Misplaced Pages

talk:WikiProject Women in Red: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:00, 2 March 2018 editSusunW (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers71,692 edits Alexander Street Press' Women and Social Movements collections now available through The Misplaced Pages Library: Jumping for joy!← Previous edit Revision as of 17:34, 2 March 2018 edit undoThe Rambling Man (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, IP block exemptions, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors286,429 edits IWD, WiR and DYKNext edit →
Line 609: Line 609:
Hey everyone - thanks to a request from ], ], and ], we were able to get free access to the collections from Alexander Street Press for use on Misplaced Pages! If you already have an account for Alexander Street Press you should be getting an email with the new login details shortly. If not, you can ! We hope these collections are of use to the project :) ] (]) 15:57, 2 March 2018 (UTC) Hey everyone - thanks to a request from ], ], and ], we were able to get free access to the collections from Alexander Street Press for use on Misplaced Pages! If you already have an account for Alexander Street Press you should be getting an email with the new login details shortly. If not, you can ! We hope these collections are of use to the project :) ] (]) 15:57, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
:OMG! {{u|Samwalton9}} Thank you so very, very much for continuing to pursue access to this collection. I am totally stoked that you have done so, especially in time for Women's Month articles. ] (]) 16:00, 2 March 2018 (UTC) :OMG! {{u|Samwalton9}} Thank you so very, very much for continuing to pursue access to this collection. I am totally stoked that you have done so, especially in time for Women's Month articles. ] (]) 16:00, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

== IWD, WiR and DYK ==

Quick call if anyone had any biographies of women ready to nominate at DYK, we're a couple short with an intention to run eight women (i.e. the whole set) on 8 March. ] (]) 17:34, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:34, 2 March 2018

Shortcuts
Archiving icon
Archives
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3
Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6
Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9
Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12
Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15
Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18
Archive 19Archive 20Archive 21
Archive 22Archive 23Archive 24
Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27
Archive 28Archive 29Archive 30
Archive 31Archive 32Archive 33
Archive 34Archive 35Archive 36
Archive 37Archive 38Archive 39
Archive 40Archive 41Archive 42
Archive 43Archive 44Archive 45
Archive 46Archive 47Archive 48
Archive 49Archive 50Archive 51
Archive 52Archive 53Archive 54
Archive 55Archive 56Archive 57
Archive 58Archive 59Archive 60
Archive 61Archive 62Archive 63
Archive 64Archive 65Archive 66
Archive 67Archive 68Archive 69
Archive 70Archive 71Archive 72
Archive 73Archive 74Archive 75
Archive 76Archive 77Archive 78
Archive 79Archive 80Archive 81
Archive 82Archive 83Archive 84
Archive 85Archive 86Archive 87
Archive 88Archive 89Archive 90
Archive 91Archive 92Archive 93
Archive 94Archive 95Archive 96
Archive 97Archive 98Archive 99
Archive 100Archive 101Archive 102
Archive 103Archive 104Archive 105
Archive 106Archive 107Archive 108
Archive 109Archive 110Archive 111
Archive 112Archive 113Archive 114
Archive 115Archive 116Archive 117
Archive 118Archive 119Archive 120
Archive 121Archive 122Archive 123
Archive 124Archive 125Archive 126
Archive 127Archive 128Archive 129
Archive 130Archive 131Archive 132
Archive 133Archive 134Archive 135
Archive 136Archive 137Archive 138
Archive 139Archive 140Archive 141
Archive 142Archive 143Archive 144
Archive 145Archive 146


This page has archives. Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.
Media mentionThis WikiProject has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:

    Women in Red
    Mainpage / Talkpage / Categories
    Editors
    Editing
    Articles
    Events
    New this month
    Ongoing initiatives
    Recently completed
    Coordination
    Past events
    2024
    2023
    2022
    2021
    2020
    2019
    2018
    2017
    2016
    2015
    Administration
    Sister projects
    "Komm rein, mach mit", meaning "Come, join us".

    Scope

    • The problems we’re trying to solve:
    • Systemic bias towards women’s biographies;
    • … and their works -- broadly construed -- such as books, paintings, etc.
    • … across all languages
    • Off-topic:
    • Editor gender gap

    What is it?

    • WikiProject Women in Red, a community-led project, was launched this week.
    • It is intended as a parent project for other projects in all languages whose scope covers women and their works, such as WikiProject Women Writers.
    • WikiProject Women in Red is a collaborative space across languages to track all things related to content gender gap.
    • creation of new articles, Featured Articles, Good Articles, DYK articles
    • events
    • news articles
    • scholarly publications
    • metrics
    • hackathon challenges
    • WikiProject Women in Red is a container project with links for blogs, conferences, contests, discussions (Misplaced Pages; Wikimedia), editathons, Inspire grantees’ projects, mailing-lists, meet-ups, newspaper articles, scholarly articles, social media campaigns, workshops, etc.

    Wikidata will be used to manage the project because of its size and scope.

    • We hope to collaborate with international festival organizers (example: Litquake).
    • A global community-run project:
    • In addition to needing editors to write the articles, several key volunteer positions have been identified: Data Coordinator; Promotions/Events Coordinator; Lead Coordinators for each language.
    • We hope to establish a teaming arrangement with the Wiki Education Foundation as we believe university students are important to this endeavor. We would like to build on the education outreach efforts described by user:Kruusamägi (Wikimania submission: Possibilities for university cooperation: Estonian example) “Every academic year more than 500 articles on Estonian Misplaced Pages are created as part of local cooperation with universities.”
    • We will seek out the expertise of WikiProject X, a project dedicated to improving WikiProjects, in order to create an appealing work space.
    • Work together with the Chapters
    • Build on Wikimedia’s “Address the gender gap/FAQ“
    • Consider the creation of a Wikimedia User Group

    April 7: Update on Wikimedia movement strategy process (#12)

    From: Katherine Maher

    I apologize that we have not had a formal update the last couple of weeks — with Wikimedia Conference, the associated Board meeting, and our regular annual planning, I dropped the ball. The good news is that — as you have probably seen and heard — a lot of discussions are taking place!

    This week, I’m experimenting with a different type of update: now that the conversations have launched, I will be sharing fewer bullet points about the process, and more paragraphs about the overall work that is going on around the movement. As more conversations happen, I hope future updates will continue to be substantive, sharing key themes and discussions as we see them emerge.

    Last week, more than 350 Wikimedia community leaders from 70 countries and many different stakeholder groups converged on Berlin, during the annual meeting of movement affiliates, the Wikimedia Conference. This year, leaders from movement affiliates were joined by an additional 200 leaders from across the Wikimedia movement to participate in a program track focused on movement strategy. In addition to participating in some in-person discussions about our shared future direction, volunteers also discussed ways to help spread this effort across their activities and groups.

    You may be wondering — where are the minutes from our meetings in Berlin? Great question. Unusually for our community, the Berlin strategy track was almost entirely analog, with markers and paper and sticky notes. The facilitation team is in the process of digitalizing all of these materials, from session notes to summaries and final statements. You can keep an eye (or watch) on the Sources page to keep track as additional materials are posted - and jump in to respond and discuss as appropriate!

    The discussions in Berlin are just one of the many ways people across the movement have been able to engage in the strategy process since my last update. Approximately 50 volunteers and groups are helping coordinate discussions and several on-wiki discussions are already underway. This cycle (the first of three) will run until April 15th, so there’s still a week to share your thoughts - please do!

    All of these are opportunities for you to contribute your thoughts on the question, "What do we want to build or achieve together over the next 15 years?" For example, if you think we should go to deep space (after all, we've gone to the Moon), tell us more! Have a quick thought you want to contribute? We want to hear it! Check out the participation page on Meta-Wiki's movement strategy portal for more information on where and how you can engage in this global conversation: https://meta.wikimedia.org/?curid=10152617

    As conversations continue, we are busy following along. Summaries of the on-wiki discussions are being posted on Meta-Wiki, along notes from 64 recent discussions (and counting!) We are thrilled to see the many different ways and places our community are finding to have this important discussion about our future. As key themes emerge across communities, I hope to share them here.

    About communications: recently, Nicole provided an overview of the progress and plans for Track A during our monthly activities and metrics meeting. We are also working on a blog post announcing the official start of the movement strategy process. In addition to these communications, we’ll keep updating these weekly updates. We appreciate all the positive and constructive feedback we have received on these updates so far, and invite you to send us more on-wiki. As we know, the more communications about what is going on, the better.

    Thank you for your continued engagement in this process. I have to confess that while I’ve been excited about these conversations, I wasn’t fully certain how everything would go once we launched. There is a big difference between having a lot of notes on a whiteboard, and actually starting a free-wheeling, global, multilingual community conversation with such a wide and diverse group of people. Three weeks into the launch of the first discussion, I’m genuinely humbled by what everyone is bringing to the conversation. This community is brilliant, our vision is inspiring, our challenges are great (and exciting), and we have so much opportunity ahead. I’m grateful to be able to work alongside you.

    Schönes Wochenende! (German translation: “Have a good weekend!”)

    Cheers, Katherine

    PS. A version of this message is available for translation on Meta-Wiki.

    https://meta.wikimedia.org/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Sources https://meta.wikimedia.org/Wikipedia_to_the_Moon https://meta.wikimedia.org/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Sources/Summary_14th_to_28th https://meta.wikimedia.org/Wikimedia_Foundation_metrics_and_activities_meetings/2017-03 https://meta.wikimedia.org/Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Updates https://meta.wikimedia.org/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Updates/7_April_2017_-_Update_12_on_Wikimedia_movement_strategy_process


    Derby editathon

    I came across International Women's Day Misplaced Pages editathon on new page patrol and moved it to the project namespace. I'm not sure if WIR has it's own conventions for naming/templating these events? – Joe (talk) 11:15, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

    Thanks, Joe: There are already quite a number of editathons in connection with Women's History Month. You can find them at Category:Misplaced Pages meetups in March 2018 and Category:ArtAndFeminism 2018. Maybe WiR should also be adding its activities to these lists. Have we any special plans, Rosiestep, Victuallers, Megalibrarygirl, SusunW?--Ipigott (talk) 11:41, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
    Oh I know about that. Its a keen newbie. I will try and tidy it up - I'm helping. Victuallers (talk) 11:50, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
    Victuallers: That's nice to know. Have fun! And please let us know if you are involved in any other meetups in connection with Women's History Month. We should announce any tie-ups on our March WiR editathon page(s). As far as I can see, we'll be covering the usual Art&Feminism but with special attention to "Women's Images" and "Boundbreakers". I'm not sure whether these are to be handled separately or whether they should all come under the same heading. Maybe we should simply have one WiR editathon in March and call it "Women's History Month"? I think that might make it easier for all concerned. If we can agree on what we're going to call it, we can start to announce it fairly soon.--Ipigott (talk) 15:42, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
    Katherine Maher & Lucy Crompton-Reid in Feb 2018
    I like your idea. The images are easily included and we could re-run the theme again later in the year. I went to listen to Katherine Maher speak on Saturday about the Future of Misplaced Pages. She mentioned our project and she uses the figure of 14%. Can't disagree, but I'm not sure we could measure it until it was about 15.5%. The early period was so tricky to measure because either Wikidata wasn't there, or Wikidata had poor coverage of the gender of the biogs. Boundbreakers could either be merged or run later as well. Victuallers (talk) 16:06, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
    I think referring to our March offerings under the umbrella of Women's History Month makes sense. On that one page, we can do a good job of introducing A+F, explain Boundbreakers, as well as talk about the importance of contributing images. And we can offer plenty of redlists.
    Victuallers, Very glad to hear that Katherine mentioned Women in Red. Any pics of you and her at that event? --Rosiestep (talk) 19:01, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
    Katherine talking to Marianne (red hair), me, Josie Fraseer (and a hundred other peeps) at Wikimedia UK event
    Victuallers: From all the other photos on the Newspeak House event, it looks as if it went off very well. Not an empty seat as far as I could see. But there seems to have been far more men than women despite three women speakers. I've tried in vain to find Katherine's slides or the text of her presentation. Do you happen to have the links?--Ipigott (talk) 11:24, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
    I'm not sure there is a shot of us two together. Closest I can find is the one I've included here and you'll see that I have women on both sides. shot I have been tweeting is of Katherine, the WMUK CEO and the WMUK Chair and they are all women. When I was WMUK chair we founded the charity and it was led by seven blokes. So although the female membership is still small there is no glass ceiling apparent. Oh and I've seen Katherine's talk being tweeted. I'm sure its on commons somewhere. I'll look for it. Victuallers (talk) 09:16, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

    UNESCO event March 8th; WiR draft space

    It was suggested to me, especially with March around the corner, that we consider developing a draft space for new articles.

    In addition to A+F events, there will be a large, French/English language event at UNESCO in Paris and online, too. (I'll provide the link when it becomes available.) I think it's good to prepare for the influx of new articles. What are your thoughts about these methods? --Rosiestep (talk) 17:05, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

    My concern is will either of those make the new articles targets for that group of editors who have expressed vocally that writing about women is "activism". I think we need to make sure to stress that articles should NOT be sent to AfC, but rather should be posted on this page. SusunW (talk) 19:15, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
    Rosiestep: I'm afraid I simply don't have time to provide WiR support on French-language articles too. I think we should rely on Les sans pagEs where they have already listed a number of meetups for March. As for creating WP:WikiProject Women in Red/Draft/, like SusunW, I think we should do everything possible to encourage editors of new articles to move them to the mainspace themselves. Draft articles submitted for approval under Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Articles for creation are typically not reviewed for weeks and then frequently refused. I think we should encourage new or recent editors to create new articles in their user space as "user:Username/Newarticle". We could possibly create a section or editathon talk page where they could be listed but I think it would be more effective to invite new WiR members/editathon participants to ask for assistance on our WiR talk page. Maybe we should assist more actively in moving valid new drafts from user space to mainspace. They are listed every day on AlexNewArtBot.--Ipigott (talk) 11:23, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
    You can also simply scan Category:Pending AfC submissions for articles that look of interest. – Joe (talk) 11:28, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
    Women in Red would not be expected to provide assistance to other language communities, e.g. Les sans pagEs will coordinate for fr-wiki.
    Please see John Cummings's proposal here: User:John Cummings/WIR. Please review and let's discuss as it would take a lot of hands to make this happen. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:41, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

    Thanks @Rosiestep: for introducing this, the main thinking behind this is that UNESCO plans to promote Women in Red to its partner organisations and on social media and so there are potentially going to be a lot of new people wanting to create new articles. I've seen perfectly good articles about women nominated for deletion more times than I can count and I'm just trying to find some sort of way of improving new editor retention. The current situation of articles that don't quite meet the standard being deleted rather than being returned to draft space is ridiculous and has made so many people give up. Having a draft space could also provide a way of new editors working together or with more experienced editors, that articles are collaboratively written in draft space as well as in main space basically.

    The idea of encouraging new editors to submit to AFC rather than creating WiR AFC may work, given that there are 1745 stuck in AFC limbo (as long as someone from WiR reviews the articles about women first), I wonder if there is a smart way of adding some kind of category to make this easier.

    Thanks again

    John Cummings (talk) 18:38, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

    John Cummings I absolutely do not think new articles should be submitted to AfC. It is not a forum designed to mentor and assist new editors. It is rather a forum designed to review articles to assess whether they could survive AfD. In that regard, they are often rejected without any mentoring whatsoever. In our essay on creating articles for the project, we discourage submitting articles there and recommend that they should either be moved to mainspace by the creator or a trusted editor, or posted here on the talk page asking someone to review and move it. SusunW (talk) 18:54, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
    @SusunW:, yes AFC is not really a workable idea is it... Its interesting that you already have a draft space for WiR articles but rather than a specific space people just post them on this page. @Ipigott: if people simply developed articles in their own userspace and added a special category or tag would this allow your bot to create a list of 'ready to publish' articles? This does seem more difficult and complex than simply having a draft space here though. John Cummings (talk) 19:15, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
    John Cummings, has someone started an EN-lang or FR-lang UNESCO wiki meetup page for the event? --Rosiestep (talk) 18:52, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
    Pinging Nattes à chat regarding this conversation. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:53, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
    What about enlisting some of the Category:Wikipedian new page patrollers? They can keep an eye out for stuff in the new pages feed and work on it if need be. I used to do a lot of that myself, once. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoLo dicono a Signa. 19:04, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
    @Rosiestep:, no page yet, I'm trying to come up with ways of helping the potentially large number of new users to have a good experience and continue to edit Misplaced Pages first. I'll put something together next week I'm sure. John Cummings (talk) 19:15, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
    John Cummings, that's fine and makes sense. A friendly FYI: Women in Red's March schedule already includes two other collaborations: Art+Feminism (articles) and Whose Knowledge (image campaign). So, on this talkpage, please be clear with any next steps/tasks you feel need attention for the Women in Red + UNESCO event. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:33, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
    Thanks Rosiestep, will do, I'll post a separate message here in the next few days. John Cummings (talk) 19:40, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
    Thanks for the suggestion @Andrew Davidson:, I guess my issue with this solution is that I'm thinking about this as a service specifically for new users and I want to reduce the number of steps and possible misunderstandings. Having a draft space within Women in Red for people to draft their articles would be the the easiest option for the new users and also would have a simple interface to see all the pages in that 'subdirectory' e.g here is a list of all the pages in my userspace, once an article had been published to mainspace it would disappear from this list. John Cummings (talk) 19:36, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

    Update: here is a working demonstration that will create an draft article in the userspace Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Draft/ and then show all pages in that namespace which can then be reviewed. This is the process with the least steps for new users available and is also easy to keep track of, I created two example pages as demonstrations you can see by following the link below.

    Type the name of the article you want to start in the box and press Start article draft


    To see all articles in the draft space click here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Cummings (talkcontribs) 14:06, February 8, 2018 (UTC)

    Thanks for creating this, John Cummings. The up side is that newbies would be working in a safe space. This would also be a good alternative to AfD. The concern is that I don't think there's any way to know how many articles might end up in this draft space, and of those, how many might include copyvios, nonsense, and/or other speedy-delete material. A year, 5 years, 10 years from now, we might have a really smooth process in place, but for now, I think we're all trying to understand potential issues (e.g. risk management). --Rosiestep (talk) 22:57, 8 February 2018 (UTC)


    Thanks very much Rosiestep
    My understanding is that copyvios anywhere on Misplaced Pages in any namespace are picked up with the same tool I know that copyvios in userspace get deleted. Speedy deletion material can be worked on until it is up to the standard of publishing and if that is not possible e.g nonsense it can be deleted.
    The risks of the current system are deletions of almost good enough content and poor editor retention.
    I could just create this system for the event and see if it works and then explore rolling it out wider if it does. What do you think?
    Thanks again
    John Cummings (talk) 00:04, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
    @John Cummings and Rosiestep: I'm a bit confused. If the articles are created as a WiR draft are the members of WiR supposed to monitor the queue and move the drafts to mainspace or only if we are asked to do so with a post on our page? Seems to me that the administrators/coordinators of any event should have the burden for review on their shoulders, with WiR as back up, if needed. Since we as a project are focused on creating articles, we can't really create if we are heavily involved in gnoming. I'm not saying I am not willing, as time permits I often review requests posted on this page, but I want to understand the scope and expectations. SusunW (talk) 01:04, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
    Unfortunately March is always one of our busiest months. I don't think we'll have time to experiment with a new system on WiR very effectively. May I suggest that John Cummings and any other experienced editors involved in the UNESCO editathon coordinate work on any additional advice or tools they think would help new UNESCO editors to create new articles. If they run up against any problems, they could of course always call on our assistance. I should also point out that our March editathon page (like all our other editathon pages) includes a link to Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women in Red/Essays/Primer for creating women’s biographies which contains lots of useful advice for both new and more experienced editors. I would also recommend the WiR essay on Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women in Red/Essays/Primer for AfD, AfC and PROD. I hope the UNESCO editathon page will be posted soon so that we can include a link in our main page announcements and help to make the event a success. One last question: is anyone working seriously on redlinks for the UNESCO event?--Ipigott (talk) 08:23, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
    I'm going to talk to John hopefully later today. (I saw him last week). An event in 4 weeks on the day that we are running lots of other events is "a challenge". Changing our recommended method of working at the same time is an overstretch. Moreover I think that the French Women in Red will be none too pleased if we parachute our methods and people onto them. This is a lot to manage as Ian reminds us. Victuallers (talk) 09:34, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

    Draft:Safiya Bukhari

    Hi everyone. I started working at the end of January on Draft:Safiya Bukhari as part of the prisoners project, but it fits for Black History Month too! I was wondering if anyone could check it out and see if it appears to meet Misplaced Pages:Notability? From brief looks at AfC... I'm just not sure a Black woman revolutionary activist will be "notable" enough for them, even though it seems fairly obvious to me that she is notable. Unfortunately most sources talking about her are leftist newspapers/journals/books and not more mainstream sources. ohmyerica (talk) 21:55, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

    Ohmyerica I believe she is notable and that there are sufficient sources to confirm that; however, I would caution that sources BY her can only be used to supplement information from curated sources. All of these are mainstream press from the Associated Press agencies:, , , . There are also sources on jstr like p43 and muse . With the mainstream press and the pieces by Herb Boyd and Joy James, I think you are fine to move it into mainspace. I also found an obit: SusunW (talk) 20:18, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
    Good advice. We can also add a fair use pic. Do not get stuck in draft - its pretty good at the mo'. Come back here and we will move it to main space for you. Lots of good stuff gets lost as our gatekeepers can be a bit nickpickety. Victuallers (talk) 09:40, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
    Hey, sorry I didn't get back here sooner! So what exactly do I need to do? ohmyerica (talk) 21:39, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
    You appear to have written "What should I do" under a section that explains what you need/could do. Can you be more specific about which bits you need help with. Victuallers (talk) 17:35, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
    Ohmyerica Like Victuallers, I'm unclear on what you need us to do. Were it an article I was working on, I would add the AP sources to the article to confirm that there are indeed mainstream sources on her and then move it to mainspace. If you can move it yourself, you should. If you cannot, just ask here and someone will be happy to do it for you. As you didn't ask for it to be moved from draft, it isn't clear what help you need. SusunW (talk) 17:44, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
    Sorry about that, I was confused by "come back here" and didn't realize I could move the page myself! (I did, thought it appears I need an administrator to merge the draft history. It's weird--I did use the "move" tab to move it, but it's saying I did a copy and paste move.) ohmyerica (talk) 22:17, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
    You don't need a history merge, Ohmyerica. You moved it correctly. – Joe (talk) 22:21, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

    Resources for new editors

    With March fast approaching, we know that there will be new editors trying to create new articles. If they find Women in Red, and if they find our template, {{Women in Red}}, they'll be able to see the links I've just added there in a "Help" section. These links were included on the meetup page for our 2nd editathon back in 2015. They might not be the best or the most current so please be bold and help curate as they are only meant to be a starting point. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:20, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

    Thanks Rosie Victuallers (talk) 09:35, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
    Rosiestep: Each of these contains useful information for new users but listing them all together in the WiR template may well cause more confusion than assistance. You may have seen in my detailed responses to John Cummings where I have suggested putting together a simple one-page guide for new users of WiR. I think Susun's essay on Writing Women's Biographies contains some excellent tips but it is not really suitable as a first introduction. Something along the lines of Misplaced Pages:Ten Simple Rules for Editing Misplaced Pages would be useful, especially if it could be adapted to "Ten Simple Rules for Writing Women's Biographies on Misplaced Pages". I also think the File:Editing Misplaced Pages brochure EN.pdf is useful, especially from page 8. There's also a useful list of printable guides at Misplaced Pages:Training/For students/Resources. Perhaps John Cummings would like to assist in drawing on these for providing the basic essentials for new users at physical and virtual editathons.--Ipigott (talk) 17:37, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
    Yes I'd be very happy to put some things together, I'd like to avoid PDF and stick to wiki pages and possibly videos where ever possible. Thanks John Cummings (talk) 17:55, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
    To be sure, what links are included, where they are housed (subsection of Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women in Red/Resources?; new subpage?; something else?) and how the link(s) to them is/are displayed on our main template ({{Women in Red}}) needs sorting out. The important thing, IMO, is to have "something" "somewhere" which is easily accessible by a newbie. I'll ping Megalibrarygirl, our Librarian in Residence, as, I think we can all agree, "resources" are her forte so she can help think this through from 60,000 feet (18,000 m). --Rosiestep (talk) 21:18, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
    @Rosiestep, Ipigott, SusunW, and John Cummings: I started this page so that we can have a bare-bones type essay with simple rules about the most important things. Please feel free to add. I'll do a little work on it as well today on and off. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:55, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
    Thanks Megalibrarygirl! I added some brief info. Am having electrical work done, so gotta get off the computer. SusunW (talk) 23:22, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
    Megalibrarygirl: Good start. I'll also add to it.--Ipigott (talk) 09:51, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
    @Rosiestep, Ipigott, SusunW, and John Cummings: I like how the essay is shaping up. We can add "see also" to link out to more in-depth discussions on these topics so that the 10 things essay stays lean. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:42, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
    @Megalibrarygirl, Ipigott, SusunW, and John Cummings:, I agree; keep it lean, and add links to See also. I've added a few words here and there to the essay. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:01, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
    I agree. The KISS principle is best for this application. SusunW (talk) 18:15, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

    Lists of red links

    Hi Headbomb - I see what you're trying to do with the template and the index page, but both seem to have problems. Are you able to sort them out? --Rosiestep (talk) 16:16, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

    @Rosiestep: playing around with it. I'll know more once I figure out a navbox issue. The recursive loop should be fixed though.Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:28, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
    I initial tried transcluding Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women in Red/Redlist index in the navbox, the idea being that you'd maintain one list and both the index and the template would get updated at once, but the syntax/code to do this proved extremely ugly and very user-unfriendly, so I aborted that plan. My ultimate solution was to axe that section of the navbox and put it at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women in Red/Redlist index instead, which can be accessed through WP:WIR/REDLIST. I feel there's little value in listing all individual redlists on the main navigation template. However feel free to revert me or suggest alternate ways to facilitate navigation for redlists, if this is not to the project's liking. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:11, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
    Looked it over, Headbomb... agree with what you did... result is awesome! Thanks for taking this on. And what a great problem we should have: finding the right place for our hundreds of redlists. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:34, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

    The World Contest user-created redlink lists

    While we're on the subject, would it be possible to salvage the user-created redlink lists from the World Contest and add them into that structure? They're easily forgotten about tucked away where they are, and for a lot of countries they're seriously more useful. The Drover's Wife (talk) 21:21, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

    I don't know any easy way of doing it, but here's the link in case someone can sort it out: Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women in Red/The World Contest/Missing articles. --Rosiestep (talk) 22:19, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
    The Drover's Wife, Rosiestep: I agree that many of these links are useful, especially those that were specifically created for the event. That's why I provided a link on the Island Women editathon page. On the other hand, a considerable number of the names were actually taken from the WiR redlists, including the Wikidata lists, often with sources added. Maybe the best way to handle this is first to clean it all up (deleting the blue links) and then provide WiR links to the six "continents" with explanations. I also think we should keep and maintain the existing World Contest structure, as we could well launch new contests this year or next, once we find someone who is willing to handle the grant applications. I'll sort out the links to the continents and add them to our lists of redlinks in the next day or two.--Ipigott (talk) 11:28, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
    Cleaning it up makes sense, but it'd be nice if it could be put somewhere prominent - the Wikidata lists are totally useless for countries that don't have good coverage in other languages either, and so having target lists for those countries (i.e. all of Oceania) really relies on the user-created lists. The Drover's Wife (talk) 17:01, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
    The Drover's Wife: I have now added the World Contest "continent" links to our main WiR page under Worklists "By geography". I will also add them to the main WiR template. I have left a short explanation under the "By nationality" section. I hope you think they are now prominent enough. I fully agree with you that the Wikidata lists are not very helpful for the English-speaking countries.--Ipigott (talk) 15:12, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

    Jean Ann Larson

    Can anyone here see a way to make Jean Ann Larson worth keeping? I don't want to question the notability of articles about women mathematicians, especially in a month when we are trying to create more, but to me her career looks utterly undistinguished. Another editor (who I believe to be a known sockpuppet) keeps trying to add minor local teaching awards to the article, which to my mind only accentuates the lack of actual notability. But my preference, if possible, would be to find something of note to say about her, rather than tearing it down because it doesn't already say any such thing. —David Eppstein (talk) 03:42, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

    David Eppstein, the article name should probably be changed. Jean Ann Larson is a health care executive who got a BS from Wichita State, an MBA from Thunderbird Graduate School and a PhD from Pepperdine. Jean A. Larson, subject of this bio, got her BS and Masters at Berkeley and then a PhD at Dartmouth.. I'll work on it either later today or tomorrow. SusunW (talk) 18:15, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
    David Eppstein This is a hard one. There are many Jean Larson's. But, I am fairly certain she is this person . Apparently she was co-creator of the Drake/Larson Theory of Finite Linear Spaces (1983), along with David A. Drake. The work led to others solving the problem of whether linear spaces on v points existed or not for v=30. If you look at the bottom of the first link, there are articles by others discussing her work, but I cannot access any of them from Mexico. I also found other lists of her publications. , This work states that she is a prominent researcher in partition relations (p 69). This is pretty fascinating to me, as it traces the links between academics and their educational progeny. It also shows that she not only participated in international conferences, but she organized them (p vii). I do not remotely understand her research and do not feel comfortable trying to add information about it to her article. According to the link I found yesterday, she was the first woman PhD to graduate from Dartmouth, which only fully admitted women in 1972. (My guess is that she was one of those 150 women who were a part of the exchange program, as she graduated in 1972). She was also apparently the first graduate student advised by James Earl Baumgartner. Perhaps with the links above you or someone else who has a better understanding of what she does can flesh out the biography? SusunW (talk) 16:19, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
    Thanks, that does help. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:26, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
    Wow! David Eppstein the article certainly looks much better now and I feel her notability is established. I'm pretty good at research, but don't usually write about topics which I cannot summarize because of lack of knowledge on the topic. (I just don't buy that theory that anyone can write on any topic.) Thank you for your work on the article. SusunW (talk) 20:37, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

    The Sun and Her Flowers

    Any thoughts on this? Draft:The Sun and Her Flowers or anyone willing to take a look and help edit the draft so we can re-publish? Hmlarson (talk) 05:15, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

    Hmlarson maybe Rosiestep or the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women writers project can help. I do people and the occasional building or institution. Book articles are not my forté, though I love to read them. SusunW (talk) 16:12, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
    Hmlarson, when I write articles about novels, I follow Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style/Novels, e.g. using these recommended headers and so forth. Another thing I do is find an article on a similar book and compare how I've laid out my article vs. how that one is set up, e.g. find the most precise Category for the book and look at many of the books in that category. This gives me inspiration on how/when to quote lines from the book, etc. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:20, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
    Just to be clear, this is a draft of an article about a best-selling book of poetry by Rupi Kaur I found sitting in Page Review. I've done some cleanup as well as another editor. If anyone else is willing to review, that'd be great. Thank you. Hmlarson (talk) 03:38, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

    Notability of beauty pageant winners

    Hi, Lonehexagon posted the following on my talk page and unfortunately I don't have much time to discuss. Any thoughts from anyone here?

    MurielMary The link to that AfD is typical of nominations on pageant participants, in my experience. Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Beauty Pageants has not developed other guidelines and uses GNG for notability according to their page. The problem one will encounter is that while a pageant may be notable, unless the individual contestants have continued to be covered in the press or other independent, non-promotional sources continue to note their accomplishments, they fail GNG as a WP:SINGLEEVENT and often are WP:BLP1E issues because outside of the pageant win, the remainder of their lives are lived as private individuals. SusunW (talk) 16:09, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
    Wow, I really appreciate everyone who has weighed in on this. I understand this is outside of the guidelines and pageant winners need to follow GNG to be included, but I'm just curious about everyone's opinion. It seems to me that a sports star will be considered notable enough for a page even if they don't stay involved with sports after they retire. Just in people's opinion, do you think major pageant winners are inherently notable enough to be included in Misplaced Pages? Lonehexagon (talk) 16:50, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
    Lonehexagon Sport, is really an industry, in that they have managed to establish ties with mainstream media, albeit there are differences in the coverage for women's events and men's events. Media biases are reflected in WP, as the platform mirrors societal biases, thus mainstream sourcing may or may not be available for women's accomplishments. As WP requires verification of notability in curated or edited sources—no fan sites, promotional materials, blogs, etc. are acceptable to establish notability. Many sport stars, even in retirement, remain active in promotional endeavors, broadcasting, etc., and those activities reinforce that their notability was not fleeting. For pageant winners, it would seem likely if they participated in a widely recognized national or international pageant, which can be verified by mainstream coverage in journals, books, or newspapers then the person likely meets GNG. If you are wondering why I put so many qualifiers in, it is because WP operates by consensus. My personal opinion is irrelevant. Recent AfDs targeting pageant winners have questioned whether they are inherently notable and unless that changes, it will continue to be a problem for creating articles on them. SusunW (talk) 18:05, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
    Thanks for your thoughts. I do agree that media bias can be a huge factor in situations like this, and that's not something Misplaced Pages has a lot of control over. Lonehexagon (talk) 20:21, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

    Women in Red in the news

    Nicely done new article by Radio New Zealand: "Archival Activism: the Editors fighting Misplaced Pages’s Sexism Problem". Thank you for all the questions. --Rosiestep (talk) 05:25, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

    I'm glad to see Susan Tol's initiative on Kate Sheppard is progressing well and that, at my suggestion, MurielMary has now also had time to go through it. Perhaps SusunW could have a look at it and let us know whether she agrees with me that it is ready for GA. It has already been peer reviewed. As for the article, it gives a good overview of Rosie's enthusiasm about Misplaced Pages in general and WiR in particular. Looks to me as if the write-up could be used in connection with future interviews or somehow incorporated into Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight.--Ipigott (talk) 10:44, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
    I've had a look at both Ipigott. Made mostly minor edits, a comma here or there, and a few copyedits for smoother text. I think it should pass GA. I love the article from the Wireless and the fact that it highlights the problems of media and sourcing bias in writing women's biographies. So glad Rosie represents us so well and bravo, Susan Tol on a job well done. SusunW (talk) 16:25, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
    Thank you all! And thanks for all the help and advice along the way! Susan Tol (talk) 06:30, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

    Feedback on creating Karen Salt

    Salt lectures at Nottingham and is the director of the Centre for Research in Race and Rights. See . She has twice been on the panel for BBC radio 4's In Our Time, which is a pragmatic indicator of impact in the field. Many of the recent biographies I have created for women historians/writers have been those I can listen to on radio 4, and then found missing from Misplaced Pages.

    I'm a little stuck on publications, as she appears to have written articles and chapters in collections, but never written her own book. She's not been given a professorship, her title is currently "Assistant Professor in Transnational American Studies". In recent articles I've been hassled about writing articles for women academics who are not "full professors", and frankly I could do without annoyance of wikilawyering the case to keep for women I find obviously notable.

    Should I create this one? -- (talk) 12:08, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

    : Unfortunately, it is not enough to draw on sites such as the one you have linked to. The short biography there has no doubt been written by herself. You need to use secondary sources such as newspapers, journals or award citations. I have not been able to find much on her but this seems to indicate a modicum of recognition. You might find these Simple Rules useful as a guide.--Ipigott (talk) 14:29, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
    Discouraging. I'll focus on my latest Commons project. -- (talk) 06:45, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

    Women in Red in the press: an interview with SAdN by OXY

    Nice interview regarding WiR member and Time magazine honoree ("one of the 25 most influential people on the internet"), Ser Amantio di Nicolao. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:20, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

    Yes, all these bits and pieces enhance the picture we have of one of our most active members. In conclusion: Rosie 40, SAdN 21. (Number of hours per week spent on Misplaced Pages.)--Ipigott (talk) 16:40, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
    Well...I do have choir rehearsal sometimes. :-)
    Thanks very much...especially to Rosie, for her nice comments in the article. I know I've been a bit more active on AWB stuff lately, but that's temporary - once I've cleared some of the backlog I intend very much to get back to writing articles. The 2018 list of Virginia Women in History honorees dropped recently, for one thing...even if nearly all of them have an article this year. (I was pleasantly surprised by that. :-) ) --Ser Amantio di NicolaoLo dicono a Signa. 16:46, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
    Woot! Lovely piece. Cannot thank you enough for all the help and support you give us at WiR and me in particular Ser Amantio di Nicolao. It definitely takes a village to nurture articles on WP and your willingness to always help me with issues is much appreciated. SusunW (talk) 18:45, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
    Always a pleasure, SusunW. Anything I can do to help. :-) --Ser Amantio di NicolaoLo dicono a Signa. 18:55, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

    Women in History: Lawyers and Judges

    Just saw this blog post used as a reference in an article. Looks like it might be of some use...it has some material about women from non-American countries, especially places where we could use some extra sourcing. :-) --Ser Amantio di NicolaoLo dicono a Signa. 18:39, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

    Also, maybe we could do a "Legal Women" editathon in the future? --Rosiestep (talk) 19:01, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
    @Ser Amantio di Nicolao and Rosiestep: That would be awesome. I have a redlist of women in law (judges and lawyers). :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:35, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
    I'm down for that too. Did several legal eagles in the World contest. SusunW (talk) 19:40, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
    Heck yes. Will prod me to finish off the law women I dug up for The World Contest. The Drover's Wife (talk) 20:21, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
    @Megalibrarygirl, SusunW, The Drover's Wife, and Ser Amantio di Nicolao: I added it to the ideas section on the Ideas page, but feel free to be bold and move it to whatever month you think might be a good fit. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:25, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
    I moved several recent suggestions to months, as it seems important to get them on the calendar. SusunW (talk) 15:17, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

    Fedora Alemán

    Just saw this come up on the NewPages list. It looks like a straight machine translation from something, most likely the Spanish Misplaced Pages article. My immediate feeling is that she meets the notability requirements; however, I haven't the time right now to do anything with it, and my Spanish is so far below par as to be useless. (As is my German, on which Misplaced Pages she also has an article.)

    Anyone else like to take a look? --Ser Amantio di NicolaoLo dicono a Signa. 18:57, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

    Ping Ipigott :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:35, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
    Ser Amantio di Nicolao, Megalibrarygirl: Thanks for pinging me. I can try to tidy it up a bit but I never actually do "translations". If I find an interesting bio on one of the other Wikipedias, I look for sources and write my own version in English from scratch. I find this not only gives a far better result but it also ensures that the sources used are still accessible. So often the ones from the other language version have become dead links. In this case, I can see that there are a number of reasonable sources such as this obit. I'll see what I can do today and tomorrow.--Ipigott (talk) 20:37, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
    I tend to do the same, but I at least include the references from the other-language articles in my search for potential sources. Often this helps me find foreign-language sources that I would have been unable to find directly. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:33, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
    I do the same, as often I find, especially on Spanish WP that the sources do not meet English WP requirements. However, I have also found that some do and oftentimes those deadlinks have been stored at archive.org in the Wayback section. The article looks great Ipigott! SusunW (talk) 16:17, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
    Meantime I've had a look at the revised article, Ipigott, and it looks great - thanks for working your magic! --Ser Amantio di NicolaoLo dicono a Signa. 15:43, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

    February 14th

    (1860-1880) Museum of London

    Happy Valentine's Day!
    It wasn't easy to come up with an innocuous Valentine's Day greeting to share with collaborators on Misplaced Pages, so I went with "evolutionary".

    Nobody will ever win the battle of the sexes. There’s too much fraternizing with the enemy. ~Henry Kissinger


    13:18, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

    Can I create an events page within Women in Red

    Hi

    I would really like people to join Women in Red when the contribute to the UNESCO editathon I'm running for International Women's Day as way of encouraging them to stay involved. Looking at the really cool sign up form you have which uses formwizard it looks like this will only work within the Women in Red space. Can I just run the event from a page that starts with WikiProject_Women_in_Red?

    Thanks

    John Cummings (talk) 16:41, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

    @Rosiestep and Victuallers: may be best to answer this. I am not remotely technical, but I know that our format has caused issues with integration of other pages and our own attempts to edit it. SusunW (talk) 16:51, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
    Sure, @John. You can use Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/UNESCO 2018. The issues which SusunW mention are related to the WikiProject X "modules" which we're slowly moving away from as most of them are no longer suitable for a project as big/evolving as Women in Red. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:14, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
    Thanks Rosiestep, I created it at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Events/UNESCO_2018 to avoid confusion, as its not a meetup. Unfortunately I have a technical issue, the Join Wikiproject button works in that I can create a profile, but when I create it it sends me to the profile and then only offers me the option of going back to the main Wikiproject page and not the event page, meaning people will get lost. Is anybody able to help me fix this? Either to never leave the event page or to offer me a way back to the event page. It loks like maybe @Harej: made the modules? So close yet so far..... John Cummings (talk) 21:16, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
    @John Cummings: Is this in connection with your thread at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (technical)#Is there a very easy to use registration or sign your name function/gadget for new editors? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:23, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

    @Redrose64:, yes, but I've realised it's much better to encourage new people to join this community than simply sign their name on an event page. Thanks, John Cummings (talk) 13:32, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

    @Isarra and Harej: work on the modules and maybe one of them can help? SusunW (talk) 15:27, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
    All: Harej has become a WMF employee and is no longer working on WikiProject X.
    I am in contact with Isarra and have notified her about the issue you describe here, John Cummings, and about the Worklist module issue, Ipigott, which you brought up elsewhere.
    John, when I click on the link to Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Events/UNESCO_2018, the page is "bare bones" and only includes a link to become a member of Women in Red. Are you planning to do more with this page? --Rosiestep (talk) 16:22, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
    @Rosiestep:, thanks, yes I'm working on a draft here User:John_Cummings/WIReditathon. Thanks, John Cummings (talk) 18:03, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
    @John Cummings: This page that you are working on is absolutely beautiful. I love that it's clean and uncluttered. and I love this image of the red and blue stick figures with the wiki globe; would it be possible add women's hair to half of the figures? --Rosiestep (talk) 18:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

    @Rosiestep:, thanks very much, yes I've tried to make it nice for new people so they stick around :) I'll try contacting the illustrator to see what they can do, my Photoshop skills are not what they used to be.... John Cummings (talk) 19:17, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

    @John Cummings:-I just came here from your post at the village pump. I have done some small drive-by improvements to the UI on the events page, feel free to revert if inappropriate. Thanks — FR 09:05, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
    @Force Radical:, thanks very much, great stuff, I'm the worst at templates. One thing if you know how to do it, I want to make the 'Get started' to sit on the left hand side of the page like the 'Activities' section, any ideas?
    Thanks
    John Cummings (talk) 10:29, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
    John Cummings-Its already aligned to the left. — FR 10:37, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

    John Cummings: If we can't make the WiR signup take them back to the page after they do the form, does it seem a reasonable fallback to just tell people to hit the back button in their browser afterwards? But assuming it does work, we can also assume that for the purposes of this event, they'll be signing up from the event page only, and will want to then go back to said event page, correct? -— Isarra 00:38, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

    Yeah, I got nothing, sorry. It may be possible, but too many things came up for me to be able to explore every avenue, and it didn't appear there was anything documented, at least, about this sort of thing. -— Isarra 15:47, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
    You may want to have the link to the signup open in a new tab or window or something so they can just close it when they're done, pehaps. -— Isarra 15:49, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

    International Women's Day Oxford 2018

    In case you weren't aware, Mvolz (talk · contribs) has created Misplaced Pages:Meetups/UK/International Women's Day Oxford 2018. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:16, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

    Very cool,thanks Redrose64 for letting us know. SusunW (talk) 15:15, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
    Nice! Thanks, Redrose64. Hi, Mvolz, if you'd like to make the "International Women's Day Oxford 2018" a "Women in Red" event, just let us know and we'd be glad to offer whatever assistance you might request. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:26, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

    WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 11

    Newsletter • February 2018

    Check out this month's issue of the WikiProject X newsletter, with plans to renew work with a followup grant proposal to support finalising the deployment of CollaborationKit!

    -— Isarra 21:26, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

    Proposal to overhaul the default tutorial

    I've put up a proposal at the Village Pump to replace the old WP:I and WP:T with the superior Help:Intro. Any opinions welcomed there. I hope that it will help new users. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo) 03:02, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

    Help:Introduction is good but I'm not too happy with emphasis on Visual editing from the start.--Ipigott (talk) 11:42, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
    From varied experiences running meetups and whatnot, I no longer send anyone to any of the plain-text starter pages unless they already have an account and have at least dipped their toes in the water. I find many newbies are overwhelmed and put off by a deluge of plain-text guidance. Instead I send them to the Misplaced Pages Adventure, which I think does a great job of orienting people by way of a walkthrough. I wish we highlighted it more. Alafarge (talk) 00:03, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

    Relevant AfD

    There's an AfD relevant to this WikiProject here. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:55, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

    Thanks, Joseph2302, she seems notable enough to me. Maybe it's not necessary to mention articles here which are already included under our Article alerts, unless of course the discussion needs stronger support.--Ipigott (talk) 11:40, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

    Award winners and nominees

    Hello. I have been a lot of women award winners and nominees that have not been covered here. Originally, I have been placing them in the crowd-listed section by field (e.g. Mathematics) but I've been way too many names across various fields. Would it be possible to have a section for women who have been award winners/nominees? Or should I just keep putting the redlinked names I find by field? --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:45, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

    MrLinkinPark333: I certainly think it's useful to keep including them under any crowd-sourced WiR redlists to which they belong. As for starting a new set of red lists under awards, this sounds like a good idea. The only problem is deciding which awards are significant enough to be included. They will have to be generally acceptable as notable. Perhaps you could let us know which ones you have in mind. If they are considered important enough, they might well have led to lists or articles on Misplaced Pages. Category:Awards by subject and all the subcategories might be useful in this connection. I'm sure Megalibrarygirl will be interested in this too.--Ipigott (talk) 11:20, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
    @Ipigott: I've been looking at Hall of Famers, while looking for awards/medals/nominees that pass WP:MUSIC, WP:NSPORTS, WP:NACADEMIC or WP:ANYBIO just to name a few. If I were to list the awards I have been looking at, it'd be too long. Also Category:Award winners would be helpful to find which women are missing in already created awards that have categories. There's too many topics I've been looking at that it'd be easier if I could provide the names and medals/honours/nominees etc. and have other do the articles so I can reduce the number of women articles on my lists that I feel should be made. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:47, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
    MrLinkinPark333: In that case, it looks as if it would be useful for you to start a page in your user space listing the red links and the related awards you think we need to work on. We can then see, as the page develops, whether we should include it as a separate WiR page of red links or whether we should incorporate the new names into our existing lists. I, for one, would be happy to provide assistance and help you to develop your listing.--Ipigott (talk) 11:40, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
    @Ipigott and MrLinkinPark333: I think having an awards redlist is a good idea. There are so many awards that are notable that don't have pages, especially Mexican awards. I'm sure other countries are also similarly under-represented. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:35, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
    @Ipigott: @Megalibrarygirl: Currently making at User:MrLinkinPark333/sandbox/Missing women (awards). I have to warn you it's going to be very long though as I've been writing many lists covering various topics and this is the only time I've actually merged them onto a redlist on Misplaced Pages. I'll let you know once I'm finished. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:14, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
    @MrLinkinPark333: That's awesome. Feel free to add any awards you think may be notable here. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 00:11, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
    @MrLinkinPark333: You've made a good start on this. It might be useful to specify which of these awards are important enough to substantiate notability in their own right. If they are not, then we might need to pick out those who are also adequately covered in secondary sources. I'll try to contribute in the next few days.--Ipigott (talk) 10:40, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
    @Ipigott: @Megalibrarygirl: I added the criteria I've been looking at. I'm nowhere near finished as I need to look at my notebook with my lists and continue adding. I think right now since it's the Olympics, we can focus on making articles on women Olympic medallists. I would also say Olympic women participants but that's too numerous. From what I've seen there's only 16 Olympic winning women redlinks. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:56, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
    Whoa, MrLinkinPark333 that's shameful! Only 16?!!! Penny Richards is working on Olympic women redlinks. She would be interested in your list, too. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:04, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
    From what I see yes. I'm not including any stubs. @Penny Richards: to take a look at my updated list. Missing Paralmypic winners on the other hand is a lot more. I don't want to count how many because I'm sure it'll reach in the 100s. :( --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:06, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
    I'm not really, but I'm interested in the topic; the folks at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Olympics/Paralympics would best be able to advise on this.Penny Richards (talk) 15:34, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

    MIssing women winners and nominees by criteria

    Since the above conversation is long, thought I should split this. An idea I had would be to make lists based on the four criteria WP:ACADEMIC, WP:NSPORTS, WP:MUSIC and WP:ANYBIO. Some names might not fit a criteria (for example inducted into a Hall of Fame/Walk of Fame}}. These names are just for women biographies. If I were to add the missing women's works that are missing that've won/nominated for awards, that's another story. (Perhaps a different list?) Perhaps if we could divide up the names once I'm done by criteria and have Wikipedians decide which ones they want to do while adding towards the lists as well. I'm only going by ones that I believe should be notable based on my POV but others can contribute as well :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:10, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

    Discussion re usability of source in Annalisa Crannell

    In one of the new WIR-68 articles, Annalisa Crannell, there is an ongoing discussion of the usability of one of the sources, an interview with the subject posted by the Women in Maths community, from which the article takes two quotes from the subject about her education. See Template:Did you know nominations/Annalisa Crannell and Misplaced Pages talk:Did you know#More BLP questions, this time regarding Template:Did you know nominations/Annalisa Crannell. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:44, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

    David Eppstein I responded on the link. Seems very reminiscent of that short-lived wordpress ban last month to me. SusunW (talk) 22:59, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
    Thanks! —David Eppstein (talk) 23:22, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
    Glad to see the DYK is now OK.--Ipigott (talk) 11:45, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

    Women's History Month 2018 at Women in Red

    Welcome to Women in Red's March 2018 worldwide online editathons.


    Historically, our March event has been one of the biggest offerings of the year. This year, we are collaborating with two other wiki communities. Our article campaign is the official on-line/virtual node for Art+Feminism. Our image campaign supports the Whose Knowledge? initiative. ]

    Continuing: ]

    (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 16:08, 20 February 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

    Awareness of Misplaced Pages

    I found the recently updated version of Misplaced Pages awareness interesting and pertinent to our own WiR interests. In particular, efforts to increase awareness of Misplaced Pages in India by means of a video in Hindi are likely to increase interest substantially (cf. progress in Nigeria). Recent figures show that over three quarters of people in India have never even heard of Misplaced Pages. (Surprsingly Misplaced Pages is best known in Spain (91%), better than in the United States (87%) and Britain (83%.) I think we should actively try to follow up on this initiative, possibly by including India as a priority in our future editathons and keeping abreast of any physical editathons in India itself. Maybe Rosie or others involved in Wikimedia planning could liaise with those involved to emphasize the need to include women in the Hindi-based initiatives to promote Misplaced Pages. We could also try specifically to involve Indian women students in propagating information about our activities and the support we offer.--Ipigott (talk) 10:02, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

    I think an Indian Women event in May or June might be a good idea. I'll see several editors from India (from various language communities) in April and could gain some support. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:49, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
    That sounds good. Keep me posted. I hope it doesn't take them too long to release the video.--Ipigott (talk) 16:21, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
    This toolkit might interest you regarding gender gap efforts in India. Of course, there's also the great work being done by the CIS employees. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:44, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

    Women's liberation movement

    There is an AfD on Women's liberation movement which was created in 2005. The discussion has got off to a good start but I think some of our members, especially SusunW, would probably like to comment too.--Ipigott (talk) 11:48, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

    Good grief. "Let's just toss the grandmothers out of the whole picture and bury them", is not a solution. SusunW (talk) 14:48, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
    Can someone who knows how to fix this fix it? The discussion was closed as a speedy keep, but when one tries to access the discussion from the talk page, it isn't there. If we are going to be able to rework the article, the discussion and sources included in the discussion would be useful to have. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by SusunW (talkcontribs) 08:02, February 24, 2018 (UTC)
     Done; ping SusunW. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:19, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
    Thank you Rosiestep SusunW (talk) 16:26, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

    You are awesome

    There's a discussion at VPM about changes to the English Misplaced Pages during the last few years. In a list of mostly negative or contentious items, WikiProject Women in Red was called out as a shining example of successful collaboration. Thanks for your work, and for inspiring everyone around you. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:09, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

    Excellent news! I enjoy the collaboration within WiR. --Oronsay (talk) 23:07, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
    WhatamIdoing thanks for letting us know! For anyone who wants to read the thread, it's here. I'm really excited and heartened to know that people see us in a positive light. And thanks to Andrew Davidson for your awesome words. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:20, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
    Thank you so much, Andrew Davidson, for your lovely words. We do much over here and it's heartening for our community to be recognized in this way. --Rosiestep (talk) 00:49, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

    Faith H. Wainwright

    Hi Folks. Can somebody please write an article on this lady. There was an article, but it went in a sock cleanup. Faith Wainwright is a Fellow of the Royal Academy of Engineering and eminently notable. scope_creep (talk) 06:28, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

    Red Planet

    Maggie Lieu is currently on the Blue Planet but is on a shortlist to go to the Red Planet. This might upset her mother so please help Maggie with her predicament. Andrew D. (talk) 08:31, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

    New WiR main page presentation

    From the very first day we came up with a presentation of the main Women in Red WikiProget page in July 2015, we felt the support of Project X would be an invaluable asset. Several of our early members liked the icon-based social-network-like features, especially the member registration facility. Those originally behind Project X have now moved on to other assignments. As a result, Isarra, a former Project X enthusiast, has decided it would be easier for us all to have a project page more in keeping with Misplaced Pages's generally accepted standards. I think this is a step in the right direction but I remember when I suggested such changes two or three years ago, several of our members supported the icon-based display and the registration mechanism. As a result, we have maintained the Project X approach until now. Although the useful registration feature continues as before, the other headings are now fully editable components of standard Misplaced Pages pages, and we now have a normal Table of Contents. I hope we can all work together on devopling the main WiR page along these lines and I look forward to suggestions for further improvement. If anyone is against the move, now is the time to make your feelings known.--Ipigott (talk) 21:53, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

    Despite the limitations of the format of the WikiProject X prototype templates (the main of which being what I've now largely removed from the page), many of you have also commented on how well the formwizard approach to the members signup works, and while that was the direction we wanted to eventually go with handling for all aspects of WikiProjects under WikiProject X, we ultimately wound up essentially scrapping the intended implementation in favour of creating a full MediaWiki extension instead. Given that it makes little sense to keep your project on an interface that is no longer being developed or maintained, the most logical thing to do here, for the time being, was remove the problem templates while maintaining the things that have indeed proven a net benefit (in particular the members thing, also maybe the icons?). Whatever the case, it should be much easier for you to go ahead and do whatever you want with the page now - and if you want to bring any particular things back or have any other questions, please feel free to ask.
    That being said, we (the WikiProject X team) haven't entirely moved on - as mentioned in the newsletter a few sections above, I have put in a new grant proposal to renew the WikiProject X project in order to complete the extension, CollaborationKit, that is intended to eventually replace all the on-wiki WikiProject X templates with guided interfaces like that currently implemented for the Members signup. If this is something you would like to see, I would highly encourage all of you to endorse the proposal so as to demonstrate to the grants committee that there is indeed still interest in this project. (And thank you to those of you who already have.) -— Isarra 22:13, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
    I am one of those who have supported the Project X grant application as I think they have done much to make WiR and similar projects far more visible. I hope, nevertheless, that further work will provide better opportunities for WikiProjects to become more directly involved in developments, and that WiR in particular will receive more attention than it has over the past 12 months.--Ipigott (talk) 22:21, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
    For the record, @Roger and I have been WikiProject X supporters from the get-go, having multiple meetings with Harej before and after we launched Women in Red in July 2015. WikiProject X developed a beautiful, modern, unique mainpage for us, as well as some modules/subpages, and we thank you for that, Isarra, as I know you lead the design team. Also, thank you for making the changes last night to our mainpage and module system per our communications during this last week. I think most will say this represents an improvement. Hope to see you in Berlin in April. --Rosiestep (talk) 23:44, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
    You're totally welcome, guys. Not that I'm going to be in Berlin; I'm not actually involved enough with any official groups or organisations, go figure. -— Isarra 05:21, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

    Already missing the icons

    I must say I am already missing the icons. I use some of them most days to check things out and update the data. While several of them are seldom used, I think it would be useful to restore those for Redlist index (pointing to Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women in Red/Redlist index), Showcase, Metrics and Article alerts in that order. For your information, over the past month Redlist index had 413 page views and 62 edits, Showcase 180 page views and 19 edits, Metrics 171 page views and 2 edits, and Article alerts 66 page views and 22 edits. (Some of the info could of course be seen on the project page itself which had 3,230 page views over the past month.) On the other hand, About us had only 76 page views (and 0 edits), Resources 47, Events 22 (of which 7 yesterday), Research 22, External links 16, and Press 13. Although About us is obviously important, now that there is a link in the right place near the top of the page, I don't think an icon is necessary. The others are simply not used sufficiently to warrant icons. I could fish the icons out of the old Project X routines but I am not sure how to make them clickable. It would therefore be useful, Isarra, if you could restore the four most important ones. And thanks for all the time and trouble you are devoting to our page, despite the fact that you have not yet received a grant. (And I'm really looking forward to your biographies of female bees.)--Ipigott (talk) 09:46, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

    I too am missing the icons, Ipigott. :( Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:45, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
    Ping Isarra. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:32, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
    I put them back as Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women in Red/WiR header. It's one of them tab header things. I slapped it on all pages I put on it, but... er... you know. Do whatever with it actually makes sense. -— Isarra 05:14, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
    Thank you, Isarra. :) --Rosiestep (talk) 06:17, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
    Just what we need. Thanks Isarra.--Ipigott (talk) 07:55, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

    Good article that may be of interest to WiR editors

    This article in the Guardian "Pushing Back: Why it's Time for Women to Rewrite the Story" talks about cultural gaslighting in literature. It describes how things men write are considered "universal" while women's writing somehow isn't. I think we deal with some of these issues when writing about women on Misplaced Pages. If we write about women, somehow that's seen by some as a "narrow" topic; which is strange since women make up more than 50% of all humans and are involved in nearly every field of endeavor in some way. The article is about literature, but it resonated with me. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:37, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

    Thanks for the link, Megalibrarygirl. Resonates with me, too. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:26, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
    Megalibrarygirl: Sarah Churchwell is indeed a worthwhile columnist (see here for her past contributions). I'm just beginning to wonder whether the "MeToo" movement is slowly beginning to change the historically accepted view of man's unchallenged superiority, under which feminists are looked upon as outsiders to be pitied. Our coverage of more worthy women on Misplaced Pages should help to correct that view. Perhaps we should begin a drive on women authors (and their works) who have supported the place of women in world society, through both fiction and non-fiction.--Ipigott (talk) 10:54, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
    Megalibrarygirl Yes, exactly. Men's contributions are somehow seen as inclusive of society and women's are viewed as separate or minority views and certainly only valid for women and at that only a small segment of women. Why is that? Why can't they both be parts of a whole? Different, but equally valid? Thank you for bringing the article to light. SusunW (talk) 15:52, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

    Draft:Anna Wong (artist)

    Hello all! This page is driving me nuts. Everything I've uncovered describes Anna Wong as an internationally known printmaker, but finding meaty sources is turning out to be really hard. Part of the problem is that her name is common. The other part may be that apparently Chinese artists weren't documented as much. If anyone can dig around and find something, feel free to add it to the article. I'd like to be able to move it out of draft for Jaggitha. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:00, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

    Sue, your problem is timeframe. She was fluent in the 1970s and 1980s, thus, most everything is still in copyright or pre-internet. I find a bunch of book snippets but nada that is totally available for reviewing. It may take someone physically going to a library, as you are correct, it is a very common name and there are at least two artists by that name. I find nothing in newspapers.com, newspaperarchive.com, hathitrust or archive.org. , , , SusunW (talk) 00:38, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

    WP:AALERTS subscription tweak

    I've made some tweaks to your WP:AALERTS subscription. It now casts a much wider net, and Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women in Red/Article alerts will report a lot more discussions. See vs , with an extra ~25 AFDs that come from Deletion sorting. While those are not technically part of the project, I feel they could become part of the project, if they were deleted. Feel free to revert me if this is unwanted.

    I've also made tweaks to Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women/Article alerts, which will now cover pretty much everything women-related, which will catch things like all WP:WOMEN-related WP:PRODs and CfDs etc. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:53, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

    Thank you for your enterprising efforts, Headbomb. I frequently look at the article alerts on WP:Women. Now I can see them all here. It should make it easier for all of us to try to save deserving articles. The other sections, GA candidates, etc., are also interesting.--Ipigott (talk) 08:28, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
    Thanks Headbomb. Hmlarson (talk) 03:08, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

    Retirement of Dr. Blofeld

    After all he has done to support Women in Red, especially in organizing the highly successful World Contest, it is upsetting to see that Dr. Blofeld has finally decided to retire completely from Misplaced Pages. I hope his work will not be forgotten and that his preparatory work for future contests will be put to good use.--Ipigott (talk) 13:27, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

    Totally agree Ian. Been busy the last several days with real world stuff, but I did see this. Hope he will enjoy his new endeavors. SusunW (talk) 16:47, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
    His work is valuable and appreciated. I hope he returns. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:36, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

    Strange weekly statistics from Wikidata

    Each week we measure how are efforts on WiR are reflected by the total number of women's biographies on Wikidata. These are posted on WHGI. This week, for the first time ever, the percentage of EN women's biographies on Wikidata has dropped from 17.49% last week to only 17.47% today. This results from an additional 1,010 new biographies overall but a net reduction of 41 women's biographies. (Last week the Wikidata count was 266,746, this week it's only 266,705, i.e. 41 less!) I have no idea what has led to these deletions or which articles they represent but they put the EN wiki at the very bottom of the list and the reductions appear to apply only to the English version of Misplaced Pages. Perhaps Jane023 can solve the mystery.--Ipigott (talk) 10:39, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

    Almost certainly linked to this thread at ANI about Sander.v.Ginkel and articles he started being nuked en-masse. The edit history of the missing female Olympians list took a fairly big spike upwards around that time as a result. Some of the higher-value articles have since been restored. Lugnuts 11:48, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

    Singapore Women Hall of Fame

    Anyone interested in created articles on Singaporean women? The article Singapore Women's Hall of Fame has 30 redlinks of Singaporean women who were inducted into this Hall of Fame alone! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:27, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

    Anamah Tan, Constance Singam, Julie Tan Eng Poh and Tan Cheng Hiong look like suitable candidates for March, given their background in women's rights.--Ipigott (talk) 11:04, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

    Women articles for deletion

    hi, this may be of interest - Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Women#women articles up for deletion, not sure how the WIR alerts list works (does it list only WIR articles?). Coolabahapple (talk) 19:52, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

    For WIR, the alerts are set to cover all {{WIR}} (and sub-templates like {{WIR-1}}) tagged articles, plus those from WP:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Women. A more complete listing will be available at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women/Article alerts, which will cover as many women-related things as possible.Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:57, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
    wow! thanks for the such a prompt response Coolabahapple (talk) 20:27, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

    Women's History Month starts tomorrow

    For many of us who are veteran Wikipedians, March is the month we give a laser-sharp focus to women's biographies and women's works broadly construed. For this reason, I am taking some time today to personally reflect on the women's biography articles I created during previous Women's History Months. Concerted efforts were started in 2011 or 2012 by Missvain, which makes this the 8th year that Wikipedians are focused on this issue. I think we are making history. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:50, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

    You have far more years under your belt than me at this editing thing Rosiestep, but this will be my 4th year. I always look forward to it and have been preparing for several weeks now to figure out who to write about this year. SusunW (talk) 20:59, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
    If I may, I'd like to take an opportunity to share something a friend posted on Facebook earlier this year. I posted a little notice about the articles I was writing last year for WiR, briefly noting Susan Brown Chase as one of my subjects. She shared it, with the following comment:
    "This is part of a recent post from Steven Pruitt, a fellow member of the Capitol Hill Chorale. It made me happy and hopeful, and I just had to share it. It doesn't only take marching in the streets. Changes in our everyday landscape can be just as important."
    Changes in our everyday landscape - that's exactly what we're doing. So nice to see it framed that way.
    (And don't worry - she's given me permission to share the sentiment.) :-) --Ser Amantio di NicolaoLo dicono a Signa. 06:38, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
    A very encouraging comment, Ser Amantio di Nicolao. Thanks for sharing it with us. Now that we have over 270 editors on our mailing list, there must be lots of contributors ready to help us with A+F this year. Just as a reminder, we created 3,074 articles in 2016 and 2,490 last year. It would be great if we could reach 3,500 this year. With the support of all the new editors participating in the 248 A+F editathons around the world—most of them in English—I think we stand a good chance.--Ipigott (talk) 13:02, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

    First Ladies and redirects

    Rich Farmbrough has been helping create articles from the list Spouses of the Governors of California, a list created for the December 2017 WIR First Ladies edit-a-thon. Pretty much, Rich has been creating stubs.

    • Ruth Amelia Perkins was moved to Ruth Perkins by John Cline upon request by Rich Farmbrough. It looks to me like it was in the process of being created as a stub. Then Fram changed it to a redirect to the governor's office with the edit summary "redirect; no reliable independent sources with indepth information about her seem to be available"
    • Lizzie Weller was first a stub created by Rich Farmbrough, with PamD, MarnetteD and Ma'az doing some edit on it, before Fram redirected it with the edit summary "redirect; no indication of notability".
    • Amelia Irwin has the same kind of history. Rich created a stub, FeanorStar7 and I did some editing on it. Fram redirected it with this summary "Redirect to remove plagiarism and because she isn't independently notable anyway"

    Need some feedback here from editors involved, and from this project. For me personally, I try not to create stubs that are only a few sentences. But the last I heard, Stubs were an accepted form of article creation. If not, WIR should address that on future edit-a-thons. But if spouses of politicians can be deleted as non-notable, that seems to punch a hole in what WIR is trying to do. Any thoughts? Also, I would prefer leaving redlinks, as opposed to redirects. If no redlink exists, then there is no visible indication that an article is needed. — Maile (talk) 13:21, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

    They were not redirected because they were stubs, but because neither the article not a basic online search indicated that they were notable (notability is not inherited, and if your only claim to fame is "being the wife of a governor" then you probably shouldn't have an article (Amelia Irwin had an expensive inaugural ball, and hosted tea for the President's wife once; I don't think this is really sufficient to qualify as independently notable on enwiki, or that this is the kind of woman we desperately need to have more articles on). If they aren't notable, then you either redirect or you delete and unlink: leaving redlinks for non-notable subjects is not what redlinks are intended for. Furthermore, the articles (especially Lizzie Weller) were WP:Plagiarism from the public domain source, which isn't allowed anyway. Perhaps it's best to check the other similar articles on these first ladies for similar problems, but certainly some of them had stronger claims to notability than these three. Fram (talk) 13:33, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

    Upcoming Editathon at the British Library on Women and Food

    Hi everyone,

    I got my copy of What's On at the British Library in the post today, and listed is a free editathon on the 23rd May. Here's the description: "Help redress the Misplaced Pages gender imbalance by spending a day improving its coverage of food related topics, especially but not exclusively those related to women, in this Wiki-editathon." It's free to attend, and I believe registration opens on the 8th March.

    I don't know how far in advance we set topics to cover for the month, but I know someone mentioned the possibility of including food related female topics as a possibility. I'm wondering now if it might be a good idea to incorporate this into the plans for this editathon. I'll be taking the day off work to go along, and hopefully I'll have some time before then to expand the female chefs with Michelin stars list in user space somewhat. Miyagawa (talk) 16:13, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

    In fact, in light of the #MichelinToo movement, I've moved the article into mainspace - List of female chefs with Michelin stars. Miyagawa (talk) 16:34, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
    Miyagawa: We already have "Women of the Sea" and "Villains" for May but we could certainly try to help out with food too, perhaps under #1day1woman. See our Ideas page for forward planning.--Ipigott (talk) 17:56, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
    Ipigott:Thanks, I'll add them all to the redlink lists there. Miyagawa (talk) 10:58, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
    Miyagawa: I suggest you add the redlinks from your list of Michelin chefs to our Food and drink page. I brought up the Ideas page as I thought you could perhaps find a slot later in the year where we could focus on food-related topics. Alternatively, you could simply list the topic at the bottom of the page as an idea to be incorporated sometime in the future. Btw, I've added your list to User:MrLinkinPark333/sandbox/Missing women (awards) which I think will soon be ready to move into the WiR project space. (cc. Megalibrarygirl)--Ipigott (talk) 11:22, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

    Alexander Street Press' Women and Social Movements collections now available through The Misplaced Pages Library

    Hey everyone - thanks to a request from SusunW, Megalibrarygirl, and Rosiestep, we were able to get free access to the Women and Social Movements collections from Alexander Street Press for use on Misplaced Pages! If you already have an account for Alexander Street Press you should be getting an email with the new login details shortly. If not, you can apply here! We hope these collections are of use to the project :) Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 15:57, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

    OMG! Samwalton9 Thank you so very, very much for continuing to pursue access to this collection. I am totally stoked that you have done so, especially in time for Women's Month articles. SusunW (talk) 16:00, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

    IWD, WiR and DYK

    Quick call if anyone had any biographies of women ready to nominate at DYK, we're a couple short with an intention to run eight women (i.e. the whole set) on 8 March. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:34, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

    Category: