Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Feminism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Main page Talk page Members Resources Popular pages

Wikipedia Primary School invitation[edit]

Hi everybody. On behalf of the teams behind the Wikipedia Primary School research project, I would like to announce that the articles Domestic violenceGender stereotypes, of interest to this wikiproject, were selected a while ago to be reviewed by external experts. We'd now like to ask interested editors to join our efforts and improve the articles before March 15, 2015 (any timezone) as they see fit; a revision will be then sent to the designated experts for review (for details, please see each articles' talk page). Any notes and remarks written by the external experts will be made available on the articles' talk pages under a CC-BY-SA license as soon as possible, so that you can read them, discuss them and then decide if and how to use them. Please sign up here to let us know you're collaborating. Thanks a lot for your support! Elitre (WPS) (talk) 18:06, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't understand. There is one article and one section of the same article. How does that work? GeorgeLouis (talk) 00:43, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Topic(s) for new article(s)[edit]

While reading about other things, this hit my radar today. I can't find an article about the Red Stockings, or mention of this in the article about Iceland or about International Women's Year.

--Lightbreather (talk) 16:44, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Well, I did find an article Redstockings, but it's about a U.S. group. Lightbreather (talk) 16:49, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

The Icelandic article (is:Rauðsokkahreyfingin) says that they first appeared in May 1970 while the New York group appears to have started in February 1969. Unfortunately, there currently aren't articles for Women's rights in Iceland or Feminism in Iceland. gobonobo + c 14:39, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

The clarification of an ArbCom decision about gender[edit]

A request has been made for clarification of whether or not a recent ArbCom decision covers topics like campus rape. Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:45, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

If I understand correctly, the determination was made that campus rape is a “gender-related dispute or controversy” so the ban applies to the campus rape page, and the case is now closed. Those who want to make a controversy out of rape have determined that campus rape is controversial. Feminists said there is no controversy: rape is rape. If you want to include Campus Rape in the ban, word the ban better. Call it: "gender-related topics"
In addition, one feminist who spoke quite eloquently about the problem ended up redacting their comments after what I would characterize as inappropriate comments. The discussion brought up points that remain unresolved. I brought up that I don't think banning people from topic areas really make sense anyway unless they take responsibility for what they did. If they don't think it's wrong, they'll just do it in another area. I'm advocating requiring apologies in the Inspire Campaign to encourage more women editors. Beauxlieux (talk) 17:37, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Women in..[edit]

FYI: a wikipedia search on Women in showed up FHM#FHM_100_Sexiest_Women_in_the_World as the first search entry. Ottawahitech (talk) 18:18, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

I get that too. I would guess that Wikipedia's search engine algorithm relies on factors such as edit frequency or page views. gobonobo + c 10:46, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nelda Ramos[edit]

Please discuss. Bearian (talk) 00:43, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Feminism-focused Inspire Campaign proposal for distributed editing[edit]

Dear WikiProject Feminism: I wish to invite you to review an Inspire Campaign proposal and offer feedback if you wish:

What's special is this proposal looks to (re)value sporadic editing and respectfully honor the expertise of subject matter experts, without asking them to 'fix' Wikipedia's problems. This is a novel approach that may gain traction with edit-a-thons and WikiProject initiatives because it comes from a feminist pedagogical perspective for analysis in order to generate re-usable lists to share/work on. What ways has this project generated/distributed 'content gap lists' in the past? What would you like to see improved upon? My observation is often there are calls for editing because of 'storms' -- but there isn't systematic topical analysis... However I would look forward to your feedback and the possibly collaboration with WikiProject Feminism.


Monika Shameran81 (talk) 05:54, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Good proposal! I have no particular suggestions, just wanted to express enthusiasm for a well-thought-out plan. Binksternet (talk) 11:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much Binksternet! Shameran81 (talk) 20:00, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
I will leave a note about this on the proposal talk page, but one thing that all academics/SMEs need to understand, not just feminist ones, is that their contributions to WP can be easily reverted by anyone at anytime. So, there needs to be a plan included in the proposal to ensure that the edits/inputs to WP articles "stick" and frankly, the only way to do that, is to get a number of people to watch the articles constantly and indefinitely and revert any attempts to remove the SME's edits. There's no other way around it. It's how WP works. Cla68 (talk) 23:42, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for taking the time to comment Cla68, I responded on the proposal talk page. Shameran81 (talk) 20:00, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the idea. I want to know who are these experts? How do they define women's knowledge? How is this different than a women's edit-a-thon? Also enlisting college students, i think is unethical. The TOS says paid editing must have full disclosure, but getting credit is coercion. Anyway, the gender gap is certainly a problem. Check out the idea to disassociate feminism from women editors. Frederika Eilers (talk) 06:19, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Courtney Martin article needs a rewrite[edit]

Courtney E. Martin, co-editor of and generally prolific online feminist writer, just survived an AfD in which I dug up a bunch of sources but don't have access to one and don't really have time to read the others in depth. Article is currently sourced almost entirely to Martin's own writings. Anyone interested? Opabinia regalis (talk) 07:16, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Ellen Pao Gender discrimination trial has concluded[edit]

The Ellen Pao gender discrimination lawsuit trial has concluded. One of its legacies is the tremendous coverage it received while it was in progress resulting in reams of text covering topics such as statistics of the numbers of women in tech and venture capital, legal information about gender discrimination lawsuits, and much much more. Talk:Ellen_Pao has captured over a hundred links to this info. I hope this resource can be useful for editors covering related topics. Ottawahitech (talk) 00:35, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Participate in the Inspire Campaign! - & How to Require Apologies[edit]

I want to encourage WikiProject Feminism to take a look at endorse and discuss some of the Inspire Campaign ideas for addressing Wikipedia's Gender Gap before the funding application deadline tomorrow, but I think you can continue to endorse into April. At the moment, 581 people have participated. It would be great to get a lot more to show commitment to the issue.

I put forth the idea of requiring apologies which I think could create the structural change required to inspire more female participation (and create a more desirable environment for everyone) but I don't know wikipedia governance well enough to know how to get it enacted. If anyone has thoughts on how to do this, please share. I know it's probably a long shot to get enacted but I think even starting the conversation would be worthwhile.

I've also put forth an idea for addressing the Campus Rape pages Beauxlieux (talk) 22:41, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Marie Stopes[edit]

The article has been expanded in recent years. There's plenty of good material there already, and there's plenty of high quality biographies and other sources out there that could be used to expand and improve the article. If someone is willing to put in the work, this article could easily reach Good Article or Featured Article status. Just a matter of someone putting in the work. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 13:52, 7 April 2015 (UTC)--

Baroness, Duchess, Empress and Viscountess articles[edit]

Thinking about the bias of just having male articles for different male titles I recently submitted the following RM:

Relevant points are being raised at the RM and now I'm wondering about other options. Monarchy and nobility aren't my topics but I think that development of articles such as Baroness, Duchess, Empress and Viscountess may be useful.

I've also posted this at Wproj:Discrimination GregKaye 20:05, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

For those who don't know the abbreviation, we are talking about Wikipedia:Requested moves here. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 07:02, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
The actual discussion is at Talk:Baron#Requested_move_7_April_2015. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 07:06, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
The proposal has been rejected, or put on ice, or something, but might I ask here if there is any kind of organized movement among Wikipedia editors for "de-sexing" article titles? The suggestion made at the page referenced above seems to be eminently sensible, not only in the case of royal and noble titles but in many others as well. Yours, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 11:56, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marion Harvie Barnard[edit]

Can we get expert input? Bearian (talk) 20:30, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

@Bearian: This just took a little research, but still needs people to weigh in. I am not from Indiana, but a very brief search on the web showed multiple sources supporting that Barnard was an officer in the Indiana suffrage auxiliary. Anyone else who can contribute or weigh in with a vote? SusunW (talk) 05:13, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
The above article was kept, and there is an interesting discussion on the page referenced above concerning the difficulty of researching women who were active in the "old days." BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 11:58, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Consciousness-Raising Repository - Call for Feedback and Participation[edit]

This is a call for feminists who are interested in developing a resource on Wikipedia for collecting and publicizing stories from people who experience marginalization in the Wikipedia community. The purpose of the Consciousness-Raising Repository is to serve as a database of knowledge about the forms marginalization can take and as an outlet for users experiencing marginalization. Right now, we're putting together a diverse group of Wikipedians to oversee the construction of the repository and recruitment and collection of stories.

If you're interested in participating, please go to the Get Involved section and endorse or add your name to the list of participants.

We're also looking for questions and feedback to help crystallize the proposal. If you have any comments or questions, please feel free to message me or ask them on the discussion page --Radfordj (talk) 23:43, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Making category Fictional swordsmen sword fighters to be gender neutral.[edit]

Would this be a collaboration with the many fiction projects that would be in WikiProject feminism's interests? Bullets and Bracelets (talk) 05:39, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Seems a positive step. What page do we go to implement (pun) it? BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 12:00, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Wouldn't this be more of a WP:GGTF systemic bias thing? I dont see how this fits inside the scope of Wikiproject feminism which is to improve articles about feminism. PS You'd have to go to WP:CFD to request a move. Bosstopher (talk) 12:07, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Centre for Women, Ageing and Media (2nd nomination)[edit]

Hi, It would be great if anyone could help to save the article we created about the Centre for Women, Ageing and Media by contributing to the discussion. It would seem that "WAM" is not notable enough, as the critics don't acknowledge the sources that are included. MaudeG3 (talk) 14:02, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

MaudeG3, please remember to assume good faith when dealing with editors. Just because someone nominates an article about a women's centre does not mean they are misogynistic. Additionally, it is worth pointing out that your tone borders on canvassing, which is not allowed. Primefac (talk) 16:14, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  • I edited my initial comment, I hope it is now more in line with your guidelines. (But it was not just because he nominated the article.) MaudeG3 (talk) 16:24, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
I give the above user credit for changing her comment and wish her the best in continuing to contribute to our encyclopedia. She can expect a gift on her talk page. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 06:51, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Hillary Rodham Clinton[edit]

Interested project members are welcome to join WikiProject Hillary Rodham Clinton, a new collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia articles related to Hillary Rodham Clinton. ---Another Believer (Talk) 04:00, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Large Edits Needing Revision[edit]

Looks like some school projects came due today. Seeing some large edits on feminism-related pages that could use some attention from experienced editors.

EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:00, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Community discussion on harassment reporting[edit]

There are many current proposals as part of the 2015 Inspire Campaign related to harassment management. I’ve created a page, Meta:Grants:IdeaLab/Community discussion on harassment reporting meant to serve as a central space where the various stakeholders in these proposals and other community members can discuss which methods might serve our community best so that we can unify our ideas into collective action. I encourage you to join the conversation and contribute your ideas!OR drohowa (talk) 02:30, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Attention required[edit]

The Feminist legal theory is an important major topic, and the text is good start, but it seems abandoned and severely underdeveloped. Staszek Lem (talk) 19:02, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it needs EllenCT (talk) 23:34, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Seeking support from experienced Wikipedians! More Female Architects on Wikipedia[edit]


my name is eleanor chapman, I am based in Berlin and with anna schmalen, justine clark (australia) and lori brown (usa), have applied for a grant to write more women architects and designers into wikipedia. we welcome comments and support for our project. in our own countries, we hosted wiki writing parties on march 8, international women's day, as a way to begin these efforts. In particular, we would welcome expressions of support and mentorship from experienced Wikipedians, as we are relatively new here. We look forward to hearing from you! Eljoch (talk) 14:55, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello Eleanor, I would be glad to help you with that. I am a civil engineering student at TU Berlin and a contributor to wikipedia since 2013. So I would really like to meet you in person. I therefore invite you to this event I am organizing with my friend:Wikipedia:Hack-A-Thon/Feminism. I am sure we could find further support here. I am also part of the women edit group of Berlin. I'm sure you could find supporters there, too. Looking forward to meet you. EarlyspatzTalk 11:12, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Feminist aesthetics[edit]

@Peter Damian: I enjoyed reading [1] and I wish you the best success. I agree Feminist aesthetics could use a lot of help from for example. EllenCT (talk) 23:38, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Women's cricket[edit] Editor removed all references to women's international cricket from an article about international cricket. Please talk to editor — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:16, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

I couldn't see the WP:Diff there. Can you provide one? BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 21:23, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
I think WP:WikiProject Cricket is probably a better venue for this issue. Oh and by the way, you're supposed to WP:AGF, accusing a fellow editor of bad faith based on a single edit is not a good idea. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 21:39, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Mattress Performance (Carry That Weight)[edit]

This has been an article with a lot of debate and discussion surrounding it, it's been contentious. Today, the article was blanked, then fully restored and later gutted and given full protection (admins only). Please weigh in with your opinion on the talk page or ANI if you have worked on this article over the past few months. Liz Read! Talk! 21:36, 3 May 2015 (UTC)