Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red/Archive 51

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 45←Archive 49Archive 50Archive 51Archive 52Archive 53→Archive 55

Translation for subtitles

So The Optical Society has licensed this video for free for us for Donna Strickland. If anybody around here speaks other languages, if would be helpful to get more additional translations of the subtitles. There are 30 or 40 language versions of the article at this point, and it's only 30 seconds worth of audio.

You can see the English that needs translated with the markup here if anyone would like to help. GMGtalk 02:17, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Nice!S Philbrick(Talk) 14:23, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Swati Maliwal‎

Swati Maliwal‎ is a women activist and her article was deleted in 2015 but now in 2018 there is coverage .She is called a prominent feminist by The Guardian.It was marked for speedy and removed by me felt it was not a speedy candidate .But it needs expansion.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:24, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Pharaoh of the Wizards I will take a look. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:08, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks and can please comment here either way on its notability just for record and for future reference. Thanks.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:12, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Get ready for November with Women in Red!

Three new topics for WiR's online editathons in November, two of them supporting other initiatives



New: Religion Deceased politicians Asia

Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative

Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!):

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:40, 14 October 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Anyone experiencing difficulties with VisualEditor?

It's been brought to my attention that one of our recent members who has successfully created three biographies has not been able to react to items posted on talk pages as they cannot be edited using VisualEditor. If this is a problem others have experienced, it might be worthwhile trying to find a solution. I'm afraid I have absolutely no experience with VisualEditor myself. Maybe there are other easy-to-learn options for those editing on mobiles?--Ipigott (talk) 12:08, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Ipigott, There is a tool, User:Enterprisey/reply-link which makes replying in threads easier. If they follow instructions on that page, they can install or it (or, as an i-admin, I can do it for them on request). Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:34, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
This looks as if it is just what might be needed. I'll bring this thread to the attention of those who may be interested. I must say, Ritchie333, you are becoming one of our most important contacts and supporters.--Ipigott (talk) 18:42, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Ritchie333: Dzingle1 has sent me an email saying she would very much like you to install the tool for her. Let me know if I need to forward the email to you.--Ipigott (talk) 08:53, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
Sure, I've installed it and dropped her a note. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:21, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
VE = training wheels for newbies. For anything other than very basic editing it is effectively malware. IMHO^ editors should be encouraged to wean themselves from using VE as soon as possible in their Wiki-careers. (^Opinion of an almost-old-fogey editor who started here long before VE was invented, so...) Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:35, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
  • VE works great. I use it for all my articlespace edits. (← Opinion of an editor who started a couple of years before the previous old fogey :)). However, it doesn't work on talk pages, never has, and there are many other areas of the project where you still need to know how use wikitext. So it's probably worth gently encouraging newbies to use talk pages the standard way. It's not that hard. – Joe (talk) 09:42, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
  • VE does work for most things, and I use it when making minor changes in an article unless there are spacing problems; I use wikitext for new writing. But for new editors, because of the talk page problem, it's simpler to teach wikitext, and tell people to learn it by looking at existing articles. I wouldn't like to have new people dependent on modifying their js file. DGG ( talk ) 15:16, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  • I discourage everyone from using VE. Dodger67's comparison to malware isn't too far off the mark. Wikitext isn't very intuitive, but anyone that wants to do more than correct a single error here and there should learn how to use it simply because VE is inadequate for all but the most basic edits, by people who don't edit very often. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 16:33, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  • I've been having issues with getting to the source editor, which i prefer. I can't switch between VE and SE, i only get the VE tool bar, but the text appears in source code. It's very strange. Only thing i've figured out is to go into an incognito chrome or resetting my preferences (but it only allows me the text editor temporarily). I'm sure i'll figure it out eventually if i keep trouble shooting.Fred (talk) 14:48, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Greek National Opera

Interesting collection of names and biographies here: it's a list of people who have worked with the Greek National Opera over the years. It's not perfect - there are quite a few smaller players here, it looks like - but it looks like a potential goldmine of material for a lot of performers and other artists who might not otherwise have any coverage in English. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:06, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

We have a redlist for Women in Music, if you notice anyone who needs an article on here.Fred (talk) 19:11, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Women in Red in Norway

Women in Red in Norway

Learn about the new Women in Red initiative in Norway, founded in September, as a collaboration of Oslo Metropolitan University and The National Library in Oslo. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:02, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Yay! I see that they are focusing on historical writers and photographers. Fortunately these are professions that left "works" which can be documented. Women who left ideas, are much harder :) SusunW (talk) 16:36, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
Interesting you should say that, Susun. Astrid Carlsen, who took the photo, is a specialist in the history of ideas. I've been looking at their project page and was intrigued to see they have a Wikidata list of women with the most links in other languages but no article in Norwegian. I thought I would apply the approach to English and created Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Most non-en links. At first sight, it looks quite interesting. Just look at how many Americans feature in multiple other versions of Wikipedia but not in English!--Ipigott (talk) 10:56, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
I see that Danmichaelo and Sam Vimes also edit on the EN wiki, offering opportunities for closer collaboration.--Ipigott (talk) 11:15, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
I'm working with Astrid on a foundation project. She's fabulous. Cross-project collaboration is fabulous. To create Esilda Villa last month, women from 3 continents helped look for sources. It is amazing how far Victualler and Rosie's idea has spread! SusunW (talk) 16:03, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
Yes, it's great to see that more and more language versions are adopting the Women in Red approach. While Roger and Rosie have certainly been great coordinators from the start, I don't think anyone has contributed more to the project than you have, Susun. What impresses me most is how you have perfected your approach to a stage where you not only create many really well developed articles each month but manage to take more and more of them up to GA (not to mention all the substantial additions you make to existing articles). It's always a pleasure to help you along with a bit of copy editing and translation work here and there, especially as it's fascinating to learn how virtually unknown women have in fact contributed so much to the world in which we live. That foundation project you are involved in with Astrid sounds very interesting. Can we hear more about it?--Ipigott (talk) 07:00, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks Ipigott, I certainly try. (I have a new candidate I will need help with :) in a few days.) The project is part of the foundation's strategic plan. We work on the Diversity Group, trying to lay out strategies to increase our representation and outreach for knowledge to encompass the plurality of our shared existence. Very early stages, but it encompasses diversifying the editor base, content, target audiences, as well as administration. SusunW (talk) 16:03, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Looks like a great initiative, concentrating on the right priorities. If others are interested, you can see it here. I was surprised to see there was no one specifically representing African interests. That seems to me to be one of the areas requiring most attention to diversity.--Ipigott (talk) 19:21, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Regarding African interests, Felix Nartey, from Ghana, announced today on FB, "I have always been particular about affiliate partnerships or collaborations within our movement. We have a lot to benefit from mutual projects and supporting each other, I wish to thank Wikimedia Norge for their support in our activities. In the coming months we will share some more highlights stay tuned!" I am hopeful this will include diversity activities such as Women in Red. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:54, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Hi! Thank you all for your interest and comments! We showed this thread to the students and the people at The National Library so they get a feeling of how international the Wikimedia movement is. Astrid Carlsen (WMNO) (talk) 09:54, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Japanese women physicists?

In case anyone cares to comment/help, there's a discussion on Twitter about the gap in coverage of Japanese women physicists. — soupvector (talk) 00:47, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Oh my. I'm going to go fix the wikidata page, because Kazumi Maki (https://dornsife.usc.edu/news/stories/335/in-memoriam-kazumi-maki-72/) and Katsuma Yagasaki (http://www.u-ryukyu.ac.jp/univ_info/inter_news/2009_may.html) (right column, 4th from top) are both men. It also appears that Aiko Gibo is a psychic, not a physicist. -Mcampany (talk) 08:53, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
So 60% inaccuracy - about normal for WD I'd say! Johnbod (talk) 11:06, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
80% it now seems - see below. Johnbod (talk) 21:33, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Johnbod: I must say I'm becoming increasingly impressed with Wikidata. New additions based on all the Wikimedia projects are being incorporated ever more efficiently and the extent of data coverage for individual items is increasing. For me, it's not so surprising that there are gender problems with Japanese. The errors probably come from the English version of Wikipedia. As time goes by, I'm sure they'll be sorted out. If we all chip in, things will improve even more quickly.--Ipigott (talk) 15:01, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Belated point - given these are all en:wp redlinks, it seems unlikely that "The errors probably come from the English version of Wikipedia", which seems a wierd zenophiliac suggestion to me. But this discussion has become interesting lower down. Johnbod (talk) 15:00, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
Wikidata is a WP:BLP disaster because of its low standards of sourcing. In my opinion it is useful only for linking different-language articles on the same subject, and even there it has rough edges (e.g. unable to link redirects when we don't have a full article on a topic). —David Eppstein (talk) 17:43, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
David Eppstein: "Patience et longueur de temps font plus que force ni que rage." La Fontaine. (I see we need an English article on "The Lion and the Rat".) I've been following Wikidata over the past two or three years and have seen huge improvements. Believe me, it's going from strength to strength.--Ipigott (talk) 19:12, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
I imagine the ratio of assertions made to sources adduced is very much higher in wikidata than on any language wikipedia, David. You give the impression of wanting to hold wikidata to far higher standards than you hold wikipedias. Doubtless in a dataset of 51m records and several billion triples we can find mistakes, but are you, out of interest, able to point to any BLP disasters associated with wikidata? --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:27, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Given very few outsiders actually try to use it in ways that would detect them, the disasters are (as here) probably still lying in wait. Absence of evidence .... Johnbod (talk) 19:34, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
I regularly get emails asking me to fix incorrect birth years that are being displayed on Google searches, because the subject thinks the problem is on Wikipedia. Invariably, it is on Wikidata. A recent and fairly public instance of this is described at [1]. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:55, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Is there an easy way to find items in Wikidata that might have errors? While doing some preliminary research before I decide to translate the Narasaki article, I found that he's also a man (http://www.narasaki-inst.com/narasaki.htm). I know for certain that that Yoko Tokugawa is a woman, but it's disturbing that 60% of these had the wrong gender and one had the wrong occupation. It can be really difficult to tell what gender someone is from their first names, especially once they're romanized (Satsuki and Kazumi are both very feminine names) so I think that's what threw off the user who added them. -Mcampany (talk) 19:53, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Never mind, I found a helpful Wikidata query that @Ghuron: had posted on their talk page. Once I'm done checking the physicists I'll change it to other occupations or something. -Mcampany (talk) 20:33, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Citizenship and birthdates are another big problem. Most entries claim some sort of nationality for their subjects; almost none have adequate sources for them. So the "data" recorded there are generally little better than guesswork from where the person worked, often a mistake in academia. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:51, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
I've used country of birthplace, rather than citizenship --Ghuron (talk) 04:09, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
With reliable sources for their birth in that country, I hope. Having a Japanese name and working in Japan is not adequate evidence of being born in Japan or being a Japanese citizen, for instance. Your recent edits adding "references" that are not actually reliable sources but merely a statement that the subject was included in a female category on the Indonesian wikipedia (diff; chosen merely because it is the most recent of your Wikidata edits at the time I write this) are very troubling to me. It appears to me that you are making the problem worse, not better, by creating the appearance of sourcing without actually adding sources. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:07, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
@David Eppstein: I know that during my problematic run, I was not specifying any references. I can see that all erroneous edits discussed here (and those that I found by myself such as d:Q11364848) are unreferenced. So my hypothesis is that referenced gender statements has significantly lower probability of errors comparing to unreferenced. What I'm trying to do is to merely reduce list of ~15K items with unreferenced female gender and japanese nationality before manually reviewing it. If someone found a mistake in gender, that has P143 reference, one will hopefully not only correct it in wikidata, but also make one step further and correct it in corresponding wiki. And a notion of "appearance of sourcing" is unclear to me, I'm yet to see wikipedian, who believes that P143 represents reliable source --Ghuron (talk) 03:44, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
@Ghuron: the point is that your most recent edits remained unreferenced. Other Wikipedias are not acceptable as references here on the English Wikipedia (nor are other articles within the English Wikipedia, nor are any open wikis) and the same should be true of Wikidata. Until Wikidata starts imposing some quality standards on its sources similar to the standards set here in WP:RS and WP:BLP, I don't think it's a good idea to allow any information from it to leak through to Wikipedia (such as in automatically-filled infoboxes etc). —David Eppstein (talk) 03:48, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
@David Eppstein:I'm not sure I'm qualified to comment on whenever en-wiki should use wikidata or not. In ru-wiki we use wikidata in infoboxes extensively, it require community to fix a lot of problems in wikidata, but it also reveals a lot of mistakes (or missing info) in wikipedia articles itself. Anyway, I'm here to fix the specific problem with high error rate for gender statements for Japanese people, that is significantly caused by my own erroneous edits. Unless you tell me how exactly my most recent edits "make problem worse" I'll continue doing them --Ghuron (talk) 04:16, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
They make problem worse by creating new claims on Wikidata that are marked as being sourced without actually being sourced. This is bad in three ways: (1) First and most importantly you are expanding the amount of unsourced information on Wikidata, and therefore most likely expanding the amount of unsourced wrong information. (2) Some Wikipedias allow only Wikidata claims that have sources to get through to their articles. By making claims that are unsourced, but have the appearance of being sourced, you are subverting their local standards and allowing information to be displayed that does not meet the community standards of those Wikipedias. (3) By giving unsourced claims the appearance of being sourced, you are making it harder to find the unsourced claims and therefore harder to fix them. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:34, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
@David Eppstein: Ok, let's start with #1. Can you please show me where I am creating new claims? Here is a sample edit, there was claim with gender==female before my edit, there is exactly the same claim after my edit. What I'm doing is to add P143 reference to the existing claim. --Ghuron (talk) 04:41, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
Given that you're making hundreds or thousands of edits per day, I'm not going to troll through your history for the most recent edits that are not from your latest batch of sourcing things from Wikipedia categories. The point is that those are bad sources and your hundreds or thousands of edits per day are bad edits. I can't believe you took the time to personally look at any of those to see whether there was a real source there, especially given the multiplicity of different-language Wikipedias you seem to be working from. All you're doing is taking error-prone data and spreading the errors around in ways that make it harder to track them down and fix them. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:48, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
Ok, I appreciate honest and professional judgement on my overall contribution in wikidata, but let's concentrate on the topic we are trying to discuss here. From your answer I assumes that #1 is irrelevant to my latest edits. Speaking about #2 - can you show my the code in those "wikipedias" that consider P143 references as "reliable sources"? I would be happy to advise them how they can fix their code so that it would actually reflect semantic of P143 --Ghuron (talk) 04:57, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
I can see that any comment here will be met with quibbles and Wikilawyering rather than any consideration of changing your behavior. I don't see the point in continuing the conversation. But if this attitude prevails among others there, I can see why the data on Wikidata has been so unreliable. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:19, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
Perhaps it's worth mentioning that the module often used to fetch information from Wikidata into infoboxes, Module:WikidataIB, specifically treats sources containing the word 'wikipedia' as if they were unsourced, and filters those results out by default if there are no other sources:
Burton has his gender sourced to the GND and to the Bibliothèque nationale de France, so it shows up. It's not too difficult to ignore imported from Wikimedia project (P143) in code, so I personally don't worry about folks adding those as 'references'. At least it shows to the Wikidatans which Wikipedia the information came from, even if we're not going to be using it here without further sourcing. --RexxS (talk) 15:50, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
That's a great idea! I'll start on the massive general list tomorrow. :) -Mcampany (talk) 08:35, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
You rang? A quick look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Writers - Japan shows me Gasuke Kamiyama, obviously male but mysteriously annotated as female in this edit by Ghuron. Actually I know nothing about Kamiyama, and perhaps there's some complication of which I'm unaware. -- Hoary (talk) 08:03, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
No complications here, he is "77-year-old younger brother" of Misuzu Kaneko "who still had the diaries in which she wrote her poems" --Ghuron (talk) 08:37, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Politicians in red who were blokes, I think: Tōma Jūmin (see his article in ja:WP, even if you can't read Japanese), Jūjitsu Taya (just look at the WD page), and I suspect also Mitsuru Kitamura but I don't know. -- Hoary (talk) 09:10, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Mitsuru Kitamura (ja:北村暢) is a man for certain. Would love to help only if I could figure out how Wikidata works. Alex Shih (talk) 09:21, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Just let me know where do you see mistakes, and I would be happy to correct them --Ghuron (talk) 09:54, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
I was certain that Kitamura was male, because of "Mitsuru". And then it occurred to me that a lot of names that I'd always thought were male only are given to girls as well. -- Hoary (talk) 12:54, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
I finished up looking through the general WiR list and found a few that needed correction. If anyone wants to take a second look and check my work please feel free! It's a long list so I'm sure I've probably missed something. -Mcampany (talk) 02:50, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
Speaking of Japanese physicists, anyone know about Izumi Ojima (ja:小嶋泉)? This is another one marked on Wikidata as female without references by Ghuron [2]. It says here that Izumi is a unisex name, leaning female, but I wonder whether a physicist who won the Nishina Memorial Prize in 1980 would have been female and remain unknown to us, and this English-language page is grammatically male. If Ojima is actually female, they might be a worthwhile target for this project. There are more errors on the same Wikidata entry: in two separate edits Haplology has labeled Ojima as a physician and mathematician when the correct occupation would be physicist (also without references and presumably this is why Ojima is not already listed in the collection of supposedly-female Japanese physicists above). —David Eppstein (talk) 04:00, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
Good catch. I found an interview with him that included a photo. He's male. I fixed the Wikidata entry. -Mcampany (talk) 04:55, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Auto Update of Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Drafts

Following on from Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Women_in_Red#How_about_weekly_additions_to_drafts?, User:Ritchie333 asked if a bot owner could take on the task of a regular update. I have written a new task for User:RonBot (Task 11).
The plan is for the bot to re-make the page once a week, in addition to the page name and the first sentence system that Ritchie333 made, I have added a third line of the last edit date with the edit summary - note that this whole line is given a "nowiki" wrapper as there are often bare links in the edit summary, which could upset the output.
I have run a user space trial to show the output at User:Ronhjones/Sandbox3. Once the Bot's talk has been approved by the Bot Approval Group, then I will start updating the target page - I have just set up the request at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval#Current_requests_for_approval. Bots are rubbish at deermining context, and there were a couple of false positives found (i.e. male biographies) - I've made a page (User:RonBot/11/FalsePositives) for these to be added, so they don't show in the main list. Details of this page will be found in the page header before the list of pages as a reminder.
Sorting. When I get the page list from wiki if comes ready sorted according to the "DEFAULTSORT" - thus Draft:Artesano appears with the "S" pages. I can change to code to sort any other way that is desired. Ronhjones  (Talk) 00:01, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Ronhjones: Thanks very much for your efforts. I was wondering if with each weekly update you could include new additions separately at the top of the listing. It would make it easier for Women in Red participants to check out articles which have been recently declined and undertake any improvements. I think it would be an incentive for new editors to continue editing on Wikipedia, taking account of improvements made to their work.--Ipigott (talk) 07:40, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
Should be possible. I can keep a local file from the previous week's run to compare with the current data. Ronhjones  (Talk) 12:26, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
@Ipigott: Bot trial approved - see Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Drafts Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:06, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
Ronhjones: Thanks for following up on this so quickly and so efficiently. It's exactly what we need. I think we should include it on the main WiR page.--Ipigott (talk) 06:29, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
@Ipigott: First full one week run has completed OK. Bot is fully approved for this task. Ronhjones  (Talk) 17:39, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Wikilinks for article and how to create an interwiki link

I'm having trouble finding pages that I can use to add wikilinks to Her Soul. I created the article when I got Amelia Rosselli mixed up with Amelia Pincherle Rosseli, so I was wondering how to add an interwiki link to https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amelia_Pincherle_Rosselli within the article. SL93 (talk) 16:34, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

I think what you might mean is a disambiguation or 'Disambiguazione' link. On the H:DIS page the example of Anita Hill I think might be what you are looking for. So add the template at the top of the page
{{nota disambigua|YOUR TEXT|Amelia Rosselli}}
Fred (talk) 17:25, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
I meant like adding a wikilink on the English Wikipedia to an article on a different language Wikipedia. I managed to find Help:Interlanguage links and did it. SL93 (talk) 17:48, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Looking for some help - Penny Martin

Wikipedia received an inquiry from the subject of this article: Penny Martin. As is often the case, she noticed some problems with the article about her and attempted to improve it. It occurred to her that this might not be the best course of action so she wrote to us. I confirmed that she should not be directly editing the article but is welcome to propose improvements or corrections on the article talk page.

The article does have a template correctly identifying a close connection issue. I know that includes a link that purports to explain how to remove this template message, but I'm not sure that we have, as a community, clearly identified what steps to take to remove such a template. My personal belief is that if another editor is willing to review the content, and determine that the article meets our standards for sourcing and neutrality, that we could then remove the template.

I don't feel comfortable enough with the subject matter to undertake that review myself but I'm hoping that someone in this project would be willing to take this on an either identify that it is acceptable as is or, ideally, make some improvements to the article.--S Philbrick(Talk) 19:47, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

@Sphilbrick: As a fellow Penny courtesy (it's a small club, it has its privileges), I did some wikifying and fixing up. I think the tag can be removed now, but I don't know what the specific rules are there. Penny Richards (talk) 20:38, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
WP:IAR, probably. I've removed the tag on the basis that the article is neutral and well referenced. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:59, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
Tagishsimon, Penny Richards wow that was quick! Thanks to both of you! S Philbrick(Talk) 21:33, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Assistance with Cleo Mayfield article

I recently created an article on American actress, Cleo Mayfield, after first seeing her included on this list of aviators. Unfortunately, the only information that I was able to find that suggests that she was a pilot was this photo [3] from the Library of Congress. If anyone with more experience in writing/researching biographies about women could be of assistance, I would appreciate the help in improving the article. ebbillings (talk) 17:21, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Ambitious Women in Religion Project

Please I wanted to find out when this will be starting as I was told there will be a collaboration. Thanks. HandsomeBoy (talk) 21:39, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

@Handsome boy: The post at top of this page seems to say that the project will be launched on 3 November? PamD 22:29, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
@HandsomeBoy: Trying again - autocorrect messed it up before. PamD 22:36, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
@HandsomeBoy:: You can also collaborate via our November focus on Women in Religion.--Ipigott (talk) 06:51, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Jennifer Chan (artist)

Is up for deletion.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 03:34, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

AfD

Not sure if the project was automatically notified on the delsorting list, but in the event not, the following discussion may be of interest to the project: this AfD. The AfD includes a total of 7 articles about young female Youth Olympic participants, so it is not just one that is up for deletion. Atsme✍🏻📧 15:04, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

RfC of possible interest

Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(people)#RfC:_Amendment_for_BIO_to_address_systemic_bias_in_the_base_of_sources Jytdog (talk) 01:23, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

NeuroGenderings Network members

During the deletion discussion for The NeuroGenderings Network, I noticed that while most of the members listed in the article were blue-linked, some of them are plain text. They might pass WP:PROF for reasons unrelated to their membership and thus could be candidates for article creation. Cheers, XOR'easter (talk) 17:24, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Two entries for Indian scientist

While going through Orphaned articles from September 2018 I came across an article on Minal Rohit. On searching for articles to link to hers, I discovered another article on her named Minal Sampath, Sampath being her birth surname. I've looked on Wikidata and found four articles as Sampath and only one as Rohit. I tried to merge the two records but it appears one can't while each has separate articles in the same language. Would someone please merge the two articles and create relevant redirect? Oronsay (talk) 00:44, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Rosiestep, I have merged the Wikidata records. Minal Sampath, being the older of the two records, remains and has the merged Wikipedia article attached to it. Oronsay (talk) 09:05, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Skye women editathon on 19 and 20 October

I see from the BBC that an editathon aimed at improving the coverage of women from the Scottish island of Skye is scheduled for 19 and 20 October. Perhaps we can help them with redlinks.--Ipigott (talk) 08:34, 16 October 2018 (UTC) I see Delphine Dallison is helping to organize this.--Ipigott (talk) 09:22, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

A BBC article titled Wikipedia edit-a-thon celebrates women from Isle of Skye describes what a successful editathon this was.--Ipigott (talk) 08:34, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
Super! Is there a wiki event page for this event? --Rosiestep (talk) 11:26, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Signpost on Donna Strickland

The current edition of Signpost covers the Strickland case in some detail, starting with OP-ED. I was however rather surprised to see that in his analysis, Chris troutman accuses Women in Red (together with the WMF) of a "tribalist right-great-wrongs mentality by pursuing ill-thought slacktivism".--Ipigott (talk) 08:12, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

I'm surprised not to see any mention of Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Drafts, which I specifically put together to avoid a repeat incident. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:41, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
Link added. GMGtalk 12:44, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
Does anyone else get irritated at Jimbo being described as the "founder" of Wikipedia? Apart from Larry Sanger, obviously. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:49, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
I'm somewhat more irritated by saying he threw somebody under the bus without a diff attached. GMGtalk 12:51, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
I'm a bit ticked off by this: "Honest Wikipedians will admit that Strickland failed the general notability guidelines and "any biography" criteria, and did not clearly satisfy academic notability criterio [sic] prior to her Nobel win". I think the declined draft's case for meeting WP:PROF was solid, unambiguous and entirely in line with the standard practice for academic biographies on this site. I said so way back, although I wasn't the first. I suppose I should now consider my honesty impugned.
There's one person here who gets to call me dishonest, and that's me. XOR'easter (talk) 14:58, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
I'm not really offended by referring to Jimbo as the founder of Wikipedia. After all, he founded Nupedia under which Wikipedia was developed. It would nevertheless probably have been more correct to refer to him as a co-founder. But in this context, it is perhaps interesting to note that his company Bomis, which was behind both Nupedia and Wikipedia, was initially developed to provide male-oriented content, including "information on sporting activities, automobiles and women".--Ipigott (talk) 15:24, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
n.b. Ipigott. And thanks again Ritchie333 for putting together the drafts list! I do wonder how actionable it is to separate the AfC staff based on content. Troutman's article was picky, pessimistic, and infers too much, imho. Did Wales really throw Bradv "under the bus"? I'd like to read that, too bad it doesn't appear to be sourced.Fred (talk) 16:49, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Years of birth

I've opened a discussion at WP:BLPN#Years of birth to discuss whether we should remove years of birth from bios when the subject requests. We already remove dates of birth, per WP:BLPPRIVACY, but what about the year alone? I've had quite a few requests for this over the years, all from women, so I'm thinking we should add something to the BLP policy. Any input would be very welcome. SarahSV (talk) 20:47, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, Sarah, for bringing this up. Given your essay on Wikipedia:Writing about women and the substantial number of women's biographies you have created yourself, you are in an excellent position to discuss the issue. I must say I have always considered the date/year of birth to be an essential detail of any biography and have always tried to find authentic sources documenting the dates I include in biographies, whether or not they are BLPs and whether or not they are of men or of women. One of the reasons is that the date of birth is a detail which clearly identifies the person in question, when for example there are biographies covering people with identical or similar names, particularly if they belong to one of the major professions such as singers, writers or sports. But it also provides useful indications of the period during which the person grew up, allowing comparisons with their peers from the same period. Even if the exact year of birth cannot be found, it is frequently possible to identify the decade of birth which can be included in categories such as Category:1980s births, which are quite useful too. For my part, I think it would be useful if we could develop guidelines on how to find the dates of birth of those we cover in our biographical work, for example voting registrations in the United States, school records for both primary and secondary education, and of course CVs, although there seems to be a tendency, particularly among academics, to avoid date or year of birth on their profiles. Finally, unless they provide a very good reason, I think we should try to dissuade women who request deletion of their year of birth, explaining to them why it is important to have it included. I therefore hope we can continue to include dates (and if possible places) of birth in BLPs about women. But if we really do go ahead and decide to delete the year of birth, then I think it might be useful to introduce new categories such as Category:Year of secondary school matriculation, Category:Year of university graduation. These would even be useful now, if the year of birth cannot be established.--Ipigott (talk) 07:47, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
This is one of many cases where attempting to impose a "one-size fits all rule" will sometimes lead to wrong decisions. (Unless you believe that we should "ignore all rules" which I understand some people regard as a terrible mantra.) If you want to understand someone - what she/he did and why (and what was done to him/her) - you need to know when they were born (aka dob). You grow up with a very different set of never-discussed preconceptions and assumptions driving your life choices if you are born in 1920 than if you are born in 1930. Or 1940 or 1950 or 1960 or 1970 or etc. The presumption must be that to produce a halfway decent biographical entry you need to include the date of birth. There may be cases when the year of birth will or may suffice. And there may be individual cases where the year of birth is not known or the subject requests exclusion for what seem to be good reasons. There may even be times when considerations of basic kindness will and should trump any wiki rules or guidelines. But the overwhelming default assumption needs to be that IF a subject justifies a wiki biographical entry at all THEN the reader deserves and needs to know when they were born. And for many of the better known ones, a date of birth can be found courtesy of Mr Google whether or not it is included in the wiki entry. The danger then becomes that wrong dates of birth become mainstream. That often happens. (It always did - even when we thought the web was something to do with the spider.) As long as dobs are included within wikipedia entries, there is a reasonable prospect that a member of a community of thoughtful folks dedicated to truthfulness will try to ensure that dobs are correctly stated. Regards Charles01 (talk) 08:34, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
This is still under discussion at WP:BLPN#Years of birth.--Ipigott (talk) 08:14, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

The Women Silversmiths of England

A little digging around online turned up this article, which appears to contain some interesting leads for anyone inclined to be writing about decorative arts. Not sure if all of the names mentioned meet the notability standard, but it's a great starting point nonetheless. I mention it in part because I found this book, Women Silversmiths, 1685-1845: Works from the Collection of the National Museum of Women in the Arts, at the museum a couple of months ago, and bought it. It doesn't appear to contain much biographical information, but it does have a list of women whose silver is in the museum's collection, which I intend to use to develop a set of stub articles in a couple of months. (Sometime at the beginning of next year, most likely.) It also has a large list of all the known women silver- and goldsmiths whose marks were known as of 1990, which could also prove to be useful. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 19:11, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Interesting. To be followed up as time permits.--Ipigott (talk) 21:56, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
I'd be loath to suggest "silversmiths" as a subset for monthly editing, as I suspect the potential would be limited. But perhaps a focus on "decorative artists" wouldn't go amiss. I'll try to work up a copy of the list of artists when I have a chance. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 05:41, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
Ser Amantio di Nicolao, good find. We could definitely use a crowd-sourced list for "decorative artists". Too bad there isn't a Wikidata item for "decorative artist". Maybe if we ran a SPARQL query for "decorative arts" (Q631931), the humans in its category and subcategories would populate such a redlist for us? We will need a Wikidata expert to sort this out before March so that we add "decorative artists" to our redlist offerings for our annual Art+Feminism event. --Rosiestep (talk) 10:57, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
For decorative arts, another site which might be of interest: the Cooper-Hewitt Museum of the Smithsonian Institution, which is dedicated to the collection of design. A list of "people" from their website is here, but it's a hot mess, as far as I can tell. Collectors are mingled in with artists and there's no easy way to break the former out from the latter. If anyone else wants to work it over and see what results, be my guest. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 15:28, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

A pleasant return

I don't know how many of you have noticed but one of our most ardent supporters is back. Let's hope it will be without further interruptions.--Ipigott (talk) 22:00, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I was delighted when he thanked me for creating an article yesterday! Oronsay (talk) 23:20, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
He appears to be retired again. SL93 (talk) 18:08, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Photos?

If you handle photos, there is none for the incumbent head of state of Greenland, Mikaela Engell, or of the Faroes, Lene Moyell Johansen. (Beside their bios, pix should be at List of elected and appointed female heads of state and government.) — kwami (talk) 18:09, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Lolita Cabrera Gainsborg - same as Lolita Val de Cabrera Gainsborg?

I'm guessing that these are two different names for the same pianist, but this link says Lolita Val de Cabrera Gainsborg performed at Carnegie Hall at 4 years old also says that she is of Cuban descent. This link says that Lolita Cabrera Gainsborg is of Bolivian heritage and started playing piano at 3 1/2 years old. This link says that Lolita Cabrera Gainsborg made her debut at 14 years old and called her a child prodigy. I'm wondering if this is the same person or two separate people. SL93 (talk) 18:33, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Her father was Russian and came to the US in June 1890, was naturalized in 1896.[8] Note on the 1900 census, Lolita born in December 1894 shows born in South America, but that is crossed out.[9]. Her mother was Bolivian[10][11] Her naming trend is odd. Typically Spanish name would be father surname/mother surname, i.e. Lolita Gainsborg Cabrera. "De" is usually an indicator of marriage, so she would become at marriage Lolita Gainsborg de X. Obviously a 4 year old was not married. So it's strange, indeed. SusunW (talk) 19:05, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
This [12] says she debuted in a chamber in Carnegie hall at age four and had her professional debut at 14. Also says she is married with 2 children. This obit gives the children's names, but not their surname [13] SusunW (talk) 19:22, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
SL93 Okay, one more, she was married to Paul Mahler, a chemist.[14] Apparently she used Mahler as her private name and Gainsborg as her professional name.[15][16] No clue what the "Val de" refers to. SusunW (talk) 19:43, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
Wow. I don't think I would be able to form a good article with my skills. Thanks for the help and erasing a bit of the confusion. I found her name by chance while browsing International Discography of Women Composers by Aaron I. Cohen. SL93 (talk) 19:52, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
Of course you can SL93! Figuring out identity is hard. Once you've done that, it is simply a matter of documentation. Collaboration certainly helps. :) Seems to me she is clearly notable. Composer, musicologist,[17] radio pioneer, as well. Lots of news articles through 1933. You might also look in the free New York Press archives.[18], [19]
I will see what I can do sometime this week. I will probably just use my sandbox first. SL93 (talk) 20:23, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
That's what I always do. Keeps those taggers away while you develop the article. Ping me if you need help. SusunW (talk) 20:29, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

SusunW I was wondering if you could give suggestions for a different article that I have at User:SL93/sandbox whether with the writing style or what I should add. The article sounds clunky to me at the moment. SL93 (talk) 02:18, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

SL93, see what you think. I have no idea of page references to the The Norton/Grove dictionary of women. I cannot access it from the Google link in Mexico and though there is an open access copy at archive.org, it is checked out with a waitlist. To cite material from the pages, you just need to add the link {{sfn|Sadie|Samuel|1995|p=}} after the text and input the page number. SusunW (talk) 07:44, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
It looks great. How can someone check out references from archive.org? I have been on the website before, but I guess I never heard of doing that. SL93 (talk) 13:36, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
SL93 it is a fabulous resource. All you have to do is sign up with a user name. Many items there require no user name, but those that still are under copyright do. If, like in this case the book you need is one of those, you press a button that says borrow. You then have exclusive use of the source for 14 days, or until you return it. If someone else has checked it out, it will say "join the waitlist". When their 14-day borrowing has expired, you will get an e-mail that notifies you that it is available. search instructions can be found in the WiR primer. SusunW (talk) 15:32, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Upcoming women's cricket tournament

Hi everyone. For info, the 2018 ICC Women's World Twenty20 will start on 9 November in the West Indies. Ten teams are taking part, with the full squad lists here. If anyone has any interest in expanding any of the biographies, even with just one source, then your help will be much appreciated. Some are in good shape, some are not. Players who are currently black linked, will have an article once they make their debut. Any questions/comments, please drop me a note/ping. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 12:09, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Gender q

There are three wikidata records for people - drag queens - which have no 'sex or gender' property. As a consequence they pop up in all reports of 'wikidata people records with no gender', which is a bit of a PITA. On the off-chance, is there anyone on this board sufficiently knowledgable to fill in the blanks? thx --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:45, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Tagishsimon, what is the correct value for these? Are they transgender proper? Are they males who play females? Are they people who exist(ed) or characters that were played? Cracker's articles refers to him as a he. LaBeija's article refers to her as a she. Miss Leona refers to her and a she, but Rémy Solé as a he. In which case, is the WD item for the person or the character being portrayed by the person? GMGtalk 20:02, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
@GreenMeansGo: I'm afraid I don't know. Male? Genderqueer? Transgender female? That's why I brought them here, on the offchance someone in this forum was more familiar than I am with the drag queen subculture. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:07, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Hmm. Actually Tagishsimon, looking into it I guess drag queen (Q337084) is defined as man who dresses and acts with exaggerated femininity for performance purposes. So by that definition, a trans m2f would be categorically disqualified, while... I guess a trans f2m who dresses up like females would be qualified? That's all a bit confusing. Maybe we should ask WP:LGBT. GMGtalk 20:14, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Thanks GMG; good idea & thank you for doing so. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:21, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
queer woman raises hand* RuPaul's Drag Race star Miz Cracker should be "male". Though I'm not familiar with them, from everything I can find Miss Leona should also be "male". Crystal LaBeija is a much more difficult one: the ball culture had both cis drag queens and trans women (it's the subject of the current TV series Pose), and it wasn't unknown for the lines to be more blurred in the 70s than they probably would be today. I can't find a definitive source on how she identified either way, though there's definitely at least speculation she was trans. I think there's always going to be cases of long-dead gender variant people where either we don't know or it is disputed and that there probably should be some form of "unknown/disputed" category for these cases. I also think it would be a good idea to change the description of drag queen (Q337084) slightly - while drag queens are usually men, there have also been plenty of trans women drag queens and even a few trans men and cis women ones. The Drover's Wife (talk) 22:24, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Thank you, The Drover's Wife , much appreciated. I've added two males and amended the drag queen description. We'll leave Crystal with no value until we get more info - which, I grant, may be never. Thanks again to GNG for getting this thread moving. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:57, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Assistance with article creation

So I'm trying to create an article for Tamara de Anda as right now she's a red link. (this blue link leads to the draft) I think I've found enough sources to prove that she's notable but I'm still not one hundred percent sure. Also, I'm really not sure if I've gotten the entire formatting of the article down correctly. I'm still kind of a new editor, and the only other article I've made was about three months ago before school started back up for the year and I'm also still convinced that it was beginners luck. Anyway, enough rambling. What I really need to know is this: 1) The subject is Mexican and I don't know how to work with the entire 'de Anda' part of her name and I'd really like to! 2)Is she actually notable? I think she is but I also don't trust myself 3)How should the article be formatted/ written? I've tried to keep it fairly concise and orderly but I'm not sure if my definition of organized and Wikipedia's definition are the same and 4) if it is appropriate, what should I do next? The last article I made went through AFC because it was the easiest, but I've been reading the guidelines here and it says in the primer not to put new women in red articles through AFC? For now, it's just hanging out in the draftspace so I figure it's probably okay there. Anyway. I'm super sorry if this was the wrong place to ask for help and if anybody does feel like lending me a hand then thank you so much! GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 23:39, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

GreenLipstickLesbian, I'll try to address your questions in order. Others are more than welcome to help fill in any gaps that I leave.
  1. According to Spanish naming customs#The particle "de" (of), her surname should be rendered "De Anda" when used alone but "de Anda" when used in conjunction with her given name(s) (e.g. Tamara de Anda).
  2. Regarding notability, the main thing to consider is that the article needs to demonstrate that she has been the subject of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of [her]" (per WP:GNG) and that such coverage is not solely related to the catcalling-taxi cab driver incident and its aftermath (per WP:BLP1E). In other words, the primary focus of the article should be De Anda's work as an author, journalist, and activist.
  3. The formatting that you've used for the article looks fine. As the article expands, you'll want to make use of section headings. (I've introduced one such heading into the draft article; the Spanish language version uses several.
  4. One reason that the primer advises against using the AfC process is that it is currently—and has been for some time—severely backlogged. Articles submitted via the AfC process can languish in draftspace for several weeks after they have been submitted for review. You'll generally get a much quicker response by asking for a review here, or by just boldly moving the article to mainspace yourself.
If you would like to continue discussion about improving this draft article specifically, we can do so at your talk page or the talk page of the draft article. ebbillings (talk) 16:27, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
Ebbillings Wow, thak you for all that information and advice! I'll try and use it as soon as I get home(I'm on my school's wifi right now on my phone and that's not an amazing combination) All of what you've told me makes sense so hopefully I won't need to ask for too much help but if I do then I'll ask on the talk page that's a good idea. Again, thank you so much!! GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 18:52, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
Sorry I couldn't do much more than generic formatting fixes. I did look around for sources, but most/all of them appear to be in Spanish. But the article looks like a pretty good start, and the existence of a non-English version bodes well for notability too.
Unfortunately, the only thing that takes longer than getting a draft through AfC, is getting a draft through AfC when the sources are all in a non-English language. So yeah, you may be better off just publishing the article directly when you think you are good and done, rather than waiting for a review. GMGtalk 18:57, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
GreenMeansGo (Sorry for the late response I had to take the SAT last Saturday and I thought I should probably actually study for it) No, thakn you for all those little thinks you did! I'm still not used to how Wikipedia formats things; you made the article look so much nicer! So, what you're saying is that submitting my first ever article over the summer with mostly Korean-language sources was a really great idea? Anyway, so I just went and added some of Ebbillings' advice just now and reformatted some stuff. I fee like I should be bold, but I also feel like I should be talking about this on its talkpage now so I'm so sorry if I messed anything up here, and I also feel like the sentence structure on some parts of the article are a little awkward? Just checking back in here I guess because everybody on this project just seems so nice and dedicated so I'm sorry if I'm bothering anyone, and again thank you Greenmeansgo for helping all those weeks ago. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 01:50, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Hey, no problem at all GreenLipstickLesbian. Us green folk gotta stick together you know. I went ahead and did some more polishing and published the draft. If you're interested, you may consider nominating it for a Did You Know if you've got time over the next week. Incidentally, it does look like Andrea Arsuaga also has a Spanish language article and none in English, in case you're looking for an entry on your to-do list.
Hope your SAT went well, and thanks for helping us build a better encyclopedia. Feel free to reach out to me if I can ever be of any help. GMGtalk 14:04, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Wow, thank you GreenMeansGo the article looks so Wikipedia-like now! Oh, DYK's are submitted? I guess that makes sense; I might do that then later. And yes, I definitely am looking for a to-do list so I'll see if I can make an article on her as soon as I'm on my laptop again.
Thanks, I feel like it went well enough. Thank you again for helping me on this, and yes I probably will reach out to you in the future because I don't think this is the last time I'll get stuck on something and you're right, you are a fellow green folk! GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 16:44, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Women not even in red

Roz Young wasn't even in red. The Dayton Daily News article didn't even mention her. Just a long list of almost-exclusively male columnists, almost all in blue. valereee (talk) 15:07, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

@Valereee: that's from my old neck of the woods: I was born in Cleveland. :) Glad you wrote about her. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:41, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Megalibrarygirl I grew up in Dayton reading her columns. You know who else wasn't even in red on the DDN page? Marj Heyduck. She's there in red now, lol, guess I'll have to write that one next. valereee (talk) 18:20, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

So how do we fix it. I've seen similar issues in sports coverage, but some of what I've encountered also involves age. Is it feasible to lower the bar a bit in the notability guideline regarding what we can expect for coverage pre-21st Century, if the opportunities/achievements were equivalent but not the coverage? Atsme✍🏻📧 18:36, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Good question. Marj Heyduck was covering wrestling in SW Ohio in the 1940s, looks like. That in itself should have been commented on somewhere, you'd think. :) valereee (talk) 18:45, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
@Valereee and Atsme: Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(people)#RfC:_Amendment_for_BIO_to_address_systemic_bias_in_the_base_of_sources SusunW (talk) 19:58, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Thanks SusunW jeez, pretty depressing valereee (talk) 20:08, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
+1 - and I'll add...that's WP democracy in action. I didn't look to see how many females voted "oppose"?? 😳 Atsme✍🏻📧 20:11, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Democracy only works if people take a stand, one way or the other. Otherwise, you allow mob rule others to make your choices for you. SusunW (talk) 20:25, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Red-linking women in underrepresented areas (or straight writing articles where we're that lacking) is always an important part of the work. I feel like that notability proposal was instantly doomed by the overreach in the initial proposal, which was never going to find support - it's enough of a battle, given the lean of Wikipedia's editor-base, to win support for these kind of things when you don't put up a flawed proposal. The Drover's Wife (talk) 20:56, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Editors in this WikiProject may be interested in the featured quality source review RFC that has been ongoing. It would change the featured article candidate process (FAC) so that source reviews would need to occur prior to any other reviews for FAC. Your comments are appreciated. --IznoRepeat (talk) 21:35, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Proposed article moves for "Grace Gao"

There's a proposed series of article moves around a couple of women called Grace Gao (one is a badminton player, the other a human rights activist). Grace Gao (human rights activist) is a new WiR article so I thought people here might in interested in joining the discussion. Basically, as it says in the opening to the proposition, the move would be 'Grace Gao → Grace Gao (badminton):

There are two articles about people called Grace Gao, neither of which, it seems, have priority over the other in terms of which should be "primary topic". Moving the content of this article to "Grace Gao (badminton)" (following article naming conventions: e.g., Michelle Li (badminton)) would distinguish the Grace Gao this article refers to from Grace Gao (human rights activist) — with Grace Gao (disambiguation) enabling people to find which Grace Gao they are looking for. This would be following similar precedent of, for example, Alexandra Bruce (badminton); Michael Fuchs (badminton); Kevin Li (badminton); Michelle Li (badminton) [all of which have corresponding disambiguation pages].

--Woofboy (talk) 20:53, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Nira Yuval-Davis

I wonder if any editor here would be interested in taking a stab at this article. The subject appears notable under WP:AUTHOR and WP:PROF, but the draft is clearly written by somebody with a COI. If there are editors interested in "adopting" this draft, that would be great. --K.e.coffman (talk) 00:20, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Cancelled contests update request

Hello. I was wondering what was happening with the 100,000 challenge for Women in Red. It was supposed to happen in November 2017 but never did. Same with the 1% contest (but that has been deleted?). Are either of these contests to be rescheduled? Thanks. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:33, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

I guess User:Dr. Blofeld was the motivating force behind these, and he's currently in retirement, spending time with his sharks & white cat. If so, unless we find a Blofeld mini-me, then they're not happening. All very sad; and best wishes to Dr. B. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:46, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
@MrLinkinPark333 and Tagishsimon: This became the highly successful Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/The World Contest held in November 2017 under Dr. Blofeld's excellent management and guidance. As for Dr. Blofeld himself, although his user page says retired, he has been editing recently as can be seen from his talk page. In any case, if anyone can arrange for support (i.e. funding for prizes), it might well be worthwhile relaunching the 100,000 Challenge for Women in Red.--Ipigott (talk) 08:36, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the kind words. Keep the faith, we'll get there somehow even if the 100,000 Challenge and a 1% contest isn't on just yet. My proposal was actually privately rejected so I didn't bother formally applying this year. It was a big struggle even to get what we did for the African Destubathon and Women in Red contest. The WMF grants staff are not trained in how to build a great content encyclopedia, they're trained in general project management and logistics and Wikipedia isn't your typical project. If WMF gave me a small percentage of their grants budget I could start to overhaul the mess which exists on the site and get people improving every article! I'm still trying to figure out some way we can scale this to what we want. I'm hoping to run a California general state contest in February perhaps, with all article improvements welcome, but top prize for improving/creating articles on women, based on the African Destubathon model. We'll see. One more contest might open some doors, but we really need outside investment if we're to pull off a 100,000 Challenge women challenge as it takes a long time to even get 3000 articles as evidenced by my challenges. 100,000 Challenge would need probably six Women in Red contests a year to make it worthwhile and we can't do that right now.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:16, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  • If as I think is the issue the prize money is necessary for the project, could someone explain how the prize money application for previous contests cannot be simply repeated? It is after all the same idea a year later. If necessary the project could be funded entirely independently from the Wikimedia Foundation via the Women in Red volunteer and social media framework, which unless I am missing something is not part of the Wikimedia Foundation and can if necessary fundraise independently for the contest funds. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 15:28, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

WMF didn't feel comfortable with giving a British man funding to run contests about women benefiting the developing world, they want to support women themselves in these countries. A woman from Women in Red could probably still apply for a rapid Grant of up to $2000 in prize money for a contest but they'll have to run it, which is super time consuming. WIR has acquired User Group status, obtaining a grant for a prize fund for multiple contests or raising it independently is still very possible, but from what I gather people here are either busy or unwilling to apply for a grant or privately raise it and be involved in that side of things.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:19, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Minor correction, WiR is not a User Group. @Rosiestep and Megalibrarygirl: and I formed the Gender Diversity Visibility Community, with the specific goals of increasing the visibility of the WiR community and expanding the available sourcing data available to members of WiR network. In that regard, we are exploring ways to improve access to sourcing, to establish a multi-language library which members can access, and to build bridges with GLAM organizations to identify collections which may help editors improve articles, to mention a few avenues we are exploring. (We are working right now to gain access to AllAfrica and the Associated Negro Press archives.) I cannot speak for anyone other than myself, but I have no time available with real life commitments, editing and working with the User Group to devote to running a contest. If a WiR volunteer wants to apply for a Grant and run a contest, I'd probably be able to contribute articles, but I am stretched thin at present. SusunW (talk) 17:24, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Like SusunW, if someone applied for a grant and ran a contest, I would contribute articles. But I am stretched thin with personal responsibilities as well as my activities with the newly-formed User Group (with SusunW and Megalibrarygirl), plus V-P of Wikimedia DC, Secretary of AffCom, Wikipedia Visiting Scholar at Northeastern University, and member of the 2030 movement strategy Community Health Working Group. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:33, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
If you outline the basic process you followed before I don't mind doing a lot of this. I have free time to run a contest or at least do a lot of it. You (Dr. Blofeld & others) could effectively supervise or at least keep an eye on things, this would not take much of your time and you would still be involved. The idea that the right person from the right background will step up do everything is not working, but unless I am mistaken we don't need that. It is enough to have a suitably inspirational person as the lead, but not necessarily doing the setup or clerical work of running the contest. I propose we look for someone who might be interested in taking a public lead role in applying for a grant and representing the contest. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 17:39, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
You're welcome to run a contest for Women in Red. I want to set up a framework which benefits dozens of wikiprojects eventually and get people to run them, I can't run everything! Sometime I also want to set up a Women in Green contest and get people working on promoting core women articles to GA.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:22, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Wow, I wasn't expecting that many responses. Thanks for the replies :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:49, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Good you brought it up, MrLinkinPark333. It looks as if our Icelandic Frayae might be able to run the next round. I too would be happy to assist but do not want to become involved in grant applications.--Ipigott (talk) 19:52, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
@Ipigott: It was more that it was on my watchlist for awhile ;) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:55, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Late to the party (as when am I not?) but I wanted to express support for this as well. I'm not in a position to help run a contest, but I'm more than happy to help create content for it. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 09:17, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Assuming that a contest is better than no contest and that it is better to apply soon due to the time it takes, I have created meta:Grants:Project/Rapid/Women in Red. There is a section for endorsements, but someone checking I filled it out right may be wise. I have written up something that is more or less the World Contest again, but for the areas and peoples that tend to be overlooked. I think it would be easy enough to tie this into the overall drive for 100,000 articles and get that challenge started. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 21:09, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
    • Can I suggest that the budget is a little bit small if we want to do something as effective as The World Contest? One of the reasons that was so effective was that there were broadly distributed prizes, which meant that it was still possible to win something if you didn't have tons of time. I was frantically busy that month and still managed 25 articles in very underrepresented areas, but I thought I'd have a go and so did a much broader group of people than I think might otherwise have given it a try. Smallish numbers of prizes are a bit discouraging because they mean many people can't participate in it as an actual contest. The Drover's Wife (talk) 09:34, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
      • @The Drover's Wife: The maximum grant is $2000. Do you have any thoughts on what prizes could be awarded with that? — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 10:58, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
        • Just spit balling, but it looks like with something like this (someone can probably find a better quote if they do more digging), you can get the cost of a 16gb flash drive down to about five bucks a piece when ordering 100 and have them custom printed with the WIR logo. Someone'd have to figure what the shipping cost would be for each, but surely it wouldn't be that much if we're sending them to Europe and North America? If we could get that figure down to about two bucks per item on average, then for around $700 US we could provide a useful prize to a hundred participants. But we'd have to set up distro in the US and Europe, or however the logistics would work out best, and then factor in shipping cost for the rest of the world.
          Anyway, that's the kind of thing that I would intuitively look for: something that costs a few bucks each when ordered in bulk. Also something that doesn't weigh very much so it's cheap to ship. GMGtalk 15:45, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
          • We could also probably cajole someone at OTRS into setting up a custom address for someone who has signed the NDA (waves) to process PII like addresses for the participants. Anyway, I did some work in logistics at the small/medium business level for a while when I was younger. So happy to help in that regard any way I can. GMGtalk 15:49, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
            • @GreenMeansGo: This is a good idea, not just because we could offer more prizes. Also because branded items give more connection to the project. If you could supply with a more exact idea of what could be achieved for $1000 (which must include all payment fees, sales tax, postage packing) then I think this could be considered as the prefered option. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 20:20, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
              • I'm also not sure why the shift to sending out stuff - the vouchers for the World Contest were much more useful than something that the contest had to pay to be physically sent. Not trying to be a downer though - very glad this discussion is happening, just keen for it to be as big a success as possible. The Drover's Wife (talk) 20:58, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
                • Well, it looks like this site is slightly cheaper, at $4.89 each per hundred (for 8gb). In total, that's $535.78 with taxes and shipping in the US. The cost of envelopes is incidental, as is printing up a nice letter to enclose, and I'd be more than happy to donate that. It would almost certainly be cheaper to box up whatever goes to Europe and mail that in bulk to some wikipedian there for distribution, rather than mailing individually from the US. But I have no idea how much that would cost. I haven't been to Europe in a long time. I have no idea how to estimate postage to the rest of the world. In the US at least, a USB drive is small/light enough that it could be sent in a regular envelope, probably for a single $0.50 stamp. Again, I don't know how that would translate to the rest of the world. (There are other items like branded sports bottles that are cheaper individually, but would be much more expensive to package and send. On the other end, there are things like custom stickers, which should be much cheaper to mass produce, but would cost about the same to ship as a USB drive.) You can also pre-load a USB drive with...well...pretty much anything you want, like if someone put together a short thank-you video, or even one of the high-quality videos like they showed ad Wikicon NA.
                • TDW is correct obviously, that a virtual prize all but eliminates the logistics. Part of that depends on how much we value giving something tangible, along with a nicely worded letter of thanks. Then there's also the reason anyone gives away branded merchandise in the first place, that you have people walking around with a symbol of your brand, and potentially a conversation starter. GMGtalk 21:44, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

The way I see it is this:

  • The Wikimedia Foundation have already said no to Dr. Blofeld's proposed rerun of last years contest. It is unclear exactly why so we should try and give them something interesting and new to increase the likelihood of them agreeing with the proposal.
  • The grant rules specifically prohibit cash prizes, gift vouchers are very close to being cash. I understand that Amazon gift vouchers were used previously to represent books. I believe these vouchers can be spent on anything in Amazon so this is not very specific, it is very close to giving cash and does not appear to fit the spirit of the grant rules well.
  • Countries without Amazon would be a major concern here, gift vouchers work well in developed areas only. Given the nature of the contest which is to encourage articles about the less well known areas of the world and engage people from these areas it would make sense to have a prize that does not rely on Amazon shipping to the winners zip code.
  • A customised item is something you can't buy yourself. Anything you can buy with a voucher you can buy yourself with money and it is not very special or much of a prize. If we send a uniquely styled item it is instantly special, even if it isn't worth much.
  • A voucher is just a number and unless the number is quite big not impressive. With branded items even a little thing can have a much bigger impact in making people feel appreciated and rewarded.
  • As GreenMeansGo says above, branded merchandise is a constant reminder of the brand featured on it, something bought with a voucher is not.

For these reasons and because it will potentially allow us to award more individual prizes, I suggest we award tangible branded merchandise as contest prizes. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 22:04, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Incidentally, since I'm on a kick looking at bulk websites now, looks like you can get custom printed vinyl stickers [20] (of the type you could put on your car) at 3.5in x 3.5in in size, and they'd cost $0.62 each at an order of 250, for a total of $157.77 with free shipping. So you could get 100 usb drives, and 250 stickers for $693.55 Assuming US shipping cost, if everyone with a usb drive also got a sticker, and then you gave 150 additional stickers out on their own, you would be looking at $125 in shipping to individuals, for a total of $818.55 to give away 250 prizes. GMGtalk 22:35, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
We can't assume US shipping, though - so the costs would be massively larger. I'm not sure I see the point of spending so much money on something that's going to cost a sizable amount of the grant to make and ship and then probably sit in a drawer for the rest of time. The Drover's Wife (talk) 00:45, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
I just end up throwing stickers away (to be clear, I don't have a car). It's just my opinion, but I think that even fridge magnets would be better than stickers, though not plain looking ones. Custom t-shirts would be a great idea if someone could find out about shipping. I have personally used https://www.tshirtgang.com/ which ships internationally. SL93 (talk) 00:51, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
We could use items from the Wikipedia store. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 01:01, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
I was just shooting out ideas really. No offense of they're bad ideas. But using the WP store, you're not going to get a very good deal unless they give us a discount at cost. GMGtalk 03:09, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Unfortunately Frayae has been banned as a sock so won't be running the contest. Somebody will have to say so on the rapid grant request on Metawiki.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:08, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Native American Women Playwrights Archive

Another source of interest: the Native American Women Playwrights Archive at Walter Havighurst Special Collections & University Archives at Miami University of Ohio. Most of the individual writers listed in the archive have articles, but a handful do not. Looks like quite an interesting site. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:19, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Archive_51&oldid=1212163615"