Study into Wikipedia entries reveals massive discrimination against women, non-white figures

Wikipedia is one of the most visited websites globally, ranking just behind Google and YouTube, with over six billion visits per month and content available in nearly 300 languages. While widely seen as a democratic platform where anyone can contribute, Wikipedia remains a space of ideological struggle.

The online encyclopedia has traditionally been targeted by right-wing leaning critics accusing it of being overly progressive, yet analyses into the platform's entries now point to a persistent gender and ethnicity gap in content and participation.

Despite its mission to encompass all human knowledge, The Conversation publication has cited a study by the University of Barcelona which concludes that only 19% of biographies on Wikipedia feature women, and female editors make up just 10-15% of contributors.

This imbalance distorts historical records and reinforces the invisibility of women’s contributions in fields like science, politics, and activism. Given Wikipedia’s role in training AI systems such as ChatGPT, biases within its content risk being amplified and perpetuated in digital knowledge ecosystems.

The Spanish research project identifies three main factors contributing to Wikipedia’s gender disparity:

1) The “Women’s Problem” Hypothesis – Suggests women contribute less due to personal constraints such as time limitations, caregiving responsibilities, or lack of confidence in digital collaboration. However, this explanation overlooks structural issues and places responsibility solely on women.

2) The “Mirror Effect” Hypothesis – States that Wikipedia mirrors broader societal inequalities. Since women are underrepresented in mainstream media and academic sources, fewer articles are written about them. Additionally, Wikipedia’s editorial decision-making processes amplify existing biases.

3) The “Systemic Problem” Hypothesis – Highlights that Wikipedia’s culture and policies favor experienced editors, who are predominantly men. Newcomers, particularly women, often find the environment unwelcoming, making it difficult to engage with and influence the platform.

These factors result in persistent gender bias, with women’s biographies more frequently flagged for deletion due to "notability" concerns—a requirement that is harder for women to meet due to historical exclusion from traditional recognition. Additionally, Wikipedia articles must be based on existing external sources, meaning women’s underrepresentation in media further limits their visibility on the platform.

Representation on Wikipedia’s main page

The Cover Women project, another University of Barcelona study funded by the Wikimedia Foundation, examined Wikipedia’s main page across multiple languages. The study analyzed 22,924 biographies featured over a decade and found disparities in gender, ethnicity, language, and profession.

-Gender: Only 29% of featured biographies on English Wikipedia were about women, dropping to 18% on the Spanish Wikipedia. Non-binary individuals were almost entirely absent.

-Ethnicity & Race: Most featured individuals were white, and racial labels were inconsistently applied. White individuals were rarely categorized by race, while Black individuals were explicitly identified.

-Religion: Christian figures dominated, with fewer representations of Muslim, Hindu, or Buddhist individuals.

-Native Language: English-speaking individuals were disproportionately featured, reinforcing a Western-centric bias.

-Profession: Politicians, scientists, and writers were the most frequently featured. Professions historically associated with women, such as nursing or caregiving, were largely absent. While actresses, including those in the adult film industry, are among the most common female figures on Wikipedia, they rarely appear on the main page.

Wikipedia’s editorial process

Wikipedia’s main page is curated by a small group of volunteer editors who follow community-driven guidelines. However, these guidelines are complex, filled with jargon, and difficult for newcomers to navigate. Decision-making privileges are largely reserved for experienced editors, making it hard for new contributors to influence content selection.

Although efforts exist to promote diversity, the biases identified by the Cover Women project show that these measures are insufficient. The selection of featured content continues to reflect the interests and priorities of the most active editors rather than a truly representative knowledge base.

Towards a more equitable platform

Wikipedia’s gender gap does not simply reflect societal inequalities—it either reinforces or challenges them. If the platform truly aims to be the sum of all human knowledge, it must address systemic barriers that exclude women. In order to achieve a gender balance, the article proposes the following actions:

-Encouraging more female editors and diverse contributors.

-Improving media representation of women’s achievements to increase source material for Wikipedia articles.

-Reforming Wikipedia’s editing culture and policies to make editorial guidelines more accessible, encourage new editors, and allow broader community participation in content selection.

Despite its flaws, Wikipedia remains a remarkable achievement—an open-access platform belonging to everyone. Ensuring it reflects the diversity of human experience is a collective responsibility. With intentional reforms, Wikipedia can become a more inclusive space where all voices are equally valued.

By Nazrin Sadigova