Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Fix link
Line 113: Line 113:


==Can we improve coverage of Italian women?==
==Can we improve coverage of Italian women?==
In the light of the discussions on this page in connection with [[:WikiProject_Women_in_Red#Risk_to_WikiDonne|WikiDonne and the Italian wiki]], I have been looking at the categories connected with women from various European countries. I was surprised to see from the subcategories to [[:Category:Women by nationality and century]] that our coverage of Italian women is rather poor, especially as Italy is one of Europe's most important countries, not only in terms of population but for history and culture too. Proportionally, Germany and France have significantly better coverage of women while little Sweden, with about a fifth of the population of Italy, has about two-thirds as many women's biographies. One of the problems may well be that the proportion of women's biographies on the Italian wiki is still less than 16.5%. We may not be able to write biographies in Italian but we could certainly try to improve coverage of Italian women in English. Would it be useful to devote special attention to this over the coming months, either by including Italian women specifically in our monthly priorities or simply by giving them special attention in connection with priorities such as writers, artists, politics and sports? There are almost 400 editors listed under [[:Category:Italian Wikipedians]] and over 2,000 mother-tongue Italians on [[:Category:User it-N]] (twice as many as the number of mother-tongue Swedes). --[[User:Ipigott|Ipigott]] ([[User talk:Ipigott|talk]]) 11:41, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
In the light of the discussions on this page in connection with [[:Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Archive_123#Risk_to_WikiDonne|WikiDonne and the Italian wiki]], I have been looking at the categories connected with women from various European countries. I was surprised to see from the subcategories to [[:Category:Women by nationality and century]] that our coverage of Italian women is rather poor, especially as Italy is one of Europe's most important countries, not only in terms of population but for history and culture too. Proportionally, Germany and France have significantly better coverage of women while little Sweden, with about a fifth of the population of Italy, has about two-thirds as many women's biographies. One of the problems may well be that the proportion of women's biographies on the Italian wiki is still less than 16.5%. We may not be able to write biographies in Italian but we could certainly try to improve coverage of Italian women in English. Would it be useful to devote special attention to this over the coming months, either by including Italian women specifically in our monthly priorities or simply by giving them special attention in connection with priorities such as writers, artists, politics and sports? There are almost 400 editors listed under [[:Category:Italian Wikipedians]] and over 2,000 mother-tongue Italians on [[:Category:User it-N]] (twice as many as the number of mother-tongue Swedes). --[[User:Ipigott|Ipigott]] ([[User talk:Ipigott|talk]]) 11:41, 20 January 2023 (UTC)


:Thank you from an Italian user, it's thoughtful of you! I think that Italian users concerned by the gender gap - like me - should start to think about some serious effort on this Wikipedia. [[User:Mickey83|Mickey]] ([[User talk:Mickey83|talk]]) 18:59, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
:Thank you from an Italian user, it's thoughtful of you! I think that Italian users concerned by the gender gap - like me - should start to think about some serious effort on this Wikipedia. [[User:Mickey83|Mickey]] ([[User talk:Mickey83|talk]]) 18:59, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 12:27, 20 March 2023

    Woman of the day: a new one each day from our women's biographies

    Can we improve coverage of Italian women?

    In the light of the discussions on this page in connection with WikiDonne and the Italian wiki, I have been looking at the categories connected with women from various European countries. I was surprised to see from the subcategories to Category:Women by nationality and century that our coverage of Italian women is rather poor, especially as Italy is one of Europe's most important countries, not only in terms of population but for history and culture too. Proportionally, Germany and France have significantly better coverage of women while little Sweden, with about a fifth of the population of Italy, has about two-thirds as many women's biographies. One of the problems may well be that the proportion of women's biographies on the Italian wiki is still less than 16.5%. We may not be able to write biographies in Italian but we could certainly try to improve coverage of Italian women in English. Would it be useful to devote special attention to this over the coming months, either by including Italian women specifically in our monthly priorities or simply by giving them special attention in connection with priorities such as writers, artists, politics and sports? There are almost 400 editors listed under Category:Italian Wikipedians and over 2,000 mother-tongue Italians on Category:User it-N (twice as many as the number of mother-tongue Swedes). --Ipigott (talk) 11:41, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you from an Italian user, it's thoughtful of you! I think that Italian users concerned by the gender gap - like me - should start to think about some serious effort on this Wikipedia. Mickey (talk) 18:59, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ipigott & @Mickey83 I think having a focus on Italian women in solidarity with Italian Wikipedians who work on the gender gap is a really good idea. I would be happy to support this. Lajmmoore (talk) 20:33, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I too would like to see us support each other better, so count me in. - Fuzheado | Talk 13:29, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    This sounds like an interesting idea – this might be a good opportunity to develop a (somewhat) formal rubric to measure the footprint of a particular women's group on English Wikipedia and Wikidata. I know we probably have our favorite casual or heuristic ways of determining this through categories, navigation boxes, metrics tools, SPARQL queries, etc. However, this might be a good way to turn lemons into lemonades and make the recent situation into a catalyst for documenting these better, or even making a better dashboard concept for tracking them. - Fuzheado | Talk 13:28, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Fuzheado: Thanks for your support. As you brought up lemonade in connection with Italy, I couldn't help remembering Benito Mussolini's constant cries of "Una grande limonata!" in relation to his successes (or aspirations). More seriously, it might indeed be useful to give more attention to the coverage of women from different countries using all the tools available to us. Projects like Humaniki provide an excellent basis for a general overview but it is often in the detail where we can observe important differences. I pay particular attention to coverage of women in the languages I can deal with and have been concerned for some time that we have not given sufficient attention to Italy. Of course the Italian language does not enjoy the support of substantial coverage outside of Italy which may be why more attention is given to German, French and Spanish speakers. Nevertheless there are Italians all over the world, including Wikipedians who do not necessarily identify as Italian, and many of us have close associations with the country as a result of travel, education and cultural interests (music, literature, fashion, cinema). I think it would be useful to see what we can do about making improvements. It would be useful if we could have some feedback on how we should go forward: simply by drawing attention to the problem, by including Italy as a specific monthly priority (geofocus or other), by trying to rally interest from Italian-speaking Wikipedians, or perhaps by sensitizing cultural organizations such as Istituto Italiano di Cultura which has an effective presence around the globe? I also think, in common with you, Fusheado, that it would be interesting to explore new avenues for assessing coverage of women by country or language.--Ipigott (talk) 17:13, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    A very good tool for the quest is surely Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by dictionary/DBI (Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani). Among all thes bios I take the liberty to point out to you these three: Giulia Beccaria (d:Q3769235), Fanny Targioni Tozzetti (d:Q996001), and Franca Ongaro (d:Q584344), as especially important and notable. --Pequod76 (talk-ita.esp.eng) 00:40, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Please also see note above concerning possible additions (eight nine eleven of whom are Italians, and one has based her professional practice in Italy for over 20 years). Thank you, Cl3phact0 (talk) 18:50, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Cl3phact0: I've added most of the Italians to the redlist section on Geofocus: Mediterranean. If you come up with any others, it would be useful to list them there.--Ipigott (talk) 06:54, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you! Will (try to) do. I'm adding them here because I haven't figured out how to properly categorise the names within the main project sections and didn't want to bodge this. I'll have a look at the link you've shared and see if I can make sense of it (just looked — oh my, there are so many, a veritable sea of red). -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 07:12, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    PS: The "Italy" link leads here. I find this confusing: "This list is automatically generated from data in Wikidata and is periodically updated by Listeriabot. Edits made within the list area will be removed on the next update!"
    This is our main Wikidata list for Italian women, based on Wikidata entries whether or not there are articles in other languages. You will see from our Redlist index that we also have Italy lists for actresses, painters, poets, politicians and writers.--Ipigott (talk) 07:36, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It seems as if Wikidata might be the place to add the names, however, I'm not certain what to add, where to add it, or how to do so. Is there a specific WiR data point that should be created in Wikidata for each? Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 09:10, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Please see Draft:Marva Griffin and note below re: same. Thanks, Cl3phact0 (talk) 17:01, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    ListeriaBot in the Community Wishlist Survey 2023

    In the upcoming ommunity Wishlist Survey 2023, there are two proposals to fix the ListeriaBot issues. I encourage everyone to support both, once the voting stage starts:

    Best, MarioGom (talk) 15:20, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks for the heads up MarioGom. Please keep us posted. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:50, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The trouble is that the WMF is very slow to respond to things. A basic attribution bug in MediaViewer has been known about and sat unfixed for 9 years. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.2% of all FPs. Currently celebrating his 600th FP! 18:14, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The voting is now open for the Community Wishlist Survey 2023. The two proposals have been merged into one proposal. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:46, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Direct link to this proposal: m:Community Wishlist Survey 2023/Bots and gadgets/A more performant bot to replace ListeriaBot. MarioGom (talk) 12:24, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It's been suggested to me on Telegram that we add the ListeriaBot issue to Phabricator as it might be worked on at the May Hackathon. I'm clueless how to deal with Phabricator. Pinging a few who might be able to help with this. @Gamaliel, MarioGom, and Tagishsimon. Thanks. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:52, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Cathy Whims

    Over at Talk:Cathy Whims, I've asked about a possible GA co-nom if any project members are interested. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:31, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    I believe User:Grand'mere Eugene intends to help, but other eyes and improvements are also welcome. Or, if anyone can find a freely licensed image to add to the infobox (I've tried!), that'd be much appreciated! ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:43, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I added one from Flickr. Nick Number (talk) 20:42, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Wonderful! Thank you so much! I had tried a search there, but clearly you did a better job. Much appreciated! ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:43, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Update: User:Grand'mere Eugene and I have co-nominated the article for Good status. Last call for any article improvements or talk page comments! Thanks, ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:36, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Does anyone have any additional sources to improve Draft:Julie Ann Dawson for this author? BOZ (talk) 16:46, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Merge to Bards and Sages Quarterly? FloridaArmy (talk) 22:44, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Humaniki down?

    The Humaniki API doesn't seem to be reachable, which makes current gender stats unavailable at the Humaniki site: I've raised a bug report. Dsp13 (talk) 16:08, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @Maximilianklein: It's that time again :) --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:16, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    We had an update on the 9th and we are not expecting another until the 16th so as far as I can see there's really no problem.--Ipigott (talk) 20:52, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It's now working again as it should.--Ipigott (talk) 06:38, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I beg to differ; it still seems to be broken. Its absence is a problem b/c it is more widely used than merely to furnish WiRs weekly statistics; which is to say, WiR is not its only user. --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:17, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, my mistake. I've alerted Max by email in the hope he'll be able to look into soon.--Ipigott (talk) 09:33, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Still down now, when I tried to update the statistics for this week. Hopefully it will be back fully operational soon. Oronsay (talk) 18:21, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    This time is really has been fixed.--Ipigott (talk) 06:23, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Sorry to say that Humaniki is down again today so I've been unable to update statistics.--Oronsay (talk) 07:31, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello. Max informed members of the Humaniki project one hour ago that the Humaniki server has been permanently deleted, related to this purge (it seems that nobody from the project received direct notification beforehand). There is no backup. We'll see what we can do. Envlh (talk) 20:22, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Pity there are no safeguards against this sort of thing. Let's hope the project can be recovered. It looks as if WDCM statistics on women's biographies on Wikimedia projects has suffered the same fate.--Ipigott (talk) 06:48, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Adding Sadads/Astinson (WMF) to the conversation as we've been chatting about tech issues that we face at Women in Red, e.g. Listeria (our redlists), Humaniki (our metrics). To enable a handshake, also pinging @Tagishsimon, Headbomb, and Gamaliel who have been quite helpful with workarounds; there are additional helpful editors when we face tech issues but I don't want to start with an over-spam. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:22, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Thanks @Rosiestep -- saw this come up on twitter, and saw that it was also restored and resolved. @Tagishsimon @Headbomb @Gamaliel -- I would love to hear more about what you think the best way to make these more sustainable systems -- the decentralized nature of of the volunteer dev network supporting the tools is consistent with gaps we encounter in other parts of the movement. Astinson (WMF) (talk) 17:27, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks, Astinson (WMF), for taking an interest in this. I've been following and encouraging the involvement of Maximilianklein in his efforts to provide statistics on the proportion of women's biographies over a number of years, first under WHGI and more recently under Humaniki. It seems to me to be expecting a great deal of a developer like Max if he is forced to take sole responsibility for keeping such systems up and running when he is tied up with other important research projects. Would it not be possible for the WMF to provide some kind of additional support, especially in cases when the system is scheduled for removal? There used to be a kind of backup with the WDCM statistics (see above) but these too have now been removed. I hope you are in a position to bring this to the attention of your colleagues in the hope that further problems can be avoided.--Ipigott (talk) 07:20, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Hi @Ipigott I have been asking about the requirement for humans to be involved in the review for critical tools-- it seems there is a larger security/maintenance concern underlying that process -- I am going to encourage them to find a way to get a process improvement on how that was communicated to non-tool owners (so critical infrastructure doesn't get taken down). I get both sides of the concern here. You might also try the Wikipedia Diversity Observatory Astinson (WMF) (talk) 13:10, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Redlists for Art+Activism

    While checking and updating the crowd-sourced and Wikidata-based redlists for next month's Art+Activism I found the following:

    • There are two WD lists of photographers: One is Photographers (Wikidata stand-alone) and the other included with the Photographers CS list.
    • There's a problem with the WD Feminists list which returns an error when I try to update it via Listeria.
    • The Cartoonists WD list has a memory limitations template for Listeria updating.

    I'm aware that @Tagishsimon was able to improve some Activists and other redlists for WIR and was in discussion with @Rosiestep earlier this month. Any chance of more help with these queries, please? Oronsay (talk) 02:44, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Also, less important, the Wikidata Artists list is 15,007 names. Although it was updated on 16 Feb, perhaps it should be pruned in some way? Oronsay (talk) 02:47, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah. I'll have a look. Still not a great fan of the current implementation of Listeria :( --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:36, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I appreciate whatever help you are able to provide, @Tagishsimon. Oronsay (talk) 19:05, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Another one that would benefit from splitting is Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Cartoonists, created in 2017 by Ipigott; now 3,597 items. Includes cartoonists, comics artists, and mangaka. There's a maintenance tag at the top of the redlist that says, "Due to memory limitations of the Listeria tool, this list currently unable to automatically update. Please consider changing the parameters or breaking it into smaller lists." (I can't sort out when it was added to that page or by whom.) Hoping Gamaliel (who also worked on the list) or Tagishsimon might be available to assist with the splitting. Thanks. --Rosiestep (talk) 00:18, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    I remember fondly the collaboration that a number of us did at WikiConference North America 2018 to get this list working in the first place. It's a shame that Listeria can no longer handle lists of this length. Anyone have any ideas about how to split this up. Mangaka could be a separate list, of course, but that would still leave us with a large group to subdivide. Gamaliel (talk) 15:08, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    What I find surprising is that ListeriaBot was running smoothly on this until September 2021. I simply can't understand why new restrictions have been introduced. If there's no other solution, we might consider creating two lists, one with site links and the other without. I don't know how feasible this would be.--Ipigott (talk) 09:35, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Celebrate Women

    Our March events are listed here: meta:Celebrate Women/Events. We may get questions... and maybe some new members! Rosiestep (talk) 13:56, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Rosiestep: The events page is a good idea. I see it simply replaces last year's meta:Celebrate Women/Events/2022. It is however a bit confusing to see that events are being posted both on the basic meta:Celebrate Women page and on the new Events page. If you click on "Look for an event that you want to take part in..." you are not directed to the new page. Perhaps in collaboration with Meta this can be sorted out. (cc Eric Luth (WMSE), Astinson (WMF), Anthere).--Ipigott (talk) 07:23, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for noticing this, Ipigott; good question. I also asked in the Wikiwomen Telegram channel where much of this is being coordinated. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:26, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It looks like it has been fixed because I see no problem right now... We will add the WLW event in the next two days... Anthere (talk) 18:35, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Mass GA delisting of articles by User Doug Coldwell

    During my reviewing of unassessed articles tagged WikiProject Women and WikiProject Women's History, I have today come across a considerable number of those created by Doug Coldwell which had lost their GA quality assessment. On looking into the reason for this, I discovered that Coldwell was first blocked following a warning on his user page by Fram on 8 September 2022. This led to blocking for disruptive edits on 24 October 2022. On 30 January 2023, he was indefinitely banned as a sock puppet and was refused access to his talk page. Unfortunately, despite successive attempts by Dr. Blofeld and others to encourage Coldwell to respond specifically to the reasons why he had been blocked (essentially for copyright problems) he was not prepared to do so but (on the basis of his talk page comments) he was ready to revise any GA article for which specific problems could be presented. This offer was not accepted. As a result, all the 200 or so GAs he has created over the years are now being delisted. The Women's History articles which were delisted on 25/26 February include Elizabeth Timothy, Cone sisters, Effie Maud Aldrich Morrison, Jane Aitken, Eugenia Tucker Fitzgerald, Gertrude Hull, Caroline Reboux, Eleonora de Cisneros and Elizabeth Plankinton. This is just the first batch as there are several other women's biographies on the remaining list of Coldwell's GAs. As several members of Women in Red have been involved in the improvement or the GA assessemt of Coldwell's articles, it might be possible to restore their GA status. Although I don't usually work much on articles about Americans, I've looked through a few of these and they certainly appear to deserve promotion, perhaps after more careful checking of any copyright problems.--Ipigott (talk) 12:27, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    As well as copyright violation concerns some have expressed, the other apparent concern relates to WP:V, specifically as many sources offered are offline sources and harder to validate. I did 2 GA reviews for DC written articles (not WiR) and am making an effort on one of these to ensure all citations can be verified (whether by finding a digitalised/online alternate or personally checking and validating the prose against the source material). I am sure a fair few now (or to-be delisted) could regain GA status if it can be demonstrated that all the prose is verified and correct (and of course, not WP:CV). Bungle (talkcontribs) 12:50, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, it's hard to fix up his articles, because there's often copyvios that have to be fixed, but also sources that have to be replaced because they don't contain the content they are being used for. Every single reference has to be checked for accuracy. And if it's an offline source, it's that much more difficult. SilverserenC 16:49, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Jane Aitken is slated for deletion as copyvio. Following procedure, I started a rewrite from scratch. I think there is enough in the sources I found, particularly the biographical dictionary from 1971, to rebuild a decent article, but I don't know when I'll have time for that. Anyone is welcome to swoop in. XOR'easter (talk) 15:19, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The rewrite is now live. XOR'easter (talk) 19:10, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi, could someone help me please with the article on Miren Agur Meabe, which I published today? It got tagged with notability tag, but I'm stumped as to why. The subject has received a number of awards, including the National Poetry Prize given by the Spanish Ministry of Culture (and was the first winner to receive it for poetry written in Basque). Additionally, the ref for this prize is from El País (an article about her, not just a passing mention), so prime example of national coverage; the win was also covered other major media. Meabe also has a bio in the Basque Encyclopaedia, but that probably wouldn't be treated as a "country's standard national biographical dictionary" per WP:ANYBIO. There are at least two more awards she's received which I could add to the article and I added a wikilink to one of the other awards she's received but maybe the issue is the way I wrote the article? GiantBroccoli (talk) 15:58, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    It looks ok to me, I must say, but more refs, especially to reviews of her books, would do no harm. The tagger is in Pakistan, so it is unlikely they can read Spanish, let alone Basque. Johnbod (talk) 16:42, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I can't speak Basque either, I wrote the article based on English and Spanish sources. Someone else just reviewed the article and removed the tag, but I'll see later if I can add some more refs. GiantBroccoli (talk) 16:50, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I've fleshed out the bibliography section and added a couple of refs. There's plenty more out there to add though. SilverserenC 23:48, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for helping! I see that some of the works on the list are in Spanish, so they are translations of her work from Basque. According to Spanish Wikipedia she did some of the translations herself and they came out the same year as the Basque originals, so it is all quite confusing to figure out. GiantBroccoli (talk) 10:43, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    This draft on an emerita professor and author who has written on some interesting subjects in North Carolina was declined. If anyone can help or has suggestions I would appreciate it. Thanks! FloridaArmy (talk) 03:30, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @FloridaArmy, did you already exhaust Google Scholar for reviews of her books? Innisfree987 (talk) 04:29, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @FloridaArmy Source re George includes "He and his wife, Carole Watterson Troxler, an accomplished scholar and professor emerita of history at Elon, were honored with the Christopher Crittenden Memorial Award from the North Carolina Literary and Historical Association and the Federation of North Carolina Historical Societies for lifetime contributions to the advancement of North Carolina history.", which you don't mention, and a room on campus being named after the pair of them. Several of the refs are inadequately formatted : "Author"? Check for typos, especially in lead phrase. PamD 06:37, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @FloridaArmy And, looking again, please remember to give her nationality in lead sentence: it's an international encyclopedia, so it can't be assumed that everyone is American unless otherwise specified. PamD 08:36, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @FloridaArmy: I added a review, so probably half-way there to WP:NAUTHOR. There is likely more. scope_creepTalk 16:17, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    I just made Draft:Death of Lisa Edwards. Any help with expansion would be appreciated. Thriley (talk) 21:23, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @Thriley: Although sad, what makes this a notable event, instead of just news which may well be forgotten about quite soon? What is the lasting implications that makes the event noteworthy? Unless this can be demonstrated, it will probably not survive an AfD, which could happen based on the article currently. Either the person or event has to be demonstrated as notable, and I don't see either being so. Bungle (talkcontribs) 17:22, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I dont see how it can be notable either. scope_creepTalk
    There is a rather chilling quote about this unfortunate incident from today's Washington Post:
    As Edwards continued her pleas for help that morning, one officer called them “an act.” He told her all he wanted to do was get some “coffee and oatmeal,” saying it was “the Lord’s day.” Another jokingly offered her a cigarette while she waited to be given her inhaler.
    Sad way to be remembered, noteworthy on not. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 14:26, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Women in Religion Meet-up

    Hi everyone, Women in Religion WikiProject is conducting an edit-athon on March 8 10am - 12pm CST. For more information, go here: Wikipedia:Meetup/Women in Religion March2023. Both experienced and newbie editors welcome! No background in religion required, just a desire to see more bios about women created. Best, Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:19, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks Figureskatingfan for keeping us informed of this virtual meeting. It may be a good idea to update your meetup page to reflect the fact that biographies of women have now reached 19.5% (rather than 18%) of all biographies. You might like to add sections on "Participants" and "New or expanded articles" so that we can provide any necessary assistance. I'll not be participating in the Zoom tie up but would be happy to support any new contributors. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 09:23, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi Ipigott, thanks for the assistance and offer of support. I have just followed your suggestions and made the changes you recommend to our meet-up page. Regrets that you're unable to attend; perhaps next time. ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:07, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Session proposals for Wikimania 2023

    History buffs will recall that Women in Red was founded in 2016 at Wikimania Mexico City during a session regarding "content gender gap". Wikimania 2023 will convene this August in Singapore and online. Yesterday, the Wikimania Programs Committee (for transparency, I'm on it), announced a call for session proposals and I hope you consider drafting one! Submissions are accepted from Tuesday, February 28 until Tuesday, March 28, 2023. There are different session types, themes, and program tracks to consider. More info here:

    Have questions? Need help? Ping me. :) --Rosiestep (talk) 16:54, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Community bulletin board

    It looks like Women in Red's spot on the Wikipedia:Community bulletin board hasn't been updated for a while. I don't know what the process is for organizing WiR events (which is why I'm hesitant to update it myself), but it might be a good idea to make a note somewhere that it should be updated when the events change. As of now, it still lists the 2022 year-long events, and it still lists the October Alphabet Run (which links to the July event when you click on it). Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:16, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks Thebiguglyalien! I updated the bulletin board, swapping out the old info for a link to our Events page that is reliably kept up-to-date. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 02:53, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It would also be useful to update Wikipedia:Contests, mentioning in particular the current Feminism and Folklore contest, at least in connection with Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/259 and perhaps Wikipedia:Feminism and Folklore 2023. Perhaps Gamaliel or ZI Jony could handle this.--Ipigott (talk) 07:09, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Ukraine's Cultural Diplomacy Month

    See here on meta. You might like to find a Ukrainian woman artist or activist with initial Q or R, to write about to tick two of our boxes and also contribute to their project this month? I had coincidentally started on my Vera Roik twofer stub before getting a notification about this event, so I've listed her in their page as a gesture of support, although the article is as yet too short to get me any points in their system even if I was interested in doing so! PamD 08:43, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Ah, I see Penny Richards is there already with a proper article at Leah Rachel Yoffie! PamD 08:46, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes! Yoffie was on my own to-do list of American folklorists; it was a bonus to learn that she was born in Dnipro.Penny Richards (talk) 15:32, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Katherine L. Knight, professor and dept chair, past president of national association

    I created Katherine_L._Knight in response to her listing here but worry that notability may be questioned and any additional enhancements would be welcomed. — soupvector (talk) 21:49, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    It appears that she passes multiple WP:PROF notability criteria (reasonable case for #C1, #C2, #C3, and #C6). I wouldn't worry much about being taken to an AfD; I'm pretty sure the article would be kept if that happened. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:14, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed. I added another independent source from a quick search, no doubt there is more out there if anyone would like to further improve the article. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 02:41, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Jess Wade on Radio 4 on Monday 20 March

    While updating The Museum of Curiosity I'm delighted to see that Jess Wade will be one of the guests on this BBC Radio 4 show on Monday 20 March, 6.30pm. It's one of my favourite programmes, taking advantage of the opportunities offered by radio: three intelligent and varied guests arrive at the imaginary museum, chat generally abot their specialisms in the first half, then each choose, and discuss, what they wish to donate to the museum. Being radio, mere problems of size and feasibility don't come into it: the last episode featured gifts of the missing second half of Coleridge's poem Kubla Khan, a white hole, and a jar of marmalade. Highly recommended. PamD 22:56, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    I hope she doesn't make her usually wildly inaccurate statements about WP stats.... Johnbod (talk) 01:29, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Johnbod Interesting: could you show an example? PamD 06:21, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, PamD, I'll certainly watch out for the related podcast. Johnbod has indeed pointed out discrepancies in the stats she has presented (e.g. in February 2021) but most of us considered these to be of minor importance compared to her enthusiasm for promoting Women in Red and for her own contributions to articles about women. I don't think it would be useful to go into further details here.--Ipigott (talk) 07:02, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, if you like - it was her first appearance on Women's Hour. I don't think it's too much to ask for someone who regularly appears on UK media on this topic to make sure they have their basic facts right (or at least avoid repeating "facts" they've been told aren't right). But by all means listen on 20 March, and fact-check. Ipigott, where do you stand on Sandi "90% of Wikipedia is about men" Toksvig? Johnbod (talk) 12:24, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    After all the advice you have given her about checking out her "facts", I don't expect any shortcomings. But even if there are, having someone who has gained worldwide recognition for her work in support of women scientists is exactly what we are striving to achieve. Unlike you and me, she has a strong following and is an effective recruiter. What's even more important is that she is a woman!--Ipigott (talk) 14:24, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Another vile Johnbod thread. Yay us. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:03, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Please, no personal attacks. Edwardx (talk) 16:16, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    ITNRD candidate

    Sadly American disability rights activist Judith Heumann has died. I am unlikely to be able to bring the entry up to snuff in the next few days (tho I will pitch in as much as possible!), so I wanted to flag her as a great WiR WP:ITNRD candidate. Innisfree987 (talk) 03:35, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @Innisfree987 I posted a proposal at WP:DISAB to bring the article up to at least GA standard as soon as possible, so let's make this a collaboration. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:49, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Looks as if Alanna the Brave and participants at WP:Women in Green might be interested in helping it along.--Ipigott (talk) 14:33, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Great on all! Innisfree987 (talk) 18:55, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    She featured prominently in the documentary Crip Camp, with archival footage. Recommended. Sorry to hear of her death. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:25, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Heumann is on the main page [1]. TJMSmith (talk) 02:02, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Leah Adler article review?

    Hello! I have literally never edited or created a Wikipedia article before but after watching the film The Fabelmans I was surprised to learn that Leah Adler, mother of Steven Spielberg, didn't have her own page. I could be off base and perhaps these are better additions to Spielberg's own page, but I put together this short article tonight. Would love any review, feedback, or advice on improving it and getting it approved. There's definitely more out there on her influence on him and his films and I suspect more to be said if The Fabelman's wins more awards this season, but I put together what I had time for this event. Thanks!


    Draft:Leah Adler Hellotaylor (talk) 02:03, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Women and cycling in Islam

    ...is one of the many suggested titles for the article currently known as Bicycling in Islam. Please weigh in on the article Talk page if this topic is of interest. (For context, there is also a related discussion on the DYK Talk page.) Cielquiparle (talk) 08:39, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Marianne Karth, traffic safety activist

    I created a draft for Marianne Karth a while ago. Are there any major sources out there that I’m missing? Thriley (talk) 11:35, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Recognition of WiR award from Lewes FC

    Just came across Award for Club Photographer ‘Boyesie’. Seems to have taken some time to filter through.--Ipigott (talk) 13:21, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Congratulations James Boyes! Who made the beautiful glass barnstar? WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:03, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    French Feminist Mariette Teisserenc (fr)

    Hello, not sure this is the place for it... but if someone can help me out regulate the following frennch page admissibility or any advice... I would be very tanksful !Olmathie(talk) — Preceding undated comment added 15:00, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi there, Olmathie. If you want advice about the French-language article, you should ask here.--Ipigott (talk) 16:17, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft feedback

    Hi Women in Red! Is it acceptable for me to ask for some feedback on improving an AFC draft that is within the scope of this WikiProject? 110.227.19.227 (talk) 14:05, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Give folk a clue, what draft is it? scope_creepTalk 18:24, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi, this is the draft. I have been working on it for a few months now. It was previously declined because I made the repetitive use of the word "praise" when paraphrasing the sources which I have now fixed in subsequent edits. The topic is also a prior AfD from 2017, but I don't know what that article contained. My best guess is that it was likely a WP:Too Soon because nearly all the in-depth coverage on the subject is post 2018. While it is resubmitted for review, I would like some feedback on whether it's worth the effort or best left alone until it can be improved later. Thanks in advance! 2405:201:1006:E279:A1DB:8B99:5358:2703 (talk) 20:43, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles about two free-access resources

    Hello all, just wanted to let you know I created articles about two free-access biographical dictionaries that helped me with articles I created or contributed to:

    Just FYI! jengod (talk) 23:07, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Just tested out the first one and its pretty rad, and from that, I ended up finding a document mentioning Isabelle Kendig, whose biography I recently updated! Anyway, the first one, especially, seems like a good resource. The second one too, I just don't know much German language. Historyday01 (talk) 00:09, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Just want to put a woman on your radar

    Today I encountered our article on Betty Pack, who was a charming, young, sex-positive, good-looking, adulterous, highly intelligent woman with at least one abortion and probably a child out of wedlock. She was also, by all accounts, a bona fide hero of Allied espionage during World War II. I've done a little tidying up of her article but I would to have some more female editors aware of her and working on telling her story in a way that is misogyny-conscious, if that makes sense. I'll circle back to her later when I have more time for a deep dive on WWII sexpionage but just wanted to flag her for all your attention. Cheers jengod (talk) 23:11, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    obsolete WiR page

    The page Wikipedia:WikiWomen's History Month is long out of date and not maintained. It's been replaced by meta:Celebrate Women (and its subpages). I would like to turn Wikipedia:WikiWomen's History Month into a redirect to meta:Celebrate Women. The disused page is embedded in WiR navigation so better to redirect than to delete. Any objections? WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:52, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Bernadette Carey Smith, one of the first Black reporters at The New York Times and The Washington Post.

    Bernadette Carey Smith, one of the first Black reporters at The New York Times and The Washington Post, died in December. Thriley (talk) 03:20, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @Thriley I've just overwritten your stub with my incomplete draft. At the moment it overfocuses on her short stint at the formation of Essence magazine, mainly because I wanted to be able to demonstrate the existence of independent reliable sources outside of her employers (The New York Times and The Washington Post) conferring notability. Some of those sources aren't exactly independent either, but there is definitely enough to satisfy WP:BASIC. The real money is in the actual articles she wrote for The Washington Post as well as the NYT that turned out to be important (and widely cited to boot). Some of the coverage about her is extremely chauvinistic and make for cringeworthy reading; she was very attractive in addition to being a good journalist, and it is evocative of the environment she was up against. Cielquiparle (talk) 12:08, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    WikiProject Women in Red's pro wrestling section

    I added a "cleaned up" version of Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Wrestling to the Pro Wrestling WikiProject's requested articles page awhile back. I believe a number of Japanese-language red links exist on Wikipedia under English-language titles.

    173.162.220.17 (talk) 20:12, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Twenty-five women architects and designers you should know (dezeen)

    Hello WiR, this article lists a number of architects and designers (and others in related fields) who may merit articles in this encyclopaedia — both the women mentioned, and in some cases, their "nominator" as well. Some are already covered, though may be good candidates for the sister project Women in Green, others are likely of interest for inclusion in various WiR sub-sections here. Rather than adding them willy-nilly to the thread at the top of this page (which, admittedly, has become a bit of a jumble in lieu of my proper understanding of how best to categorise correctly by WiR sub-section), I thought it best to start a new discussion. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 07:55, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Cl3phact0: As you've written biographies of male architects and designers, perhaps you would like to make a start on some of these yourself.--Ipigott (talk) 10:30, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, yes, I intend to! I have started one (very rudimentary) draft, and I helped out with Sabine Marcelis quite a bit (including a DYK nomination). I also have most of the names I've added here on my list too (which needs an update: pretty messy place "my list" — please don't think poorly of me). I'm also pretty slow when confronted with a blank page. I've been doing this for a bit over six months and have only published two from-the-ground-up articles. When I get rolling, I generally roll and roll until I run out of steam. (I know that all sounds like a bunch of excuses — point taken.) Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 10:59, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Cl3phact0 I would recommend signing up for a Women in Red event, like #1day1woman. Contrary to the name, you don't actually need to contribute 1 new article a day, just share whatever are working on when you are ready. (You can also post links to existing articles you have "upgraded".) It is a great way to get more notice for works-in-progress, pick up suggestions and contributions from other editors, and also see all the interesting content that other editors are working on. Cielquiparle (talk) 11:29, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, I'll have a look! -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 11:33, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Please see Draft:Marva Griffin and note below re: same. Thanks, Cl3phact0 (talk) 11:15, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    This Smithsonian magazine article on adventure traveler Elise Wortley is interesting. FloridaArmy (talk) 20:24, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you, FloridaArmy for posting this suggestion. I don't often create articles from scratch, so hopefully the stub I just make is okay? Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 00:45, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    COI discussion Sage Publications

    There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Sage Publications about an editathon on Women Social and Behavioral Scientists organised by Sage Publications. Wikipedia:Meetup/DC/SAGE edit-a-thon lists ten new articles created, which may be in need of wikification. TSventon (talk) 09:27, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Caribbean writers

    Hello folks newish editor @Alijdonnell is creating some excellent pages some of which relate to Caribbean women writers. Lajmmoore (talk) 10:15, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    This might include some help with this draft Lajmmoore (talk) 10:53, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks so much @Lajmmoore I have had a couple of entries pushed back into draft entries that I want to find a way of publishing. I can work on Maggie Harris's myself as I think there are other sources to explore and which might offer replacement citations but Inez Sibley is much trickier as she has been almost completely ignored critically. If anyone has any tips on how to improve this for publication I would be so grateful. Alijdonnell (talk) 16:17, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Duplication on Wikidata

    I've just created Emilie West and tried to update Q62080005 but somehow an additional Q95246989 was created. Can anyone help with merging these or is there anywhere on Wikidata that the problem can be mentioned?--Ipigott (talk) 14:19, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Looks as if this has already been sorted out. Thanks.--Ipigott (talk) 14:48, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Ipigott, I have merged the items. If you want to merge items yourself it is straightforward using wikidata:Help:Merge#Gadget. If there are problems I would ask here. TSventon (talk) 14:53, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you, TSventon. This is the first time I have experienced this kind of duplication. I had already found the existing entry in Wikidata and had tried to update it but somehow a new entry was created. I'm glad you have been able to restore all the former sources. I tried to access your Merge gadget but was unsuccessful and ran into all kinds of logon problems. Wikidata seemed to be treating me as a completely new user. Thanks anyway for your help. It's good to know we have experts who can deal with out incompetence.--Ipigott (talk) 15:12, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @TSventon: Did the original items describe the same subject? I cannot see a source which ties one to the other.
    • Q62080005 was created in March 2019 as part of an import from Dansk kvindebiografisk leksikon, and appears to be the needlework expert described in the WP article.
    • Q95246989 was created in May 2020 as part of an import from Biographisches Lexikon des Kaiserthums Oesterreich, and describes "a contemporary youth writer, from whom the youth writing: “The Werner family or twelve pictures from German life, together with the Aspini family in six pictures from northern Italy. For children from seven to ten years. With 8 col. Lithogr.” (Vienna 1863)". [2]
    --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:47, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ipigott and Tagishsimon:, the two items appeared to describe the same subject when I merged them, but the Danish Emilie West is unlikely to have been the subject of a biography in Biographisches Lexikon des Kaiserthums Oesterreich, so I have undone my merge. Several other edits which confuse the two women will need to be undone as well. TSventon (talk) 16:11, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, that's all sorted now. --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:28, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you @Tagishsimon:, I have added that the author was female, as BLKÖ describes her as Jugendschriftstellerin, with the female suffix -in. There seems to be very little information online on her or her book. TSventon (talk) 18:54, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Footballers wives deletion campaign

    For those who don't see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Article_alerts, today's list is swollen by a large batch of AfDs for women who appear to have in common that they are in Category:Association footballers' wives and girlfriends. I looked at a random one who seems to have a substantial article in Italian Wikipedia. PamD 09:20, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    All the nominated footballers' wives and girlfriends articles have now been speedy kept by Fram. TSventon (talk) 11:44, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Marina Goldovskaya, Russian American documentary filmmaker

    Marina Goldovskaya was included in the in memoriam segment of last night’s Academy Awards. There seems to be a lot of room for improvement. Thriley (talk) 16:17, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Her NY Times obit:[3]. Thriley (talk) 16:38, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Requesting inputs @

    Bookku (talk) 03:53, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Dolores Klaich, feminist author and activist, has died

    I nominated Dolores Klaich at the last minute for RD. Her bio is thin but well referenced enough for posting I think. Thriley (talk) 18:45, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Many editors had edited this article without spotting that it had a link to a disambiguation page: I've now retargetted the redirect Medical aid in dying to go to Assisted suicide instead of the dab page at Assisted dying, as the term seems to be used in US legislation with exactly that meaning.
    But in passing, can I remind you all of a lovely useful Gadget: you can spot links to disambiguation pages if you go to Preferences, Gadgets, scroll down to Appearance, and 5th from last is "Display links to disambiguation pages in orange". Just click to select it, and you should never again accidentally link to a dab page, or let one go past your eyes without spotting it.
    I've also gnomishly added a surname redirect from Klaich as she is the only name-holder with a link-worthy mention. (There is a composer who gets a very minor mention but not worthy of a redirect or surname page entry, I reckon). PamD 20:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    On This Day main page section

    Hi all. I've recently (with Eddie891) started putting some time into Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries which manages the "On This Day" (OTD) section of the main page. The section highlights significant dates in history and the births and deaths of important figures. This section had lain abandoned for some time, leading to a lack of new content and errors appearing on the main page, I am hoping we can rejuvenate it.

    Candidates for inclusion are stored in the edit pages of individual dates (for example, you can see the days for March here: Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/March). However many of the candidates have referencing or other issues and so cannot be included, leaving a pool of perhaps 10-15 to choose from. At the moment these tend towards European or US topics and male figures. I am keen for the section to include diverse content from across the world and, where possible, to feature a good mix of male and female figures. I think this project would be well placed to assist with this and would welcome any help members can provide.

    Ways you can help:

    • Add event and birth/death date entries to the Wikipedia articles for individual days (eg. March 31). Note that this doesn't add them as candidates for the OTD section but I sometimes look for new entries here when short of candidates.
    • Add event and birth/death date entries to the OTD pages (eg. Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/March 31), these should added to the "Eligible" section of the edit page in date order. Note that entries must comply with the Selected anniversaries criteria for article quality, referencing etc.
    • If possible have a go at curating a set of OTD entries for an upcoming day. This involves rotating the old events and births/deaths out (return them to the "Eligible" section), adding new entries and checking they comply with the criteria (in particular that the facts in the entry are cited in the article). You can see upcoming dates that need this doing at Wikipedia_talk:Selected_anniversaries#March_checks.

    This is a really easy way of featuring good content on the main page so please do get stuck in! I am happy to help out with any queries or questions you might have - Dumelow (talk) 08:42, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Marva Griffin (draft)

    I've made a first draft of an article about Marva Griffin. She was on the earlier list of possible additions (now archived), and is also probably relevant to the above thread about Italian women. I'm inclined to move this to mainspace (per Grutness on stubbing). Please review and advise. Thank you, Cl3phact0 (talk) 09:06, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Celebrating Penny Richards!

    Today we are celebrating an amazing Wikimedian (and a contributor to this project), Penny Richards. You can discover more about Penny on Diff or on a dedicated celebratory Meta page, where you can also comment, congratulate and wikicelebrate her incredible work. NSzafran-WMF (talk) 17:01, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Congratulations, Penny! You are truly an inspiration! --Rosiestep (talk) 18:04, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you! You can tell it's been chilly and damp in So Cal because I'm wearing a crocheted hat AND sweater in the photo. ;) Penny Richards (talk) 18:10, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Well it's like that in Britain a lot, so you'd be more likely to need a waterproof coat. I'm glad editors like you and Rosie keep this project going and highlight what diversity can do. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:20, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    A great choice and a wonderful write-up.--Ipigott (talk) 06:49, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Congratulations! It's well deserved recognition for your contributions here, at WP:DISAB, and generally in the entire 'pedia. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:28, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Sabine Marcelis DYK

    The article about the Dutch designer Sabine Marcelis which was recently published thanks to the efforts of this group was also featured on DYK. (Thought this might be relevant to those who are interested keeping WiR statistics up to date.) Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 17:25, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Cl3phact0: We try to keep track of DYKs about women on Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Showcase. You'll see SM under our DYKs for March. Thanks for your contributions to the article. Looking forward to more of the same kind.--Ipigott (talk) 07:01, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you, Ipigott. I am still getting to know my way around this vast WiR universe. Appreciate your pointing me in the right direction (again). Once the Marva Griffin article is ready for publication (see above), I will submit that one for DYK as well. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 07:31, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Cl3phact0: Looks as if you could be a useful member of Women in Red. If you would like to join, you can sign up under "New registrations" on Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/New members. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 07:38, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
     Done
    I'm also keeping a WiR list in my Userspace where I try to keep track of the people who I have added to this Talk page. (Someone who's been helping me here suggested this, possibly even you!) -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 07:51, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I've kept a list of all the new articles I've created, on my user page, and I'm so glad I started doing so right from my earliest editing as I sometimes see an article and can't remember what inspired me to create it (sometimes filling a red link or fixing a disambiguation problem, as well as lots of WiR editathons, topics heard about in the news, etc)! A lot are just solid little stubs, but well sourced and with the relevant incoming redirects, dab page entries etc. I've got a separate table of all the WiR contributions too. It's fun to have records to look back at. Happy Editing. PamD 08:47, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks! You are very well organised indeed—much more so than I am (but then, I note that you're a librarian, so I suppose that says it all a lot). I'm still building-up my wikitext toolbox, wondering how I might apply it to improve my (admittedly minimalistic and cryptic) presence here, and mustering the courage to actually do something different. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 08:11, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Cl3phact0: If it's any consolation, I rely on Xtools to list the articles I have created. You can see yours with their current ratings here. I mention a few of the articles I have really helped to improve on my user page, where I also keep a list of the DYKs I have been involved in. PamD is one of our most active members and an inspiration to us all.--Ipigott (talk) 11:02, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks & yes, I see how PamD is an inspiration—what a dizzying quantity (and quality) of work. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 11:12, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Not so sure on quality: I tend to produce solid little stubs, and do lots of gnomish redirect and dab page stuff, while many of our colleagues on this project produce really substantial articles. But we all make our own little niche. Welcome to WiR, however you decide to keep your records. With an increasingly-sievelike memory, I value having a quick reminder of how each article came into being - though I suppose the edit summary of the initial creation is another good place to note that, and will stay with the article permanently. I always note WiR editathons in that first edit summary, and have probably usually recorded other reasons for article creation too. PamD 11:37, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Article retention

    As an editor who often faces AFDs from older articles, one thing I've noticed is that if it's a women's bio I rarely see anybody from this project at the AFDs comment, even when notability is very clear. I believe there are editors here who do often comment on AFDs, and editors are often very busy with their own research, so don't want to be critical of them, but I think protecting (notable) Women's bios from deletion should be as important as creating new ones. Perhaps a department and a few editors commit to patrolling AFDs, or at least some kind of rota to spread the monitoring of them for a day or two. In my experience the AFD ers wanting to delete articles I've started are almost always wrong. I've witnessed women's bios from other editors being deleted which can be expanded which would never have been deleted if they were being monitored. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:43, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]