Reply #5: "Yes, these are actual things men have told me on Internet discussion boards."

[lumberjack_jeff]

"There isn't a problem with the education of boys. They're lazy slackers only interested in video games"
"More male teachers wouldn't improve educational outcomes for boys. (The education secretary) only wants more men so they can fire tenured women."
"The fact that 3 women graduate from college for every two men is a good thing, because there are plenty of men's jobs (like plumbing, wiring and construction)"
"Men shouldn't be teachers because men are child molesters."

I've heard these actual things on the internet too. Three of the four were from people claiming to be teachers. Facts are determined by a show of hands? One needn't go so far as wikipedia.

Wikipedia is about as accurate as Encyclopedia Brittanica. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v438/n7070/full/438900a.html

I'm having trouble with the underlying idea that factual articles are somehow more likely if written by women. It's arguable that more topics of interest to women will be written if they participate, and is in itself a good reason for you to rethink your decision to not sign up, but the infrastructure and rules of wikipedia make every statement falsifiable. If I say something that can't be independently validated, someone will call me on it. Gender has nothing to do with it.

Besides, how does anyone know the gender of "bluesky996", or any online persona for that matter? I just signed up. The signup screen doesn't ask for gender or real name for that matter. How can you increase the participation of women to 25% if you don't keep count?