0

Just like this comment?

3 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

But if they contributed something to society, then those 3 lines SHOULD exist.

3 years ago | Likes 70 Dislikes 3

It's not supposed to be an encyclopedia of everything, and from how often they beg me for money, they are already not doing well economicall

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 29

They are actually extremely ahead of schedule on payments and can run off their current funds for decades to come. Look it up.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

...have I been tricked?

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Yes. And what's the harm? Disk space?

3 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 1

Well, yes. If you'd do an encyplopedia of everything publically made by everyone it'd be unsustainable. It's also backup storage and more...

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 14

I think you are overestimating how expensive disk storage is.

3 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

the german wikipedia is worse, let me tell you. Even important stuff is removed because "only locally relevant", its a cesspool

3 years ago | Likes 31 Dislikes 1

It's why I stopped using it. None of them are perfect, but English wiki is easily better

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Dieser Kommentar erfüllt nicht die Relevanzkriterien. Bitte löschen, danke.

3 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

Same with Finnish Wikipedia. There's also rampant misogyny in Wikipedia, also on the English site.

3 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 1

Schrebergartenkultur at its finest :) Also true for German forums, subreddits, and usenet groups (yes, I'm old)

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Dazu gabs schon nen Thread. Bitte SuFu benutzen. Ich mach hier dann mal zu.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I've seen the Böhmermann show about it. "Worse" is a pretty polite description :D

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

I'm german, we are always polite, aren't we? ;-)

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Actually...no :D

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0