I don't see how that can meaningfully be determined.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_bias_on_Wikipedia#Poten... has a long section about possible reasons for why females might not be participating, and ideas for how to improve the situation, with the explicit belief that higher levels of female participation will lead to a better Wikipedia.
Thus, is the "percentage of women in general [who] would ever be interested in writing for Wikipedia" using the current Wikipedia as the baseline, or some hypothetical best-of-all-possible Wikipedias?
In either case, how do we even go about determining that percentage?
At best this would be a latent variable which depends very much on the model you have. While important, it may be very hard to determine. (Eg, 'happiness' is an important variable, but unlike money, it's hard to measure accurately.)
My model in this case is that the editorial population will be similar to the reader population, but lagging by about 10-20 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_bias_on_Wikipedia#Poten... has a long section about possible reasons for why females might not be participating, and ideas for how to improve the situation, with the explicit belief that higher levels of female participation will lead to a better Wikipedia.
Thus, is the "percentage of women in general [who] would ever be interested in writing for Wikipedia" using the current Wikipedia as the baseline, or some hypothetical best-of-all-possible Wikipedias?
In either case, how do we even go about determining that percentage?
At best this would be a latent variable which depends very much on the model you have. While important, it may be very hard to determine. (Eg, 'happiness' is an important variable, but unlike money, it's hard to measure accurately.)
My model in this case is that the editorial population will be similar to the reader population, but lagging by about 10-20 years.