Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red/Archive 69

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 65

←

Archive 67

→

Quick FPC update

So, uh... I had insomnia... In addition to the FPCs listed above, we now have....

Hattie Caraway, senator's wife, ignored the whole women's suffrage issue, and said that "after equal suffrage I just added voting to cooking and sewing and other household duties." Then her husband died, and she was asked to finish his term for him. She did. Then surprised everyone by announcing she was running for re-election... and winning. As she said, "The time has passed when a woman should be placed in a position and kept there only while someone else is being groomed for the job."
Hubertine Auclert thought women should have no taxation without representation. She campaigned for women's rights, both in France and Algeria, constantly pushing for more and more rights for women.

Also, the 1966 flood of the Arno and Gina Krog images are both now FPs. And I just noticed my signature is telling me I've hit 7% of all FPs, which is nice. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7% of all FPs} 11:33, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

"List of people from X" etc

I've just discovered List of Ghanaians, List of Canadians, List of English people etc. See them all at Lists of people by nationality or by following links in Category:Lists of people by nationality. For some nationalities there are only a group of specific lists (sportspeople, artists, people from xyz region, etc), while for others, as above, there is a list which looks as if it ought to include everyone from that country who has an article (andprobably also a whole lot of narrower lists). I'm very sceptical about the value of such country-wide lists except for extremely small or under-represented countries: list of English people has a "politicians" section which is frankly tiny, and it isn't clear whether this is someone's view of "important" politicians, or just incompleteness because not many editors add their new articles to the list.

But since these lists exist, we ought to make sure that women are well represented. So when you create an article about a woman, please consider adding her to the relevant "List of ...", or to whatever specific sublist is appropriate (eg for Australia, List of Australians is a redirect to Lists of Australians which lists a lot of more specific lists).

I had a look at the outcomes of our "Millenial countries" editathon and couldn't find a single one (didn't check all) which seemed to have an incoming link from a "List of ...", so I think I'm not the only WiR editor who wasn't aware of these lists.

So now the list of things to think about adding, to raise the visibility of our articles, includes:

Redirects from every plausible version of their name (or hatnotes, dab page entries, etc as appropriate)
Redirect (if unique) or list entry from their surname (sometimes this involves creating a surname list page, when you find there are other people of the surname but no list yet, or a redirect to just one of them: start it with {{subst:refer|type=surname}} and end it with {{surname}})
List entry from their given name (though I really have my doubts about the usefulness of that one!)
and now List entry from List of people from XYZ/Xyzians, or from whatever more specific list(s) you can find eg by occupation, city, etc
... any other suggestions, anyone?

If anyone was in the mood for a mindless-but-useful job (feeling slightly ill, or listening to a radio play?), you could go through the outcomes lists of some of our editathons and check for any or all of those. I've done one or two lists, checking for redirects from alternative forms of names. It occurs to me that it might be useful to note on the talk page for any particular WiR editathon if we do any sort of followup checking and link-making like that, to avoid duplication. PamD 17:25, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

While we're discussing nationality lists, there are of course also Lists of women by nationality. There is a good overview of all the lists about women at Lists of women. May I suggest that one of the ways to improve the Lists of people by nationality would be to include appropriate links to the corresponding women's lists for each of the sections of the main nationality lists for which they exist. I have spent quite a lot of time and effort creating women's lists but have not worked specifically on the more general country lists despite the fact that the page views on these show that they are frequently accessed. As PamD suggests, I think we should therefore make sure they are updated and completed with at least minimal information about the women they include (dates of birth and death, main occupation or interest). The List of Danes seems to be quite a good example of how to go about it while the List of Swedish people shows how links to more specific lists can be used.--Ipigott (talk) 07:29, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Search their name, and add links back where non-links were before. There's a tendency not to redlink, but, if there isn't a link, people will presume no article exists. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7% of all FPs} 10:32, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, PamD, I think I had come across some of these lists, but I had not added any of the East Timorese women I created articles for to the relevant list, so I now have. I did create more East Timorese categories for them - occupations, awards, etc. I will keep lists in mind too. RebeccaGreen (talk) 06:20, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

A task I work on from time to time is updating lists of women, particularly writers and artists, with year of birth and year of death when these details are recorded. When a woman dies her bio may be updated but often not the surname, first name and DAB pages on which she also appears. Oronsay (talk) 08:08, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Suggestion for stub contest

I just signed up and I agree with dawnleelynn (above) that it's a bit confusing, although I found my way. Having just participated in a Good Article backlog drive, I was wondering would it be useful to adopt the listing format they used? For that, the participants self-listed giving their username as a level 4 heading, making it easy to see who had done what and also keeping it easy to count individual contributions. Hope that makes sense, you can see what I mean here. I don't mind to reconfigure the two current lists (Newly created stubs: October and Destubbed articles: October) if people think it would help. In any case good luck everyone with the stubathon! Mujinga (talk) 12:46, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Mujinga: Thanks for your suggestion but now we have started the way we have, I think we should wait and see how things progress over the next few days. The listing presentation is in fact a minor concern. The main problem is that many of the participants are not familiar with "running text" (also known as "readable prose") or how it is measured. I've now added a word about it on the stub contest page.--Ipigott (talk) 18:45, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Ipigott Thanks for the reply, sure I guess it makes sense to see how things proceed. Yes indeed the prose measuring got me with Nicole Schafer since I was using ORES and when it said it had gone from stub to start I thought i had done enough. Luckily there's more in the sources and I'm expanding it now :) Mujinga (talk) 18:50, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Mujinga: Sorry about the confusion with ORES which is usually pretty reliable for Start and C class articles. The problem seems to be that ORES also takes references into account. Nicole Schafer looks fine now.--Ipigott (talk) 19:00, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Ipigott No worries, Schafer is above 300 words now. I'm not really into stub creation but it turns out stub expansion is my sort of thing, so I'll prob do some more of that. Cheers! Mujinga (talk) 19:12, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Women in Red's stub contest is starting now

Our three-month stub contest is starting now and will continue until the end of the year. Although there will be no physical prizes, each month (October, November and December) recognition will be given to the winners of two different sections: one for new stubs, the other for enhancing existing stubs. The contest is open to all registered members of Women in Red. Join in now and help us improve women's coverage on Wikipedia.--Ipigott (talk) 19:04, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

@Ipigott: A couple of questions:

The page lists a minimum length for entries but not a maximum one. Can we enter new articles that are Start class or better in the "new stubs" section (with the understanding that they won't subsequently be entered in the "destubbed" section)?
Will the recognitions be limited to editors who are explicitly participating, or will entries be created on behalf of people who aren't on the Participants list? I ask because this happened once before and caused some confusion.

Thanks. Nick Number (talk) 21:38, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

To add to this, are we just counting content (and not codes or categories etc.?) I don't plan to use infoboxes on stubs... thanks. dawnleelynn^(talk) 23:04, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Nick Number: Thank you for these queries. The idea is to encourage as many new articles as possible; that's why we put emphasis on stubs. However, I see no objection to a given participant's new start or higher class articles being included in the new stubs section in any given month provided they are not also included in the de-stubbing sections at any time during the competition. Any contributor who is a member of Women in Red may participate. It will however make things easier if those competing enter their names as participants and also list their new and/or enhanced articles on the contest page in accordance with the instructions given.

Participants who are not members of Women in Red will not be included among the winners although, as always, we welcome contributions from all Wikipedians.

dawnleelynn: For new stubs, we are aiming for running text or readable prose of 160 words or 1,000 characters. In accordance with Wikipedia:Article size, readable prose is "the amount of viewable text in the main sections of the article, not including tables, lists, or footer sections". Similarly, de-stubbed articles should reach 250 words or 1,500 characters of running text. Any article can be submitted to Xtools article info which lists prose size and number of words.

I'll copy this to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/140.--Ipigott (talk) 08:47, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

IpigottThank you for your reply. I added my first stub last night. I used the DYK script which said I had 1,632 characters so that's 50 percent higher than the 1,000 listed on the Stub contest page. It just counts the prose. Is that an acceptable tool? So, I gather it will count for a new stub but not be eligible for expansion. This is actually my first stub ever and my first contest. But I have written full size articles for WIR. Also, you seem very knowledgeable. I tried to add a new stub for rodeo. I followed the examples in [1] (search on rodeo). Then added the tag to my article Mabel Strickland Woodward but it's an error. I also have no idea about adding an icon. Do you know about this or know anyone who could help? Thanks! dawnleelynn^(talk) 16:50, 1 October 2019 (UTC) p.s. I also have the ORES script and it considers the article as Start quality, so there's no question really. dawnleelynn^(talk) 18:43, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

No one seems to understand the instructions about the first article being listed in order created but then remaining articles going underneath it. They are doing all articles chronologically. oops! :) dawnleelynn^(talk) 19:10, 1 October 2019 (UTC) hoping for clarity on this issue dawnleelynn^(talk) 19:52, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

dawnleelynn: There have been a few teething problems but things seem to be going pretty well. To make things easier, I suggest you use the country based bio stub tags such as {{us-bio-stub}}, although Mabel Strickland Woodward has in fact already reached start class. .--Ipigott (talk) 07:29, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Ipigott Appreciate your answer. I think many of them can be handled with the equestrian stub tag actually. But if not, the country code will work. Just because I have a scripting background doesn't mean I should spin my wheels trying to figure out a coding issue. Thanks! dawnleelynn^(talk) 20:51, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Did somebody notice that an embassy hosted to create women biographies?

Japan has been celebrating the 2019 Rugby World Cup and the Olympics just coming on the way to Tokyo. The country has also not forgotten to give priority to women as well. Of course, I read the news regarding the special event which was conducted on 29 September 2019 by the Swedish embassy in Japan to promote biographies about women in Wikipedia in both English and Japanese languages. But I was also confused on one of the sentences which was mentioned in the source. It said Rina Yomota, an editor of an agricultural website created an article about Eri Otsu, a farmer who won an award in 2017 from the UN Food and Agricultural Organization. But the sentence didn't clearly specify whether the article Eri Otsu was create in English or Japanese version. When I searched it in the English version, it was not available. I even just now searched and try to create for that person and unfortunately my attempt was a failure that I hardly found any sources to create for Eri Otsu. I am also just having doubts whether the above source that I linked here is a reliable one or not. Abishe (talk) 14:28, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Abishe: See here.--Ipigott (talk) 16:52, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Ipigott Thanks for the link you provided here from the Japanese Wikipedia. I created the article Airi Ōtsu and of course without your help my efforts wouldn't have been possible. You deserve this article. Thanks a lot. Abishe (talk) 03:40, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

World championships

Here is a list of pages that are red-linked on pages relating to women's world championships. Most of them are women, a good few are teams, events or "country at event"/"country in sport", and a few are men related to women's sport (referees, coaches etc.).

Hope this is useful. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 23:09, 2 October 2019 (UTC).

Rich Farmbrough Thanks a lot for your great work on creating a list like this. This will be very much useful throughout the contest. Abishe (talk) 07:20, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Good list. I've included it in Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Sports.--Ipigott (talk) 09:05, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Alex Depledge

Alex Depledge was nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alex Depledge. Concerns were raised that the article is promotional and that she is not notable. Alexandra Depledge is "a British technology entrepreneur, known best for being the founder and CEO of Resi, and also as the founder and former CEO of Helpling that was formerly known as Hassle.com". Can anyone find more sources about her? Cunard (talk) 07:59, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

I just added a ref from the Guardian to the article and a keep to the deletion discussion. Kind of ironic that it's about her advocacy for diversity in the tech industry. JSFarman (talk) 18:07, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Visual examples of vandalism

Hello all, I've been asked to provide examples of articles within our scope that include "visual examples of vandalism". If you are aware of any, would you kindly post diffs here? Thank you. --Rosiestep (talk) 10:51, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Rosiestep You mean like this?:[2],[3],[4],[5] I'm sure there are many more, but these two are really recent and so quickly came to mind. SusunW (talk) 12:33, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

There's this low-level battle of wits in which I was engaged for some while until I protected the article. Beginning with the most recent: [6], [7], [8], [9], [10]...there are more, too, going back a bit further. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 13:17, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

This just happened [11] SusunW (talk) 20:03, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, @SusunW and Ser Amantio di Nicolao. --Rosiestep (talk) 01:29, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Ukrainian women

This announcement on FB may interest some of you: --Rosiestep (talk) 19:43, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

"Please help us showcase the achievements of Ukrainian women to the world. We at Wikimedia Ukraine (Вікімедіа Україна / Wikimedia Ukraine) are organizing a Wikipedia writing challenge aimed to improve the coverage of Ukrainian women — https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/She_Did_It . The marathon has already started and will run for a week — by the end of October 11th. You can create and expand articles in any language other than Ukrainian🙂 The rules and the scoring system are inspired by WikiGap Challenge, so they might be familiar to some of you🙂 Prizes are premium Grammarly subscriptions for most active contributors. Special offer for anyone from the CEE community — Wikimedia Ukraine's warm love and souvenirs at the upcoming CEE Meeting🙂 Please join the challenge and, of course, help us spread the word about it. Thanks!"

Good to see the Swedes are active in Ukraine too. They're doing a great job on the gender gap. As far as I can see, all the articles they list are already in the EN wiki. They should have included Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by nationality/Ukraine for those who want to create articles in English.--Ipigott (talk) 08:55, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Article about Canadian Wikipedians in Residence

Just came across Why universities are hiring “Wikipedeans-in-Residence” by Aaron Hutchins. It raises the problem of gender bias.--Ipigott (talk) 08:19, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

The Wikipedian in residence profiled in that article has made all of 206 edits to English Wikipedia. I wonder if this is an example of the leadership of the future, a new emerging class of paid professionals to lead the volunteer workers who do the actual editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vexations (talk • contribs) 13:41, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Who's that? This has long been an issue, though most such people, who weren't involved in WP before, drop away when the pay checks stop. Or is there a different user account for the role, a sensible thing to do. Johnbod (talk) 15:38, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedians_in_Residence_Exchange_Network/join&diff=19134752 Vexations (talk) 15:50, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

(and coded/added to the list incorrectly. Meow.) WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 21:18, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! Hmm, and 8 edits on Wikidata! Johnbod (talk) 15:58, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

I see the Wiki Women's User Group membership list has also been messed up. Perhaps Rosiestep knows how to fix it. I can't access the entry causing the error.--Ipigott (talk) 10:51, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks, Ipigott. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:39, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Feedback needed

Hi again! This time I have a request re actual content. I recently created an article for a redlink listed on this Project's page, Ella Russell, under the Focus on Suffrage initiative. I subsequently received a message by User:DragonflySixtyseven arguing "the second half of the article doesn't really pertain to her, does it?" I disagree, having stated that it "establishes very clearly why her work was ultimately important to suffragism both locally and nationally". Could you please provide feedback as to which view might prevail? My intentions as always are to try and include as much information as possible concerning underrepresented topics, as sustained by sources. Much appreciated, and please improve the article if you deem it necessary or possible! PK650 (talk) 11:19, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

PK650: The entire article looks fine to me. The follow-up on the club is useful and should be kept. Well done!--Ipigott (talk) 08:23, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 15

Newsletter • September 2019

A final update, for now:

The third grant-funded round of WikiProject X has been completed. Unfortunately, while this round has not resulted in a deployed product, I am not planning to resume working on the project for the foreseeable future. Please see the final report for more information.

Regards,

-— Isarra ༆ 19:24, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Isarra: I'm really sorry to see what difficulties you have had to cope with, especially as they seem to have affected your health. From what you say, your decision not to be further involved in Project X is the right one. It is, nevertheless, unfortunate that there now appears to be no one left to continue providing support on Project X, let alone making further improvements. Unless you are able to help us out with the Women in Red pages designed under Project X, I suppose we'll have to decide whether to keep things as they are or reformat the pages into more familiar Wikipedia set-ups we can deal with ourselves. May I take this opportunity of thanking you, Isarra, for helping us to sort out the problems we have encountered over recent months and wish you all the best for the future. I hope the other project you are involved in has been more satisfying and successful.--Ipigott (talk) 07:13, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Isarra: I hope you fully recover from this. I went through similar experiences with volunteer work and I've experienced how it can be far more stressful than non-volunteer work, with way more self-imposed pressure and precarious resources. I hope your reflections on the final report, as well as the learning patterns, help the WMF and the community to better support this kind of work in the future.

Ipigott: I'm interested in the improvement of the WikiProject experience and have been dealing with WPX. Even if I can be useful to a small degree, compared to the original team, I'd like to try solving some of these problems. Do you have the problems written somewhere? --MarioGom (talk) 07:40, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

MarioGom: That's a very kind offer. There's no list of problems. The kind of problems that have occurred involve access to page sections, difficulties in editing, and page presentation in general. When problems have occurred, we have brought them to the attention of those working on Project X (latterly Isarra) and they have usually been corrected without delay. It's good to know we have someone to help us along in future. Thanks also for all the short biographies you have added over the past few weeks.--Ipigott (talk) 07:51, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

If things break with the current stuff, you can still feel free to let me know and I'll see what I can do, but yeah, I'm glad there are others that may be able to do more. And man, you guys have been incredibly successful - just because our project management/budgetting/sanity went a bit out the window doesn't mean we weren't able to do some amazing things and support some amazing projects in the meantime, so that's certainly something! -— Isarra ༆ 14:21, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Pic for Jelena Porsanger

I took a few pics of her at a conference, but nothing really turned out great. I'd been planning on going back and taking better ones the second day of the conference, but didn't get there because of a migraine. Two pics were semi-ok and I uploaded them, but I can't decide if they could be used in her article here on the en-wiki:

Could either of these be used? Or edited to make them better? -Yupik (talk) 11:11, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Yupik, I added an infobox and included one of the photos. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 18:54, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

HickoryOughtShirt?4: thank you! I added the pic to the Wikidata item. -Yupik (talk) 22:18, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Large batch of biographies from a Wiki Education course

Hi all, Becca Barnes's most recent course has concluded and it looks like Dr. Barnes just moved the content from sandboxes to mainspace this weekend. I'm starting the preliminary cleanups now. Here are the articles created. Per previous discussions, I thought I'd drop you a line and let you know. Thanks, Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:29, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

@Elysia (Wiki Ed): Many thanks, Elysia. I'll go through these now; I'm sure others here will have a look. At a quick glance these look to be very high quality articles - very welcome! --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:22, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Major tasks here, for ~27 articles, is 1) categorisation and 2) finding pages to link to the new articles, if anyone specialises in those two areas. Very impressed by the articles I've looked at so far. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:56, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Been through quite a few, de-orphaned most I've looked at. Also merged a couple of Wikidata double-ups. Always happy to help - right up my alley. Articles seem well researched, written and referenced. Well done! Oronsay (talk) 20:35, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Very grateful for the assistance with categorization, de-orphaning, and general cleanup @Oronsay, Tagishsimon, and RebeccaGreen: Thanks! Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:38, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

These are incredible articles! Just wow! -Yupik (talk) 22:25, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Twitter mates

One of our Twitter (#wikiwomeninred) mates is Prof Jo Delahunty QC who recently gave one of the free lectures at Gresham College on "Have women achieved professional equality". She talks brilliantly for about an hour. After 54 mins she talks about raising the visibility of women .... and Women in Red on Wikipedia is seen as a force for good. Proud to see us mentioned. It wasn't at our prompting and she only mentioned it as we chatted about other things. Its not a "media" mention, but impressive to see this project mentioned there. Roger aka Victuallers (talk) 05:51, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Event to add biographies of women on ENWP today

Hi, all! I'm writing to notify anyone who's hanging around here today that I'll be helping a group of people run an event to add biographies to ENWP today. It will primarily be scientists and engineers who identify as women or with other marginalized groups. We'll review notability requirements, and my team will help new editors start stubs that meet those standards. Last time we helped a group run such an event, I promised to make a note here. Looking forward to seeing some new Wikipedians join in this great cause! Jami (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:15, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Excellent; thanks @Jami (Wiki Ed):. If you can give us a link to a list, we'd be glad to help. thx --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:49, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! We have put together a list and made it available on the Wiki Education Dashboard. You can find it via this link, though I can't be sure exactly which bios people will choose! Jami (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:05, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

A very good crop of articles; very little to do by way of fixing stuff. Well done. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:48, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

see that Kathaleen Land is at AfD. Can anyone help it along?--Ipigott (talk) 08:19, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

I've added a bit to Kathaleen Land to try to improve it. Another one up for AfD from last night's editathon is Vivian Miranda, transgender astrophysicist. I've added quite a bit to that one. Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:45, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Relevance?

Hello. Not too sure of the relevance of this for the Women in Red page, and I'm hoping that if it isn't, maybe someone can give me a bit of a steer... I was given the Women in Red talk page as a possible place to ask my question, so here goes:

I've struggled with the publication of my first wikipedia entry here Draft:Liz_MacRae_Shaw I thought I was getting somewhere after a major editing frenzy earlier this year, but after searching libraries for book titles to reveal notability, the reviewer came back and commented that the books are in almost no libraries, so the subject was not considered to be notable enough.

One of the author's most notable pieces of research appears in the Gaelic Society of Inverness and it seems as if this has maybe been overlooked by the last reviewer.

If this is irrelevant, I apologise, but I'm having one last go at getting my first entry published. Thanks for any help you might be able to offer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hazelraee (talk • contribs) 12:39, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Hazelraee, I would say this is indeed a good place to ask. I'm sorry you are trying to publish your first article and having it rejected, that must be really frustrating. I'm glad you stuck with it. I've checked the reasons given for the article being declined and it's because the reviewers are not seeing mentions in reliable, secondary sources. I just google searched for news about "Liz MacRae Shaw" and there were only two hits, both from the Oban Times (ie a local newspaper) and both were quite tangential mentions. I'm all for including things on wikipedia but I'm afraid it doesn't seem like there are enough secondary sources to make Liz MacRae Shaw notable for wikipedia. These criteria are specified at WP:AUTHOR. Naturally I'm not making any judgement on her or her work further than a personal view on wikipedia notability and I might of course be wrong, but that's my view. I would suggest maybe participating on some other articles in the Women in Red stubathon which just began and maybe returning to Liz MacRae Shaw when more secondary sources can be found. I hope that helps. Mujinga (talk) 12:56, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

This is one of the reasons I dislike AfC. I think the article would get past AfD, but they can be quite stringent with AfC. Number of libraries is not the notability guideline. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7% of all FPs} 13:11, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Mujinga and Adam Cuerden

Adam Cuerden - can I ask what you mean by AfD? Is that articles for deletion? Thanks for your help on this, and for pointing out that the number of libraries is not the notability guideline. I'm on a very steep learning curve here! Hazelraee (talk) 14:40, 9 October 2019 (UTC) Hazelraee (talk)

@Hazelraee: Yes, sorry, articles for deletion is often abbreviated because of the shortcut link WP:AFD. I think this article wouldn't be deleted if it existed, but as it is... Mind ye, it's one of those things where the notability is borderline, but I think it's right at the level where AfC is rejecting it, but it would just about pass muster at AfD. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7% of all FPs} 18:22, 9 October 2019 (UTC) Thanks for your reply, Adam Adam Cuerden Hazelraee (talk) 12:23, 11 October 2019 (UTC)Hazelraee (talk)

Now over 300,000 women's biographies in English

I see from WHGI that we now have over 300,000 women's biographies on the English version of Wikipedia, far surpassing those in any other collection. From Wikipedia:WikiProject Women and Wikipedia:WikiProject Women's History, you can see that quite a few have reached FA or GA. On the other hand, there are still lots of stubs which need attention, for example those listed as high or mid importance. Perhaps we can deal with some of them under our current stub contest, aiming for both quantitative and qualitative improvements. Never a dull day!--Ipigott (talk) 12:30, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

As usual when these importance ratings are looked at, they appear pretty dubious. I looked at all the "high"s, & it wasn't obvious any really deserved that rating. The 1916 Icelandic election looked promising, then I saw that the 1907 Finnish parliamentary election, actually the first to elect women, wasn't even tagged for the Women's History Project! I haven't made any changes but somebody with time to waste might. Johnbod (talk) 15:01, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Early October FP report

So, all the images from the last report and its update passed, which is a fantastic success rate. I usually try to wait for a minimum of three new ones before posting again, although it's a bit of a judgement call, as I like having them up while they're still relevant, instead of announcing the new featured picture candidate... that just passed. Last week. Going to borrow some of the captions from WP:FPC, because, dagnabbit, if I'm the only one with nominations at this particular moment in time, I can be as self-indulgent as I want. Oh, wait, Coffeeandcrumbs snuck one in while I wasn't looking. ...Eh, still doing it.

Iris Calderhead, suffragette, daughter of Kansas Representative William A. Calderhead, who travelled extensively to advocate for suffrage, and who was arrested multiple times while protesting against Woodrow Wilson. Also involved with several organizations in fairly important roles, and did some interesting research, but these captions need kept to a certain length.
Marguerite Durand in 1910. I don't think I can do better in summing her up than the first sentence of her article: "Marguerite Durand was a French stage actress, journalist, and a leading suffragette. She founded her own newspaper, stood for election, had a pet lion and now has the Bibliothèque Marguerite Durand named for her."
Coffeeandcrumbs contribution to this set: Nobel Prize in Literature winner Toni Morrison. It's hard to know what to say about an author you haven't read. Oprah's love of her work created the Oprah Winfrey Book Club - and in turn brought her to a new audience, which she didn't get through her Nobel Prize. Alongside Maya Angelou she's probably one of the most prominent African-American female writers of the 20th century. So, yeah, I should definitely read her.
Ada Flatman, one of the leading British suffragettes, who, when the suffrage organisations of Britain agreed to stop work until after WWI, decided to move to the U.S. and joined Alice Paul to become the business manager of The Suffragist.

I'm really excited by the release of the archives of the National Women's Party to the Library of Congress. I have a... few chosen out. Alright, like 20. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7% of all FPs} 02:36, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Always good to see your inspiring FPs livening up our page.--Ipigott (talk) 06:57, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

...And it's already out of date, because I just did Alice Park. I'll give it the usual three images, since I think I'll have another two... not too far in the future, honestly. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7% of all FPs} 21:30, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Infobox academic - poor ordering of information

I see from Anne Salomon that {{Infobox academic}} is still rooted in the c1950s ... taking the topmost information to be most important, I learn she is a Canadian marine ecologist married to Tim Storr and has one (I'm sure lovely) child.

Later on there's some stuff about her academic credentials. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:25, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure if it's easy to change this, because those fields are inherited by {{Infobox academic}} from {{Infobox person}} and all the fields from the base template come before ones specific to academics. But the best place to raise it would probably Template talk:Infobox academic. – Joe (talk) 07:14, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Pankhurst Centre and Ada College

I'm training today (belated #AdaLoveslaceDay editathon) at the Pankhurst Centre. Its a day late but wanted to hold it at the Pankhurst's house in Manchester. Eventful times as the centre was broken into and they have just raised £20K to fix the damage. The CEO said that the editathon was too important to cancel!. So I have cloned a page for the newbies to sign up to and our twitter mates are interested in joining in. I have created the page too quickly and not sure if it all works. Can anyone volunteer to test and fix i? Really keep to use the outreach dashboard. I'm travelling for next six or so hours (its a long drive from Scotland). Obviously if we have editors who would like to join us online (or in person) then that would be great. (I have been watching WIR editors looking at the list of Force fed suffragettes and great to see the collaboration in progress). Thanks in anticipation Victuallers (talk) 05:51, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Victuallers: The page looks good enough to me although we're now actually at 18.06%. If you can create a list of new articles on the event page, I would be happy to monitor progress and help things along. It would also be interesting to have a list of participants on that page. Hope the change in schedule does not upset things too much. Let me know if there's anything specific you need help with.--Ipigott (talk) 09:04, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Ian, ever useful and supportive. Thank you. The day went well but I didn't get around to using the page as we had too much talking and I was keen to get the newbies to edit. That worked well. One newbie wrote three articles in 2 hours. My decision created work as I need to recreate the page but I think I have enough to start but it will take a few days. I'm pleased to see that there are so many in person editathons - but one newbie was making the point that not everyone lives in striking distance of a big city. Our on-line editathons may be their newbie route. Thanks again and sorry for belated reply @Ipigott:. Cheers Roger aka Victuallers (talk) 08:30, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

REDress project going live on DYK today

Moira Paul's wonderful article on the REDress Project is going live tonight on the front page of this wiki's DYK for those of you in North and South America and tomorrow morning (UTC 1:00) for the rest of us. This is already her second DYK in the last couple of weeks. Great job, Moira Paul! -Yupik (talk) 11:06, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Striking initiative! So now WiR just needs to create a biography for Jaime Black, who is of course an indigenous women herself. Sources include [12], [13], [14], [15], [16] as well as those used in the REDress Project article.--Ipigott (talk) 07:56, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Would you be up to creating an article on her, Ipigott and Moira Paul? And oh man, I wish I'd known about it being in Naperville; I could've told people I know there to go see it! -Yupik (talk) 22:20, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

I'll wait a while to see if Moira Paul takes it up although she hasn't been active since 23 September. If not, I'll make a start on it myself.--Ipigott (talk) 08:05, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Oh wow, thanks for the nomination for this and the Wen Shu page. I've got Jaime Black on my maybe list, but I doubt I will start any time soon. So please feel free to make a start. We need a second project or work that she is involved in, in order to prevent it being folded back into the REDress one. Moira Paul (talk) 19:15, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation page entries added at Red Dress and redress. PamD 05:58, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, PamD! -Yupik (talk) 22:26, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

List of female chefs with Michelin stars

I noticed that List of female chefs with Michelin stars is at AfD, but more importantly, it looks like a good candidate for names in red to turn blue. XOR'easter (talk) 19:58, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Good list. Luisa Marelli Valazza certainly seems to be a priority. For some reason, she's not included in List_of_Michelin_3-star_restaurants.--Ipigott (talk) 07:45, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Nobel Prize in Literature awarded to Olga Tokarczuk

I know this slightly off topic but I would appreciate any help in improving Olga Tokarczuk so she can appear on the Main Page for WP:ITN/C. We need a source for all claims on the page. Don't try !voting at ITNC that is pointless. Just need team work to quickly improve the page to meet the quality standards. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 14:50, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Interestingly most of the page views were on the 10th (over 116,000) before we worked on it, while on the 11th, after she appeared "in the news", there were only 50,000. Fortunately there was a pretty informative article about her before she received the Nobel award. It looks to me as if many of the press reports drew heavily on our Wikipedia article. Adam Cuerden: On my display, her box image is elongated. If you have the same problem, can you fix it?--Ipigott (talk) 14:00, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

I think that's just a "fully refresh your page" thing. It's common when the image has been recropped, which it has. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.1% of all FPs} 20:16, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Esther Duflo wins Nobel award

The biography of Esther Duflo needs urgent attention, especially the lack of in-line referencing. See [17].--Ipigott (talk) 10:53, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

There have been a number of improvements but we need a lengthy section on "Career". Any volunteers? Don't want to be landed with everything myself.--Ipigott (talk) 18:25, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Looks as if my efforts were worthwhile. It's not often articles I have worked on get 227,000 page views in one day!--Ipigott (talk) 11:45, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Mid-October FP report

Hey! I'm back! Fiancé went back to the states, restoring images is calming... it happens. I should probably point out the lead image of Frances Willard, because, while it's quite a bit too small for featured pictures, I'm rather happy with it. And I do do things outwith WiR. I just try to make at least half my FPs WiR-related, which, since some of the others... aren't gender related, pushes up the gender balance at FP. All three of these are suffragettes, all with their own reasons, and all interesting outside of suffrage. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.1% of all FPs} 21:18, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Alice Locke Park was one of the most important California suffragettes, as well as doing a lot of other good, for instance, she brought Arbor Day to California, and made sure that Californian women had a right to guardianship of their minor children.
Pattie Ruffner Jacobs fought against child labor, convict leasing, and prostitution, and decided political power for women was necessary to push through her progressive reforms.
Dr. Caroline Spencer was not only an early doctor, but served as one of the Silent Sentinels, and was arrested as such, having such a bad reaction to the dust that a (different) physician ordered her release, and she had to recuperate back in Colorado.

Brief video on the startup of Women in Red

Despite being busy with college work nowadays, I managed to take a look at the brief video about the chapter of Women in Red campaign started way back in 2015 as we know. It has been a nice journey for our campaign with lot of ups and downs. Take a look at this. Abishe (talk) 02:39, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Abishe: Is there supposed to be sound on this or just subtitles? It's strange to see people talking when you can't hear what they are saying. Most of the sequences seem appropriate to illustrate the difficulty of writing about women on Wikipedia but I was sorry to see there was nothing about the progress we have made as a result of the coordination offered by Women in Red. As is stands at the moment, the video could well discourage those interested in contributing.--Ipigott (talk) 12:02, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

I finally managed to get the sound by moving the cursor right back to the start. Unless I do so, it continues to run without sound. I sympathize with the comments made but the overall impression is pretty negative. All those in the credits seem to be connected to Mashable. Do you know who was behind it from Wikipedia?--Ipigott (talk) 12:42, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Ipigott: I first of all kindly apologize for just mentioning it as a brief video rather than commenting about the content in the video. I too was partly discouraged when I watched it thrice and I faced some network issues when I tried to watch the entire video for the first time. Don't know how a video of this type was leaked by Mashable. I got this video when I just simply typed Wikipedia in the google search index and clicked the news section. When I watched this 4 minute video, I felt deeply that the video didn't exactly specify the achievements of Women In Red but it attempts to hurt the sentiments of the Women In Red members. I just thought to bring this here for further attention. Abishe (talk) 02:41, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

The video was released yesterday for the first time but the clips are certainly not recent.--Ipigott (talk) 06:44, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

I was interviewed for 3 hours by a Mashable producer regarding Women in Red. One of the jillions of questions asked was regarding harassment as a result of my involvement with WiR, and I answered it honestly. Still, it's a bit disappointing that the Rape of the Sabine Women is included in the video, and the other 2 hours and 55 minutes is not. I did not know that Emily and Siko were also being interviewed for this video. I did not know that the video was finished and available online; it's surprising to learn about it via this talkpage. I could say that I'm baffled as to why the video portrays itself to be about WiR, when it's actually something else altogether, except that would be a naive statement. Mashable knows what garners the most clicks amongst its viewers, and that's what it chose to include. The story behind how and why WiR got started, and what we've accomplished is apparently boring, so it was cut. Lesson learned by me: the next time I hear a politician remark, "What I said was taken out of context," I'll have some empathy for them. --Rosiestep (talk) 06:49, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm glad you explained that, Rosie, because you certainly don't come over as the enthusiastic WiR supporter, we all know -- I mean the one we all know from all your presentations.--Ipigott (talk) 07:27, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Women in Woodworking task force

Hello Fellow Wikipedians! I have been working on adding more biographies on women woodworkers and am wondering what is the best way to have all of the names in one centralized location. So far I have been putting them under the Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Crafts section but I am wondering if there is an area for artists by discipline that I am not seeing? I have been thinking of starting a separate task force for this woman in woodworking project. I have several editors interested in working on specifically women in woodworking and we gather informally every month and may start to host larger editing gatherings in which having a centralized list of women woodworkers with red links would be helpful. I am also thinking the task force may want to include articles recently turned blue or other articles on the subject that could use editing, in which case perhaps the task force should be a child of the project Wikipedia:WikiProject Women artists. Any input is welcome! Thanks Terasaface (talk) 06:28, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Terasaface: First of all, thank you for your two interesting biographies on Wendy Maruyama and April Stone and for all the well-sourced additions you have made to Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Crafts. It seems to me that this is the most logical place for listing wood workers and furniture makers but there is nothing to stop you from creating a more specialized list at, for example, Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Woodworking. In my experience, many furniture designers are also architects. You can find several on Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Architects. It would be interesting to know who else is involved in your woodworking group. If you are interested in writing about furniture designers from outside the United States we could even create a Wikidata redlist on them (furniture designer = Q12328065) but it seems to me you have more than enough to work on for the time being. Let me know how things progress.--Ipigott (talk) 13:26, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

If there's any images you need restored, feel free to ask! Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.1% of all FPs} 04:48, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Ipigott I think I will keep using Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Crafts for now until the group decides it should be something larger. Creating a wikidata list sounds interesting! I am new to using wikidata and am just starting to update information for these red links there. Thank you! Terasaface (talk) 22:55, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata humans without sex property

There are, at least, 567,927 Wikidata items which are human (Q5) and have no sex or gender (P21). This obviously affects the coverage of our redlinks. I think it is more frequent for some countries than others, such as Chinese people whose article exists only in Chinese Wikipedia. Do you think we can do something to close this gap? Best, --MarioGom (talk) 13:04, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

This is problematic though, since we are assigning sex or gender (P21) to people who might not feel the same way about what we are assigning to them. I've been thinking about this for a while, but I haven't come to any conclusion how to go about this without potentially misgendering people. -Yupik (talk) 13:52, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Yupik: I think that would be a really small percentage. Checking some random examples, it doesn't look like potential misgendering issues are a significant reason for the missing property. --MarioGom (talk) 13:56, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Here is a sample of 500 redlinks with missing sex or gender (P21): User:MarioGom/sandbox/Missing P21 no enwiki. --MarioGom (talk) 14:23, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Maybe we could organize lists of items with missing sex or gender (P21) classified by languages with existing articles? That should help us find items where we can fill the property. As far as I can tell, language barrier is the main problem here. --MarioGom (talk) 14:40, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

If you decide to do something to close this gap, please be careful. We had a discussion last year where misgendering Japanese articles based on given names caused some problems. I've been chipping away at ungendered wikidata items attached to Japanese Wikipedia, but because Japanese doesn't use gendered pronouns (she/her/hers, etc), it can sometimes be difficult to tell from the article text what gender someone is, and as you'll see in the linked discussion, going by given name doesn't necessarily work well either. I'm not very good at Chinese, but I suspect that you might run into similar issues.

I use this wikidata query to find items that have Japanese sitelinks but no gender. It's currently set to find all wikidata items that have Q5 but not P21, but you can change the statements value to show items that have more than one statement but no gender statement. You can change the query to search Chinese wikipedia by changing any instance of "ja" to "zh". Mcampany (talk) 19:01, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

MarioGom: I don't think this is seriously an issue for our redlinks. It seems to me it is far more important for Wikidata itself and for biographies in the Chinese and Japanese versions. If you are interested in improving our redlink links, then I would suggest you consider enhancing correctly gendered Wikidata items by adding details of occupation, etc. Many of them contain little more than the person's name, human and female.--Ipigott (talk) 07:02, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Mcampany: I think we need to work on languages we are familiar with to read the relevant Wikipedia articles or sources. I have created Missing P21 Spanish and Missing P21 Catalan and it has been quite easy to add gender (sometimes country and occupation too) for these articles since I speak the language. I avoided gendering some Chinese and Korean items where their Spanish or Catalan article were stubs from a massive creation batch and I think they could have easily got the gender wrong in the first place. If anyone else is interested, let me know and I'll create lists for other languages.

Ipigott: Yes, definitely not important for Women in Red alone. Fully closing this gap would probably require engaging with other projects rather than just English Wikipedia, but I guess we should start somewhere. --MarioGom (talk) 09:12, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

BBC 100 Women in 2019

Hello all! The BBC published their list of 100 Women in 2019 today, so in the spirit of WiR, I made a table and a list of the women to see who we have articles on and who we don't. I've also included Wikipedias in other languages too. Some of the names on the non-appearing list might have Wikidata items or be on Wikipedias in other languages, since the search I did was based on the way the BBC wrote their names. On the other hand, we can use the redlinks on the meta page to add redirects since people could be searching for them based on the BBC's versions of their names. (And of course, the reason why I saw this list in the first place is that Skolt Saami journalist Sara Wesslin made the list! :)) -Yupik (talk) 10:20, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Yupik. Quick work. You are becoming more and more enterprising. We seem to have 44 of them in English with 54 to go. I don't know what happened to the other two. Sara Wesslin looks like one for you. It seems to me as if many of them will not be considered notable enough. Maybe you have a photograph of her.--Ipigott (talk) 11:32, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

My pleasure, Ipigott. I've fixed the rest of the ones I could find items for in Wikidata, so now we have 53 women who have items in Wikidata, of which 47 have articles of some sort in the English Wikipedia. Some of the ones not in the en-wiki have articles in other languages. One note, it may be that there are women in Wikidata from the list for whom I couldn't find since their names are written there in Arabic, Hindi, etc. The sumo wrestler's name in Japanese seems to be 今日和, but I couldn't find the boxer's name in Chinese. I fear that Wesslin will not be considered notable enough by the en-wiki community, but I'm quite up for trying! (And alas, I have no picture of her, but I can ask around if someone else does.) -Yupik (talk) 11:50, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

@Yupik: There's a P166 value, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q16153104 which has been used with a P585 point in time qualifier for the previous years - see e.g. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q336543#P166 ... would you fancy makng this so for 2019? --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:09, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

@Tagishsimon: That is seriously cool. I'd be interested in doing that, yes, especially if I can figure out how to do it as a batch run! -Yupik (talk) 12:36, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

@Yupik: Quickstatements (help)is your friend. (Sorry, I'm being lazy ... I could as easily have done it myself, but I feel I should venture out irl :) --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:39, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

@Tagishsimon: that's the one, thanks! I'll get around to it when I get back from class :) -Yupik (talk) 13:55, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

That's a very nice table. I will take a look at translating Mabel Bianco. Nick Number (talk) 14:28, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Nick Number: Hope I haven't snatched Bianco away from you. I didn't see your message here until after I had created the English version. As you may have seen, there are also lots of good sources in English. I expect I'll have finished working on it today. Then you are of course welcome to make any additions.--Ipigott (talk) 06:51, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

@Ipigott: No worries, I have plenty of other Spanish articles to work on. Nick Number (talk) 14:09, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

...So, it's been almost two days. Well, a day and a half, anyway. Time for another FP report!

This set of FPs is brought to you by Women in Red! Because two of these women got articles through Women in Red as part of the Focus on Suffrage this year, and the third got a massive improvement! Also by crippling insomnia and being too ill to go out. That's the less fun part. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.1% of all FPs} 07:40, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Flora MacDonald Denison, Canadian suffragist. I'm sure I've heard her mentioned a lot in connection to women's suffrage, so I don't know how we only have her now. The original had writing on it. If I could've proved it was her handwriting, I might've left it. I could not. That was a fun restoration.
Elizabeth Glendower Evans. I saw her image while going through the National Woman's Party records, and thought it was a really nice image, but thought I should focus on the articles we had. Then I saw her pop up in the WiR list, and knew I had to.
Joy Young Rogers, about to deliver a request for women's suffrage to the White House. She's the one whose article existed, but got massively improved. I love these rare action shots. On a related note, what about her sister, Matilda Young?

Adam Cuerden these are gorgeous, as are the ones above. Sorry I was off-wiki anniversarying for a couple of days. I love your commentary on them as well. SusunW (talk) 12:56, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Don't know if anything'll pass, though. NOTHING has been voted on from Spencer on. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.1% of all FPs} 16:37, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Nice restoration of the Rogers image Adam Cuerden, but you overwrote my cropped version. I think you should have made your own version of the image, even if you feel yours is better than what I had. Just sayin'. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 18:21, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

@WomenArtistUpdates: I figured new crops can be made with CropTool pretty easily, that would bring forwards the scratch removal and such, and it was only used in the one article. I didn't see much point in keeping a crop from the rather damaged original. (Do look into CropTool, by the way, if you're not aware: Really useful.)

In this case, though, I found a bunch of documentation for what was going on in the image, and wanted to get that documentation into the article, which meant including the parts of the image - basket, White House - that documented it. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.1% of all FPs} 21:25, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Sahar (singer)

Some doubts about this article have been raised at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Sahar Moghadass, and, while I think there's enough to satisfy WP:GNG, it's also true that it's a mess, with blog articles as a large number of sources, and ~~Wikidata~~ sorry, Wikiseda, but still, the name doesn't give me high "Reliable source" vibes used as a source in one case. This article DEFINITELY needs some TLC, ideally from someone who speaks Persian. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.1% of all FPs} 20:04, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Please take note of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tur kboy1 - the article has been pushed by cross-wiki undisclosed paid-editing sockpuppets, in violation of the Terms of Use. MER-C 08:34, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

That's... less ideal. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.1% of all FPs} 01:28, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Featured picture report, again.

...I swear I'm not trying to be funny here by posting reports so often. It's just a super-good period for women at FPC. This time, it's ~~mostly not~~ only half by me. (Insomnia attacks once more!) Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.1% of all FPs} 01:36, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Sahar. As established above, there's some controversy as to her article being paid editing, but she does seem notable as an Iranian female singer in a country that bans female singers.
Eileen Collins, first woman to take command of a space shuttle... doing so.
Lucretia Mott, considered the greatest American woman of the 19th century by her contemporaries.
Crystal Eastman, co-founder of the ACLU.

Input requested at User talk:StraussInTheHouse#Draft:List of Books About Women in History

Hello all,

A user has come to me asking for advice regarding my decline of a draft submitted via the AFC process. I have responded to the user but I am also posting a link to the discussion here so any interested users can chime in and offer some more advice. The discussion can be found at User talk:StraussInTheHouse#Draft:List of Books About Women in History.

Many thanks,

SITH (talk) 18:45, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks a ton SITH, (I'm the user SITH was referring to). Here is the problem I am trying to solve:

While books about women may be considered feminist, they're not always explicitly about feminist issues, so may be missed by 'feminist' lists
Books may be written by women, but not have women as the subject
It would be nice to know quickly if the subject is from a diverse background
I personally came to Wikipedia and looked for a list of books about women, but could not find it, so tried to create it
While a category might be a possible solution, Wikipedia search function does not seem to return category pages, hence searching for 'feminist books' (an existing category) does not return the the 'feminist books' category page
I personally was hoping for a solution that doesn't involve a lot of clicking, where you could quickly locate books of interest.

Love to hear people's thoughts Hermionefc (talk) 21:24, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

P.S. Here was what I proposed, to give you an idea — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hermionefc (talk • contribs) 21:48, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

StraussInTheHouse: I don't want to appear too critical but there are a huge number of books about women in history. The list could run to thousands of volumes. For Women in Red, we try to list useful resources including fully accessible biographical dictionaries. There are also extensive lists from publishers, such as [18], [19], [20]. In my opinion, it would be more useful if you could create (or expand) informative articles on the books listed, ensuring that they are correctly categorized. Perhaps for the time being, you should keep your list in your user space where those who contacted you can review it. If you intend to write about women, you may be interested in becoming a member of wp:Women in Red.--Ipigott (talk) 08:51, 8 October 2019 (UTC) Also pinging Hermionefc.--Ipigott (talk) 08:56, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ipigott, thank you so much. Agreed re: importance of adding to women's biographies on Wikipedia. For me an authoritative list of books about women is slightly different and also critically important, so I really appreciate the idea to try it on the user page, a great way to do a low risk POC! Hermionefc (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:08, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject X components

Hello! I'm requesting feedback for WikiProject X components usage. Your project is using templates related to my proposal and your feedback would be really appreciated: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject X § Streamlining WikiProject X components. Thank you! --MarioGom (talk) 10:37, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi MarioGom, I responded there, but will do so here, too. As long as the changes you describe continue to give WiR the flexibility it needs for add-ons, or etc., your proposal is fine with me. One of the issues that WiR encountered with WikiProject X was that sometimes, its components lacked the flexibility we required. --Rosiestep (talk) 10:48, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

I have also responded on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject X explaining that it might be useful to consider how we could maintain the general presentation of our main WiR page (and the way in which it links to the various subsections) by adopting more conventional features rather than those embedded in Project X. But above all, we are really happy that MarioGom has volunteered to help us out whenever we run into WPX problems.--Ipigott (talk) 12:37, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

BBC's 100 Women for 2019

Have spent today creating the table for 100 Women (BBC)#2019 and adding info to Wikidata, including new names. I see there are CS and WD lists on the Redlist page. The WD list is for 2018 only and for some reason has retained blue-linked names. Someone with skill in this area may care to sort this out. I have not yet clicked through to all the bios and added a statement, reference and category for the award of 100 Women. Again, someone may like to take on this task. There would appear to be a good number of interesting women who deserve to have bios written. Oronsay (talk) 08:09, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Could you do me the favor of removing the women you've created QIDs for in Wikidata from the not-in-Wikidata list at the bottom of the page here and move their qids to the table above it please? There's more discussion about this here. Thanks! -Yupik (talk) 08:30, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Tagishsimon is our expert on the WD redlink lists. Perhaps he can fix the problem and also extend the listing to cover other years.--Ipigott (talk) 14:20, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks mainly to Oronsay, they are now all on Wikidata. As far as I can see, there are only four new biographies on the EN wiki: Sara Wesslin, Mabel Bianco, MiMi Aung and Jalila Haider. So there are still lots of opportunities for creating new biographies.--Ipigott (talk) 16:24, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Oronsay! And Ipigott for the Sara Wesslin article too! -Yupik (talk) 19:10, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Apologies, I didn't see the conversation, above, had already started on this topic. I'd come across a tweet about the new list. Glad it seems to be well in hand now. Oronsay (talk) 19:14, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

No problems, just figured it'd be better to let you know :) And thanks for updating all the Wikidata items and creating the new ones! I've fixed the table page and it looks sooooo satisfyingly complete now! -Yupik (talk) 19:31, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Lovely table, Yupik; lovely data, Oronsay. Excellent work, thank you :) --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:17, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, but I can't take credit for designing it, just plugging in qids. As the module says: "-- Shamelessly copied from meta:Module:WikimediaCEETable: builds a list of articles based on information from Wikidata" :D -Yupik (talk) 00:10, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Helen Kay Raseroka

If someone is looking for an article to create for the landlocked countries portion of WIR this month, this woman is a great candidate. I'm quite surprised that we don't already have an article about her yet. Wikidata has items for some of the articles she's written, but no qid for her yet. No photos in Commons. -Yupik (talk) 00:08, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q71887157 --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:11, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! -Yupik (talk) 01:12, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

works by women

Is there a project heading for works by women, books, stories, buildings, paintings whatever, by women which do not but probably should have an article? ☕ Antiqueight ^chatter 12:42, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Antiqueight, the ones that we currently have are listed here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Redlist index#Works.

Architecture (WD)
Art: paintings (WD) / sculpture (CS)
Classical music (CS)
Conferences (CS)
Femicom Museum (CS)
Films (WD)
Organizations (CS)
Seasonal celebrations (CS)
Writing: books (CS/WD) / novels (WD) / plays (WD) / poems (WD)

Feel free to suggest others, either to be created via Wikidata, or perhaps there's a webpage you've seen with a good list, or etc.. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:15, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Rosiestep. I have replied on twitter to the person who brought it to my attention and will see what I can do to add to it asap. I figured there was something already set up but blanked on where to look. ☕ Antiqueight ^chatter 14:16, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Where appropriate, I think we should add these redlists to our monthly priorities. Women's works are an important aspect of Women in Red. I can see we need to do something about classical music. Maybe Tagishsimon could put together a Wikidata redlist for us.--Ipigott (talk) 14:55, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

I've just been looking through Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Films and am amazed to see the huge number of Danish films directed by women. The only problem is that many of them have different names in English. Perhaps we should begin writing short biographies of some of the more productive directors.--Ipigott (talk) 15:20, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

If someone could create Wikidata lists for sculptures and essays, that would be helpful. Also, can a Wikidata list be generated for items where the founder is a woman? --Rosiestep (talk) 17:46, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Yes, all can be done. I'll have a play; others may too. --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:11, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Sculptures --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:31, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

@Tagishsimon: Wow, it is lovely. BTW, some of the older Wikidata lists noted above are "funky", e.g. missing number of site links, etc. When you have time, would you please clean them up so they look like the sculptures list? --Rosiestep (talk) 21:44, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

I'll do that. Meanwhile, Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Institutions --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:04, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

@Tagishsimon: brilliant! Can you add a column for what type of institution (e.g. instance of)? Thanks. --Rosiestep (talk) 12:11, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Done --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:05, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

All - In light of the conversation we've been having in this section, I'm wondering if it might not be worthwhile to include a monthly (quarterly?) "Works focus" event, like we have a monthly "Geofocus" event? Although works might not be everyone's "cup of tea", this might bring in new editors. --Rosiestep (talk) 12:11, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Rosiestep: I was wondering whether we couldn't combine works with women in various occupations, simply by providing two slots on our meetup pages: one for biographies, the other for works, organizations, etc. Alternatively, instead of geofocus which is running a bit dry, we could devote meetup pages to paintings and sculptures by women from Europe, Asia, Africa... or to literature by women authors writing in French, Spanish, German, Arabic...--Ipigott (talk) 13:52, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

You've been very productive with these, Tagishsimon. Any chance of a WD redlist on leaders and perhaps one on feminist archives and libraries? See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Ideas for November.--Ipigott (talk) 13:52, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

If I can find data to support them, yes. I'll get around to it. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:51, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

A nice problem to have?

I'm kind of running out of suffragettes with images to restore. Currently, my queue is Inter-Allied Women's Conference, once I burst out of the frantic madness of restoration I've been stuck in, then Ethel Smyth, Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton if I can find a good one of her, Hazel MacKaye (who has the best lead image I've seen), Nina Allender, and then I'm kind of running out of ones I've found good images for. So, I suppose I'm open to suggestions? I want at least half female-related FPs, and have a few things I'd like to do outwith Women in Red, so need counterbalances. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.1% of all FPs} 07:38, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

I think Vera Collum's photo could use your expert input.... ☕ Antiqueight ^chatter 09:04, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

And how about Jutta_Bojsen-Møller? You might also find some interesting ones on the List of suffragists and suffragettes. And while I'm here, I've just been working on the operetta singer Marie Geistinger and was impressed with a 1866 portrait of her. Maybe you can improve it even further? --Ipigott (talk) 10:44, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

@Ipigott: I found these, a little small, but worth grabbing? https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8438641c/f11.item.r=Marie%20Geistinger.zoom Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.1% of all FPs} 16:57, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Adam Cuerden: The images from Gallica are certainly interesting but as far as I can see there is no info on the date or what and where she was performing. But by all means work on them. They are certainly worthwhile. It would be interesting to see who produced the 1866 portrait as it is unusually good for the period. Any thoughts on how we could establish its origin and possibly the photographer?--Ipigott (talk) 18:20, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

@Ipigott: They all have little reference numbers under them. It's also possible we can find them identified on another website. That's how I identified the photograph of Lucy Arbell in Bacchus, for instance (Uh, not that anyone but me has seen that bit of research yet...). Just looked around for articles on her. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.1% of all FPs} 20:40, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Mabel Vernon's photo could use some attention, at least for contrast. --Rosiestep (talk) 11:09, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

@Rosiestep: I don't know, it looks fine to me. *whistles innocently* Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.1% of all FPs} 20:09, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

@Adam Cuerden: you're the expert, so if you think it's fine as is, then let's go with that. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:17, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

@Rosiestep: Maybe you should look at it again. ;) Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.1% of all FPs} 20:38, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

@Adam Cuerden: LOL and OMG, it looks marvelous now! Thanks! --Rosiestep (talk) 21:11, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

I tried restoring this image a while ago, but just wound up making too many mistakes for FP. GMG ^talk 20:20, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
Just making a note here, going off Mabel Vernon, that I should add Olympia Brown, Lucy Burns, and Florence Bayard Hilles to the list. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.1% of all FPs} 20:33, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
She's not to my knowledge a suffragist (although active on other progressive issues), and the scan we have may be too low-res and recopied to do much with, but File:Kate Claghorn.jpg is a favorite of mine. The only suffragist I remember creating an article on, Helen Edmunds Moore, is sadly lacking a picture. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:42, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

I know the LoC has the NACCP records, so I'll do a check. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.1% of all FPs} 20:59, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Speaking of LOC images, the LOC picture of Henrietta Rodman on her article was uploaded by me and probably done all kinds of wrong (it was one of my earliest attempts to add a picture). I'm sure it could be better. Penny Richards (talk) 21:09, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

@Adam Cuerden: Here are 6 New Zealanders to consider. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:38, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

There's a couple for Rosika Schwimmer that seem promising. [21], [22] SusunW (talk) 21:50, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

I kind of love the irony that this one of Schwimmer [23] was made by Olga Máté, a photographer who was also a suffragist. SusunW (talk) 21:59, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

I do like that one. I think I'll add Harriot Stanton Blatch to look into, although none of the readily-available photos are great. https://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/ggbain.13707/ may be the best. Certainly better than the full funeral garb of the lead there. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.1% of all FPs} 23:06, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Just as a heads up, I might take a bit to go through everything, as I always like to research each name, to make sure I'm going with the best possible image for the person, which means checking all the likely places, which in this case looks to include, just offhand, the Te Papa, The National Libraries of France, and Norway (both of which have GREAT open-access to their images), the Metropolitan Museum in New York (a surprisingly useful source for photos and painting, if somewhat random as to whether it'll have nothing or a wealth of stuff), The Library of Congress, the New York Public Library (erratic as to what they've put into the free-download categories, but sometimes useful), Google, and whatever else seems relevant. This can take a while. I tend to do research in batches, then work through it, removing things as needed from the list if I hit problems with it. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.1% of all FPs} 23:24, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

So, so far...

Mabel Vernon (nominated for FPC)
Rosika Schwimmer (partial restoration/improvement, due to some problems with the original)
Henrietta Rodman (Probably going to be nominated to FPC; just want to liase with Penny)

There will, of course, be more, but thought it might be good to have a progress bar. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.1% of all FPs} 11:18, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Naaz Joshi

I spotted Draft:Naaz Joshi today (it turned up at CAT:CSD because it had been copied and pasted around a bit), and the creator is having difficulty getting going. One of the problems I've got is that some of the news sources I looked up are blocked where I am, so I can't pull facts from them. Oldperson has already given it a bit of spit and polish, but I think it just needs some care and attention from the right person - then we could get a DYK out of it. Any takers? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:41, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Ritchie333 is there any way you can remove it from CSD. The reason it has been copied and pasted a bit is my clumsiness and lack of knowledge,prbably not paying attention. I tried to move her sandbox to Draft. If there is a template for that thenI don't know what it is. But not paying attention I moved the talk page to Draft, realizing what I had done. I then copied and pasted the article to the draft, and then what I could of the original talk to the talk page of the new draft. Totally clumsy.

I've run into that paywall problem many times, especially with links to Washington Post and New York Times, which are none the less reliable sources. I will check out the citations to see if any are in Sindhi, but those aren't suppose to be a problem. Thanks for helping out, you must be a helper like me. I get a psychic reward from helping people. By the way, those 8 citations are not blocked nor behind a paywall. I wonder where you are that they are blocked. anyway they are good citations.Oldperson (talk) 22:07, 24 October 2019 (UTC)