User:AleatoryPonderings/Systemic bias in deletion discussions
 | This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
 | This page in a nutshell: Deletion is one of the most consequential decisions we make here. Systemic bias is everywhere, including at articles for deletion. You should take special care to avoid systemic bias at AfD. |
This is an essay about systemic bias at articles for deletion.
Notability is vague
[edit]Wikipedia's notability guidelines are purposefully and necessarily vague.
- Our general notability guideline requires significant coverage.
- Our subject-specific notability guidelines require, for example:
- important artists;
- significant roles in media; and
- major political figures.
These guidelines are purposefully vague because applying them in practice demands a certain flexibility and brevity. They are necessarily vague because the concept of notability itself is not clear.
But vague guidelines make it easy for systemic bias to creep in. It is easier to dismiss a person as insignificant if they seem marginal. It is easier to dismiss coverage as insignificant if it comes from sources that seem marginal.[a]
Deletion is consequential
[edit]Deletion is one of the most visible and consequential manifestations of systemic bias. When an article on a marginalized subject is deleted because it seems insufficiently "significant" or "important" to participants in the deletion discussion, this sends a powerful message:
- It tells the world that the subject is not worthy of inclusion in one of its most widely used reference sources.
- It tells the article's creator that their article was not worth creating.
- It tells the Wikipedia community that the subject should not be considered important in the future.
Considerations
[edit]Here is a non-exhaustive list of considerations to keep in mind when evaluating subjects for notability that may be particularly susceptible to systemic bias.
 |
- A person will likely seem less significant to you if:
- They are from a country you are not familiar with.
- They speak a language you do not speak.
- They are covered in media you consider "niche", unprofessional, or outside the mainstream.
- A source will likely seem less weighty to you if:
- It is written in a language you do not understand.
- It appears "unprofessional" to you.
- It is written for a specialized audience, such as a particular cultural or ethnic community.
See also
[edit]Notes
[edit]- ^ If Wikipedia worked perfectly, according to its own guidelines, it would perfectly reproduce the bias that already exists in media and scholarship.