https://mobile.twitter.com/Claudia_Sahm/status/1172822150199369728
Really surprised no one has used the sexism card yet
Open discrimination against male economists by Claudia Sahm
-
She thinks she is notable enough to get a Wikipedia page because the Sahm rule or whatever was mentioned once on tv and because having a wikipedia page (written by herself) makes her 9 year old daughter so proud
Really makes me wonder what life would have been like as a woman, having everything handed to you so that you develop expectations like this and then act all shocked when "midlevel manager at a government body" is not notable enough to have a Wiki page
-
I have suggested two forms of deletion. Both have been declined citing her accomplishments. If anyone cares to pursue an AfD discussion, you have my blessing to do so.
If your concern is that others who are notable do not have articles, the solution is not to remove hers but to create theirs.
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/Claudia_Sahm/status/1172822150199369728
Really surprised no one has used the sexism card yetPerhaps, and this may be difficult for you to understand, people are irritated that a section chief and member of the CEA is being accused of not being notable, rather than it being sexism.
-
I flagged it as not notable a few days ago.
She basically wrote the thing herself, clearly. I think it is pathetic.But she clearly is notable by guidelines written long before she had a page.
If true, the guidelines suck.
Make your own guidelines with blackjack and hookers
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/Claudia_Sahm/status/1172822150199369728
Really surprised no one has used the sexism card yetPerhaps, and this may be difficult for you to understand, people are irritated that a section chief and member of the CEA is being accused of not being notable, rather than it being sexism.
You are correct. This is very difficult for me to understand.
Section Chiefs at the Board are a dime a dozen. There are lots of Section Chiefs who could not get tenure at a top 50. I mean no disrespect to the many fine (but not notable) economists who are section chiefs when I say that it is not notable to be a Section Chief. I'll bet that most of them would agree with me.
Claudia Sahm was a staffer at CEA. She was not a member of the CEA. Big, huge difference. Again, being an economist at a Federal agency is perfectly respectable work but there are literally thousands of economists who could do that. Thousands.
I know at least 15 economists at my own institution who have much better or at least approximately equal claim to notability. None of them have wikipedia pages.
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/Claudia_Sahm/status/1172822150199369728
Really surprised no one has used the sexism card yetPerhaps, and this may be difficult for you to understand, people are irritated that a section chief and member of the CEA is being accused of not being notable, rather than it being sexism.
You are correct. This is very difficult for me to understand.
Section Chiefs at the Board are a dime a dozen. There are lots of Section Chiefs who could not get tenure at a top 50. I mean no disrespect to the many fine (but not notable) economists who are section chiefs when I say that it is not notable to be a Section Chief. I'll bet that most of them would agree with me.
Claudia Sahm was a staffer at CEA. She was not a member of the CEA. Big, huge difference. Again, being an economist at a Federal agency is perfectly respectable work but there are literally thousands of economists who could do that. Thousands.
I know at least 15 economists at my own institution who have much better or at least approximately equal claim to notability. None of them have wikipedia pages.Then. Make. The. Pages.
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/Claudia_Sahm/status/1172822150199369728
Really surprised no one has used the sexism card yetPerhaps, and this may be difficult for you to understand, people are irritated that a section chief and member of the CEA is being accused of not being notable, rather than it being sexism.
You are correct. This is very difficult for me to understand.
Section Chiefs at the Board are a dime a dozen. There are lots of Section Chiefs who could not get tenure at a top 50. I mean no disrespect to the many fine (but not notable) economists who are section chiefs when I say that it is not notable to be a Section Chief. I'll bet that most of them would agree with me.
Claudia Sahm was a staffer at CEA. She was not a member of the CEA. Big, huge difference. Again, being an economist at a Federal agency is perfectly respectable work but there are literally thousands of economists who could do that. Thousands.
I know at least 15 economists at my own institution who have much better or at least approximately equal claim to notability. None of them have wikipedia pages.Then. Make. The. Pages.
Why?
I am not particularly interested in plugging my colleagues.
Also, the pages would be quickly taken down for lack of notability. Because my colleagues are not notable.
My colleagues are not especially notable as economists. Claudia Sahm is even less notable as an economist. She has a wikipedia page because she furthers the desired narrative. The page has nothing to do with any very modest accomplishment that she has.
(You seem to have difficulty with punctuation. Protip: Periods go at the ends of complete sentences.)
-
^ Are you retarded? He is saying these people are more notable than CS, but don’t deserve pages themselves.
Why not just give every intern at the IMF a page? Or how about every AP at Clemson? Or all the deadwood at FSU?Only one way to find out if his speculation is correct, right?