I'm not sure the article supports the title's claim that women scientist biographies are more likely to be removed. The only evidence provided is that one woman wrote 700 articles about women scientists and 6 were removed. I'd say that's an amazing ratio honestly, most people who've ever tried to edit wikipedia know how harsh the site is about reversing/undoing even well meaning edits so I don't exactly buy the fact that 0.9% of this person's articles on women being deleted constitutes unduly harsh or sexist treatment.

Moreover, the article even says that women are less likely to get fellowships/awards (no source provided but I believe it) that would allow them to meet wikipedia's notability requirements for an article, so if anything it sounds like wikipedia is applying it's rules without discrimination but rather it's the scientific community/academia's discrimination that would make it more difficult for an article to get made according to wikipedia's guidlines.