Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countering systemic bias

Systemic bias in Wikipedia discussions, in light of prejudice

Hi, I only recently came across this project - interestingly, it didn't come up in the research I did for a very relevant essay. I guess Wikipedia is such a huge place that it's hard not to miss a l(and WikiMedia is even bigger)!

Something I've been wondering about is whether Wikipedia has any functioning mechanism to counter the tendency for editors to get burned out on editing particular pages due to the behaviour of other editors. For example, bullying, chauvinism or outright bigotry have a well-established tendency to push out people belonging to relatively marginalised groups - something I have observed on Wikipedia's autism-related pages over a number of years. I imagine this also helps explain the perennial male-dominance of this site!

Of course, one of the basic ideas of Wikipedia is that consensus should be reached among the editors who show up to a page, and that, for example, "notification done with the intention of influencing the outcome of a discussion in a particular way" is considered inappropriate. But faced with prejudice, stonewalling and so on, editors from more marginalised groups tend to just stop showing up over time. Do we have a way of countering that, besides the laborious dispute resolution mechanisms and obviously the slow influx of new editors over time? Oolong (talk) 18:53, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm not aware of any mechanism that attempts to address this, though I'm not that experienced an editor, and perhaps one exists that I'm not aware of. You might post a note on the WikiProject Editor Retention talk page, as a heads up that you've raised a relevant issue here. As a minor thing, I recently came across this essay, and you might think about whether there's something that would be good to add to the "What you can do" section about what editors can do to be allies. FactOrOpinion (talk) 20:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

RfCs on autism

There's an RfC on whether the current article is consistent with NPOV and a second RfC on whether to keep the current lead or replace it. LogicalLens (talk) 06:05, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Feminism

Feminism has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 04:04, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Recent areas of focus and active participation

I am an occasional Wikipedia editor and not very confident in what I can offer as an editor.

I have been concerned about systemic bias for a long time and am glad to have just discovered this WikiProject. I am concerned it is now rated semi-active.

I can well understand that activity comes and goes.

I would like to contribute more to this project.

I am relatively privileged.

I am using a smart phone, which is a less privileged way to engage with Wikipedia than it used to be. I use a laptop which is a sign of some of my privileges.

What can I do to become a more useful participant in this project?

I believe sharing more about my privilege in an appropriate way could also be helpful.

I believe I need to engage more fully with the issues this brings up. Suggestions on how to address this are welcome.

I am not sure how these observations and requests relate to Wikipedia’s overall policies and to participating in this project. CuriousMarkE (talk) 03:34, 15 March 2025 (UTC)