User talk:SusunW

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Welcome!

Hello, SusunW! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 01:09, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines

The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

New articles[edit]

AFC-Logo.svg
Gina Gray, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

AFC-Logo.svg
Kansas Act of 1940 , which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

AFC-Logo.svg
Tillie Hardwick, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Invitation to join Wikiproject[edit]

A page you started (Camposagrado Palace (Oviedo)) has been reviewed![edit]

Thanks for creating Camposagrado Palace (Oviedo), SusunW!

Wikipedia editor WordSeventeen just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Great article. Thanks!

To reply, leave a comment on WordSeventeen's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Happy New Year![edit]

Wikipedia Asian Month 2017: Invitation to Participate[edit]

Sun Wiki.svg

Hello! Last year, you signed up to participate in Wikipedia Asian Month (WAM) 2016 on the English Wikipedia. The event was an international success, with hundreds of editors creating thousands of articles on Asian topics across dozens of different language versions of Wikipedia.

I'd like to invite you to join us for Wikipedia Asian Month 2017, which once again lasts through the month of November. The goal is for users to create new articles on Asian-related content, each at least 3,000 bytes and 300 words in length. Editors who create at least four articles will receive a Wikipedia Asian Month postcard!

Also be sure to check out the Wikipedia Asian Art Month affiliate event - creating articles on Asian art topics can get you a Metropolitan Museum of Art postcard!

If you're interested, please sign up here for the English Wikipedia. If you are interested in also working on other language editions of Wikipedia, please visit the meta page to see other participating projects. If you have any questions, please visit our talk page.

Thank you!

- User:SuperHamster and User:Titodutta on behalf of The English Wikipedia WAM Team

This will be the last message you receive from the English Wikipedia WAM team for being a 2016 participant. If you sign up for WAM 2017, you will continue receiving periodic updates on the 2017 event.

Women in Red World Contest[edit]

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

April editathons at Women in Red[edit]

Inter-Allied Women's Conference FAC thoughts[edit]

  • Tables. If you want to go to FAC, then avoid I think. See WP:WHENTABLE, especially "Inappropriate use" just below.
My thoughts on the table: Instead of having a list of women and having to scroll down to see their photograph, a table would allow presentation of them, followed by their photograph and an explanation of who they were and what organization they represented. I have no earthly idea how that could be done in a list. SusunW (talk) 21:41, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
See article talk page.
  • Similar thoughts on copy editing to Margaret Macpherson Grant. (I have spotted various bits and pieces, but rather than list them, I will simply sort them if you give me permission.)
I have sent 2 articles to the GoCE and both came back with a lot of strange grammar mistakes. The article has been edited by me, Ian, you and gone over with a pretty fine toothed comb by Australian Rupert, Peacemaker67, CPA5, and Pendright. I cannot imagine that there are many grievous mistakes, but feel free to edit at will. :) SusunW (talk) 21:41, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
Umm. You take your chances as to who you get at GoCE I am afraid. I have mostly heard good things, but as one of their leading lights it is entirely possible that people are avoiding telling me bad things. One does get their better editors if one flags a request as pre-FAC.
  • Link Lady Aberdeen in her image caption.  Done SusunW (talk) 21:41, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Otherwise it looks broadly FAC ready to me. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:51, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Ian said he would be glad to put alt text on all the photos, but simply inputting "|alt=photograph of blah blah," doesn't seem so very hard, even for non-technical me. SusunW (talk) 21:41, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
My understanding is that alt text should be more descriptive of just what you see - the caption should already do what you outline. Eg ' A black and white, head and shoulders photograph of a woman' you might add 'in a formal pose', or insert 'informal', or add 'wearing a large hat', to avoid monotony in the gallery. Or 'A black and white group photograph of 15 women in Edwardian dress posing on outdoor entrance stairs'. But I am not an expert. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:10, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
Okay, well, I did that, but I must have done something wrong as I don't see anything happening differently on the page. Perhaps Ipigott can review them and tell me what I did wrong. SusunW (talk) 19:52, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
Face-smile.svg It's to aid visually impaired readers. If you are "reading" via audio it will use the alt text to describe what you aren't seeing in the image. If anything had shown in the text it would have meant that you had done it wrong.
You won't see anything different on the page but the "alt" comments will be read out to visually impaired people. I'm still rather concerned about the list of names at the end. In general, FA reviewers insist on running text. I would suggest you try either to transform the list into short descriptions of the participants (for instance grouping them by country, region or occupation) or prepare a separate article presenting them all in a table. You could make short introduction about the participants and include a "main article" link. I would be happy to help you with this but you should choose what you want to do. You could of course just leave things as they are and see what kind of reactions you get after you nominate for FA. There should then still be further opportunities to make any changes that are called for.--Ipigott (talk) 06:42, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
OK. Well, now we offer it up, as carpenters and the like say. It has been a pleasure working with you; I hope that I haven't been either too obtuse nor acerbic. Hopefully we are now into easier waters; we shall see. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:23, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
@Ipigott and Gog the Mild: I do not want the women in a separate article. There aren't enough of them to warrant that and to my mind it is an unacceptable solution. As Gog thinks a table is unacceptable, Ian thinks they need more text, and I also think we need a bit of explanation of who each was and what organization they represented, I guess we expand the prose. Maybe a paragraph on France and Belgium, one on the rest of Europe, and one on outside of Europe? Depending on how much goes in we may need to expand this, but it seems a logical place to start with just 3 paragraphs. I'd love your help Ian. Obviously, Gog, that means sources will change, but it cannot be helped. SusunW (talk) 13:32, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

─────────────────────────That makes perfect sense to me and is a logical expansion of the article. I assume that it will go between Background and Actions? Gog the Mild (talk) 13:46, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Hadn't really decided, still pondering, but that seems like a good place — Define the playing field, then the players and finally the action. I am working on a Georgian woman that I want to finish today and then I'll probably start on it tomorrow. SusunW (talk) 13:50, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

I certainly understand that you want to make all these women part of the article itself rather than sending them off to an external article or table. I would therefore suggest you cover them mainly in the "Actions" section. You could do this in two ways: by expanding the background on each of the participants already mentioned in that section and then by writing one or two paragraphs on the others, possibly in a subsection on, for example, "Other major participants". That would keep the chronological structure of the article in place while maintaining the interest of the reader. If you make a start, I'll try to help you along. You already seem to have given summary background on some of them, e.g. Marguerite de Witt-Schlumberger. When discussing the National Council of French Women, you could possibly also include a few words on Marguerite Pichon-Landry and Gabrielle Alphen-Salvador, explaining that they also participated in the conference. For Great Britain, Millicent Fawcett is OK too but the others need to be included. These are just suggestions. Let's see how it goes.--Ipigott (talk) 15:09, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

@Ipigott and Gog the Mild: I've worked on this all day. Then I realized that I started with the last action, so may have to move some of them to another section and unlink them here. I'm also missing one, so I have to figure out who the 17th woman is. *sigh* But, is this what you had in mind? I'll probably break the paragraph at some point, but just want to get them all in first. If you think this is fine, then I'll start on the first action tomorrow. SusunW (talk) 22:43, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
I'm sorry to hear you have had to devote so much time to this. It looks to me as if you have made considerable headway. The sentence starting "On 18 March" is however very long. It may be a good idea to break it up by rephrasing it into groupings of representatives of each country, especially as so many came from France. For example:
On 18 March, suffragists testified before the Labour Commission, giving an overview of women's working conditions. In addition to Margery Corbett Ashby[32] (United Kingdom), a member of the executive board of the National Union of Women's Suffrage Societies, several of the delegates were from France. These included Eugénie Beeckmans,[32] a seamstress and member of the French Confederation of Christian Workers;[34] Georgette Bouillot,[32] representating the workers of the Confédération générale du travail;[35] Jeanne Bouvier,[32] co-founder of the Office français du travail à domicile and a trade unionist;[35] Cécile Brunschvicg,[32] a founder of the French Union for Women's Suffrage and its first general secretary;[36] Gabrielle Duchêne,[32] co-founder of the Office français du travail à domicile,[35] pacifist, and member of the National Council of French Women,[37] and Maria Vérone ,[32] lawyer, journalist, and general secretary of the French League for Women's Rights. Delegate from other countries included Florence Jaffray Harriman (United States),[32] Chair of the Women's Committee of the Democratic Party;[38] Madame D'Amatio Tivoli (Italy)[32][Notes 3] Louise van den Plas (Belgium),[32] founder of the Féminisme chrétien de Belgique (Christian Feminism of Belgium) Association. The resolutions the women's conference delegates presented to the chair, Samuel Gompers,[32] covered a variety of issues including the health hazards of working conditions.[30]
This is just a quick suggestion. You may be able to improve on it. Good luck!--Ipigott (talk) 07:09, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
And *that* is why I need you Ian. I figured it would take a couple of days to work them all in with descriptions and proper citations. This is perfect as I was worried about how long the lists were. Thank you! SusunW (talk) 13:22, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
The changes look spot on to me, except I wonder if the country in brackets after the name of some of the delegates is not redundant in some cases? Eg "Marie-Louise Puech (France), a secretary of the French Union for Women's Suffrage" or "Fannie Fern Andrews (United States), a Canadian-American teacher and pacifist, as well as a member of the Woman's Peace Party, who founded the American School Peace League". Gog the Mild (talk) 14:11, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Gog, yet another observation that is helpful. I think what I will try to do today is work the rest of the names in and then we can figure out how to massage the text, to avoid long lists and redundancies. The biggest problem is that I cannot access the first pages of Oldfield and am thus missing January and February lists. I shall see what I can find. SusunW (talk) 14:32, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
Have you tried asking for that page at Resource Request? I have found them very helpful in the past. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:53, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
Thought about it, but the problem is that I have no idea what pages might cover the conference. What I can see starts in mid-March, so I would need all of February and March. But, I'll figure it out. Searching newspapers now. SusunW (talk) 15:12, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

───────────────────────── @Ipigott, Gog the Mild, and GreenMeansGo: I think I have finished. Very stoked that I figured out who Miss Atkinson was. A reference that said there was an Australian delegate, (no evidence of that, I think they meant South Africa) led to a clipping that said she was from Nelson, New Zealand, so checking Te Ara led me to find Ruth. I also figured out that Marie (née Tivoli) d'Amalio, is our Mme. Tivoli from this picture.[1] It also gave the info that Constance Drexel didn't just cover the conference for the Chicago Tribune, she participated (which I verified with other sources). That made me look at the other photo to correct some names and I discovered that Sonnine Carpi is actually Graziella Sonnino Carpi. That means they are all identified except the Polish woman, whose name is decidedly not Polish. Thus, I think it is ready for y'all to work your magic on Britishizing the text and copyediting. Feel free to make any adjustments you see fit.

I decidedly do not want to do another photo review, but I think it might be nice to add either of these [2] [3] for Constance Drexel. (I cannot prove the one on her article was ever published and Nikkimaria is unlikely to accept the LOC statement that there are no restrictions.) There is also this photo of Valentine Thomson. I searched Galica (found only one image of her here—clearly not the same), Bibliothèques Municipales Spécialisées (found only this one, which I don't think is "of" her but rather produced by her?) and Les Archives nationales, which does not appear to have any photographs of her. I then searched copyright.gov and there are no results for her as a keyword, title or person. So I think I am safe to add that one? Which brings me to why I need you GMG, I searched the name of the article from the Tribune and while this is a better version, it isn't great. Any chance you can wave your magic wand and find the group shot for the end of the conference? SusunW (talk) 16:46, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Well, it looks like here is a somewhat better version of the image you are currently using for Drexel. I'm only mainly seeing three or four images bouncing around and the newspapers just traded them back and forth. The image from the LOC seems likely to have been published, since it looks like someone has gone back and framed the image half-length for publication. Movover, the LOC may have overshot the date. The "Leviathan" seems to be HMS Leviathan (1901), which was decommissioned in 1920, and would place the image between 1914 and 1919, when the ship was operating in the Atlantic.
As to an image of the end of the conference, I'm not sure I have anything better than you've already found. GMGtalk 02:13, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
  • You've done a really professional job on this article, Susun. I'm not too worried about the pictures. I think it would be just as well to wait and see any reactions on them from those commenting on your FA nomination, which I hope we'll see soon. But how about the remaining red links, particularly those on the names of people? It seems to me it would not be too difficult to put together summary information on two of them: Valentine Thomson on the basis of the article your linked above for her photo and this; and Graziella Sonnino here with perhaps other details from her association with the Unione femminile. Do you think it would be worthwhile?--Ipigott (talk) 07:22, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
Thank you so much GreenMeansGo! Totally appreciate you and your help. I will use your find for Drexel and hopefully the graphics lab can clear up the Chicago Tribune image. (I'll just have to figure out which two women are unidentified in the photo, because there are 16 women in it but only 14 names listed *sigh*) Ipigott, thank you so much. Your help means the world to me. And yes, I'd love to clear out the main red links. When I was looking for a photo for Thomson, I found a ton of sources and put them here Valentine Thomson (?-1944). I can't read the French ones, other than the tiny notice that talks about the 10 year anniversary of her death. But there are plenty of sources to get her to GA stage. (Totally fascinated with her creation of a hotel school to train women for the hospitality industry). That's a great find on Sonnino! She's listed in the it.wp as a red link on the article about the Unione femminile (also missing article with plenty of sources on the it.wp) and cited with a dissertation I could not find. The only one I found, was from Germany, but perhaps someone searching from Europe would have better luck. (I also wondered if she was somehow related to Sidney Sonnino, who was the Italian delegate to the Peace Conference). SusunW (talk) 14:45, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
I guess I should ask you Ipigott if you would start on Sonnino and I can start on Thomson, but will need you to input the French sources. I am going to upload GMG's two photos, and since Gog the Mild did some editing, for which I am grateful, I guess I need to know if he thinks we are ready once those are loaded? SusunW (talk) 15:06, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
SusunW: I'll see what I can find on Sonnino. Not sure what you mean by French sources. I think you are right that she was related to Sidney Sonnino - he also was of Jewish descent - but I can't find anything. Also looking for traces of her in Switzerland after 1938.--Ipigott (talk) 15:39, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
I meant French sources on Thomson, Ian. There are a bunch of them and I cannot read them. No idea what that article I posted above even says about her. Also @Ipigott, Gog the Mild, and GreenMeansGo:, I want to send the final group photo to the graphics lab to see if they can clear it up and straighten it (being catty-whompus makes me crazy), but I am not sure if I should have them crop it to just the women, or leave it as a newspaper clipping. Seems kind of interesting to me to have it be a clipping, but I am unsure. I am also fairly sure it's the four in the middle on the back row that are misidentified...I think, looking at chin lines that I've marked Vérone and Corbett Ashby correctly, which means each of the women to their left is unidentified. Given who we know was at that last meeting, maybe to the left of Ashby is Fry? and to the left of Vérone would either be Gabrielle Alphen-Salvador or Marie-Louise Puech, as I do not think she looks anything like Elisa Brătianu SusunW (talk) 16:06, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
I was wondering if we have any contributors (librarians???) from Chicago who could pick up a less crumpled copy of the Chicago Daily Tribune for Tuesday, April 29, 1919, and photograph or scan the page with the image headed "They Got Equality for Women in the League of Nations". Perhaps Sue can link up to a librairains network there? Or perhaps you can access it from here?--Ipigott (talk) 18:49, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
Ipigott The one at Newspapers.com is horrible. One used to be able to access the Trib's archives directly, but then they made an agreement with Newspapers.com and you get what they filmed :( . I'll have the graphics lab work on this one and if we ever find a better copy, we can always replace it. SusunW (talk) 18:55, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

FAC ready[edit]

Hi all. From my point of view, as mentor (not that I have done much, nor needed to have done), it is FAC ready. Re the final group photo, I would leave it as a newspaper clipping, but level it off.

  • A minor point regarding prose flow in the "Actions" section: The second paragraph is a long list of the delegates ending with "At the meeting Wilson suggested, instead, that the male diplomats on the commission form a Women's Commission to which the Inter-Allied Women's Conference could serve as advisers." I suspect that by this point most readers will have forgotten the content of the last sentence of the first paragraph, and need to reread; also it does not naturally fit into a coherent paragraph with the list of delegates. I am not sure that there is a good solution to this, but a least bad may involve moving this sentence back to the end of the first paragraph[?] Alternatively, end the first paragraph at "... Wilson" and either start the third with "At the meeting the delegation asked if a Women's Commission could be included in the conference to address the concerns of women and children. Wilson suggested, instead, that the male diplomats on the commission form a Women's Commission to which the Inter-Allied Women's Conference could serve as advisers." or that this be inserted as a short, stand-alone paragraph. There will be other fiddly bits like this picked up at FAC, and IMO it is still FAC ready whatever you decide to do about this, including nothing. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:45, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
Thank you Gog the Mild, yes it was tough not to lose the reader with the list of names. I'll see if I can tweak the text as you suggest and will post the clipping to see if they can fix it at the Graphics Lab. I really, really cannot say enough how much I appreciate you pushing me to get this ready for FA. I might never have dug in and identified the other women had we not made this final push, but the puzzle part of discovery is what I find most fascinating about history. SusunW (talk) 18:51, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
No worries. I am glad that you are having fun, which is why we are all supposed to be here, rather than finding that it starts to resemble "work"! Gog the Mild (talk) 19:07, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
Holding my breath. I tried to follow those very confusing instructions. Not remotely sure I did it correctly. Can you check this Gog the Mild? I don't see it on a list anywhere. Is it supposed to be? SusunW (talk) 14:28, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
Okay, I figured out the problem with it being on the list. Hopefully it is now correct. SusunW (talk) 14:35, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
Drat! I overrode the edit clash, so you didn't get my response. It is up, and should automatically have added itself to your watchlist. Now we wait. It looks good. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:46, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Gog. I should thank both you and Sturmvogel 66 because had you all not been so supportive after that Class A photograph review, I am sure it would never have been nominated. I am slow when it comes to pushing myself out of my comfort zone on wp, but I am really happy that we have now identified almost all of the women. Who that Polish woman with a non-Polish name is, I may never figure out (and it will continue to bother me), but the rest of them are now definitely identified. SusunW (talk) 14:52, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
Good. And I can very much relate to a desire to stay within one's Wiki-comfort-zone. Your first comment is up. I have asked a couple of experienced FAC assessors if they might care to have a look. One has responded in the affirmative. I doubt they will cut you any slack, but if they disagree with anything I am pretty sure that they will be pleasant about it. Have you given NikkiMaria a ping? Would you like me to? Gog the Mild (talk) 20:58, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
I didn't ping anyone except you and Ian. I never do, as I am unsure if it is okay to do that or not. I haven't pinged her, because I wasn't sure if I should or shouldn't. Feel free to do that if you think it will help. SusunW (talk) 21:08, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
Done. Gog the Mild (talk) 09:44, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Susun. The article is doing well. Can I suggest that you ask Vanamonde very nicely if they would do a source review. Nikkimaria has said no to redoing the image review. Do you know anyone who might be up for it? They could, I think, rely on Nikkimaria's ACR review for the images which overlap. Ipigott? Gog the Mild (talk) 23:32, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Gog the Mild Perhaps Green Means Go would review the photos? I don't know, but he is who I go to when I need help on copyrights with them. Ian has probably been too involved, but I don't know that for sure. I can and will ask Vanamonde, but will wait until we are back home on Friday. We are out of the country for a few days and I had no internet access at all today until just now. SusunW (talk) 02:20, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
Gog the Mild, literally just back home. Been traveling since 6 this morning (13 hours), so I'm pretty beat, but I did ask Vanamonde about source review. I will also ping GreenMeansGo and ask about the photo review, but I probably won't be on the computer much longer tonight. Need to unpack, see the kitties, and sleep. Will check back tomorrow. Thank you so much for keeping me on track. I truly appreciate it. SusunW (talk) 00:17, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Sorry. I've been travelling/super busy/travelling again. I don't see any obvious issues with any of the images. Having said that, three of them ([4], [5], [6]) rely on a non-renewed copyright. I'm not super savvy with that bit, so I couldn't tell you with supreme confidence that someone at FAC wouldn't be more knowledgeable than I am. GMGtalk 20:11, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
GreenMeansGo totally understand real life commitments. If it makes any difference Nikkimaria accepted Fry and Brunschvicg for the Class A Review. If you are not able to do the photograph review for the FA nomination, can you point me in the direction of someone who could? Thanks for your help, as always. SusunW (talk) 20:39, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
I can do everything other than those three. I'll throw down a few pings. Just lemme know when the FAC starts. GMGtalk 21:23, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
GreenMeansGo Here Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Inter-Allied Women's Conference/archive1 and thank you so very much! SusunW (talk) 21:28, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Alexander Grant's will[edit]

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, SusunW. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Potential GA articles[edit]

Hello! There are two articles I'm thinking about nominating for GA status. They are Shelby Starner and Marie Smallface Marule. Marule's was recently ce by the guild. Do you think they look close enough to the criteria to be worth it? Thsmi002 (talk) 11:50, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Starner is quite good and though shorter than a lot of GAs fairly comprehensive. Dawson's Creek should be italicized. Also it is weird to me that the Artistry section has 3 one-sentence paragraphs. I would make it all one paragraph, unless there is more information on how Joplin influenced her. I'll get back to you on Marule in a bit. SusunW (talk) 14:19, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
Marule is fascinating. Great job. My nit-picky observations:
  • Personal preference, but it seems weird to call her by Marule until she married him. People I knew before I married (36 years ago tomorrow) still call me by my maiden name. To them and in any records created before my marriage, I appear under another name.
  • Give a brief description of George Manuel when you introduce him.
  • I think it is important to introduce Jacob Marule in the first paragraph of Advocacy and state he was South African. (Otherwise we lose the whole context of the problem of her indigenous status under the law) When I read this, my first thought is who is Jacob? Where did they meet? Then I read the part about marital status and wondered if he was not indigenous. By the time I got to the bottom, and the answer to that was resolved, I realized it was all there, but it's hard for the reader to understand without the context. I would disassemble the paragraph Personal life…your personal life isn't separated from the rest of your life, it happens in the course of living, and it helps give context to the rest of the bio. I'd put her brother in the early life section; move her husband up to where he first appears in the text, as well as incorporating the daughters … subsequently they had… or something like that.
  • Give a brief description of what provisions the Indian Act had on women married to non-Indians.
  • Do you have dates for when she was secretary-treasurer of NIB, executive director, chair of the police commission, chair of the tribal elections appeal board, chair of Indian News Media or secretary of the Indian Association of Alberta?
  • Give a brief description of the Kainai Studies and Niitsitapi Teacher Education Programs.
  • I would lose the whole separate Personal life section, see above. Either move death up to the earlier section, or retitle this section Death and Legacy (my preference here would be the latter). Where did she die? What was her importance? Just add a sentence or two summarizing her achievements, i.e. She is remembered for developing inclusive curricula so that education respected cultural heritage and indigenous identity.[7] Her vision was one of preserving Indigenous cultures and language through education, promoting higher learning locally, but also nationally and internationally.[8]
Thsmi002, I definitely would send both of these to GA. Great job on their development. SusunW (talk) 15:33, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
Your insights and comments are very much appreciated! I went ahead and nominated Starner's. I'll work on Marule's article before nominating it. Thank you! Thsmi002 (talk) 17:27, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
You are very welcome. Good luck with them both. If you need further help, I am happy to try. SusunW (talk) 17:39, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
I made most of the changes you suggested. The only one I didn't address is the dates she served in various positions. I can't find a more specific source. Do you have any thoughts on a fair use image I should use? I found these: [9][10][11]. I don't think there are commons eligible ones. Thanks! Thsmi002 (talk) 21:36, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
Looks good, Thsmi002. If you can't find dates, you can't find them. Happens to me a lot, but GA reviewers always ask ;). I like the first one.[12]. Just be sure you put in a rationale and you'll be fine. I always try to use a picture, regardless of whether it is commons-eligible or not. Makes them more relatable to my mind. SusunW (talk) 21:49, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Happy anniversary![edit]

Kitten (06) by Ron.jpg

Enjoy your day! You deserve it!

Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:36, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Megalibrarygirl. We had a lovely day. So nice to spend time with someone you truly like and care about. SusunW (talk) 13:48, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
It sounds like you have a beautiful relationship. I'm glad you enjoyed the day! :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:02, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
Happy anniversary from me, too! :) --Rosiestep (talk) 18:41, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Rosiestep. We're taking a few days next week too. :) SusunW (talk) 21:16, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
Belated best wishes from me too.--Ipigott (talk) 07:41, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Ian. SusunW (talk) 19:48, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Nino Tkeshelashvili.png[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Nino Tkeshelashvili.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Josh Milburn (talk) 17:56, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Rosika Schwimmer[edit]

There's a weird crop issue on the original, which means I'd probably move on to other images of her normally, but the damage is really distracting so I did something I don't do that often: A partial restoration. File:Rosika Schwimmer, seated on bench.jpg is a lot more useful in articles, but it doesn't have nearly the level of work I'd put in if I could be happy with the end result. [13] is an option, though I'm not sure; it seems a little unflattering, shooting her from below and all. You be the judge.

As for other options, I don't like the crop we're using, as it's an unusual pose and only seeing a bit of it looks weird, but [14] may be the best. I think I'll poke a little first. Don't suppose you know how to spell Rosika Schwimmer in French? Yes, I know, weird question, but back in the 19th and early 20th century, names tended to get adapted to the local language more than now. It's why we talk about Frederick III of Germany, and not Friedrich III. And why it's Frédéric François Chopin, since he settled in Paris, Frederic Chopin in a lot of English publications, and never Fryderyk Franciszek Chopin. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.1% of all FPs 07:26, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Adam Cuerden, I think that is the French spelling. Her original name is Bédy-Schwimmer Rózsa, or Rozyka Schwimmer. I agree with you on each point you made. I searched the one on her seated and while it is clearly marked Atlier Lackner, I couldn't find anything about the firm or who owned it. Lots of photos 1890-1905, not much after that. I also don't really like the lede photo, but given that I honestly think the Máté photo is worse to restore and like you, think the shot from below is unflattering, the existing lede one may be the best we have. *sigh* SusunW (talk) 14:14, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
Adam Cuerden So...I'm working on Schwimmer, as I figure you guessed. The Máté photo is definitely usable as was published in 1914 (I added evidence to the common's entry). Also found this and this both date to 1914 and are taken by Harris & Ewing. Clearly part of a series, as this similar image in the same dress was published in 1915. The final photo I found is this one dated to 1927 and published here. There is no renewal on it as far as I can tell. I searched copyright.gov and the only items renewed for the Telegram & Sun are:
  • Title Full Title Copyright Number Date
  1. New York world-telegram Joe Williams baseball reader / edited by Peter Williams. TX0002633237 1989
  2. New York world telegram & the sun Undercover teacher. By George N. Allen. RE0000301742 1986
  3. New York world-telegram and the sun, May 2, 1962 Americans in action; despite death in the snow, every town asked to help. By Mackinlay Kantor. RE0000463435 1962
  4. And only item for Schwimmer is "Nowhere at home: Rosika Schwimmer (1877-1948) and the short twentieth century." TXu001715612 / 2010-02-08 Claimant: DAGMAR WERNITZNIG. Address: Behringstrasse 3, Villach, A-9500, Austria
Any chance any of these will work? SusunW (talk) 19:43, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
I think all of those will. I'll get to it. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.2% of all FPs 18:11, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
Woot! I literally was just about to post this here which shows the not-full-body-image by Harris & Ewing was published in 1916. You are awesome Adam Cuerden. SusunW (talk) 18:17, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Józefa Joteyko[edit]

Updated DYK query.svgOn 23 October 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Józefa Joteyko, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Józefa Joteyko believed that wages should be based upon scientific research and the amount of effort required to do a job, rather than arbitrary factors like gender? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Józefa Joteyko. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Józefa Joteyko), 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Zdeňka Wiedermannová-Motyčková[edit]

Updated DYK query.svgOn 25 October 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Zdeňka Wiedermannová-Motyčková, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Zdeňka Wiedermannová-Motyčková. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Zdeňka Wiedermannová-Motyčková), 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

October
Apfelbaum und Pappeln, Ehrenbach.jpg
... with thanks from QAI

Thank you for article improvement in October! - I have a peer review open, DYK? Clara Schumann, 60 years of recitals, and what a life! See my talk today for great music that we sang yesterday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:05, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Every time you ask me for help, Gerda Arendt, it seems I am busy with real world stuff, so today, I took the time to review Schumann. I think I am not good at doing reviews, as it makes me very uncomfortable to be critical, but I hope that it helps. If you have any questions about what I wrote, just ask. And thank you for your constant encouragement. It really does mean a lot. SusunW (talk) 23:58, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
First: good wishes for real life! We just sang an outstanding concert! - Next: don't feel obliged, - it's just that my experience with quality articles about women is low, and yours high, and I'd like to profit - for the article. Next: no time stress. She just was in focus for her bicentenary, had the google doole, and still only 7k views that day (but 10k+ with the piano concerto DYK). Going further is an act of defiance ;) - 18 September, - long time to go. Defiance: I was unhappy that Márta Kurtág, another woman who played the piano for more than 60 years - didn't appear on In the news (ITN), because if Márta Kurtág had been an American man, she would have appeared, but she is an Hungarian woman.. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:28, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. You make me smile. I am sorry that Kurtág could not be on ITN. I am 100% in harmony with your statement "I didn't want to create any rule(z), just ignore one or two". It is really hard to write about women. Much moreso than men because even today, the sources are much more sparse. SusunW (talk) 15:38, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, and also for the courage to enter the first comments to Clara Schumann's PR! Will reply, but still have a DYK to nominate, after expanding. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:16, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
Your feedback is valuable! Regarding name, there was am RfC. I miss John who insisted. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:45, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
I always find it weird when people insist that it is confusing to refer to people by whatever name they used in a period of time. People I went to high school with, call me by the name I used then. If they were good enough friends to continue a relationship, they know the name I use now. No one is confused by how different people refer to me. I know from speaking to many other women, this is the same for them, so I can only infer that it isn't confusing, but is used argumentatively as if it were. I find it totally bizarre for someone who does not know me to refer to me by my first name. Thus, it would never occur to me to refer to a biographical subject in that manner (male or female or non-binary/fluid). Wikipedia gets hung up on so many things that I just don't understand, as they are not logical. I didn't know John, but he and DGG expressed my thoughts on the subject well. SusunW (talk) 16:28, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
Agree. That talk and a few similar ones may have driven him away, - so sad. Read his statement if you have time. Or GFHandel's. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:18, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
Today, I am proud of a Márta on the Main page, finally! - Here's my ideal candidate for arbcom. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:26, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sara Braun[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sara Braun you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ganesha811 -- Ganesha811 (talk) 18:01, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

November 2019 at Women in Red[edit]

Women in Red logo.svg
November 2019, Volume 5, Issue 11, Numbers 107, 108, 140, 141, 142, 143


Check out what's happening in November at Women in Red...

Online events:


Editor feedback:


Social media: Facebook icon.jpg Facebook / Instagram.svg Instagram / Pinterest Shiny Icon.svg Pinterest / Twitter icon.png Twitter

Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

--Rosiestep (talk) 22:59, 29 October 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

DYK for Zdeňka Wiedermannová-Motyčková[edit]

Updated DYK query.svgOn 31 October 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Zdeňka Wiedermannová-Motyčková, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Zdeňka Wiedermannová-Motyčková established the first girls' secondary school in Moravia? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Zdeňka Wiedermannová-Motyčková. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Zdeňka Wiedermannová-Motyčková), 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.

valereee (talk) 00:02, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for another good one! Did you know that I have a tenor in the set, and two articles I reviewed? I would have written about the soprano but she had an article already. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:48, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Gerda Arendt, it nearly wasn't as it got pulled from the front page queue once before because someone didn't read the discussion on the nomination page. Had it not been for Filelakeshoe's efforts while I was unavailable and on a plane, it would likely not have run. I really, really am discouraged about contributing to DYK and cannot figure out how you stay so positive and contribute there, when so many seem to try to keep stuff from appearing rather than working towards presenting quality material. SusunW (talk) 16:53, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
If you watch the discussions, it's often tedious, but I do it for the subjects. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:29, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Mary Ritter Beard[edit]

Thanks so much for you kind words and encouragement. I've contributed to WiR several times, but wasn't familiar with the Women in Green efforts. I'll submit Mary Ritter Beard for a GA nomination and see how it goes. I was not aware of all her work documenting women's history and it was certainly an impressive achievement. Rosalina523 (talk) 14:11, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Rosalina523 Yay! As I said, I learned of her work while working on Schwimmer and reading Beard's philosophy, I realized she was actually way ahead of her time. She was a "liberationist" before the term was even coined. I learn as much by writing articles as I impart to the reader, something I adore about research :) If you'd like to list the article on our goals page for suffragists, that would help with the initiative. Any time you need help (except with technical stuff, at which I am worthless), just give me a ping. If I don't know, I probably know someone who does. SusunW (talk) 14:39, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar[edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Great work on Zdeňka Wiedermannová-Motyčková! I found the article fascinating and it is clear how much work went into it. Congratulations on a job well done. :) Ganesha811 (talk) 19:14, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
Thank you so much Ganesha811. I appreciate you taking on the review of Sara Braun, as well. So many fascinating women to research and write about, so little time, but I love learning about them while I am writing. SusunW (talk) 19:24, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
SusunW, yup! I recently came across Mary van Kleeck via the random pages button and found her fascinating, so I was able to dig up some sources to expand the article - she did so much cool stuff. Sara Braun is, I think, even more interesting - I won't have a ton of time until Sunday to finish up the initial review, but I'm looking forward to getting to it! :) Ganesha811 (talk) 19:34, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
Very cool. I often come across my "next victim", while writing another article. ;) No rush on the review. I'd rather it be thorough and when you have time to do it, so we end up improving, if things need clarified/fixing. SusunW (talk) 19:45, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sara Braun[edit]

The article Sara Braun you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Sara Braun for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ganesha811 -- Ganesha811 (talk) 23:41, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Rosika Schwimmer[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Rosika Schwimmer you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Fiamh -- Fiamh (talk) 00:40, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Rosika Schwimmer[edit]

The article Rosika Schwimmer you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Rosika Schwimmer for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Fiamh -- Fiamh (talk) 08:21, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Fiamh, thanks! That was really fast. Appreciate the review. SusunW (talk) 13:32, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you![edit]

Thanks for your DYK review of Catriona Ida Macleod! QuakerSquirrel (talk) 18:24, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

You are very welcome, QuakerSquirrel. Enjoyed reading the article. SusunW (talk) 18:55, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

In appreciation[edit]

Wiki medal.jpg The Featured Article Medal
By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this award in recognition of your working long and hard to bring a large, complex and important article to featured status. Impressive. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:11, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Gog the Mild You know as well as anyone, that that would certainly have never happened without your nurturing me along (okay, and sometimes prodding me ;) gently). I cannot say enough how much I learned from the process and I thank you profusely for all of the coaching and support you have given since the article was first conceived a year ago (11 months). Along the way, you also introduced me to a bunch of editors I would probably never have encountered before, as well. It truly does take a village to grow a wp editor and I am very appreciative of you and your help. SusunW (talk) 18:19, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Congratulations, SusunW! Great effort. And well done to Gog for offering a helping hand. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:46, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
And thanks to you both for reviewing it twice. So, Peacemaker67, I'm curious, is pacifism part of military history or not? My husband and I have debated this for days. SusunW (talk) 04:58, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
No worries, it was a pleasure. I think there is definitely a thread of pacifism amongst some veterans, perhaps due to having seen the brutal realities of war, knowing that it rarely solves anything, and not wishing it on others. Not true pacifism, I suppose, but a reluctance to engage in war unless absolutely necessary. The number of Australian Vietnam veterans who demonstrated against the Iraq War is an indication of that sort of view. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:43, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
So far as MilHist is concerned, pacifism is included, as are all of the anti-war movements. Although tagging of them seems to be patchy. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:37, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

You are now eligible to apply for a Four Award and a Triple Crown. Can I encourage you to do so?

PS What are you nominating next for FA? You have plenty of quality articles to choose from. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:37, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

LOL, Gog the Mild. I have hardly caught my breath from the last one. The discussion came up because I was working on Rosika Schwimmer, an important suffragist from Hungary, internationalist and pacifist. She ended up being a "woman without a country" and impacted US immigration law. Had war never existed, her career would have taken an entirely different trajectory, so it seemed to me that at the very least, military history applied, but my husband argued that it was the opposite of military history, i.e. anti-military. (We love debate :)! ) Not sure what might be my next target, am currently trying to finish up a Japanese pacifist, turned supporter of Japan's WWII expansionism. As I've never heard of the above two awards, will have to look at the links. I also have about 8 articles nominated for GA, so am hoping to clear out that queue a bit. SusunW (talk) 21:57, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
Face-smile.svg No sympathy from me - I currently have two articles at FAC and hope to have to have a third up by the end of the week. The area you work in needs more visibility and recognition. (You know that I realise. (Or even: I realise that you know that.))
I shall attempt to press a definitive answer out of the MilHist team.
Fascinating: the next year the Nobel peace prize went to a local hero of mine, Philip Noel-Baker, MP for the place I live.
Get your applications in. I shall personally fast track them.
Want to pick one of those GANs for me to have a look at? Preferably the one most likely to go on to FA.
Gog the Mild (talk) 22:15, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
Oldest to newest nominations pending: Marie Rennotte (Belgium/Brazil), Annie MacDonald Langstaff (Canada), Nino Tkeshelashvili (Georgia), Maria Grzegorzewska (Poland), Martha Watts (US/Brazil), Thung Sin Nio (Indonesia/The Netherlands), Alma Sundquist (Sweden), Marie Lang (Austria). Mine usually linger for a while because I tend to do international women, thus not a lot of English sourcing, so I indicated their places of origin. If you want to take one on, that would be lovely. Rennotte, seems to me to be FA material, but what do I know? By the way, I did the 4 Award thing, but I am not sure what the triple crown is. It's pretty confusing to me. What's the criteria? SusunW (talk) 22:36, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process[edit]

Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)