User talk:Rosiestep

Keeping an eye on things around here.

Challenges

Hi, Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Turkey) would be very grateful if you put any articles you've done up as it's usually the same people doing all the work! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:56, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Ok, will do. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:13, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Don't know if you have time or interest in Cathedral of the Resurrection of Christ, Podgorica, some sources might be in Serbian.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:36, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion, Dr. Blofeld. I have interest but zero time at the moment because of focus on logistics issues, multiple continents, for the December 8th BBC 100 Women edit-a-thons. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:13, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Yeah don't worry!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:17, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Semra Ertan

Hi, I'd like to nominate this for DYK. OK with you? Yoninah (talk) 00:27, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi Yoninah. Sure, and thank you. DYK doesn't seem kind or friendly anymore, so I've avoided it for awhile. --Rosiestep (talk) 00:30, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

BBC editathon

Hey - do you know who's running this? Question came up from Nick on IRC. Katie^talk 12:42, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi @KrakatoaKatie and Nick: - It's being organized by BBC, WMF, and WMUK. Planning committee includes: Maria Cruz (WMF), Lucy Crompton-Reid (chief executive WMUK), Ahmen Khawaja (BBC producer), plus me. There are edit-a-thon nodes all over the world who'll be participating on Thursday. Could use some assistance with the article associated with the campaign. Please let me know if you have any other questions? Thank you. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:31, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Category:BBC 100 Women has been nominated for discussion

Category:BBC 100 Women, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:29, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Woot! You're a BBC author! [1] SusunW (talk) 21:59, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

It's a wonderful achievement!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:01, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Like ---Another Believer _(Talk) 23:01, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much, @SusunW, Dr. Blofeld, and Another Believer. :) --Rosiestep (talk) 01:54, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Well done. And well said. I find more missing names faster than I can write articles and by the looks of the growing lists of names that is true for everyone here. But we are working on those lists and with articles like this to attract people to write, we will blue link them all and find more to write. ☕ Antiqueight ^haver 02:09, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much, @Antiqueight. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:33, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

BBC 100 Women editathon and article creation

Hi Rosie, I'm sure you'll pick up the message on the WikiProject talk page, but leaving you this note as well as I've been posting it to a few talk pages. As you created an article on this list (the 160+ articles created on the day of the BBC 100 Women editathon), can you take a look and help out, or add any articles you know that were created that might be missing? Thanks. (Technically, the article was the day before, but it is still there in the upper section.) Carcharoth (talk) 23:26, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Carcharoth, and thanks for notifying me. I'm on it! --Rosiestep (talk) 00:25, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

They are still coming in and will continue to do so over the next few days as the BBC broadcasts continue. I'll do what I can to tidy up as many up as possible, Carcharoth and Tagishsimon have been helping me to compile a list for 8 December on our editathon page. They have been doing a great job adding notes on what needs to be done on each of them. It looks to me as if we could also compile similar lists for at least the 9th and 10th. If and when I have time, I'll also try to put together a list of new editors who have created women's biographies. There are certainly many more who have edited existing articles but these are too difficult to identify at this stage. I'll then try to contact them on their user pages and encourage them to join WiR. Did you keep a list of newbies from Washington?--Ipigott (talk) 08:38, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Mary Chase Walker

On 13 December 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mary Chase Walker, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that schoolteacher Mary Chase Walker (pictured) was boycotted in 1866 in San Diego, California, after lunching in public with a black woman? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mary Chase Walker. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Mary Chase Walker), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello again

Could you take a look at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias/Gender_gap_task_force#Board_resolution_on_inclusivity_and_safe_spaces or the linked meta page? It seems to me that there should be some sort of reply or reaction to the Board's announcement. This could be a real opportunity. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 03:13, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

I don't know if the discussion there is open to everyone, so I'll just post my comments here. I am not in favor of "separate but equal" as a general rule. But that being said, in this environment, there is very little ability to change set-in policy to be more inclusive because the group of very vocal voices against change are entrenched. What is odd, is that because each group tends to focus only on their specific "cause" you have those various entrenched groups in each area—creation, policy, deletion, admin, etc.—with each not realizing how the project as a whole is effected. Bottom-up management has not made WP a more inclusive place, instead it has made it a more rigid place. It seems apparent to me, that for real change to be made, it will need to be a top-down implementation, which I am not sure would ever happen.

One of the biggest barriers to addressing the gender gap is the type of coverage sources give. But the powers that be, refuse to recognize that. I can best explain it by an example. Several days ago, I did a search to see how many articles for a well known man or woman it takes to create a biographical piece. I put in 2 names with no identifying characteristics: Gloria Allred and Geoffrey Robertson. For him, the very first link I pulled up gave a fairly complete bio: [2] (Surprisingly it does actually mention is personal life, though many articles on WP leave out family information on men's bios entirely) For her, the first five links had merely snippets in a bunch of articles, most of which focus on her work, her celebrity clients, her activism and a lot to do with Donald Trump. Little to do with her life, so I modified the search to Gloria Allred, biography. Weeding out the non-notable IMDB, and fan sites, I came up with her age, she went to high school (where?), she went to Loyola Law School in the 1970s, she went to University of Pennsylvania, she married twice; her age, she is a feminist, interested in politics, in 1966 she was working as a teacher, she was born in Philadelphia, she went to the University of Pennsylvania, she married twice. As is easily seen, multiple articles are needed to even create a biography. Imagine on someone not as famous, how many links one must pull up to complete a biography for a woman? Which is why, in article after article, the question comes up about sources being more about their work/their cause being more important than the woman behind the cause, [3], articles which namecheck a woman in a list of other discussion,[4], whether the selective criteria or GNG is applicable, [5], [6], etc. Unless and until we figure out a way to adequately address that sources for men and women are different, we will never address the systemic inequality of a gender gap. Just my opinion. SusunW (talk) 18:59, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Completely agree with your opinion, @Susun. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:10, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Rosie. As I said, I didn't post it to Smallbones' link, because I was unclear if it was a call for general input or only specific people to input. If appropriate, it can be shared there. SusunW (talk) 21:17, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

I think all thoughtful opinions are welcome on that page. If you're comfortable doing so, cross-posting would be good. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:20, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

• Perhaps both Rosiestep and SusunW should start by signing up as WikiWomen (which Missvain set up a few years ago). It seems to be time to revive the whole idea of collaboration between women. While I don't think it would be sensible for women to become dissociated from Wikipedia, it might be interesting to see whether an all-women environment would make for progress on the creation and acceptance of articles. But once articles have been successfully created, they should of course be integrated into the main Wikipedia and that could lead to the wellknown problems.--Ipigott (talk) 15:56, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

I guess, Ian, I am of the opinion that making a separate space will solve nothing, as it doesn't address the overall issue *here*. IMO, that will require a policy directive, which has yet to be forthcoming. The self-policing policy is clearly broken and ineffective. Unless and until addressing that is tackled, change will not happen. The best we can do is carve out safe spaces like WiR where we can, carry-on and suck it up, or decide it's too much to deal with. SusunW (talk) 16:34, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm afraid policing just won't work. You would need to have an army of super-admins who would be accused of bias. But I do think women's pressure groups could assist in solving the problem. I was intrigued by a comment from LucyCrompton-Reid (WMUK) at the BBC editathon who said the editing environment on smaller wikis such as the one for the Welsh language was much more friendly and completely open towards women. The sheer size of the EN wiki requires more structured administration which leads to all kinds of problems.--Ipigott (talk) 17:09, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

I have to agree with that, although I think the issues of size are just a part of it. There are also the issues of widely divergent social and political standards across the English speaking world, and, unfortunately, the fact that, so far as I can see, the English wikipedia tends to have the most detailed articles and the most hits from around the world, making the articles here, effectively, in some cases, almost a sort of default "standard". John Carter (talk) 17:13, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Ipigott - Good idea re get better organized and we're on it but could do more! The WikiWomen's User Group, an approved member of the Affiliates member, is the offshoot of the WikiWomen's Collaborative, and there are similar approved UGs in Spanish (WikiMujeres) and Italian (WikiDonne); I and others have regular conversations with their leaders, e.g. planning BBC 100 Women, etc... likewise with the Art+Feminism UG, as well as with WikiLovesWomen, which is not a non-Affiliate community. Women in Red, IMHO, seems to bridge all of these communities in terms of new article creation, which is just one spoke of the work that everyone is doing, e.g. everyone would also like to see more women editing, improving articles about women, etc.

John Carter - You bring up some interesting points re smaller wikis and divergent social and political standards. I'm giving the smaller wikis point some thought. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:31, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

The WikiWomen's user group doesn't seem to be very active unless something is going on being the scenes. I would suggest they might give serious attention to how women editors could be encouraged to become more involved in all aspects of Wikipedia, not just editing and creating articles. Their minority position in a world where women are increasingly gaining status goes against the general trend. I think lessons could be learned from some of the other wikis where efforts appear to be effective in providing a more welcoming environment for women and increasing their coverage in the encyclopaedia. And maybe in parallel, there should be a men's group for those of us who support the cause!--Ipigott (talk) 08:18, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, Ipigott, as you suspected, a lot goes on behind the scenes. Allies are welcome! --Rosiestep (talk) 17:32, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

WikiCup December newsletter: WikiCup 2017

On 1 January 2017, WikiCup 2017 (the 10th Annual WikiCup) will begin. This year we are trying something a little different – monetary prizes.

For the WC2017 the prizes will be as follows (amounts are based in US$ and will be awarded in the form of an online Amazon gift certificate):

• First place – $200
• Second & Third place – $50 each
• Category prizes – $25 per category (which will be limited to FA, FL, FP, GA, and DYK for 2017). Winning a category prize does not require making it to the final round.

Note: Monetary prizes are a one-year experiment for 2017 and may or may not be continued in the future. In order to be eligible to receive any of the prizes above, the competing Wikipedia account must have a valid/active email address.

After two years as a WikiCup judge, Figureskatingfan is stepping down. We thank her for her contributions as a WikiCup judge. We are pleased to announce that our newest judge is two-time WikiCup champion Cwmhiraeth.

The judges for the 2017 WikiCup are Godot13 (talk · contribs · email), Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email).

Signups are open now and will remain open until 5 February 2017. You can sign up here.

If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:02, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Just spreading a little holiday discomfort here

Regarding missing biographies of women, if anyone wanted to go through them all, a look through the various editions of Biography Index would possibly be able to find several thousands, or more, of missing biographies. In the event anyone out there is a student with nothing to do over the next few weeks but happily go home to family and friends, this might be a way to Scrooge up their vacation. John Carter (talk) 22:44, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, @John. Let's see if anyone takes you up on the offer. For sure, it won't be me, though.  :) --Rosiestep (talk) 22:47, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

On a slightly more serious note, wikisource:Wikisource:WikiProject Biographical dictionaries contains a lot of works in the PD. It might be possible to find quite a few bios there. John Carter (talk) 15:08, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Quviahugvik

Hello Rosiestep: From high in the Canadian Arctic I hope you enjoy the holiday season, the Winter or Summer Solstice, Quviahugvik, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hannukah or even the Saturnalia, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 10:11, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Adapted from {{Season's Greetings}}

• Thanks, CambridgeBayWeather, and cheers to you, too! --Rosiestep (talk) 15:47, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Season's greetings!

Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

• Thanks, Ser Amantio di Nicolao, and cheers to you, too! --Rosiestep (talk) 15:47, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Festive greetings!

A barnstar of deep recognition for all your efforts on Women in Red throughout the year. Enjoy the end of year festivities and prepare to put more women on the world map in 2017. --Ipigott (talk) 09:02, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

• Thank you very much, Ipigott. This is lovely, and I wish you the same sentiments. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:06, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Rosie. Feel free to address it to any other well deserving participants I may have forgotten. I've been keeping a list here.--Ipigott (talk) 16:11, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

	Wishing you a very happy holiday season and a fulfilling 2017. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. --Another Believer (Talk) 18:07, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

• Thank you, Another Believer, and wishing happy holidays to you and yours, too. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:32, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/33

Hi Rosie; I was (pleasantly!) surprised to see a January editathon for Women in Philosophy; as you know, I've been running a drive for women in philosophy since August which is due to end just as yours starts. I'm certainly happy to throw my hat into the ring and contribute to the editathon, but I wondered if you had particular plans to get people involved; while the 2016 drive certainly hasn't been a failure, I wouldn't call it a roaring success, either! Josh Milburn (talk) 23:57, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi J Milburn. First, thank you for your multi-month campaign for women in philosophy. Regarding getting people involved in WiR's January event, I know we'll be sending out invitations early next week via MassMessage. @SusunW, Megalibrarygirl, Ipigott, and Victuallers may have additional info (am on holiday wikibreak). --Rosiestep (talk) 16:36, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

You are of course welcome to encourage all your contacts to take part in the editathon. If you need any further help, please let me know.--Ipigott (talk) 16:49, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas to all!

	We wish you a Merry Christmas and a prosperous New Year 2017!
	Wishing you and yours a Merry Christmas, and a Happy, Glorious, Prosperous New Year! God bless!  — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 11:36, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Ssven2, and wish you a Happy 2017! --Rosiestep (talk) 16:39, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

An award for your contributions

These virtual BBC 100 Women freebies are for you. Thank you for your contributions to our very successful BBC 100 Women editathon Hundreds of articles were created in thirteen countries.
	WiR/WMUK/BBC 100 Women worldwide online edit-a-thon Hosts: BBC, Women in Red, Wikimedia UK December 2016

--

(See you at our next event Women in Philosophy online edit-a-thon) Victuallers (talk) 13:55, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Victuallers; appreciate it. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:04, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

Merry Christmas from me! Thanks for your company during 2016. We have seen the percentage of articles on women rise from 15.5% to 16.77%. 20% is within our grasp and that's an increase of nearly a third over what we first found. Victuallers (talk) 13:55, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, @my friend, and Merry Christmas to you, too. I looking forward to continuing this journey with you, every step of the way. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:02, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas 2016

Merry Cristmas everybody!!!

"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,

I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."

Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)

Tito Dutta (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas.

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.

Spread the cheer by adding {{Subst:Xmas4}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

--Tito Dutta (talk) 16:21, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, @my friend, and wishing you happy holidays, as well! --Rosiestep (talk) 17:34, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Happy Festivus!

	Happy Festivus
	Air grievances, enjoy meatloaf (vegetarian or not) and challenge others in feats of strength! :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:44, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Megalibrarygirl and happy 2017 to you! --Rosiestep (talk) 00:08, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Twas the Night before Christmas

A Visit from St. Nicholas

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 20:17, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Smallbones and happy 2017 to you! --Rosiestep (talk) 00:08, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Holiday card

Wishing you a Charlie Russell Christmas, Rosiestep!

"Here's hoping that the worst end of your trail is behind you That Dad Time be your friend from here to the end And sickness nor sorrow don't find you." —C.M. Russell, Christmas greeting 1926. Montanabw(talk) 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Montanabw and happy 2017 to you! --Rosiestep (talk) 00:08, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry, merry!

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 22:06, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Bzuk, and happy 2017 to you! --Rosiestep (talk) 06:14, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Holiday Greetings! Rosiestep

	Merry Christmas & Happy New Year!
	Thank you for helping make Wikipedia a better place. Blessings. May we all have peace in the coming year. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:50, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, 7&6=thirteen, and happy 2017 to you! --Rosiestep (talk) 07:57, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Invitations for January

I realize you are taking a short break at the moment. Please just let me know if you would like me to send out the January invitation manually. I can easily devote a half hour or so to it tomorrow.--Ipigott (talk) 16:26, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi Ipigott. I'm back from my wikibreak so I can MassMessage the invitations. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:28, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Great. Let's see what we can make of education and philosophy. Plenty of scope for the new year.--Ipigott (talk) 17:30, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Contributing to The Signpost

Hello Rosiestep, I'm Mz7. I was brought here by Go Phightins!, who stated here to contact you to see how to get involved in The Signpost. I would be interested in helping out if needed. Mz7 (talk) 07:56, 28 December 2016 (UTC)