Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red/Archive 113

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 110Archive 111Archive 112Archive 113Archive 114Archive 115→Archive 120

April edithon on Women's/Gender studies

I wanted to give a huge shoutout and thanks to those who have been diligently working on this topic, as it is incredibly important to me that the pioneers who began documenting women's lives and pressing for them to be academic subjects are preserved. I know I said earlier that I hadn't spent much time creating US entries on the crowd sourced list, but I picked an Indian woman, who has worked in the US. That led me down a rabbit hole and I haven't finished her article because I ended up writing Coordinating Council for Women in History first. There are a whole slew of historians in the article who served as national president and would likely fall within this month's editathon, if anyone is interested. On another note, I have zero clue how to search for articles that have the name of the council or its predecessors Conference Group on Women's History or Coordinating Committee on Women in the Historical Profession. Perhaps someone like @Ser Amantio di Nicolao and TJMSmith: who have magic wands can check that? SusunW (talk) 22:51, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

This found a few CCfWiH hits, which I've linked. Quick pointer to Sasha Turner, an article with a notability tag which WiR might wish to demolish. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:33, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
And there seems to be a "Coordinating Committee on Women in the Historical Profession", which I presume is a different thing. this search ... in fact, I'm going to leave those two for you, @SusunW: --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:38, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Oh, sorry, that was third in your list. Hadn't got that far. Anyway: still yours to link. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:39, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
And so ditto "Coordinating Committee on Women in the Historical Profession", yours. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:40, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Miss Abbott's School Alumnae Association

While completing a Ph.D. at Brown University, Berenice A. Carroll received two Miss Abbott's School Alumnae Association fellowships. I've created the following Wikidata items: Miss Abbott's School [Wikidata] (1860-1898) and the Miss Abbott's School Alumnae Association [Wikidata] (1912-1930). It appears to be a girl's school in New England. It is possible that the school is notable. If not, it likely funded many WIR academics in the early 20th-century. TJMSmith (talk) 20:45, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

I told y'all it was a rabbit hole. One thing leads to another. Thanks TJ. SusunW (talk) 21:11, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
"Miss Abbott's School" might be Abbot Academy? Penny Richards (talk) 21:55, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Nope. That's in Massachusetts. My very brief search in between working on Chaudhuri shows the proprietress was Josephine L. Abbott,p 191,[1] it was located at 280 Benefit Street in Providence, Rhode Island,p 64, Abby Aldrich Rockefeller went there,p 173 and in 1897 it was taken over by Irene Santewska. SusunW (talk) 22:07, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Earth Day

WiR climate logo 2022

April 22 is Earth Day. I am taking the opportunity to remind WiR that our year-long initiative on Climate continues through 2022. Drop by the page to read some of the contributions. Please add an article or give suggestions for articles. If you have contributed, please drop a line here to report any tips or topics. (The topic of "Climate" is expansive. I had some fun writing about botanists.) Thank you! WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 15:14, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Dede Robertson

Dede Robertson, the wife of televangist Pat Robertson, has died. I’m unsure how to describe her. Not sure if she qualifies as an activist and I don’t want to just to call her a homemaker. Thriley (talk) 07:13, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

sv:Lilly Walleni

Lily Walleni

Doesn't seem to be a hugely remembered opera singer, but literally has an entire page of high-quality images on Commons, so she must have had some importance back in her day. Thought I'd mention her here in case anyone was interested. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs 02:47, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

And if that's of interest, commons:Category:Glass_plate_negatives_in_the_Swedish_Performing_Arts_Agency offers many more suggestions. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs 02:51, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
Adam Cuerden: This is just the kind of person I like to cover but apart from [2], [3] and the source given in the Swedish article, I'm afraid the sources I can find are pretty weak after searching under Lilly Walleni, Sanna Klara Vallentin/Wallentin and Lilli Wallentin-Strandberg. I might be able to put together a short article on the basis of these but I would welcome inputs from one of our search experts such as SusunW as there might well be more substantial coverage in newspapers, theatre programmes or obituaries. Let's see if anything turns up over the next few days.--Ipigott (talk) 08:57, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
Ipigott Try Clara Wallenthin/Wallentin there are programs of the Boston Symphony in that name. Also found: [4],[5],[6],[7],[8][9],[10],[11],[12] Can't help you sort through the Swedish newspapers, but try this link SusunW (talk) 13:11, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
And while we're here, I obviously use newspapers.com and newspaperarchive.com a lot, but there are also Wikipedia:Free English newspaper sources. Because I write a lot of foreign bios, I know lots of archives, but I wondered if we had a list of those too. We do: Wikipedia:List of online newspaper archives. SusunW (talk) 13:33, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
I know the National Library of Norway, https://www.nb.no is excellent. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs 15:10, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Been a bit since I did one of these. As always, this is not a voting guide. If this ever turns into WP:CANVASSING, it'll need to stop.

We'll start with the FP promotions for March and April related to women.

I believe only Chamberlain counts as a Woman in Red from that list.

And now, the ones currently up for voting, all of whom are Women in red

I'm rather disappointed to note that the only one I didn't personally nominate (besides a failed nomination of Emmy Noether) is the yawning infant. Mind, FPC is very much in a slow period just now. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs 16:45, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Is the infant relevant because they are female or because it’s related to motherhood? Dronebogus (talk) 18:12, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
She's a female infant. I wasn't sure if I should include her, but, well... Seems better to be over-inclusive than under-, and, well, since I was worried about the paucity of women being nominated by people other than me, it seemed wrong to not mention a, well, not woman, but baby girl that was nominated and passed. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs 19:07, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Redirects

Although Rose and Ottilie Sutro has been around for 14 years, there were no redirects from the individual names and an editor has just wasted some time working on Ottilie before finding this one. I've now added the Rose Sutro redirect. So please, please, remember that if an article covers two people they should each have one or more redirects from their own name(s), to help both readers and editors! PamD 13:43, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

This also shows that it is a good idea to search Wikipedia for the subject of your article before starting writing, but that probably is not news to WIR project members. TSventon (talk) 18:22, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
For less experienced editors, however often we warn them to be careful, a name on one of our redlists is often the basis for writing an article. As in this case, they often succeed in creating a biography in article space before they discover the person in question is covered elsewhere. The same is true when a new biography is created with a slightly different name (e.g. with or without initials). As Wikidata frequently lists names which do not coincide with the EN Wikipedia, they appear on our redlists. I don't think there is any easy way to overcome these problems but I must say PamD's redirects, inclusion of name variants, listings under family names, etc., are all extremely useful. Google is often better than Wikipedia itself at turning up related Wikipedia articles, not only in English but in other language versions.--Ipigott (talk) 07:53, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Actresses from the Swedish Performing Arts Agency archives

So, I'm starting to go through commons:Category:Glass plate negatives in the Swedish Performing Arts Agency. Here's the results; hopefully some of it's suitable for the Women in Red project. I'll try to get through the whole list in a few days, although there's an intimidatingly large number of A's.

Actress My opinion of the best photos
Agda Helin
Agnes Mowinckel
Agnes Spångberg (all are good, though)
Agnes Symra-Christensen
Aino Ackté , though all are good
Alfhild André
Alma Anderström
Alma Bodén
Amanda Personne
Andrejeva von Skilondz
Ann-Marie Rönngren
Anna Tropp or if you want/don't mind Oscar Tropp as well.
Anna Arehn
Anna Bartels/Anna Fernqvist
Anna Gräber
Anna Grünberg/Anna Oldenburg
Anna Hofman-Uddgren (though a less dramatic dance is also available.)
Anna Lagergren Arguable, but I'm thinking or
Anna Lundberg Unsure, maybe
Anna Norrie
Anna Oscàr

That's just the first 200 (of about 3,500). Might need to move this to a subpage. It's getting a little long. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 12:02, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Portuguese pianist Helena Sá e Costa

I deprodded Helena Sá e Costa recently as she appears to have been a notable 20th-century pianist in Portugal, but the page could use some attention. I usually focus on writers, so if anyone with an interest in music or Portugal wants to have a go at it that would be awesome. Also, there are some photos of her from the 1950s which are probably in the public domain in Portugal, but maybe not the United States. pburka (talk) 14:25, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Barbara Noske proposed for deletion

The article for Barbara Noske a Dutch cultural anthropogist who introduced the concept of the Animal–industrial complex has been proposed for deletion. She appears to meet notabilty as an author. Thriley (talk) 06:36, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

I've added some sources and removed the proposed deletion tag as I think it would at least require an AfD with the new sources. More could still be done though. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:23, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Thank you! Thriley (talk) 16:49, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Thanks also from me — this now demonstrates WP:AUTHOR notability for me, whereas previously it hinted at it but didn't actually make the case in the article. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:08, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
I like the approach Silver seren took of combining multiple book reviews into a single reference. I may start copying that elsewhere. pburka (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
I completely agree with the kudos for combining multiple book reviews. The syntax cuts down on awkward phrasing in the text, while making it clear how notability is met. I have copied that into my own code stash. Thanks Silver seren. DaffodilOcean (talk) 20:50, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
I copied it from someone else originally (though I can't remember who it was at this point). It's especially useful for the books that get a LOT of reviews, like 10+. Because the article looks a bit ugly if you have just a long string of reference numbers in there. I hope you all find it useful. SilverserenC 22:52, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Could have been from me. It's a style I've been using for a while. The bullets make it easier for readers to see that there are multiple reviews, making notability more apparent, and as SS says it's also helpful to reduce the number of footnote markers in the main text. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:12, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
If it was, thanks for introducing it to me! I've improved many an article with the format. Sometimes too successfully. Just look at the reference list for John Fraser Hart. SilverserenC 01:53, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Biographies of women neurosurgeons

I happened to find is reference while looking for something else. I think it might be useful here. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:38, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Actually the entire issue of the journal is about women neurosurgeons , not just the one article. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:17, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
This is so cool Dodger67! Thanks for sharing, will try to do some editing based on it. @Dsp13: there's a whole article on African women in neuroscience! Lajmmoore (talk) 20:34, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
Thanks very much both of you! Lajmmoore I set about creating a stub for Faiza Lalam, before realizing you had got going on a draft already :) Dsp13 (talk) 22:26, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
Moved to mainspace! Faiza Lalam but could probably do with more sources, if anyone fancies digging! Lajmmoore (talk) 07:07, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
@Lajmmoore I'm particularly pleased to see that Karin Muraszko is one of the editorial team of the special edition. The article about her was the first BLP I wrote (it's probably overdue for an update!). Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:09, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
I've added the African neurosurgeons mentioned to Wikidata, and here's a redlist page where they're now included: Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Neurosurgeons Dsp13 (talk) 10:50, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Ideas for May – feedback and help requested

I just realised that April is almost over and we haven't decided on topics for May. Please head over and contribute to the discussion on our Ideas page. I'm happy to get to work on some of the pages and invitation when we know what we are doing.--Oronsay (talk) 20:15, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

The pages, templates and invitation have all been created, but Women in the Ancient World and its template still need to be proofread by another pair of eyes. Then we will be ready for the month of May.--Oronsay (talk) 23:02, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata problems with Swedish opera singers and dancers

Thanks to the enthusiasm of Adam Cuerden for image enhancement, I have recently been developing articles on several Swedish opera singers who have articles in Swedish and/or images on Commons. Surprisingly, I was unable to find many of the most important ones on Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Actresses - Sweden or even on Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by nationality/Sweden, both of which have recently been updated. As a result, I have had to develop my own List of Images of female singers and dancers at the Royal Swedish Opera on the basis of Commons category Black and white photographs of performers at Kungliga operan. All the names on my list seem to be on Wikidata but many do not appear in our redlists. This may well explain why we haven't developed their EN biographies until now. Can anyone help? (Examples include Anna Bartels (Q26240336), Liva Järnefelt (Q4957657), Otti Pegel (Q110916484) and Paula Maria Lizell (Q4963255).)--Ipigott (talk) 11:21, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Great to listen this. For mine, The main problem is that I rarely found the English language sources as I didn't have any software to translate that into English Language. Thank you! Fade258 (talk) 11:33, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
@Ipigott: I made this based on the actresses list in case it will be of any use: Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Singers - Sweden. Gamaliel (talk) 16:33, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
That's wonderful, Gamaliel. I see that those who were missing in the other lists are now included. Would it be possible to add a column on Sitelinks?--Ipigott (talk) 18:14, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
@Ipigott: There should be one on the far right. I removed some of the middle columns to make it more visible. Gamaliel (talk) 19:34, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
@ @Ipigott:, thank you for this. You might share your list with WP:WikiProject Opera as well, of which I am an active member. In looking at your list, Anna Oscàr is the married name of Anna Thulin, so you have two entries for the same woman. I am not sure which name should be the primary; but one of them should redirect to the other. Perhaps you can do some digging and make a decision on that front. Best.4meter4 (talk) 11:03, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
@Ipigott:, see above post. @4meter4:, there was some confusion, Anna Dorothea Oscàr (Q4971398), Anna Oscàr, was an opera singer born in 1875, now merged with duplicate Anna Dorothea Oscàr (Q42173760). There is also Anna Thulin (Q28357357), sv:Anna Thulin, who was an illustrator born in 1904, I have removed her wikidata image dated 1896. TSventon (talk) 11:44, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
@TSventon Thank you for sorting this out. Shouldn't this image, File:Anna Thulin, rollporträtt - SMV - H3 207.tif, be added to Anna Dorothea Oscàr (Q4971398)?4meter4 (talk) 20:39, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
@Ipigott and TSventon. I went ahead and redirected Anna Thulin to Anna Oscàr; as she used that name during the first third of her career and it is a reasonable search target. If or when an article is created on the artist of that name; the redirect can always be written over and a hat note put in to direct to the opera singer article. Interestingly, Anna Oscàr was only known by that name during the last third of her career as the middle part of her career she performed using the name Anna Hellström‎ (which I have also created a redirect for) from her first marriage. Less than half of her career was spent using the name Anna Oscàr.4meter4 (talk) 21:20, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
4meter4, the image could be added, possibly in exchange for the group image. There are 18 images in commons:Category:Anna Oscàr, which is probably too many for a Wikidata page. TSventon (talk) 02:10, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

AfD for "Women in the Montana government"

Please see this discussion. Cielquiparle (talk) 16:17, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

UPDATE: Thanks to @Ipigott for joining in the AfD discussion. The AfD discussion has now been re-listed, so it would be great if we could get a few more people to weigh in. (I have no prior experience with this process so am still learning how it all works.) It seems the main argument now is that an article such as "Women in the Montana state government" should not exist as a standalone, on the basis that all the information already exists in individual biography pages, which seems wrong to me. Cielquiparle (talk) 09:12, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Kat Rosenfield

Last year I created a stub article for author Kat Rosenfield. A editor is claiming she is not notable on the talk page. From what I see, she has had coverage of her books for the past ten years, including write ups in notable reviews. Don’t these establish her notability? Thriley (talk) 18:47, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

You can point them at WP:NAUTHOR#3. From a brief glance, it looks like she "has created...a significant or well-known work or collective body of work" and those works "have been the primary subject...of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." pburka (talk) 18:51, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Looking at the sourcing, I see that there's only one review for her first book, the other sources are Publisher's Weekly, which is basically press releases, and a reprint of the Connecticut magazine review. For the second book the Wired interview isn't a great source, and the other three aren't reviews, and only mention her in passing. The review for the third book looks good, and the fourth book has one blog review, which doesn't help, and another good review. It's not great, but I wouldn't AfD it. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:54, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Thank you both. Two of her books have reviews from Kirkus Reviews. Is that a reliable/notable enough source? Thriley (talk) 18:58, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Yes to Kirkus in general. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources: "Most content by Kirkus Reviews is considered to be generally reliable. Kirkus Indie is a pay for review program for independent authors, its content is considered to be questionable and to not count towards notability, in part because the author can choose whether or not the review is published. " Edwardx (talk) 10:21, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, that and the Connecticut magazine source look good. Here's more: full review, blurb, full review, not sure on source, full review, full review, and another full review. I think there's more than enough for notability. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:14, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Publishers Weekly is a reputable reviewer. There are also two reviews at Library Journal and two more at School Library Journal. pburka (talk) 19:33, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Agree re: Publishers Weekly. For many book publishers, it has traditionally been the holy grail to get them to even acknowledge your book. Cielquiparle (talk) 21:28, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Not sure where I got my mistaken impression. Thanks for the info. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:00, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
If you are uncertain about any source, first check Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. If there is nothing there, then then you can search the 100s of pages of archives at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Looking there for "Publishers Weekly" brings up 14 results. Broadly speaking, one should give greater weight to more recent discussions, or those that give a more detailed discussion of the source. Edwardx (talk) 10:29, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

More revenge fantasies against banned editors and damage to articles on women being done

Tamingimpala was just banned today for being a sockpuppet of an older account. Per usual, some people are going through and tagging every article they've ever made for deletion in order to make Wikipedia worse than it was yesterday. The editor was an active member of WiR and made a decent number of articles about women that are in the process of being deleted as quickly as possible. You can see a list of the person's article contributions on this old version of their userpage and which articles have already been deleted in the past 24 hours (more than half, it looks like). At least they aren't blatant enough to try to go after the DYKs, but that may be only a matter of time. If you want to try and save and/or resurrect the, likely all perfectly good and notable content, articles, there's the list to go by. Have fun. I don't have the time or energy these days to try and combat these anti-Wikipedia people and their frothing vendetta of punishing banned accounts. SilverserenC 06:03, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

I also inquired about this and received a mostly favorable hearing (diff). Per my broader absence I don’t really have the bandwidth to go through these myself at present, but anyone available and motivated should not feel too intimidated about the probable response to a request to restore WiR-related content, I think. Innisfree987 (talk) 06:25, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
And anyone can also check the individual articles that have been deleted through the Wayback Machine if you want to know what was there. For example, here's Margareta Berger, a Swedish journalist who died 35 years ago. Seems like a perfectly normal article to me with sources to national biographies. SilverserenC 06:43, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Ady Fidelin, model and muse

The New York Times recently published an obituary for Ady Fidelin: [13] She was part of the French avant-garde art scene in the 1930s and 40s and the subject of hundreds of photographs by Man Ray and at least one work by Picasso. Thriley (talk) 16:36, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

See Adrienne Fidelin in French--Ipigott (talk) 16:40, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Thank you! I should have checked.. Thriley (talk) 16:46, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

If folks could keep an eye on ...

Talk:Rohese Giffard, where one of our few Middle Ages bios of a woman is being .. discussed. Ealdgyth (talk) 11:51, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Francisca Wieser

I have been working on this draft about Francisca Wieser, she was a noted scientific illustrator. Before this draft moves to the main space it is missing a few more sentences and RS citations elaborating on her career. For whatever reason I am struggling with completing this one, I hit a writing block. If anyone has any interest in helping out so eventually it can be moved, please feel free. Thanks, PigeonChickenFish (talk) 06:00, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hadley Rille Books

Can anyone locate sources for Hadley Rille Books, a small press publisher of fantasy, sf & historical fiction which explicitly attempts to promote strong female characters? I deprodded it but have failed to find much in the way of reliable significant coverage of the press to contribute to the AfD. (There are reviews of their books but I've not had much luck in persuading AfD commenters that they contribute towards the notability of a small press.) Unfortunately the article has had multiple contributions from editors with probable COI. Thanks, Espresso Addict (talk) 01:40, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Ellen Wetherald Ahrens

DC Women

Question for the hive mind:
Which is the better death date for Ellen Wetherald Ahrens, 1935 or 1938?

  • 1935 is stated in Oxford Art Online and the Philadelphia Museum of Art
  • 1938 is stated in Invaluable, askArt and the Nasher Museum.
  • (ArtNet states 1953, but that is mostly likely a typo)

My inclination is to use 1935. Any learned opinions welcome. Thanks. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 22:54, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

She clearly learned the art of resurrection and the people were forced to return her to the grave repeatedly to prevent the undead apocalypse. SilverserenC 23:18, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Wow, she really faded into obscurity. Any suggestions on how to note all the different dates welcome. Thanks! WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
There are some thoughts at MOS:APPROXDATE - "Other forms of uncertainty should be expressed in words, either in article text or in a footnote". Perhaps (c.1859 - c.1938) and a footnote listing the various claims? --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:07, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks Tagishsimon! I think I got it. Ellen Wetherald Ahrens Feel free to improve the way I handled the death date Best, WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 20:27, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
1937. First-class diplomacy skills, WAU :) --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:31, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Tagishsimon well, after all that brain power and research Gamaliel found the death certificate and she died on October 31, 1935. BTW check out Wikipedia:100 DC Women. There are some interesting new articles being submitted. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 16:57, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

May Women in Red events

Women in Red May 2022, Vol 8, Issue 5, Nos 214, 217, 227, 229, 230


Online events:


See also:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:51, 30 April 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging

It is Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month, but that's America. We should do an Asian event soon, though. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs 15:26, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Agnes Janson image

I'm writing about the Swedish opera singer Agnes Janson and have found a suitable image in the journal Idun here. Is anyone able to extract the image and add it to Commons? Perhaps Adam Cuerden?--Ipigott (talk) 11:11, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Can you read the text in the lower left of the image? Fors____? It's important to work out credit. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 15:12, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Adam Cuerden, it could be Forssell, but sv:Christian Forssell died in 1852, so perhaps sv:Gabriel Forssell. TSventon (talk) 15:45, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Better, sv:Gunnar Forssell (konstnär) did work for Idun, see commons:File:Alice_Bonthron_Idun_1891,_nr_18.jpg. TSventon (talk) 16:02, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Looks like Forssell to me. Compare with this one which reads G. Forssell.--Ipigott (talk) 19:25, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Ipigott, Hi all, Can you help me for tagging the correct liscense regarding this image Agnes Janson? Fade258 (talk) 02:41, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Fade258: Looks to me as if the nearest thing to an author is Draycott rather than the signature dealer Tamino. Don't know if it's a good idea to use an image with the Tamino label on it. I've added a category.--Ipigott (talk) 07:44, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
@Ipigott:, Thank you for your response and I have an one image same to this but on that image water mark of Taminoautographs is omit. Can I upload that watermark free image with this same liscense tag? Fade258 (talk) 08:04, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Fade258: Yes, please go ahead.--Ipigott (talk) 08:24, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
@Ipigott:, Ok, Thanks for your cooperation. Please look on that image I have uploaded an image to that existing page. Have a look and if any mistake occurs then tell me. Fade258 (talk) 08:27, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
@Fade258:, the photographer seems to be John Arthur Draycott, see Commons:File:Portrait, Blanche Thompson, c. 1890 Wellcome L0037363.jpg. TSventon (talk) 09:08, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Women in Red Translation Contest

WiR Translation Contest 2022 logo

The Translation Contest is now in its second month. It started in April and will run through June 2022. It focuses on the translation of biographies of women from other language versions of Wikipedia. April brought 165 new translations! It would be great if the active contributors could share their experiences. For example is there a particular area or language editors have found fruitful or even particularly tricky? Do you find that the existing articles in other languages need much work to meet English Wikipedia standards? In my limited experience looking at the other language Wikipedias, English Wiki is the gold standard.

Also if anyone cares to self-identify their language skills, please do! I, myself, can only speak and read English so I particularly admire these translations. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:13, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@WomenArtistUpdates I'm loving seeing all the energy (& new pages) that the translation challenge is bringing! I only have a bit of German, and a tiny tiny bit of Russian, so usually rely on Google Translate and common sense (neither of which are reliable), but most translations I do turn out OK! In fact, translating from Arabic Wikipedia inspired me to take a course in Arabic language! My only piece of advice with translation is to watch the numbers too: I did a translation of Meri Avidzba using Google Translate sources, and nominated it for DYK, but in the translating I misunderstood the numbers and it ended up on the front page, and has gone into the annals of mistakes! See Talk:Meri Avidzba for the full discussion! Lajmmoore (talk) 14:23, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Geneaology help?

Hello all, I just started a draft for Paula F. Beaubrun was who the first woman to be appointed Attorney General of the British Virgin Islands (1972). I can't find a date of birth anywhere, nor whether she has passed away. Would someone be able to take a look? Also, I'm not sure about nationality? I couldn't find any sources that said definitely where she was from. She lived in Saint Lucia in later life, but that doesn't mean she was Saint Lucian. Thoughts (or better search-engine usage than mine) welcome, and with thanks. Lajmmoore (talk) 06:38, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Could this be her? https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/88880062/paula-f.-beaubrun Gamaliel (talk) 14:25, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Who's Who in the World lists her birth year as 1928. Gamaliel (talk) 14:29, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
That seems logical, as this says she was 45 in 1974 and while it doesn't name her father, it says he was the colonial treasurer. This shows the colonial treasurer was I. C. Beaubrun and this shows she had ties to St Lucia. SusunW (talk) 14:56, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Pinging @Guettarda: who might know good places to look for sources on people from the Caribbean. Gamaliel (talk) 15:22, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Lajmmoore more bits and bites. Appointed as AG in 1967.[14] She studied law in England[15] and apparently those studies were at Lincoln's Inn where she was admitted in 1960.[16] This might be an indicator of when she graduated, if you can find full access. SusunW (talk) 17:02, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Ancestry.com has passenger manifests for the UK, Canada and the US, which is often a good place to get approximate DOB and residence at a point in time. Odds are she'd be in there. I often rely on UF's Digital Library of the Caribbean.
@SusunW, your first link also says that she was born in St. Georges, Grenada and that her brother was "Matthew" Beaubrun. Based on the date and the description they give, that's got to be Michael Beaubrun. Assuming, though, that IC Beaubrun is their father, it does look like he was St Lucian. In 1908 he's an assistant clerk in the Audit Department in St Lucia (which would fit the c. 1889 DOB from the headstone). In 1946 he's the Controller of Imports and Exports in Trinidad (p. 200). Here he's mentioned as comptroller, in Barbados in 1950, and here he's the chair of the Central Housing and Planning Authority in St Lucia (and an OBE).
So I'd say she's probably Grenadian-born, St Lucian by heritage, and quite possibly grew up all over the Eastern Caribbean. Guettarda (talk) 17:13, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
(Ancestry.com is available through WP:TWL, btw). Guettarda (talk) 17:19, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Guettarda I can't access Ancestry and there is a wait list. Ignatius Cecil Beaubrun per the Lincoln Inn registry is definitely her father. This says he was St Lucian and his wife Clyte was Grenadian. Paula's birth record on FamilySearch says 5 Oct 1928 and mom was Clyte Eleanor Mar?in. But other records show the maternal surname was Harbin SusunW (talk) 17:35, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
There's an unsourced entry in a Beaubrun family tree on Ancestry that gives her mother's name as Clytemnestra "Clytie" Eleanor Harbin.
This arrival record for the UK in 1955 lists Paula's DOB as 5/10/1928, her occupation as bank clerk, her last permanent residence as St Lucia, with her passport issued in Trinidad. Guettarda (talk) 17:53, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
That was fun Guettarda! Collaboration at it's best. I checked the Florida collections and came up with nada. Lajmmoore you might score an obit or clippings by shooting off an e-mail to the National Archives or to the The Voice newspaper, which printed her sister's obituary. SusunW (talk) 18:16, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
@Guettarda@SusunW@Gamaliel - you're all so amazing! Thank you so much for finding the time, and going to the effort, so grateful! Lajmmoore (talk) 18:48, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
I created entries in Wikidata for Paula (Q111907955) and her father (Q111907786). TJMSmith (talk) 19:28, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
It was a lot of fun - real collaborative work is the best part of Wikipedia (and happens far too rarely). It was pretty cool too, because although I didn't know Michael Beaubrun (and didn't know Paula or their father existed) I believe my uncle was friends with him, and my parents knew him. It's cool to discover someone who I could, in theory, have met in real life, but I didn't even know existed. Guettarda (talk) 21:24, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Exactly, and a thing in the Caribbean. Though the islands are spread far apart, they are all connected, as are the people. That "Six Degrees to Kevin Bacon" thing is more like one or two degrees. I often encounter that when writing about Caribbean people. I may not know them, but I know someone who knows/knew them or I have written about someone who knew them. I love that because it truly shows us how interconnected we really are. SusunW (talk) 15:27, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shakuntala Atre

Would appreciate thoughts on this one. pburka uncovered that the subject publishes as "Shaku Atre", which seems to be being getting lost in the wash. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 22:39, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Why are we examining an adjunct professor as an academic? SusunW (talk) 17:26, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
Pragmatically, if we could prove that the subject were notable under WP:PROF then we don't need to meet GNG. Her notable research was, I think, probably done while at IBM, and might not have been published at all. The subject is probably most notable as an author, but I and others have failed to find book reviews. I don't think that's because they don't exist; I fear it reflects the bias of the WL databases. If Atre is considered neither as an academic nor as an author, then we need to meet the companies requirements, which are tough. I feel GNG is met, with the sources I and others have found, but other contributors to the AfD disagree. Espresso Addict (talk) 23:54, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Kathy Barnette

Noting some press about this article being "deleted":[17][18]. For the interested. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:16, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Why the scare quotes? It was deleted, after two AfDs: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kathy Barnette (April 2021) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kathy Barnette (2nd nomination) (May 2022). —David Eppstein (talk) 08:22, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
Because it's currently a redirect, with some relevant info. To their credit, CP notes the distinction. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:49, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Women who no longer edit Wikipedia

I'm one of them. I keep getting messages from all you lovely Women In Red people, and it reminds me every time that I stopped editing Wikipedia because it felt like such an aggressive masculine environment. I wondered today if there should not only be a list of women Wikipedia ought to include in terms of articles, but also a list of women Wikipedia drove away in terms of contributors. (I couldn't decide whether to add this here because it feels like whining, and then I remembered that every time I entered any kind of conversation on Wikipedia, I was mostly treated as if I was just whining, no matter what I was saying. So here it is.) BessieMaelstrom (talk) 13:54, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello @BessieMaelstrom, Thanks so much for sharing your experience and I am so sorry that's what you've found. I don't know enough about listing Wikipedians, but thanks for being honest. When I started editing in 2019 I found it similar to what you describe, but I do feel like I've personally noticed change over the past couple of years; that said there's still more work to do. In the meantime, sending wikilove to you! Lajmmoore (talk) 14:28, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
BessieMaelstrom walking through the world as a woman requires navigational skill to ensure one's safety. This environment is no different. I can't speak for all women, but when I began editing in 2014, I experienced the same type of aggression. I still see those behaviors from time to time. But as Lajmmoore said, I think it's improved. Perhaps it is not so much improved as 1) Women in Red was created and is a safe space, 2) building a network and relationships with other editors makes one feel safer, 3) establishing a reputation for quality and collaborative work provides a buffer, or 4) one just gets used to it. I applaud you for your honesty and am sorry we were unable to support you long enough for you to find a safe space to contribute. SusunW (talk) 15:59, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
BessieMaelstrom, is there anyway we can convince you to come back and edit? Your perspective is so valuable. I can't promise you that you won't face some of the things you did in the past but this project is extremely supportive and I think you would find your adventure to be different this time. I understand if you have hesitation and I empathize with any anxiety you may feel over it but I think so highly of your experiences in life and the impact they can have on the way we see things as you share your perspective that I think it would be a travesty not to ask. It is so crucial to a collaborative effort like Wikipedia and why the retention of good faith editors is so important. --ARoseWolf 17:06, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
I'm definitely reminded how much more confrontational other parts of Wikipedia can be every time I come to this board and find such a welcoming and affirming environment. So add my thanks to all participants here for keeping it going, my hope that it is possible to spread that feeling of community-building more widely, and my disappointment that the aggression elsewhere has continued to drive away the women editors whom I believe we badly need. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:26, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

BessieMaelstrom You are not alone. I have several times taken some very long wikibreaks due to misogynistic behaviour on en.Wikipedia. Problems that I have encountered include the following:
  • Misusing WP rules to undermine my work, e.g.
  • (a) Accusing me of expressing opinion on article talk pages, when actually opinion is permissible on talkpages (just not on articles, where I don't do that).
  • (b) Deciding unilaterally and without discussion that certain information in a female biography e.g. education and training, teaching art and lists of works (all cited), is "irrelevant", and that commissioned artworks are not art but "just work" (take that, Michaelangelo!) deleting it, and accusing me of edit warring if I put it right and I request discussion.
  • (c) Reverting my every edit on an article which is under construction, so that I then work it up in userspace before publishing my edit - then trolls alerting other editors to the location of my userspace workup in such a way that others are being asked to watch my every step before publication (inciting stalking, surely?)
  • (d) Attempting to speedy delete the article on grounds of non-notability, then when that fails, deleting or drastically minimising large fully-cited sections of an article in the hope of removing any sign of notability.
  • (e) Making dismissive remarks as to the "minor" status of the still-living-and-working female subject of the article, on the talk page, where the subject of the article could theoretically read it.
  • (f) Putting me on their watchlist, then tracking my every edit across en.Wikipedia, and joining in other discussions so as to contradict whatever I may be saying.
  • (g) Making a great play of complaining that during the first half-hour after publishing a female biography, that I had not yet added the Wikiproject templates to the talkpage, although there is no WP rule to say that one has to do that within a timeframe. On that occasion, I was doing the what-links-here links first, and the Wikiproject templates were my next job, but they were already making accusations of incompetence 20 minutes after I had published.
  • (h) When I took the matter to arbitration, I was shocked to see that not only had they brought in their friends to put me down, but a female admin, in an awkward attempt to make peace, said that they should leave off, but that I should tolerate "robust" criticism (what?) She then told me on a user talkpage that I was wrong to take it to arbitration, because the attackers all congregate there, so that there would be no help for me. The trolls saw that, took it out of context, and thereafter repeated that I "should not have taken it to arbitration". So I had to conclude from that, that WP not only has no working form of assistance for women suffering misogyny here, but that its own arbitration system is functionally counterproductive.
In respect of one of "my" decimated and minimised female biographies, The trolls subsequently prevented me from editing it by accusing me of edit-warring whenever I tried to improve it. I therefore took to emailing copies of the full, original published article to the many academic institutions, galleries and newspapers which were associated with that biography subject. They were grateful for that, because they could use my research (especially sources) in their own work, and for their own records, because the original article contained cited information which they did not all possess. Those establishments were aware that they could not have used the decimated article in that way, because the information and citations were now gone.
I now feel unable to edit those decimated articles further myself, due to the behaviour that tends to occur if I do so. The saddest effect is that once the article has become decimated and minimised, decent editors try to come in and repair some of the damage, but they usually cannot get it right, because they cannot access many of my original citations, because I tend to use archives with paywalls. Similarly, the trolls cannot see those sources either, so their edits are based on source information which they know nothing about - so both vandals and well-meaning follow-up editors have been adding information which is incorrect. Storye book (talk) 17:37, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Hello BessieMaelstrom. I'm sorry you had a rough time trying to contribute! There are a lot of male editors, some of whose behaviour can be... offputting -- but there are also surprisingly many women, some of whom (myself included) choose to contribute under a gender-neutral user name. The Women in Red talk page is certainly a lovely haven. I find wikibreaks are invaluable for stress relief -- I tend to work on an informal 50% on 50% off schedule, and just walk away for a month or three when things get to me. I must admit, I can't really understand the deletionist mindset; if one doesn't want rich varied content, why is one contributing to an encyclopedia!?! Espresso Addict (talk) 00:06, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Hi @BessieMaelstrom:, I'm sorry for what you've faced while contributing in wikipedia. Being a male editor, I'm also a member/participant of this WIR project. By addressing the problem faced by female editors over a past days, Can you (all editors present in this discussion) have some suggestions to reduce this sorts of problem? As they feel more comfortable or safe in this environment to contribute in wikipedia. Fade258 (talk) 03:12, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
    I've been mulling this question over; one thing that strikes me is that one should consider an editor's talk page as their "home", and defer (as far as policy allows) to what that editor appears to be comfortable with. Some people are happy inviting people to party on their talk page, others find strangers turning up even to make positive comments intrusive. And avoid overpinging; a lot of editors find it stressful. The thanks button is an excellent invention; it isn't insistent and doesn't invite response (thank you Foundation for that one, at least!). All of these apply independent of the genders of either participant. Espresso Addict (talk) 04:42, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
    I've pondered the question a lot too. I think in general, the anonymity of the internet allows some people to be uber-agressive and rude in a way they would not be in person. And, there are just people who edit here who by their own admission just enjoy being confrontational and telling other people what to do. A virtual platform also means that recipients of any message have no visual or audible clues to assist them in determining the tone of the message or the frame of mind of the recipent. Truly, the only real advice I can give on the subject, Fade258 is to ask yourself before you post something, "is this how I would react/say this if the person was beside me"? If we are all more aware of how our posts effect others, hopefully we try to communicate in a more respectful manner. SusunW (talk) 15:29, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Thank you, BessieMaelstrom, for bringing your problems to our attention. It's also useful to see how many other women editors have experienced discrimination. Whenever a contributor becomes a member of WiR, I invite them to let me know if ever they need assistance or face problems. In your case, apart from initial exchanges, I can't remember any further communications from you. If you had let me, or other members of WiR, know about the problems you were experiening, we may well have been able to help you out. Even now, we can no doubt provide support if you decide to return to active editing. Over the years we have been able to assist quite a number of editors who have experienced mistreatment and several have since become outstanding contributors. Our contacts with the Wikimedia Foundation in this connection are indeed beginning to bear fruit although it is no easy matter to overcome the unfortunate traditions on the English version of Wikipedia which have developed over the years. As for a list of women who no longer edit, it may well be useful for those who feel it is specifically because they are women they have faced insuperable problems. Aprart from women who do not hide their gender, there are many other contributors who leave as a result of unfair treatment, often as a result of unjustified blocking. We also need to take their difficulties into account. Nevertheless, my overall impression is that things are generally improving and that many of our members continue to edit without running into serious difficulties. We'll be able to do even better if we can encourage more editors to become active members of our project, and that means attracting more women editors too. I can tell you one of the most satisfying experiences you can have on Wikipedia is to help new contributors gain success.--Ipigott (talk) 06:34, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
    • Fade258 Regarding your request for ways of dealing with misogynistic trolls etc. on WP. I can tell you what I do about it, but it doesn't always work, and it wouldn't work for everyone.
    • 1. Female username or unrevealing username? Mine is purposely unrevealing, but it doesn't always help. I create or edit all sorts of articles, including subjects which in the "old days" were normally associated with only men or only women - such as knitting and railways. This can confuse trolls who may lack confidence in their own sexuality. I created a male biography for which the only available free ID photo was an experimental camp-looking portrait taken by one of his artist friends in the early days of photography. An editor who had decorated his userpage with pictures of himself in camo gear next to army weaponry took issue with that photo. He apparently had little knowledge of the biog. subject's country of origin or artistic profession, but the troll became quite desperate to have that photo removed, and became very angry with me in the process. I got the impression that he was angry because he thought I was a gay male editor because I had used that photo, and I still wonder whether, if I had used a female username, he would have been less aggressive. That event does show, though, that it's not only women who are vulnerable here.
    • 2. When the trolling about the camp photo happened, I ran away from WP for several years. I am naturally the appeasing type, but since I came back I have tended to come out with all guns blazing when I get trolled. I try to be over-careful to do that within all WP rules, but it's probably not altogether a good idea. I know that I have at least once hurt the feelings, quite unnecessarily, of at least one of the participants in this very conversation - because I jumped to a wrong conclusion, and I over-reacted when in fact they had perfectly good intentions, and were making valuable contributions. Coming out with all guns blazing (while strictly within the rules) does work with misogynistic trolls, certainly. But I have to be very careful indeed not to lower myself into doing anything similar to what the trolls do.
    • 3. Perhaps the most valuable thing that I've learned from those experiences is how to edit more perfectly (to avoid giving them any excuse whatsoever to criticise). When I publish an article, I prepare several what-links-here links in other articles in advance, and I have ready one or two Wikiproject templates, so as to get them up and running on the article talkpage within five minutes of publication. I also make sure my biogs have a defaultsort and an authority control template. Each of those makes one less thing for trolls to shout at me for. If a troll has any criticism which is even remotely valid, I put it right immediately and thank them if possible. (I have also tried to compromise in the past, but that doesn't work: if anything, it makes them worse). You can see from this that my experiences of trolling have made me fairly paranoid as an editor, but on the other hand, my articles now have fewer imperfections that would waste the time of our good copyeditors and bot-controllers.
    • 4. Just sometimes, after I've called them out in no uncertain terms, a troll will try to compromise, and will be clearly doing their best to adjust their behaviour. I do try to be aware of their efforts and show appreciation by cooperating with what they are doing, thanking them for their edits, or whatever. This did happen recently, so the world is not so bad, all the time.
    • Please don't take any of my above points as advice. We all have to do whatever fits our own needs. But maybe there will be something there that people can adapt and use in their own way. Storye book (talk) 09:17, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
      @Storye book: The {{under construction}} template is useful as a defence against editors who might pick on imperfections in a brand new article before you have given it all the bells and whistles, as long as right from the start it has enough sourced content to assert notability. PamD 11:44, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Since a few people have mentioned experiencing unhelpful edits and criticism within minutes of an article being created, I'm guessing that a lot of it comes from new page patrol, which is a vital firewall against spam and the like, but definitely has some... problems in the way it communicates. If you've got a good number of articles under your belt, there's no need for your creations to go through this process, so those who haven't already might consider requesting autopatrolled. You can do that at WP:PERM/A or I'd be happy to give it to eligible members of this project directly (since I review a lot of requests at PERM/A anyway). – Joe (talk) 12:35, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
    • I would also highly recommend drafting either in your own sandbox (or in the Draft namespace). Guettarda (talk) 13:55, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
      BessieMaelstrom, I, too, am so sorry that you have had to deal with these negative experiences and that you have stopped editing as a result. I hope you've been encouraged by some of the comments in this space. Should you feel comfortable enough to return at some point, Women in Red is here for you.
      Storye book, I add {{under construction}} or {{in use}} when I create a new article and that (usually) keeps the template-slappers away. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:43, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
      @Guettarda: The one problem with starting in sandbox or draft, especially if it's someone very topical or part of a redlist from an editathon, is that you might put a lot of effort in and then find that someone else had started an article in mainspace, so you end up having to merge your work into that one. I prefer to start a solid little stub: couple or more good sources, clear assertion of notability, {{under construction}}, and then work on the incoming redirects, surname page entry, links to other wikipedias, talk page project banners, that sort of infrastructure, before coming back to expand the stub. (Or I just leave it as that solid little stub in the hopes that someone else will come and expand it from the good sources I've given!) But we all choose the editing process which suits us best. PamD 15:06, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
      @PamD: You're right, I wasn't thinking about editathons. Creating articles for editathons is really hard. Guettarda (talk) 15:46, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  • This is sad, I personally know at least two Nigerian women editors, who are facing exactly what you faced. The sad thing is I feel completely powerless to help. Hopefully, people get the message. HandsomeBoy (talk) 14:58, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
    • Rosiestep I use {{under construction}} and {{in use}} when expanding a stub in mainspace, but when creating one of "my" articles it can take me years, and I mean years. It would not be practicable to use those templates in that circumstance, so I work it up in userspace. Often it takes time to establish notability in the manner required by WP, and that is another reason to keep it in userspace until it is ready for mainspace. Those templates would not protect a not-yet-notable just-begun article, and nor would draft-mode. I have my own way of working up an article - sometimes first collecting a large number of images in a Commons category; sometimes collecting a long list of online sources and nothing else on the article page before beginning writing up the text - that way I can be sure that everything comes from the sources and that I have included no half-remembered facts. Again, no construction template would protect that kind of startup. Also I have home responsibilities, which means I often have to drop what I'm doing halfway through a sentence, and do a quick save before leaving the article alone for a day or so while I deal with real life duties - and again no construction tag would protect that. I have also found that female biographies require more proof of notability than male biographies do, on WP. For example, trolls in my experience will work-to-rule regarding the specification that artists need a good three works in public collections before notability can be established. I have seen that happen for female artist biographies several times, but not yet for male artist biographies. Storye book (talk) 15:30, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
      • Then you obviously haven't watchlisted Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Visual arts, where you see this all the time! Come off it! Johnbod (talk) 01:34, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
        • I'm sure. And do you see any issues with:"For example, trolls in my experience will work-to-rule regarding the specification that artists need a good three works in public collections before notability can be established. I have seen that happen for female artist biographies several times, but not yet for male artist biographies."? Johnbod (talk) 11:18, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
          • You are taking it out of context, Johnbod. I was talking about what I've seen happen or not happen to male and female biographies that I created. My own work has been the subject of my own posts in this conversation so far. I am not in a position to generalise. Storye book (talk) 14:44, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
            Oh look, it's Johnbod. Every time we have this discussion on whether trollish behavior makes Wikipedia a hostile environment for women editors, Johnbod sealions in to say "well actually that's perfectly appropriate behavior because they do the same thing to everyone else" (check the archives e.g.). Look in the mirror, Johnbod. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:09, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
            • Bullshit, Eppstein. I'm not saying that, & have never said that or anything like it. By all means look at that old discussion, which doesn't in the least support your assertion. Got any others? More research needed. Johnbod (talk) 16:42, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
              @Johnbod: If this was an ANI or Arbcom discussion, or a place where individual editors were being called trolls, your response might be warranted. But Storye book is trying to describe their experiences. Even if you don't feel their comments are quite fair, it's worth letting people vent.
              I think you also should bear in mind that you're also speaking about your experiences. None of us is speaking from carefully analysed data. My experience in my other life, where I get deletion notifications about student work, suggests that a lot more new bios of women get nominated for deletion, often by anons or editors with very few edits. The problem is that the student editors I work with create more bios of women, and women are less well covered in RSs, so there's a huge confounding factor.
              The thing is, your response here feels aggressive, it feels disruptive. Nuance in written communication is really hard to parse, and I don't believe it's your intent to derail things. But there's often a gap between intent and effect. Guettarda (talk) 16:59, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
              • I think one of the few things that is clear from academic research in this area is that male bios are more likely to be put up for deletion than female ones, and more likely to be deleted. Johnbod (talk) 17:05, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

It is usually at this point that I go radio silent, as this thread has begun to make me uncomfortable. Because my safe zone is WiR, I'm going to say something that is possibly unpopular (and then go radio silent). The irony of a thread talking about reducing aggression devolving into an aggressive thread is surely not lost on anyone. Can we 1) stop name-calling people? Describing bad behaviors does not have to use words like "troll" and "sealioning", which often will trigger an aggressive response. 2) stay focused on the topic of retention of editors and not descend into personal attacks? 3) be civil even when discussing topics that are difficult? Thanks, I'm out. SusunW (talk) 16:58, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

  • Comment. Everyone please be kind to one another. While we may not always agree with other's perspectives we should respect them. Further, it isn't wise to tell other people how to feel about what they have experienced.4meter4 (talk) 17:02, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Shireen Abu Akleh Image?

I noticed that the article for Shireen Abu Akleh no longer has an image. This article will be getting hundreds of thousands of views over the next few days. Any chance there appears to be a usable image somewhere? Thriley (talk) 04:30, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

I am not see anything in PD. "Fair use" might be contentious this close to her death. I think the image presented will be the best available at this time. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 21:19, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of women innovators and inventors by country

This deserves serious consideration. It is one of the many lists I have created to show the place of women in various fields, compiled in part on the basis of successful additions to Wikipedia following our WiR editathons. If this one is deleted, many more could go the same way. The argument that it does no more than the relevant categories is misleading: it makes it easier for users to see how women have played an important part in an area which is traditionally associated with men. The list could of course be expanded on the basis of recent results.--Ipigott (talk) 05:39, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

I've started expanding the list by including more women who have been noted for their inventions. Over the next couple of days, I'll try to develop coverage of innovators from around the world. The assessments of the more important names from wp:Women in Business should be of assistance here (excluding film and theatrical interests). I'll also be livening it up with a number of images. If we are serious about developing interest in how women have contributed to various fields, lists like this one should be instrumental in conveying understanding. I would of course welcome suggestions on how we can further improve lists such as this as I have tending to base my developments on names, dates and summary descriptions. (I'm afraid I'm not much good at tables and find those which exist on women difficult to edit or improve.)--Ipigott (talk) 16:59, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Going offline now, but what's most needed, imo, is reliable sources discussing women inventors as a topic, which should not be hard to find!!! Given the preeminence of the GNG, most people at AfD are swayed by significant coverage type arguments. Espresso Addict (talk) 21:23, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
[Bit more with it after having my coffee now] I fear we should have contested the deletion of the other list, which has the potential to set an unhelpful precedent. Is there nonlist content on the history of women inventors, because there's clearly bags of content to write on that topic? A lead to this list that establishes it is a notable topic by multiple bombproof sources would be valuable. (And sourced leads to all the other lists might be effective in making them look less like easy pickings.) I quite like sortable lists, as they allow people to sort the information to find what they are interested in, but the weight of code can make editing large pages nearly impossible on my overstrained laptop, so I can understand the counterarguments. Espresso Addict (talk) 02:44, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
  • @Ipigott: The first thing that jumped out at me, is that there is not one single reference on the entire page. It looks likely to pass as a Keep at AFD, but IMO without references, it could be put up at AFD again. Even CSD if it catches the eye of some editor who feels a need to rid Wikipedia of un-referenced content. — Maile (talk) 03:21, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
    In the light of the above and the supportive comments made at AfD I will continue to expand the lead, already improved by Espresso Addict, adding more general background supported by reliable sources.--Ipigott (talk) 05:44, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
    Now closed as keep; thanks everyone who worked on it! I do think valid criticism was raised during the debate, relating not only to this list but others in the series. The most important points seem to me to be inclusion criteria; bias towards US women (which may just reflect sources); lists must have a lead that demonstrates (via sources) that the topic is notable as a list (ie the entries are discussed as a set); sourcing issues (should such lists have sources or rely on the sources within the sub-articles). Espresso Addict (talk) 23:51, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
    Another thing that would be really nice, if someone here knows how to do it, would be a composite image for the lead, showcasing the variety of women inventors. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:07, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
    Espresso Addict It might make more sense to create a gallery where more images can be added over time. Point me to some PD images and I can start one. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:27, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

2022 Pulitzer Prize finalists

I created stubs for four 2022 Pulitzer Prize finalists:

Any help would be wonderful. Thank you, Thriley (talk) 05:58, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

  • I have added surname page entries for three of them: when Sylvia moves out of draft space, good luck in working out where to add her in the chaotic-looking list at Khouri (to which Khoury redirects): I can't work out what order it's trying to be in! PamD 11:54, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
    • I've also added DEFAULTSORT for all four - but can I point out to everyone the joys of the template {{L}}?
    It has to be used "substituted", but in just a few keystrokes you can add the DEFAULTSORT and whichever is appropriate of Category:Living people, Category:Year of birth missing (living people), and/or birth or death year categories. It takes three parameters, identified by their position in the template call: birth year if known, death year if known (or "missing" if known to be dead), and DEFAULTSORT value. Just type {{subst:L|||Power, Carla}}, for someone living, birth date unknown, sorting on "P". If you know someone's year of birth or death, include that: {{subst:L|1952|2022|Surname, Forename}} etc. If editing a draft, use this template, save the edit, and then immediately go back in with a second edit to hide the categories (colons or commenting out) while it's in draft (as I did with Draft:Sylvia Khoury)
    It gives good value per keystroke and makes it easy to give a biography article some of the infrastructure it needs! PamD 13:29, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
    One more: Erin I. Kelly. Thank you for your help! Thriley (talk) 05:46, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
  • I've added in-links to these authors from other WP pages. I thought this would be quick - but in fact there were a load of unlinked mentions - showing how overdue these pages were! Thank you Thriley for creating them Dsp13 (talk) 11:57, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rhea Kewalramani

Hi! Any folks here really good source ninjas? We're running into issues with verifying whether her films ran at Cannes in a student section and any coverage of her work and would like this to have a fair AfD (I say this as nominator). She's currently(?) working as an animator in Mumbai. Thanks either way. Star Mississippi 13:39, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Archive_113&oldid=1091656659"