Racial bias on Wikipedia
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Racial_bias_on_Wikipedia an entity of type: Thing
Wikipedia telah dikritik karena memiliki ketimpangan rasial sistemik dalam sorotannya, karena representasi rendah orang kulit berwarna dalam basis penyuntingnya. Presiden pada masa lampau, James Hare, menyatakan bahwa "ruang dihiraukan" di Wikipedia, karena artikel-artikel umumnya ditulis oleh para penyunting kulit putih. Menurut beberapa orang, artikel-artikel yang ada tentang topik-topik Afrika kebanyakan disunting oleh para penyunting asal Eropa dan Amerika Utara dan sehingga hanya merefleksikan pengetahuan dan konsumsi media mereka, yang "memberikan citra negatif" terhadap Afrika. Maira Liriano dari Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture, berpendapat bahwa kurangnya informasi terkait sejarah orang kulit hitam di Wikipedia "membuatnya tampak seperti tak penting."
rdf:langString
The English Wikipedia has been criticized for having a systemic racial bias in its coverage. This stems in part from an under-representation of people of color within its editor base. In "Can History Be Open Source? Wikipedia and the Future of the Past," it is noted that article completeness and coverage is dependent on the interests of Wikipedians, not necessarily on the subject matter itself. The past president of Wikimedia D.C., James Hare, asserted that "a lot of black history is left out" of Wikipedia, due to articles predominately being written by white editors. Articles that do exist on African topics are, according to some, largely edited by editors from Europe and North America and thus reflect only their knowledge and consumption of media, which "tend to perpetuate a negative ima
rdf:langString
rdf:langString
Bias rasial di Wikipedia
rdf:langString
Racial bias on Wikipedia
rdf:langString
Viés racial na Wikipédia
xsd:integer
46401819
xsd:integer
1123842384
rdf:langString
Wikipedia telah dikritik karena memiliki ketimpangan rasial sistemik dalam sorotannya, karena representasi rendah orang kulit berwarna dalam basis penyuntingnya. Presiden pada masa lampau, James Hare, menyatakan bahwa "ruang dihiraukan" di Wikipedia, karena artikel-artikel umumnya ditulis oleh para penyunting kulit putih. Menurut beberapa orang, artikel-artikel yang ada tentang topik-topik Afrika kebanyakan disunting oleh para penyunting asal Eropa dan Amerika Utara dan sehingga hanya merefleksikan pengetahuan dan konsumsi media mereka, yang "memberikan citra negatif" terhadap Afrika. Maira Liriano dari Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture, berpendapat bahwa kurangnya informasi terkait sejarah orang kulit hitam di Wikipedia "membuatnya tampak seperti tak penting."
rdf:langString
The English Wikipedia has been criticized for having a systemic racial bias in its coverage. This stems in part from an under-representation of people of color within its editor base. In "Can History Be Open Source? Wikipedia and the Future of the Past," it is noted that article completeness and coverage is dependent on the interests of Wikipedians, not necessarily on the subject matter itself. The past president of Wikimedia D.C., James Hare, asserted that "a lot of black history is left out" of Wikipedia, due to articles predominately being written by white editors. Articles that do exist on African topics are, according to some, largely edited by editors from Europe and North America and thus reflect only their knowledge and consumption of media, which "tend to perpetuate a negative image" of Africa. Maira Liriano of the Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture, has argued that the lack of information regarding black history on Wikipedia "makes it seem like it's not important." Different theories have been provided to explain these racial discrepancies. Jay Cassano, writing for Fast Company magazine, argued that Wikipedia's small proportion of black editors is a result of the small black presence within the technology sector, and a relative lack of reliable access to the Internet. Katherine Maher, executive director of the Wikimedia Foundation, has argued that the specific focuses in Wikipedia's content are representative of those of society as a whole. She said that Wikipedia could only represent that which was referenced in secondary sources, which historically have been favorable towards and focused on white men. "Studies have shown that content on Wikipedia suffers from the bias of its editors – [who are] mainly technically inclined, English-speaking, white-collar men living in majority-Christian, developed countries in the Northern hemisphere." In addition to the racial bias on Wikipedia, public encyclopedias are generally vulnerable to vandalism by hate groups like white nationalists.
xsd:nonNegativeInteger
15688