How to achieve a 94% female contributor ratio on a wiki
lola-pr.blogspot.com
lola-pr.blogspot.com
While Wikifashion is pretty and, that beauty certainly (I'm sure) helps contribute to it's success: Don't you think your high female contributor ratio has more to do with your subject matter being more interesting to women?
Incidentally; Wikifashion is genius. I'm totally going to score points by showing it to my fashion-obsessed-and-wikipedia-contributing girlfriend tonight.
http://www.top-fashion-designers.info/
So it seems reasonable to assume that her site could pull in more than a few guys, making the mere 7% a bit surprising. I have no explanation to offer for that though, not even a guess.
http://mashable.com/2009/09/01/women-wikipedia/
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/02/02/where-are-th...
It's not about appreciating beauty, it is about having good taste.
Also, to contrast with wikipedia, certain kinds of anti-social behaviour, arguing and power-seeking are not just encouraged, but practically enshrined at wikipedia. Frankly the only surprise is that it isn't even more of a sausage-fest.
It is not hard to get a heavily biased female contributor ratio...you simply need to talk about things that are of interest to females. Computers and startups, unfortunately, do not seem to be among them.
Wikipedia Signpost also had a bit to say about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/20...
http://vintagepatterns.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page
When it first started, the pages were bare-bones and the UI was not "pretty" in any way, so I don't think it was UI driven; I think it was content-driven. Now there are >35,000 pattern images, with plentiful metadata, including category tagging, and links to reviews and vendors.