Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Ideas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Women in Red logo.svg
WikiProject Women in Red (talk) (photos)
OOjs UI icon bell.svg
Article alerts
OOjs UI icon stripeFlow-ltr.svg
Essays
Simpleicons Business calendar-with-a-clock-time-tools.svg
Events
OOjs UI icon bulb.svg
Ideas
Bar graph - The Noun Project.svg
Metrics
Newsletter icon.png
Outreach/List
OOjs UI icon newspaper-rtl.svg
Press
OOjs UI icon stripeToC-rtl.svg
Redlist index
Noun Project books icon 2649770.svg
Resources
OOjs UI icon ribbonPrize.svg
Showcase
Noun 33167 - Social media.svg
Social media

Schedule planning at the Virtual Ideas Cafe (VIC)

Women in RedAbout us


Hello! and welcome to WikiProject Women in Red (WiR), whose objective is to turn red links into blue ones. Our project's scope is women's biographies and women's works, broadly construed. Did you know that, according to Humaniki, only 19.12% of the English Wikipedia's biographies are about women? Not impressed? Content gender gap is a form of systemic bias, and this is what WiR addresses. We invite you to participate, whenever you like, in whatever way suits you and your schedule.
Women in Red warmly welcomes you!

Women in Red logo
Wikipedia - filled with knowledge.jpg
About
Welcome to the Ideas Cafe where we serve up ideas for Women in Red's virtual editathons! The Ideas Cafe is our planning page, where your ideas become WiR events. Here, we discuss, organize, plan, and coordinate our activities. Please join the discussion here or on our project talkpage.
Use social media to promote our work!
FacebookWiki Women in Red
Twitter@wikiwomeninred
PinterestOur WikiProject's board
Hashtag#wikiwomeninred

2022[edit]

2022 geofocus?[edit]

Do we have more of the continents left? Or do we need to think about how to geofocus for next year? There's a nice alphbet based idea above? Lajmmoore (talk) 17:04, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

5 Regions of the United States
Thanks for bringing this up, Lajmmoore. We've now covered most of the world but not yet the United States and Canada. I had originally suggested that we could possibly address certain areas of North America -- or even specific states or provinces -- in 2022. We could, for example, devote each quarter to one of the five geographic regions: Northeast, Southeast, Midwest, Southwest and West. That would bring us into the first quarter of 2023. We could then tackle Canada. Perhaps we could give special attention to indigenous and minority communities. Any interest in this approach?--Ipigott (talk) 19:55, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
If this approach is done, it'd also make sense IMO to do territories as a section. They rarely get any focus and like the Caribbean gets lost in Latin America and the Caribbean, territories get lost in the US or Pacific focus. SusunW (talk) 23:15, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
How about devoting January to the territories: American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands? In February and March we could cover Canada before returning to the first of the five geographic regions of the United States in the second quarter (April to June), taking the others in the following quarters? Just a suggestion. Any more ideas?--Ipigott (talk) 10:45, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
That sounds good to me. I know Maile66 had previously mentioned Guam on the WiR page. Somewhere in our archives would be a list of teachers from the USVI who had schools named after them. I'll try to search for it. SusunW (talk) 19:46, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
Ipigott Here's the Guam redlist, whici came from Guampedia Women in Guam History. I think your idea for January is excellent. — Maile (talk) 20:21, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
Apparently, I listed them all /The_World_Contest/Missing_articles/Latin_America_and_the_Caribbean#_US_Virgin_Islands here. SusunW (talk) 19:53, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
SusunW, Maile66, Ipigott I like the idea in principle, I think my only concern is that we'll be investing a lot more time on North America than we have for the other continents - but I'm not clear whether this is still part of the continental challenge, or has evolved into a new initiative? Would two months each for the US regions & territories work? Or two months for the regions, then one month each for Canada and Overseas territories? or do people prefer the 3 month time period? Lajmmoore (talk) 21:44, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
Lajmmoore, December ends the Continental Challenge! The original brainstorming session of the Challenge is in the 2019 archives under "August Brainstorming". I think we have succeeded, but I think my prediction of Oceania having the highest count will depend on December:) Best, WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 23:01, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

First quarter 2022 and beyond[edit]

  • My reasoning behind this was that whether we like it or not, most of Wikipedia's biographies are on people from the United States. For this reason, if we are to reduce the gender gap we need to improve our coverage of U.S. women in all the occupations and interests we cover. By specifying geographic areas, we should be able to encourage contributors to look more carefully into women from their own region or from states, cities and communities in which they have a special interest. Each of the three months per quarter could emphasize the need to cover different aspects, for example historical figures, indigenous and minority communities, and current leadership. (These can of course be refined later, with suitable redlists based on state-by-state analysis, etc.) In my opinion, a quarter for each geographical region would therefore not be excessive but maybe two months per region would be sufficient for those who feel American coverage does not require too much additional effort. In any case, if we can agree that in January we should cover the territories and in February and March, Canada, we could always decide later how exactly we handle the United States -- if at all.--Ipigott (talk) 09:30, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
My personal opinion is that focusing on regions of the US would be difficult and I'm not sure how effective so my vote would be for the US event to include all states, and as a separate event, the territories (mentioned above). --Rosiestep (talk) 16:31, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
I'm not too sure if I understand what you are suggesting, Rosie. Do you mean we should specify a selection of states for each quarter? If so, how should they be grouped?--Ipigott (talk) 19:29, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
I was looking at the regional map included in this section and thinking that for me, it would be hard to focus on a region. For someone else, that might be easy. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:23, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
One month each for US territories, Canada and the whole of the US seems sensible to me, to avoid contributing to US-centric bias. Could be one last “quarterly” contest, but with a focus each month? Innisfree987 (talk) 21:39, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
Just a heads up, I am tapping out of the geofocus "contests" once the Continental Challenge ends Dec 31st. It was a good experiment and I think it showed that quarterly editathons can have sustained interest and cut down on administration. My opinion is that we should continue with our established Annual initiatives (Black History, Art+Feminism, Pride, STEM, etc.) but WiR should do quarterly events, rather than changing everything up every month. I don't think that narrow geofocus editathons will gain traction among our members. I don't see a reason to have multiple new events each month. There just isn't enough return on time invested, especially geofocus. Quality over quantity. Just one editor's opinion. I am happy to continue helping with the invite and pages. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 02:12, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

WomenArtistUpdates: Let me just start by saying how much I have appreciated all your excellent work on the continental contests. You've been able to keep us fully informed of progress, have awarded prizes and barnstars to participants and have kept tallies of overall results. Great work!

Bur on future planning, I'm a bit surprised that you bring up "time investment" in connection with our month-by-month planning? When I was doing all this myself, it took me about an hour each month. All I really needed assistance with was additional sets of red links. From time to time Rosiestep would come up with new topics and innovative ideas for presentation and Megalibrarygirl would check things through for errors or shortcomings. Personally, I think monthly priorities make everything so much more interesting, keeping hundreds of our members and page viewers aware of our dynamism. If there is a preference for quarter-by-quarter not just for geofocus but for everything else, then I would of course agree with the consensus. As for the "traction", I have found from reviewing and assessment that many of the new biographies created each month coincide with our priorities but do not appear on our event listings as apparently some of our most active contributors find it too much of a hassle to find the event number, etc., preferring instead just to specify WIR on the talk page. (It's actually quite astonishing how many biographies carry just the basic WIR tag or the tag specifying the year.) Even so, it seems to me listings of 225 writers, 90 scientists and even 68 indigenous women are pretty significant results. If those who have been working on new events pages are finding it too constraining, I would be only too happy handle them myself once again. I always found them interesting to work on, choosing illustrations, finding relevant contacts, alerting other wikiprojects, etc., but I must say I would not be able to replicate the impressive artwork and barnstars from WomenArtistUpdates. There also seems to be a case for one-day events, as Victuallers was able to show with Ada Lovelace successes. Maybe we could introduce more of these in 2022. In any case, before we abandon our month-by-month priorities, I think we should seek wider reactions, not only here but on the WiR talk page.--Ipigott (talk) 12:05, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

I interupt my work on Mary Earle today. A biog that is inspired by our "deaths in 2021" subject next month, however she also scores under my contributions to the Oceania theme where I have just been made an "Honorary Aussie" for my work. Oh and she was born in Scotand so she also scores a point for 55th WIR editathon at Edinborough University last Friday. When I was working as a teacher I would say "write about an engineer", but the students were more interested when I said "write about a woman engineer but she must not be alive or someone who was born in the UK or the US"... Just saying. Victuallers (talk) 12:18, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
WiR has hundreds of participants and I think that offering variety has contributed to that. Because we showcase some of the new articles created during each month, our Twitter account has >10K followers. So before we make any major changes to our programming format, let's request feedback on our WiR talkpage. We could do so now, and include a notice in the December MassMessage that there's still time to comment. In fact -switching now to my MBA hat- I think requesting feedback on an annual basis is a great idea. Thank you, Ipigott! That said, WomenArtistUpdates, it is a lot of work to plan/prepare for the next month and thank you for what you and others have been doing! As part of seeking feedback on our WIR talkpage, we could include a "help wanted" appeal for coordinators. And Victuallers, bravo on being made an "Honorary Aussie" for your WiR work!! --Rosiestep (talk) 20:02, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
Rosiestep: I think it might indeed be a good idea to discuss this on our main talk page, maybe in a week or two, unless there are further signs of support for our existing approach here. We also have a new proposal that geofocus for the first three months should be devoted to the U.S. territories (January), Canada (February), and the whole of the United States (March). Any reactions on that?--Ipigott (talk) 07:31, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Ipigott, I go along with the consensus. --Rosiestep (talk) 11:12, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Rosiestep, WomenArtistUpdates, Innisfree987, SusunW, Megalibrarygirl: It looks pretty clear to me that unless anyone objects, we should go ahead with Women in business and geofocus on the territories in January. But we still need to sort out whether we should continue month-by-month priorities for the remainder of 2022 or just establish more general topics on a quarterly basis as earlier suggested. It would be useful to have more reactions here. Not sure who else to ping on this. Any suggestions?--Ipigott (talk) 11:35, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Ipigott, how about asking on the WiR talkpage? --Rosiestep (talk) 11:44, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Done! I suggest further discussions on these items should be on the main WiR talk page under "Plans for 2022".--Ipigott (talk) 12:12, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

2022 year-long initiative[edit]

Climate 2022 (WiR #214)[edit]

Greta Thunberg urges MEPs to show climate leadership
  • Environment/Climate Crisis? This could include activists, but also scientists? Lajmmoore (talk) 21:14, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
I really like this idea. Obvs, it's timely. But I also like the potential to collaborate with members of other WikiProjects, e.g. WikiProject Climate change and/or WikiProject Environment, on things like redlists, maybe even some global event(s) during the year. Ping @Phoebe, Sadads, and Scann. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:28, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
It was the @Smirkybec: podcast that had an episode on climate change and Wikipedia that made me think of the topic. In the podcast, the person (I forgot who) was saying that one of the most important things you can do is add paragraphs/sections on the topic to existing articles, so perhaps there's space for a expansion as a deliberate goal too? Food for thought Lajmmoore (talk) 13:33, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Ha, that was probably @Sadads: who you heard, Lajmmoore. I'm more than happy to help organize something again around this topic. Right now I'm organizing an edit-a-thon on Spanish Wikipedia for COP26. One thing we need more of is to include gender perspectives in environmental articles. For example, in the article about water scarcity, farming, pesticides or mining, you could add sections on the different impacts according to gender. Another thing that could be done is adding more pictures of women in articles such as "farmer". Maybe we could have an informal videocall about some of these ideas. --Scann (talk) 13:50, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Just noting the redlists we have -Environmentalists (WD) (174 articles) and Climatologists (WD) (34 articles)- and noticing that there are very few new article possibilities. Can we add to these? --Rosiestep (talk) 13:56, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
@Lajmmoore: it was @Femkemilene: :) Smirkybec (talk) 15:21, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
I like this idea! The time is right and I think it might attract younger editors. Great opportunity to collaborate. And Yes! expanding existing articles is a good goal too! WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:29, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Hey! I'm on that list. Got a year to become notable then :).
In all seriousness, great idea. Plenty of people in WP:PROCC that would be interested I think. Femke (talk) 18:53, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
@Lajmmoore if you are looking for actions that could be done around adding content to articles, we have been documenting them at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Climate_change/Small_to_medium_tasks-- per the comment by Scann I think there is a lot of room to work on adding the research of the Women climate scientist and environmental journalists (most of whom are women) to existing articles about the environmental topics -- both their work, and the topics most studied by/about women are systematically missing in a lot of cases. Sadads (talk) 19:38, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Not yet a redlist, environmental scientist (Q16529590) is another occupation to consider adding. Perhaps sustainability could further broaden this idea.--Oronsay (talk) 16:07, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Oronsay I added Q16529590 to the Environmentalists WD list, manually re-ran the list, and now it has 240 articles. I think sustainability is a good way to broaden the topic. Any suggestions for which WD occupations would be applicable? --Rosiestep (talk) 18:20, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Also, added wd:Q17276189 # atmospheric scientist to the Climatologists WD list, re-ran the list, and now it has 34 items. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:30, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
A few thoughts:
* Is there a way to make a list of Green Party/Parties politicians? Or do we have one already?
    * Include the Farmers redlist - its not very long, but farming is so closely linked
    * Activists ... there are lots of environmental activists on that list, maybe we can use that?
    * I wonder if we should start a crowd-sourced list too? 
    * The overall theme could expand a bit to "Climate, Environment & Sustainability" - so then could include biological sciences more broadly? 
    Will continue to think! Lajmmoore (talk) 10:13, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

The more I think about it, the more I like this topic and Ipigott is an influencer. While planning for Ada Lovelace Day events, he was keen on attracting new members. I think this topic can have that effect. Lajmmoore, environmental activists, Green Party/Parties politicians, farming... yup. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:17, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Rosiestep, for mentioning my interest in attracting new members. This is indeed a priority and we really need to work on it. Unfortunately, my last attempt fell short of expectations but I think you are right that "climate" might indeed attract more contributors. I would actually be inclined to target simply "Climate" as I think this would have greater impact. That doesn't means environmentalists, etc., should not be included in our redlinks but the leading strain should be condensed into one word. We could perhaps have quarterly priorities which target items such as research, lobbying, third-world issues, success stories, etc. Let's go for it.--Ipigott (talk) 16:30, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
Sounds good - maybe Climate Emergency as a title? Quarterly themes seem a nice addition too. Lajmmoore (talk) 16:58, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
I’ll say I’m partial to the breadth invited by “climate” as one-word topic. Innisfree987 (talk) 20:43, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
Sweet! Climate it is! Lajmmoore (talk) 07:46, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
@Ipigott @Lajmmoore@Innisfree987I think it makes sense of the scope note to describe women leadership in the climate crisis however -- happy to add a bit of context, if you need, Sadads (talk) 18:01, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
Sadads: The leadership angle is certainly something we hope to cover. Can you point to any sources, names or redlists?--Ipigott (talk) 18:19, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
The lightweight example of this is the premise for All We Can Save -- but I am thinking, for example that women are much more represented in climate activists, leaders in sustainable agriculture, NGOs working on this space, land defenders etc, Sadads (talk) 18:34, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

I started a place to build up crowd-sourced names here: User:Lajmmoore/sandbox/Climate - Women in Red - I'm hoping to make a bit of time to pick up some potentially notable people from COP26 to add to it. All help welcome! Lajmmoore (talk) 15:09, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

@Camelia.boban, Lajmmoore, Ipigott, Oronsay, Sadads, Femkemilene, WomenArtistUpdates, Smirkybec, Scann, and Phoebe: See this meta:Women in Climate Change 2021 as a kick-off event prior to the start of the WiR 2022 initiative. See also this User talk:Camelia.boban#Women in Climate Change regarding potential live social media promotion. I'd be interested in participating, e.g., Streamyard, Wikipedia Weekly episode, etc.. Anyone else? --Rosiestep (talk) 15:43, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
Rosiestep: I mentioned this earlier on the WiR talk page and have left a message for Camelia. Strange my ping to you didn't work.--Ipigott (talk) 15:53, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

I am very keen to work on Women in Climate - can someone pls message me when this happens? Thank you 08:20, 24 November 2021 (UTC) DrPlantGenomicsDrPlantGenomics (talk) 08:20, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi DrPlantGenomics, As a member of Women in Red you should be receiving our monthly announcements on your talk page, so you will get a reminder about Climate 2022 :) Best, WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 16:14, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Jan 2022[edit]

Yearlong initiative: Climate[edit]

WiR climate logo 2022 comments welcome WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 02:00, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

I love the idea that women stand between the sun and the greenery, striving to protect the environment from global warming.--Oronsay (talk) 02:44, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

I love this logo! I'll be happy to see it for a year. --Rosiestep (talk) 01:32, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
Excellent! I’m adding it now. @WomenArtistUpdates, if you see fit to change the color palette for the accent colors on the page, please do! Innisfree987 (talk) 02:09, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
WomenArtistUpdates: Looks great on #214. Amazing work!--Ipigott (talk) 16:15, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Yearlong initiative: #1day1woman 2022[edit]

Annual January initiative: Women who died in 2021 (Dec 2021 / Jan 2022)[edit]

Continuing.--Oronsay (talk) 20:54, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Women in business[edit]

A bit hard to believe, but we haven't ever done an event with the word "business" in the title. After recently becoming aware of WP:WikiProject Women in Business and after Ser Amantio di Nicolao so kindly assisted by adding the WikiProject's talkpage template to articles within Category:Businesswomen, we have a better understanding of articles which already exist regarding this occupation... a great starting point for those who prefer to improve articles. We also have a crowd-sourced redlist and a Wikidata generated redlist for those who like to create articles during our editathons. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:43, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

I think this is a really good idea Rosiestep - would join in Lajmmoore (talk) 21:03, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
Yes, I fully support it too.--Ipigott (talk) 07:23, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Finance, Economics, Banking

Not sure if/when this theme has been done before, but since Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala has been appointed head of the WTO, I wondered if a monthly focus on Women in Banking, Finance, Economics, etc. might be nice to celebrate her appointment? Lajmmoore (talk) 09:49, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Lajmmoore, I think this is a great idea! And I just checked, none of those three topics have been done. July’s looking a little thin: maybe we could add it to the docket then? Innisfree987 (talk) 22:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Innisfree987, That would be good! Lajmmoore (talk) 07:18, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
Moving this from the "Non-geofocus ideas" section into this section as it seems a good fit if others agree that "business" can include "finance, economics, banking". --Rosiestep (talk) 04:28, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
@Rosiestep, this was actually the subject of a July 2021 editathon but we should def scavenge its red lists! Innisfree987 (talk) 04:39, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
Innisfree987, Oh, yes, I do remember that now. And yes, let's scavenge the red lists! --Rosiestep (talk) 04:44, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Geofocus[edit]

In line with the suggestion for 2022 above, we could cover the U.S. territories in January: American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands.--Ipigott (talk) 10:53, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:04, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Firming up for January 2022[edit]

YEAR-LONG INITIATIVES
* Climate
** Event #214: Climate Green tickY
** Talkpage template: Template:WIR-214 Green tickY
* #1day1woman 2022
** Event #217: #1day1woman Green tickY
** Talkpage template: Template:WIR-217 Green tickY
** Time for a new logo?
NEW
* Women in business
** Event #218: Women in business Green tickY
** Talkpage template: Template:WIR-218 Green tickY
* Geofocus: US territories
** Event #219: US territories  Green tickY
** Talkpage template: Template:WIR-219 Green tickY  
CONTINUING
* Women who died in 2021
** Event #216: Women who died in 2021 Green tickY
** Talkpage template: Template:WIR-216 Green tickY
ANNOUNCEMENTS (FACILITATED BY OTHERS)
* TBD
INVITATION: 
* Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/2022#January 2022 Green tickY
** logo: TBD 
COMING UP:
* Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Events Green tickY
  • Unveiling as I am concerned the last week or two of the month could be busy, so it would be nice to have things in place ahead of time. I am working on the assumption that the themes above are what we want to move forward with? Innisfree987 (talk) 01:06, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for making an early start on this, Innisfree987. Things seem to be progressing pretty well. I've worked a bit on #218 as Women in Business might sound rather boring for many of our contributors. I thought they might be more interested if they realized they could write about architects, film producers, fashion designers, restaurateurs, etc. I was wondering if we could somehow add pertinent redlinks on entrepreneurs and other related occupations from the Dictionary of Women Worldwide but I'm not sure how these should be presented, in the redlink index or in the CS women in business list. Perhaps you can help. Any ideas or a related WD search?--Ipigott (talk) 10:39, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
See you've just been developing Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/DoWW/Business. Looks good.--Ipigott (talk) 10:43, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
Hello Innisfree987 & Ipigott just a message to say I'll try and do some tidying this weekend, but I probably won't be able to help again until Jan (including the mass messaging, apologies will defs help in the new year). Lajmmoore (talk) 11:23, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, Lajmmoore, for offering to check things out and thanks too for all your useful assistance this year. Hope you have a well-deserved Christmas break and look forward to your return in January.--Ipigott (talk) 11:29, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
Totally understand @Lajmmoore, as I too unfortunately can’t be “on call” in the near term either. Roger mentioned he might be willing to handle the mass-messaging—I don’t know if you’ll be around @Victuallers? If not perhaps another admin could be enlisted? I think all have the permission automatically. Innisfree987 (talk) 04:19, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Invitation[edit]

The number of new members has not been very encouraging recently. Up to now, we have had only three this month. Perhaps it would help if we replaced:

by

  • Try to attract someone to become a WiR member this month.

It might help if we placed it as the first item under "Other ways to participate". I've tentatively made the change but can revert if there's no support.

I was also wondering if WomenArtistUpdates could select something a little more attractive for our New Year's greeting.--Ipigott (talk) 12:49, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Ipigott, I swapped out the "Happy New Year" graphic with the Climate 2022 logo. Please feel free to revert if it doesn't appeal. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 16:35, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
  • In this connection, I was wondering if we should substitute:
Go to Women in RedJoin WikiProject Women in Red
for the main WiR page. This could be used when writing to contributors who look as if they might like to become members of our project. Links to our main page have sometimes resulted in confusion.--Ipigott (talk) 13:38, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
  • I really like the updates on the invite. I made 1 change on the invite: I moved Climate into the "New" bullet-point section but you can revert if you think better to leave it in as a unique bullet-point. Everything else seems fine. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:41, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Thanks, Rosie. Looks good. Made it a bit more compact. Think everything's in order now.--Ipigott (talk) 20:47, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Feb 2022[edit]

Annual February initiative - Black History Month[edit]

Sport[edit]

  • Women in sport is really popular event, generating hundreds of new biographies. I think it would be worthwhile to consider making it an Annual Initiative. I put "???" next to it so that others weigh in with their views. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:57, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
    The 2022 Winter Olympics and Paralympics are in February and March, so perhaps then? Additionally, I think it would be great if we directed the energy perhaps into a contest, with a minimum word limit or similar benchmark, to encourage high-quality creations in addition to the impresssive quantity. (We have a pretty good set-up with the continents contests, that allows people to still record entries that don’t meet contest rules.) Innisfree987 (talk) 00:31, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
    I think a tie in with the Winter Olympics sounds really nice. Would love to start a page for a bob-sledder! Lajmmoore (talk) 21:12, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Basketball - has this been proposed before? Specifically basketball. Women's Basketball Hall of Fame aready exists. But what I've been seeing in some US states, is if I'm surfing around looking for state womens halls of fame, is that there are halls of fame for women's basketball, but not necessarily anything else. That particular sport for women seems to be really popular with audiences and sportscasters. — Maile (talk) 22:18, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Women climbers and mountaineers? 2021 saw the 100th anniversary of the all-women Pinnacle Club here in the UK (see https://www.pc100.org), and I hope to be working with the Alpine Club (UK) library early in 2022 to teach them how to edit existing articles and get new ones written on some of the under-noticed notable female climbers, and (hopefully) to mobilise some of their archival photos, too. NM Demo (talk) 19:35, 28 December 2021 (UTC) (note: this is an alt-account of User:Nick Moyes - please ping any replies to my main account)
February / March
Olympics, Paralympics

I think Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/204 (Olympic & Paralympic Games | Jul-Aug-Sept 2021) can be seen as a success with 800 new articles, expansions and media (and stil counting!). I would like to see again an Olympic & Paralympic Games in February/March 2022 during the Winter Olympics and Paralympics. It's only a few months in between from the 204 Meetup, but otherwise the next one would be in July 2024... SportsOlympic (talk) 10:27, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Wow SportsOlympic!!! that is a truly impressive list :) I hope you report out to the talk page with the final tally at the end of October. (If you don't, I will be sure to). Best, WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 15:46, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Geofocus[edit]

Hong Kong and Macau. See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Women_in_Red#Geofocus_for_2022.--Ipigott (talk) 16:22, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Mar 2022[edit]

Annual March initiative - Artists & Activists[edit]

  • with Art+Feminism. Executive Director: user Kiraface
Would it be possible to add a Public Domain element to this event? In the past I think Victuallers organized a list of women artists whose work had fallen into public domain. It would be great to add some works to the Commons in March. Thanks for considering. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:47, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Love to take the credit WAU, but its not me. Items fall into the PD on January 1st so its a matter of finding out who died 70 years ago, and it does seem that we have missed out on this this year. I find that images drive my articles. An artist who died 69 died years ago is nowhere near as interesting as one who died 71 years ago because illustrations are possible. There is a difference between Morisette and Manet's work but it is much more than words can describe. This includes the lists for 2020 and if you edit the SQL then its easy to see where the dates are stored. Victuallers (talk) 21:03, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
I agree Victuallers, adding images helps the articles :) I don't know how to edit SQL. Anyone know how? We need women who died in 1951 like this one for North America and this one for Europe from 2 years ago. Any help appreciated. Thanks. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 03:01, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Annual March initiative - #VisibleWikiWomen[edit]

  • with Whose Knowledge?

Sport[edit]

Continuing. Innisfree987 (talk) 20:29, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

24-Hour Global Edit-a-thon #2[edit]

Apr 2022[edit]

Annual April initiative - Gender studies[edit]

Classical women?[edit]

What about women from the classical world (however we define that) for April (redlist is here)? This would build on last February's theme of Classicists which kindly supported the WP:Women's Classical Committee's work. April is the month of the Classical Association's conference and I believe WCC are planning an event to encourage new editors too? Perhaps @Eritha: or @Srsval: might have ideas as well? What would people think? Lajmmoore (talk) 21:10, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

I'd vote "women from the ancient world" myself to give as broad a scope as possible (redlist has people from e.g. China, Vietnam) ! But yes, we have proposed a training/editing session at the CA conference in April, though that is supposed to have a focus on Welsh women classicists (/archaeologists/historians/etc) due to the CA's location in Swansea. I see one Welsh saint on the redlist, maybe there are more and we could combine the two themes! Eritha (talk) 08:48, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

also there are a bunch of people who are definitely not from pre-400 on that redlist, Idk how to fix that? Eritha (talk) 08:53, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Yes I spotted that on the redlist - I think the issue is with each WikiData entry for them - I deleted a few statements that had their birth as XX YYY 0CE last night. Or ones where instead of 1999, 199 had been put. Will tinker over the weekend! Lajmmoore (talk) 13:29, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
ah, I see. tried to fix a couple of others myself, hopefully that will have worked next time the list updates! Eritha (talk) 14:18, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
@Eritha, I nudged the list to update; hope it reflects the changes! (I am having some difficulty getting the Endocrinologist list—for the November 2021 editathon—to notice everyone I’ve added to Wikidata and I’m not sure why…) Innisfree987 (talk) 19:50, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
@Innisfree987, thanks, looked like that worked! at least, the volleyball player is gone from the list (much as I like the idea of an ancient volleyball player...) Eritha (talk) 08:19, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

May 2022[edit]

Jun 2022[edit]

Annual June initiative - Pride[edit]

Jul 2022[edit]

Aug 2022[edit]

Annual August initiative - Indigenous women[edit]

Sep 2022[edit]

Annual September initiative - Writers[edit]

Oct 2022[edit]

Annual October initiative - STEM[edit]

  • with Ada Lovelace Day

Nov 2022[edit]

Dec 2022[edit]

Annual December initiative - Women who died in 2022[edit]

  • Dec 2022 & Jan 2023

Potential/Suggestions[edit]

Table of annual events/collaborations[edit]

Month Annual events Invitations to collaborate with other wiki communities
January Public Domain
February Black History Month AfroCrowd; WP:BLM
March Art+Feminism; #VisibleWikiWomen Art+Feminism; Whose Knowledge?
April Gender studies
May MayMays; CEE CEE User Group
June Pride; JuneJunes; International Women in Engineering Day (INWED) LGBT+
July JulyJulies
August Indigenous women m:Interwiki Women Collaboration
September Writers WP:WPWW
October Ada Lovelace Day/STEM
November Wiki Asia Month
December Women who died in 202x

Geofocus ideas[edit]

Geofocus A-Z[edit]

Seems to me that we tend to focus on the same areas over and over and I am wondering if we just did a straight alphabetical list of countries each month, if that would get more coverage of women worldwide. So for example "A" would have lists from: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, American Samoa, Andorra, Angola, Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Aruba, Australia, Austria, and Azerbaijan; "B" would have Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bermuda, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso and Burundi; and so forth. SusunW (talk) 20:09, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

@SusunW: That would be interesting. The geofocus would be filled for almost 2 years before the list would be repeated :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 03:54, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
I like this a lot. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:48, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Did we decide to do this? It does seem like a sensible idea ☕ Antiqueight chatter 13:17, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
We did "I" a while back. Nice idea to do all 26 but ... Some letters don't have any or many countries: see List of sovereign states. Three for F and for J, only one O, one Q, no W or X, one Y, two Zs. PamD 15:40, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
I've been thinking that this might be a unique way of covering geofocus for January 2021 – December 2022. Over the course of 24 months, we would cover countries at the rate of one letter per month, except for December 2022 when we would include X+Y+Z. Some letters have very few options, e.g. countries starting with the letter Q, while other letters have a lot of countries. But over the course of 24 months, this would even out. Some considerations:
Incorporate Historical States that no longer exist within the alphabet scheme?
Skip our annual May geofocus on "CEE countries" and November geofocus on "Wiki Asia Month"?
Omit US and UK? --Rosiestep (talk) 15:46, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
I don't see why not to include Historical states, as it'd flesh out the possibilites. I think we'd have to see which countries would fall under May / November first before deciding to keep/skipping over. Omitting US/UK doesn't seem right as it won't be worldwide. Whether it's a year long/two year long geofocus, the Us would be near the end of the list. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 15:58, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
How about developing this idea for the 12 months of 2021, carefully selecting countries for each month, not just one letter but perhaps two or sometimes three at a time. On the basis of the experience we gain from our June 2020 geofocus on reducing gender imbalance, we could compile a list of "deserving" countries for the whole year. Looking further ahead, in 2022, we might consider doing something along these lines for deserving cities or federal states, maybe even picking some from the English-speaking countries.--Ipigott (talk) 16:04, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Having two or more letters per month seems good as some letters are limited like PamD said i.e O/Q. Expanding on your idea, maybe in each editathon there could be a focus list of countries per letter while not excluding the other countries. It'd give a heads up to editors to know that these countries need a bump in articles. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 16:11, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Geofocus by latitude[edit]

How about a by-latitude split? Countries between perhaps equator and Tropic of Cancer, then Capricorn; countries of latitute from Tropic of Cancer north to x, then north of x, similarly for south. Or some such - sweeping across all the continents. Need to adjust the bands to make very roughly similar sizes, and perhaps accept that some countries are in more than one zone - a pity that the List of sovereign states mentioned above doesn't have a field for coordinates! PamD

Just found List of countries by northernmost point and List of countries by southernmost point - astonishingly few countries with northernmost point south of tropic of Capricorn...perhaps southernmost points gives a broader spread somehow! A fascinating pair of lists, anyway. PamD 15:50, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Geofocus by religion[edit]

I really enjoyed the Arab World one last year though, and liked its intersection with Islam particularly, so wondered if maybe something like women from Buddhist countries, or similar might work? The other idea I had would be to focus on women, based on a sea/ocean area e.g. Women from the Mediterranean, Indian Ocean, etc. which might get some really interesting cross-overs? (Sorry if these have been done before, I'm still new!) (Lajmmoore (talk) 11:14, 17 February 2020 (UTC))

Geofocus by language[edit]

Not sure if this has been done before (a quick archive search didn't mention it, but I wondered about a focus on countries with lower rates of English speaking? This article gives some details based on a couple of different metrics. Countries it lists include: Iran, Egypt, Kazakhstan, Venezuela, El Salvador, Oman, Mongolia, Saudi Arabia, Angola, Kuwait, Cameroon, Libya, Iraq and Laos. It also includes China (as rate of speaking is very low, even if reading and writing is pretty high). Gives an interesting spread of places. There's probably a better place to get statistics from than that article. Cheers (Lajmmoore (talk) 06:54, 23 May 2020 (UTC))

List of countries by English-speaking population may help! Corachow (talk) 18:37, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Historical States that no longer exist?[edit]

Hi All, I wondered whether a geofocus one month could be on "historical countries that no longer exist"? (I'm not sure that's the best way to describe what I mean!) It's not something I know very much about, but I've noticed places like Kingdom of Saxony Kingdom of Prussia Austria-Hungary come up on redlists. I don't know whether its a theme people have done before, or what might be possible in terms of lists, etc. I found this List of former sovereign states and there's others too. All the places that are no longer recognised would maybe be too big, so there would be a question about period or geography maybe too? Equally, sorry if its been brought up before! (Lajmmoore (talk) 09:33, 31 March 2020 (UTC))

Lajmmoore: It was done in September 2019: Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/135. Unfortunately, it didn't get much traction. --MarioGom (talk) 09:36, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
MarioGom Thanks v much! I must have just missed it! Gonna have a poke around in the page now though! Thanks (Lajmmoore (talk) 10:26, 31 March 2020 (UTC))

Politicians USA in November[edit]

Not really sure if this is the right place for this. US Election Day is November 3 and it's one of the biggest elections of modern history. I do a lot of work around women in politics in the US and I'd love to see a geofocus on it, especially since we will see more women coming and going from national and state politics after the election results, and we might have our first female Vice President. I think it would be a great opportunity to improve coverage about women in American politics past and present. Thanks for your consideration. Missvain (talk) 20:23, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Aotearoa New Zealand[edit]

Happy New Year everyone! A few years ago (in September 2017, to be exact!) WiR ran a geo-focus on New Zealand, which produced 120 articles on New Zealand women. It was awesome to be a focus for the project! Since then, the editing community in NZ has become a bit more organised and cohesive and one of our group, DrThneed, has created a number of redlists of New Zealand women (which have been added to the WiR redlist index) which several editors are working with. We have also started holding in-person and remote editathons and editor meet-ups, including editathons on topics related to women (one on Maori women weavers is coming up this week). We're wondering if there is an opportunity in 2021 to have a WiR geo-focus on New Zealand women again, and we could back it up with some in-person editathons too and really make some inroads into our lists - and also potentially attract some new editors here. Any thoughts? MurielMary (talk) 10:07, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

MurielMary, I'd be happy to support this idea! Would it be useful to coincide it with when the three-month geofocus gets to the region? (I can't remember when that's meant to be) Lajmmoore (talk) 21:22, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Gender imbalance per country[edit]

Hello all! Just putting a vote here for another month-long focus on gender imbalance per country, like we did in 2020. The countries have altered slightly, which is interesting, and I found it fun to do! Lajmmoore (talk) 21:25, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Francophone/French language countries[edit]

Hello, so in March it is International Francophonie Day. So I was thinking we do one about countries that speak French. It would include countries such as Benin, Burkina Faso, Democratic Republic of the Congo, France, Gabon, Guinea, Ivory Coast, Mali, Monaco, Niger, Republic of the Congo, Senegal and Togo. Sahaib3005 (talk) 21:07, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Sahaib3005, I like this idea! Lajmmoore (talk) 14:02, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Non-geofocus ideas[edit]

A is for "A start"[edit]

Just before we started Women in Red I completed (after work of lots of others) in writing a biography of every woman in the Dictionary of National Biography. This meant that any (UK related) women who was recognised as notable before about 1900 was in Wikipedia. Obviously the DNB did not stop there and the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography took over. That has LOTS more women - so what to do? I set out to do every women in the ODNB whose first name began with an A. I think I have made quite a dent in it. Look here or here. My suggestion is that we have a go at picking off all the women whose name begins with A (or alpha if she is ancient Greek) in any country. Our progress will demonstrate the size of the problem of doing all ~26 letters- Victuallers (talk) 09:44, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

@Victuallers: Would this just be ODNB related or any woman whose first name starts with name? For the ODNB list, there are currently just over 100 A first named women left (not bad). --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:11, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
@MrLinkinPark33: I was proposing women whose name begins with A (or alpha if she is ancient Greek) in any country. I imagined that we might be able to finish the UK and start on other countries. A demonstration of the fact that writing wiki biogs for women in just one country for just one letter is a large task. I see some arguing that the 83% blokes on wiki is because women are prevented from having wikiarticles because of notability rules or lack of written sources. These are problems, BUT they are not stopping us from adding thousands of more articles to fix the gap. Oh and thanks for your work and for noticing its just over 100 - do you have a more accurate list? Cheers Roger aka Victuallers (talk) 11:03, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
@Victuallers: Didn't get the above ping so I just saw it now. I only counted the people starting with A in the above ODNB link you mentioned. I can't confirm whether it is 100+ or not (since I don't write articles on ODNB people). Starting with A (in general) would be nice as it reminds me of the Countries starting with I contest we did last year. Also provides 2 years of contest material if we did one letter per month (see @SusunW:'s idea below) :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:14, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
@Victuallers and MrLinkinPark333: I read this thread after the latest WiR notice landed on my talk page.
Has any further progress (i.e., beyond 'A') been made? I'd be interested to help, and to help spread the word. If nothing else, could a list be made of women in the dictionary who don't have articles? I'm not sure if I have access, but it looks like access is free (?), or I can see if institutions I know hold subscriptions. = paul2520 (talk) 00:04, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
No idea as I haven't been following up with this idea. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:18, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Twitter mates[edit]

We have monthly editathons now running in Edinburgh which are mainly in person. Ewan is one of the Wikimedians in Residence and they are very successful - They are badged as WiR - great!. A similar series is starting in Swansea. Last month they did nurses and this month business people. They want to be a "women in red" event. I will see if we can harmonise subjects. This is for info only I guess but is there a good place to log in-house events ? Victuallers (talk) 14:01, 19 January 2018 (UTC) p.s. I see WiR is getting mentioned by name in French! Femmes Rouge Wikipedia Victuallers (talk) 14:01, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Victuallers - I think it would be great to include in-person Women in Red events in our list here: [[Template:Women in Red]]. To that end, I just added a line for in-person events in the 2018 section. Please add whatever events you're aware of... and 2017 events, too. After you get the ball rolling, we should mention it on the main WiR talkpage so that others know to do so, too. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:21, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Update - still running. The next one is on August 16th at Edinburgh Uni Library. Victuallers (talk) 09:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
They are now Virtual and running about every week hosted by the Women in Red intern - next one is on June 13th 2020. Victuallers (talk) 11:26, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Femicon Museum[edit]

See this tweet conversation Victuallers (talk) 09:22, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

This seems cool, Victuallers, and we haven't touched this focus area before; did you reply to her? Maybe we could start an email convo with a few of us? Hey, Megalibrarygirl, I looked over the website, and wondered how easy it might be to create a redlist for this focus area, "femininity, girlhood, and the aesthetics of cute within twentieth-century video games, computing, and electronic toys"? --Rosiestep (talk) 18:55, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
I think I could try to create a redlist based on the Femicom collection. Will start. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:09, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
@Victuallers and Rosiestep: Here's a start-up redlist: Femicom Museum Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:13, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Megalibrarygirl; mega cool... mega thanks! --Rosiestep (talk) 23:38, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
I invited her to post here. I'm not sure how big the museum is and we would need her or one of us to take the lead. Its not a subject I know anything about - but I can see that its an important area. Big thanks to MLG - do feel free to tweet her. Victuallers (talk) 06:52, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Trading article ideas[edit]

I was wondering if anyone would be interested in trading names of women with others who are interested in creating articles on specific topics. For example, I have many names of American women who have won prizes or been inducted into hall of fames. That way, our lists on Wikipedia and our personal lists could hopefully be reduced and we get to work on articles that are in our interests that we might not have come across already. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 05:50, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

I'd be interested in adding lists that others have created (such as yours) into the Women in Red redlist collection. Let me know if this interests you? This is because it is my hope that Women in Red is as well known for its redlists as for its created articles. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:26, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
@Rosiestep: That would be perfect. It'd help reduce the amount of people on my to-do lists and give them out to others who want to work on them. I already moved my first one here but I'm thinking on making another one on women who were/are United Nations Special Rapporteurs as that list is huge. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:29, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
That's awesome, MrLinkinPark333. Also pinging Megalibrarygirl who is really good with to-do list ideas! --Rosiestep (talk) 21:52, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
Just finished Rosiestep Megalibrarygirl. See here for the United Nations redlist. There are also women in United Nations working groups but I haven't included them in this list. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:20, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
Sweet! Thanks for taking the iniative, MrLinkinPark333! I hope everyone feels comfortable adding to our lists, but if you don't, ping me. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 01:03, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Filling out lists[edit]

A suggestion of something a little different, maybe? We have a whole lot of lists that are partially filled out with articles - various women's halls of fame, for instance, or the list of National Heritage Fellowship recipients. Many of the by-year lists of Guggenheim Fellows as well. What about a month where we pick one or two of these lists and look at filling in all the redlinks? That would give us a nice filled-out list at the end of the month. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:05, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: Funnily, I was thinking of creating a list of Guggenheim Fellows names as the recipents are automatically notable as per WP:NACADEMIC Criteria #2. That'd help boost up the percentage without worrying about notability :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:39, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
@MrLinkinPark333: As would the National Heritage Fellows...and those have the advantage of being sourceable to the NEA's website. Which means that their biographies there are in the public domain...if we wanted to we could crank out the articles pretty quickly thanks to that. :-) --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:48, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: In that case, I think the National Heritage Fellows would be easier to complete as the Guggenheim Fellows does not have a lot of info on each recipient, just the notability. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:51, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
@MrLinkinPark333: No reason we couldn't suggest both for different months. :-) I'm not sure this would be a monthly challenge, necessarily...but bimonthly or trimonthly, perhaps. Besides, getting all of the Guggenheim Fellows in one go would be a bit of a tall order. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:59, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: Yep, that's why I didn't press on having them done first, because there is so many of them :/ However, I'm making a different list of names that are presumed notable based on individual criterias instead. ;) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:05, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
@MrLinkinPark333: What about other fellowships/awards? How about the Rome Prize, for instance - does that convey automatic notability? --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 18:45, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: That specific prize I do not know if it passes WP:ARTIST or WP:ANYBIO. As for other fellowships, Criteria 1-3 and their respective notes of WP:NACADEMIC are the ones I see for fellowhips. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:51, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Women with redirects[edit]

While looking through NY Times Notable Deaths 2019 I noticed a couple of women with redirects. I was wondering if there were many women who wouldn't appear on any redlist, but would need an article written. Maybe some were AfD merges but times have changed. Perhaps we can come up with some criteria for creating a new (short?) list of potential articles from these redirects. StrayBolt (talk) 20:22, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

By reference work[edit]

Have individual reference works been used as a theme before? Each entry would start with at least one high-quality source (and, usually, a pre-compiled bibliography). In-keeping with aforementioned ideas re: Oxford Dictionary of National Biography and filling out lists, could pick any reasonable list from Category:Women in Red redlink lists (by dictionary), e.g., missing only 121 items for parity with the Encyclopædia Britannica Online. czar 07:31, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

@Czar: I'm late to your message but I'd be interested in a Britannica Online based one. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 15:16, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
I still keep banging away at the ODNB. One of the successes we had 5 years ago was to add every woman from the DNB. (The DNB was "the" UK biography book in the UK c. 1910.). Doing the Ency. Brittanica in date order might mean that we have a measure of success if we could do say every (woman) born before year x. Victuallers (talk) 11:32, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Compiling a list of biographies of the most significant women[edit]

I'm not too sure how much enthusiasm there is about this but as a result of the "Vital articles" discussions on the WIR talk page, I suggested it might be a good idea to draw up a list of biographies of the Fifty most significant women on Wikipedia. This could later lead to a Balanced list of Wikipedia's most significant people which would list 100 names, 50 women and 50 men. The general idea would be to show that we believe the contributions of women to our world are just as important as those of men. If there is any support on this, we could start working fairly soon on selection criteria and which areas of interest should be covered.--Ipigott (talk) 07:23, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

There is a long history on wikipedia of drawing up 'balanced' lists of articles of different types and they almost always seem to end up generating more heat than light. I strongly encourage you to either (a) find a balanced list produced by an independent party outside of wikiepdia and import it as a table or (b) focus on improving the quality and quantity of the articles in traditionally underrepresented areas. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:56, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Monthly editathon on the word vision for 2020[edit]

Hello. I was wondering if one of the monthly edithathons this year could be on vision. The reason why I suggest this year is because of 20/20 vision. I was thinking of using Vision as multiple ideas together:

  • people who work in vision related fields like opticians or optometrists.
  • people who have vision difficulties or who have lost their vision
  • women who work with people that have lost their vision or have vision difficulties
  • people who have been called a visionary.

Let me know what you think! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:34, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Names (by month, e.g. April Aprils) (by holiday, e.g. Christmas Holly) (by mammals) etc.[edit]

By month

Since we've been doing May Mays, I was wondering if we could do women with the name April in April and women with the name June in June. This could also apply to middle names as well. I was thinking maybe these could be added for 2021, so we could have the name themes from April, May and June. Let me know what you think! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 15:55, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps I'm too early for this, but what about Jan January? We can also do women with names such as Jane, Janet, Jenny, Jennifer, etc. What do you think?Corachow (talk) 18:15, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

By holiday

The names themes seem popular and I wondered about Christmassy names for December? Ivy, Holly, Carol, etc. (Lajmmoore (talk) 12:17, 25 August 2020 (UTC))

Don't forget Natalie, Noelle, Stella, Mary, Angel... ;) Penny Richards (talk) 16:50, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
I don't care for Christian oriented themes. Just one person's opinion.WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:24, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
@WomensArtistUpdates: Great point! To be honest I'd forgotten Christmas was to do with religion when I mentioned it - but I 100% get that it's not very inclusive. Thanks for bringing it up! (Lajmmoore (talk) 07:15, 22 September 2020 (UTC))
Eponymous Women & Animals

Hi All, I was tidying my sandbox, and I found this list I started, women who have mammals named after them. I'm not sure if it's a theme that has been done already, but I wondered whether it might be fun for 2021? The sandbox list was based on this book, which I manually searched for women from. There's also a version for Reptiles, one for Birds, for amphibians and one for Odonata. I don't think all the women were notable from the mammals book, but some definitely were. I don't mind making lists, if a) people think it would be useful and b) people could give me some tips? Lajmmoore (talk) 11:36, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Wives, mothers, etc.[edit]

Something I've noticed more and more in recent years as I've done my research: more biographical dictionaries are beginning to incorporate separate articles on the wives and mothers of notable men, focusing on their achievements rather than those of their husbands and sons. Usually these are women who were previously featured as addenda in their husbands'/sons' articles. I think it could be an interesting theme to develop...maybe for Mother's Day next May? --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 05:56, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Mother's Day isn't the same day in every country, most notably it's in March (or very occasionally April) in the UK. It's also March in many European and Middle Eastern countries. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:14, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
@Joseph2302: Just a suggestion - doesn't have to be keyed to any particular month. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 00:40, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Spreading evenly[edit]

Thinking about "July Julies" etc leads me to a couple of thoughts:

  • These themes bias towards women with names based on European languages (as do the Holly/Noel etc themes). Perhaps we should spread our work around by dividing redlinked women into a-z chunks by given name ("Aaa-Ada" etc, perhaps 24 or 36?) and offering one chunk a month? Or by surname (instead, or following) ?
  • Perhaps have a "born in the month" every month of the year, then the next year a "died in", and repeat, alternating years?

PamD 06:04, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Love it! Any/all of these ideas sound good to me. Innisfree987 (talk) 06:38, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Variations on Monthly Achievement Initiative[edit]

Given the current interest in this initiative (around 575 articles added by 29 August), it might be interesting to change the targets for the coming months. For October, we might for example call for articles on women from 31 predefined countries, one for each day of the month. We could list the countries beforehand, drawing on our redlists (but perhaps leaving out those without at least 20 redlinks). We could allow a maximum of three days for each country, e.g. 1 to 3 October: Albania, 2 to 4 October: Algeria, 3 to 5 October: Angola, 4 to 6 October: Argentina, etc. Participants could list their articles both under the countries and under their own user names, giving a clearer view of achievements. Then in November, we could do something similar with occupations. Would this be worthwhile or should we just continue using the August/September model? Personally, I think variations might attract additional interest. Other suggestions for variations would of course be welcome.--Ipigott (talk) 08:57, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Pinging Rosiestep, Victuallers, Megalibrarygirl, SusunW, Antiqueight, Abishe, Nick Number, cbratbyrudd, Stuartyeates, Alanna the Brave for reactions or other suggestions.--Ipigott (talk) 17:39, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
Glad to hear there's been lots of interest, Ipigott. My thoughts: I like the idea of variations on topics each month (either nationality or occupation), but I'd be wary of making it too complicated for participants. I usually have to do some preparatory research before creating an article (which may take several days depending on how busy I am), and I don't want to have to try to remember whether I can submit an article about an Algerian woman on October 4th or an Argentinian woman on October 6th. On the other hand, I might be open to having broader weekly themes: during week 1, we write about women from western European countries, then for week 2 we write about women from Middle Eastern countries (or it could be women scientists or artists, etc.). Alanna the Brave (talk) 18:00, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
I kind of feel I should recuse myself from giving suggestions, as both this month and next my real world life is impacting my editing time. That being said, I like the idea of variations, but agree with Alanna the Brave that it needs to be simple to follow or we will end up discouraging editing. Congrats on the success. 575 articles is awesome! SusunW (talk) 18:08, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
@Ipigott: I think having a broad area of occupations/countries would work better (in my personal case). Maybe have special awards that says, for example Wikipedian who created the most (specific occupation) this month, or the most articles from (specific country, area). That way if people want the special awards, they can go for it while keeping the broad range of coverage for others who just want the 5, 10, 15 articles etc. barnstars. This monthly imitative helped me clear through some articles that I wanted to do, but didn't get around to start/finish them :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:53, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
As a relative newcomer to WiR I feel that the new monthly initiative is a great place to record and celebrate all the WiR articles written in a given month, i.e. from the monthly meetups and the #1day1woman ongoing. I find that most of my articles end up in #1day1woman as I don't want to hold them up waiting for a specific meetup to come along. My preference is that the whole recording system not become over-complicated. Oronsay (talk) 02:26, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
My thirty-ish contributions only accidentally in the list, it was work I was doing anyway, but this stretch got done quicker with this extra motivation. Stuartyeates (talk) 07:04, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the comments so far. I can see the simplicity of the current approach is appealing. It therefore looks as if any variations should be "additional extras" rather than a complete revamp. Let's see how we do in September.--Ipigott (talk) 14:58, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
I echo those who suggest we keep it simple. There are many contributions to the #1day1woman page which are currently also eligible for the Monthly Achievement Initiative, meaning articles from any country and any occupation. Requiring articles fit a certain geographical or occupational category during a short window of time will limit participation in the initiative, and might be discouraging to our membership base who will see it as more of a competition. If the initiative is all about increasing participation and increasing metrics, I'd vote to not change the current model. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:27, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
Ipigott I'm not very creative in brainstorming ways to get people to participate, but I do want to help you keep the work load at something you can handle. If that means wikignoming a lot, that's fine. Just keep me posted. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:26, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Could you review my submission, I was getting negative feedback about submitting Jenny L. Davis, a linguist and social activist because she is 'merely' an assistant professor who speaks a indigenous tongue and is attempting to revive it. CaptJayRuffins (talk) 00:12, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Edited Book Ideas[edit]

We are wrapping up an edited book, Wikipedia and Academic Libraries, which is schedule for publication in September, 2021. There are other edited volumes about Wikipedia, including Levering Wikipedia and Wikipedia@20. My co-editors and I were pondering, "What will the next book be?" And, based on the submissions for our book (almost 2 years ago) we suggest that someone consider editing a book about all the activity related to Art+Feminism. Bridges2Information (talk) 18:54, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Idea: Ancient women (probably not a great title)[edit]

I wondered whether this might be a nice theme for later this year or next? The redlist got fixed recently and its got a really good geographic spread and all the women lived prior to 400 CE. Lajmmoore (talk) 15:33, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Rescue a draft[edit]

This list of declined drafts just came to my attention. Many won’t ever be notable but we could undertake a concert effort to find and bring up to standard the ones that have potential? Might identify some new contributors this way too, altho sadly in many cases we’ll be months behind the original submitter. But perhaps worth a shot, and a change of pace for style of editathon? Innisfree987 (talk) 01:05, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Sea[edit]

Women and the sea? I'm not sure if that's been done before? It could include naval officers, sailors, sportspeople, then scientists, etc. Lajmmoore (talk) 21:18, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

To add World Maritime Day is 30 September, so perhaps this could be a September theme? Lajmmoore (talk) 10:16, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
... but I just found Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/75, so maybe the 2018 event is too recent? Lajmmoore (talk) 10:20, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
It's been over 3 years since we've done it as a focus, so I kinda think no one could say we are placing too much emphasis on the category. SusunW (talk) 22:39, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Other ideas for 2022 from the Historical Association (UK) website[edit]

This is a UK-based list of events and anniversaries next year, which I wondered might help support some themes? These are some things that stuck out to me:

  • 1962 (60th anniversary): Uganda, Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago are all granted independence from Great Britain. Could it be worth having a month focussed on those places? Or is that too British Empire focussed?
  • 30 April 2022: 70th anniversary of Anne Frank’s diary being published, 1952 - a focus on women connected to the Holocaust, perhaps?
  • 20 June: World Refugee Day - a theme on refugees??
  • 26 September: International Day of Languages - perhaps we could have a focus on translating pages?
  • 27 September: 200 years ago the French orientalist Jean-François Champollion announced that he had succeeded in deciphering the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs on the Rosetta Stone, 1822 & November 4: 100 years since the British archaeologist Howard Carter discovered the tomb of the Egyptian pharaoh Tutankhamun, 1922. ? maybe a focus on Egypt and Egyptologists?
There's others things too, like 25 years since death of Diana, Princess of Wales, in September?
All food for thought! Lajmmoore (talk) 22:08, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Thanks,Lajmmoore, for all these interesting ideas. In connection with Champollion and the Rosetta Stone, we could also focus on linguists, especially those concerned with ancient or minority languages. As for Anna Frank, the original Dutch version was published as Het Achterhuis on 25 June 1947. I believe editions in German and French appeared before the English versions which were published in the United States and Britain in 1952 - so take your pick. Commemorations of Anna Frank have traditionally been held in connection with her birthday, 12 June 1929, especially in 2019 for her 90th anniversary.--Ipigott (talk) 16:15, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
Ipigott Linguists sound like a great idea for September - I suspect we have a list for them already? Lajmmoore (talk) 17:21, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
  • I think we should develop a crowd-sourced list. We have plenty of time to do so. I know lots of women have been involved in documenting the American Indian languages and I believe some have contributed to the indigenous languages of Oceania.--Ipigott (talk) 17:25, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Ideas submitted by Instagram followers for 2022[edit]

Hello all! I asked the people who follow our instagram channel what themes they might like to sea us look at in the coming year, and their ideas were:

  • Women at war/resistance
  • Women in medicine
  • Nobility
  • Women in agriculture
  • Women in historic preservation (I think some noises about curators/museums have been made before?)

Anyhow, just a bit more the mix! Lajmmoore (talk) 13:51, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

In the news[edit]

An editathon to encourage submissions to the Main Page In the news feature, given concerns raised repeatedly (which I share) about systemic bias in what ends up featured there. I will note that the Recent Deaths feature of ITN tend to get as much as 10x the traffic as DYKs, in my experience. So omission of women there is consequential. Innisfree987 (talk) 23:42, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

World literature[edit]

Writers, scholars and critics (etc!) of languages other than English. Innisfree987 (talk) 03:58, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Ideas page administration[edit]

Wikipedia - filled with knowledge.jpg
Common tasks for each event.
This list is incomplete. Please add to it
.
  • identify sponsors and/or WikiProject hosts
  • create list of potential participants, including active editors from the area(s) to be covered
  • create editathon banner
  • create/find editathon icon
  • develop the WiR redlist, find related redlink lists
  • create meetup page, completing sections on
  • "Add these to articles" (stub templates, applicable categories, useful lists)
  • "Add these to article talkpages" (WikiProject banners, editathon banner for the event)
  • create the invite
  • distribute the invite
  • develop social media campaign (FB, Twitter)
  • We haven't been doing this but it would be great if we had a social media volunteer
  • add Authority Control if missing to all the articles created during the event
  • double-check each article for categories
  • double-check each article for talkpage banners
  • create the thank you and/or barnstar
  • develop a list of contributors (overlaps to some degree with registered participants)
  • distribute the thank you and/or barnstar after the event to the contributors
  • create Wikidata entry if none exists

Checklist for updates of virtual meetups[edit]

This section is purely administrative. It is not about the ongoing discussions of topics.

WiR generally has a variety of monthly, quarterly and annual events. WiR also sends out an “invitation” to its registered participants notifying them of those events. This is an effort to list tasks associated with the admirative tasks of updating and adding pages. We will be maintaining this list to assist with Quality Assurance. This is a working document and should be maintained to reflect current bast practices. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 16:52, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Basic overview of tasks using March 2021 as a guide[edit]

Each month there will be new events and ongoing events

NEW
* Art+Activism
** Event page: Art+Activism 
** Talkpage template: Template:WIR-192
* VisibleWikiWomen
** Event page: VisibleWikiWomen
** Talkpage template: Template:WIR-193 
CONTEST (Jan/Feb/Mar)
* Africa
** Event page: Africa
** Talkpage template: Template:WIR-186
CONTINUING
** Women's rights
**Template:WIR-188
** #1day1woman2021
** Template:WIR-184 & Template:WIR-00-2021 
INVITATION: 
* Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/2021#March 2021
  • Step 1 – Add each new event, by next available number, to Template:Women in Red. It will be a redlink. (topic needs to be expanded).
  • Step 2 – Using the Step 1 redlink, create a new event pages. The easiest way to do this is by either copying from the previous year’s similar event (like "Black History Month" in February) or referring to an event page from the current month, or a combination of the two.
  • Step 3 – Create a new "Talkpage banner templates" to coincide with every new event. These are the tags editors put on the article talk pages whether it's a new or improved article (example Template:WIR-193). Note, editors are welcome to add multiple talkpage templates to an article talkpage if it meets the criteria, e.g. an African woman artist would qualify for templates #186 and #192.
  • Step 4 – Update the template "Template:Women in Red navigation" to include the new events. Click on the "edit source", scroll down to "group4 = Events" and add events.
  • Step 5 – Create the invite (e.g. Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/2021#March 2021) using the previous month's invite as a go-by.
  • Step 6 – Invite and receive feedback from a sufficient number of WiR enthusiasts that all event pages, talkpage banner templates, and the invite are okay. Mark reviewed items with {{ok}}
  • Step 7 – Send out MassMessage notification.
  • Step 8 – Update Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Events, e.g. the templates embedded in that page.