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 14:15, 27 January 2020 editBearian (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Rollbackers85,153 edits →BBC 100 Women: agree← Previous edit Revision as of 14:19, 27 January 2020 edit undoRitchie333 (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Administrators125,314 edits →BBC 100 Women: restoredNext edit →
Line 719: Line 719:
:::{{u|The Drover's Wife}}, it is normal practice at AfD to close AfDs as "delete" if consensus to do so is unanimous, even if very few people have commented. This is because we need to conclude the discussion at some point, and community consensus, as encoded in deletion policy, is that this point is after seven days. Relisting is the exception and done only if consensus is unclear ''and'' there have been few comments. That is not the case here. People do need to show up in time if they want to make their arguments count. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 13:58, 27 January 2020 (UTC) :::{{u|The Drover's Wife}}, it is normal practice at AfD to close AfDs as "delete" if consensus to do so is unanimous, even if very few people have commented. This is because we need to conclude the discussion at some point, and community consensus, as encoded in deletion policy, is that this point is after seven days. Relisting is the exception and done only if consensus is unclear ''and'' there have been few comments. That is not the case here. People do need to show up in time if they want to make their arguments count. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 13:58, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
::::I agree with the speedy close. AfD is not the place to hash out copyright nor listing issues. By that I mean (a) Afd is not the forum to argue over whether some information is possibly copyrighted - unless it's a clear cut and past, and (b) who goes on a list, or whether every subject on the list is notable, is for the talk page or other fora, not AfD. AfD is the busiest bulletin board on Misplaced Pages; it doesn't need to be cluttered with disputes that can be handled elsewhere. ] (]) 14:15, 27 January 2020 (UTC) ::::I agree with the speedy close. AfD is not the place to hash out copyright nor listing issues. By that I mean (a) Afd is not the forum to argue over whether some information is possibly copyrighted - unless it's a clear cut and past, and (b) who goes on a list, or whether every subject on the list is notable, is for the talk page or other fora, not AfD. AfD is the busiest bulletin board on Misplaced Pages; it doesn't need to be cluttered with disputes that can be handled elsewhere. ] (]) 14:15, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

I have restored this to ] so Andrew and others can work on it. ] ] ] 14:19, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:19, 27 January 2020

    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
    ? view · edit Frequently asked questions What is WikiProject Women in Red (WiR)? WikiProject Women in Red is a community-led project launched in 2015. We're interested in reducing the gender gap in content coverage across all languages, especially concerning women-related biographies, but also women-related topics (broadly construed), such as artwork, books, sports events, and scientific theories. This concerns both works/topics by and works/topics about women. Specifically, we collaborate on
    • the creation of new articles
    • the improvement of existing articles (featured articles, good articles, DYK articles, stubs...)
    • events such as edithatons and hackatons
    • developing gender-gap related metrics
    • the identification of missing content Misplaced Pages ought to have
    • scholarly publications
    We're not, however, trying to solve editor gender gap, meaning that we think both men and women are equally able to create articles about notable women. How is WikiProject Women in Red related to other WikiProjects? WiR is intended to be a parent project and a resource hub for other projects (in all languages) whose scope covers women and their works, such as

    And related projects

    What specific efforts is WikiProject Women in Red making to reduce/improve the content gender gap?
    • We maintain lists of blogs, conferences, contests, discussions (Misplaced Pages; Wikimedia), editathons, Inspire grantees' projects, mailing-lists, meet-ups, newspaper articles, scholarly articles, social media campaigns, workshops, etc. We use Wikidata to manage several aspects of the project because of its size and scope.
    • We hope to collaborate with international festival organizers (example: Litquake).
    • 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."
    • Work together with the Wikimedia Chapters
    • Build on Wikimedia's "Address the gender gap/FAQ"
    How can I help? Who can join? Anyone can join! You do not need to have edited Misplaced Pages before, nor is the project restricted to women. Any help you can give, big or small, is greatly appreciated! To get started read our primer.
    Media mentionThis WikiProject has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:
    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.

    Shortcuts
    Woman of the day: a new one each day from our women's biographies

    January 2020 at Women in Red

    January 2020, Volume 6, Issue 1, Numbers 146, 148, 149, 150, 151, 153


    Happy Holidays from all of us at Women in Red, and thank you for your support in 2019. We look forward to working with you in 2020!

    Online events:


    Editor feedback:


    Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter

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

    Women in Green report for 2019

    Hi all,

    I thought I'd share a short update on what Women in Green got up to this past year. In 2019, Women in Green had a goal of nominating 40 articles about women and women's works for Good Article (GA) status. By the end of the year, we had nominated 44 articles for GA status, with 29 successfully passed (the other 15 are still awaiting review, but will almost certainly pass as well). Twenty of our GA nominations were focused on women's suffrage, following Women in Red's theme for the year, while the others covered a wide range of topics. Outside of official goals, Women in Green members also successfully brought four articles about women and women's work up to Featured Article (FA) status. We're still finalizing our goals for the new year, but we're looking forward to more article improvement successes in 2020, and we encourage other editors to get involved if they're interested. Alanna the Brave (talk) 15:06, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

    Yes, Alanna the Brave, a great year indeed thanks in particular to your own enthusiasm. I'm glad to see that once again with "Sports" for 2020, your theme for the year reflects that of Women in Red. That will provide encouragement for us to enhance our new creations up to GA class and perhaps beyond. While up to now I have not spent much of my time writing about women in sport, I look forward to helping along with copyediting and any research based on a knowledge of European languages. Do you intend to develop a 2020 Goal Tracking page listing articles for further development? If so, I hope it also contains some of the pioneering sportswomen from around the world who deserve special attention. All the very best for the New Year!--Ipigott (talk) 07:40, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
    Thanks Rosiestep. :-) Ipigott, we'll definitely have a page to track our GA nominations for 2020 -- but if you're asking whether we'll keep a list of suggested articles for improvement, I'm not sure yet. We put together a big list of suffragists/suffragettes for 2019, but then most editors just went off and found their own suffrage projects to work on (the list didn't get much attention in the end). I would like to see more articles improved about women from outside North America and Europe, so I'm thinking maybe we could "highlight" a different geographic region every couple of months (e.g. Asia, Africa, Oceania), compiling smaller lists of pioneering women in sports from those areas. Something to think about, anyway. Alanna the Brave (talk) 00:26, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

    Thanks for sharing the great news about Women in Green- it was a lofty goal and I am so happy it was surpassed! I had meant to contribute PMCH2 (talk) 19:14, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages's gender bias in mathematics and literature

    Another interesting article by Kirsten Menger-Anderson: The Sum of What? On Gender, Visibility, and Misplaced Pages, Undark, 2 January 2020.--Ipigott (talk) 13:03, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

    Thanks for your comments in the article and for inspiring us, @Merrilee and Jane023. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:20, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
    Thanks! It is always nice to read how other people interpret the hurdles we try to convey. As I recall (this was back when it was first a conversation on the Wiki mailing list) I was responding to the difficulties of sourcing artwork citations to the female authors who wrote about them. It's always been a hobby of mine to find who exactly contributed to museum catalogs (especially the "first" catalog any museum produces). Most were either written or commissioned by women, but go down into the museum's canon of publications as the work of then-director (mostly because people assume the choice of works on show are the personal choice of said director). Jane (talk) 16:41, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
    Interesting, but it's hard to tell from this whether we are introducing bias in who we are citing in our mathematics articles, or merely reflecting the existing bias in the makeup of the people who write the material used as sources for the articles. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:25, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
    In my opinion, Misplaced Pages citations amplify existing systemic bias, simply because they summarizes content published by reliable sources. They not only summarize the textual content of mathematical (or other arts) contributions, but they summarize the metadata of that content. So for example, museum wikipedia articles list artists in their collection, and such lists are based on not-so-precisely dated summaries printed in reliable sources. In reality, museums are living, breathing institutions that inhale and exhale artworks into and out of depots and sister institutions, as well as into and out of collections through sales, trades, and longterm loan agreements. Rarely do such short lists reflect the top artists mentioned on actualized museum websites, and rarely do they include works by women, unless it's some giant spider parked in front of the entrance, like in Bilbao. Jane (talk) 10:33, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

    Female New Zealand professors

    I've recently finished a project to write bios for (nearly) all Female New Zealand professors. The work has been written up at https://sciblogs.co.nz/guestwork/2019/12/18/how-i-came-to-be-writing-wikipedia-biographies-for-female-new-zealand-professors/ https://sciblogs.co.nz/guestwork/2019/12/19/what-to-put-in-a-wikipedia-biography-and-what-gets-left-out/ https://sciblogs.co.nz/guestwork/2019/12/20/15-years-of-editing-wikipedia/ to coincide with my 15th anniversary. Stuartyeates (talk) 01:05, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

    @Stuartyeates: That's amazing! Brilliant work. I'm surprised that you only ran into three deletion/draftifying problems; my experience (as an admin who intermittently patrols A7 speedies) is that many articles that are clearly about full professors are nominated for A7 deletion, and certainly some of these do get deleted. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 02:40, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
    Yes, being a full professor is no guarantee of notability. Johnbod (talk) 04:09, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
    @Espresso Addict: I think 'professor' in New Zealand is different to other places. Here it's an academic rank that many life-long academics never attain. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:11, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
    It's just the same elsewhere (the UK for example, at least in the old days), and no, it does not guarantee notability - see WP:PROF. Johnbod (talk) 19:17, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
    @Johnbod and Stuartyeates: Indeed, it sounds like the old UK system; I well remember when the first woman who lectured me (in my second year!) was subsequently made a professor, in 1991 when the university decided to allow more than one person per department to hold a professorship. Before that, as I recall, there were no sub-department chair professorships. It isn't a cast-iron guarantee of meeting WP:PROF, but a decent research-focused university will not be handing out professorships to people whose research doesn't meet #1. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:28, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

    Peggy Siegal draft

    I wanted to ask here if anyone wants to help improve the draft I created on Peggy Siegal. She is a publicist for many major media organizations who organizes small private events, mostly in Manhattan, with artists, filmakers, publishers, etc. She also has connections to Jeffrey Epstein.—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 06:56, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

    I've removed all details of Epstein's crimes from the article and added much better sourcing for the details of their connections. Much early coverage / mentions of her can be found by going into google news ad searching for "peggy siegal" -epstein and starting from the last page of search results. Stuartyeates (talk) 20:23, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

    Canadian Museum for Human Rights

    Hi everyone, I recently went to Winnipeg where I visited the Canadian Museum for Human Rights. I have been in contact with the Head of Collections who said if there was specific images we are interested in, she would be happy to work with us to discuss use permission requirements. So, if anyone has had their eye on an image we can work on getting it added to Wiki. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 06:06, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

    Nike Doggart

    Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Nike Doggart

    I nominated this article as part of a walled garden that was set-up by a sockfarm. The socks are now blocked, but the borderline notability of this particular scientist/conservationist is such that I'm wondering whether any participants here might be able to salvage the article using reliable sources (perhaps the BBC?).

    jps (talk) 18:31, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

    It occurs to me that I'd have a really hard time explaining to someone not involved with Misplaced Pages exactly why "they discovered a new species" is not adequate for notability. (Particularly if it's a frog species — there's that vertebrate chauvinism at work, but also the sense that discovering a new frog requires a lot of splashing through the mud and isn't as automatable as other processes of discovery.) Where was this decided, anyway, and does it make sense across all taxa? I recall it being argued that what taxonomists do is name new species, and not every taxonomist should be notable just for doing their job, but that doesn't seem applicable here, with the taxonomist being somebody else (J. C. Poynton) who identified Doggart's specimen as a new species . XOR'easter (talk) 19:12, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
    The controversy over whether "they discovered a new element" Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Clarice Phelps (and what, exactly, "discovery" entails in these situations) as a threshold for notability comes to mind. In general, I find these rules of thumb for notability to be somewhat problematic. What I would hope for, instead, are enough high-quality sources on which to base a decent article. I have no doubt there are people who have discovered a species or two for whom it would be impossible to write a decent biography on Misplaced Pages given the rules at this website. YMMV. jps (talk) 19:46, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
    It's about secondary sources and secondary sources are biased by the numbers of people studying them. There are more academics studying people (and their parasites) than there are all other animals put together; and more academics studying mammals and birds (and their parasites) than all the invertebrates put together.... This bias in secondary sources is reflected in tertiary sources such as wikipedia which are necessarily built on them. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:48, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

    I agree, but it's hard for me to see what the standards should be for biographies considering this kind of systemic bias. We can understand the lack of sources because someone has labored in obscurity, but we also are under an obligation to produce content that conforms to the standards that Misplaced Pages set up to avoid problems that can arise when writing articles about obscure subjects. Right now, the sources in the article are pretty mediocre at best. Indications are that there may be some better ones, but I've been less than thrilled with the options hinted at. jps (talk) 22:16, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

    Enquiry

    I would like more information on how to post an article. It is actually about my wife. I am U.S. born but she is from Kathmandu Nepal and we together own a karate school in New Mexico. She competes Nationally in the Brown Belt Womens division and recently won world Grand Champion in kata and also finished National points champion in both kata and fighting with the United States Association of Martial Artists. I thought her being a Nepalese citizen yet winning a world title in America, and also her back story on paying her own way to America and going to college here, and her journey could be an inspiration to other women that are also foreign born and or minorities, or just women, that posting facts about someone like my wife could show that any goal can be achieved, regardless of where you come from, or what roadblocks are in your way. Let me know and I will write something up for approval, editing, and submission , if that's possible Dbossong6193 (talk) 17:46, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

    moved to bottom Mujinga (talk) 04:23, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
    i replied on the talkpage of Dbossong6193 Mujinga (talk) 04:29, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
    Dbossong6193: In general, it is not a good idea to write about close friends and family on Misplaced Pages. May I suggest you give us your wife's name and details of her championship here. Someone might then be interested in creating her biography. You could also mention her on the WikiProject Nepal talk page.--Ipigott (talk) 11:00, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

    Duplicate redlists?

    When creation Nicole Van Goethem, I noticed in the links to this article that WiR seems to have some duplicate lists. Most obviously Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Screenwriters and Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Screenwriter, which are either identical or extremely close; but also Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Animators and cartoonists, which despite its more expansive title seems to be a subset of Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Cartoonists.

    It seems overkill to have two identical lists, but I'll leave it to you to decide which one to keep and which one to redirect (assuming there isn't a good reason to keep both). Fram (talk) 13:18, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

    Fram: Well spotted! The "Screenwriter(s)" seem to have been created accidentally by two different editors. I was interested to see you mentioned animators and cartoonists as - if I remember correctly - this was the area of interest which you first worked on here. I hope you will be creating a few more women's biographies on them, perhaps with a few more from your native Belgium. When Tagishsimon sees your message on duplicates, he'll perhaps sort things out.--Ipigott (talk) 15:20, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
    Thanks! I create articles rather randomly, when I stumble on something I see missing, but (comics) artists are a major part of them indeed. Although I think that Betty Haig could be a nice WiR article (with DYK material) as well. Fram (talk) 15:46, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
    I've redirected the Screenwriter list to Screenwriters; agree with Ian, that was he & I creating much the same list at much the same time. I suspect Animators & Cartoonists versus Cartoonists probably arises from a list created for a meet-up. Cartoonists hasn't been updated since August 2019, because the SPARQL now hits the time-out limit; so that needs a little work, which I'll do.
    The policy question for WiR is whether or not we must retain lists because they were featured in a meet-up - in this case, Animators and Cartoonists.
    There will be more instances of this - redlists created for meetups, whch are not listed on the redlist page, and which overlap or duplicate redlists listed from the redlists page. I'm not actually sure how to find them; is there a method of getting a list of all files within the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women in Red/ namespace? --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:24, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
    You could start with Category:WikiProject Women in Red but there are a lot of inconsistencies.--Ipigott (talk) 21:18, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
    This query can help with Wikidata-based lists. --MarioGom (talk) 17:32, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
    Excellent; thank you, MarioGom. That looks just the ticket. --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:32, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

    Lucille Lang Day draft

    I have been working on an article about the San Francisco Bay Area poet Lucille Lang Day, and it has been rejected in part because "The literary awards she has won are local/state level awards." That is not true; for instance, the Blue Light Poetry Prize, and the Josephine Miles Literary Award is for "U.S. multicultural writers" (not just Bay Area writers). I'm sincerely interested in creating more articles about women writers, but this has been frustrating because I feel the reviewer did not really look into the specifics of these awards before dismissing the entire article. Of course, if there is anything else I can add that might help, I would be more than willing to do that! If someone in this group could look over the draft and give me some more constructive feedback, I'd be extremely appreciative. loudfan (talk) 22:36, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

    @Loudfan: Sorry about that, Loudfan. I've promoted the article to mainspace - Lucille Lang Day - and suggest for the future that you avoid the Articles for Creation process, and simply start articles in mainspace, or move your own drafts. I forget how many edits you need to be able to do that; very few.
    I had a quick look at the article. As far as I can see it passes WP:GNG and so questions of the territoriality of awards does not apply. Beyond that, it seems well written and solidly referenced - really, it's everything we want in an article.
    It may yet, of course, get marked for deletion, because other editors have other ideas. If so, and we don't spot it, do let us know. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:50, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
    @Tagishsimon: Thank you so much! I truly appreciate it. I didn't realize it was possible to avoid the Articles for Creation process. loudfan (talk) 01:39, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

    Interesting article on les sans pagEs

    On France Culture, Hélène Combin reports on developments under WiR's French partner in her article "Wikipédia : seulement 18% de pages pour les femmes" (Misplaced Pages: only 18% of pages for women). Conveying details from Natacha Rault (i.e. Nattes à chat) who started the project, she reports on the difficulties encountered, mentioning in particular the poor coverage of women in the press and the resulting lack of acceptable sources for Misplaced Pages articles. We also learn that les sans pagEs now have three sources of funding (Wikimedia Switzerland, Wikimedia France and the Wikimedia Foundation). Looks good!--Ipigott (talk) 16:21, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

    Hi @Ipigott: thanks for mentioning this. For people interested in the press coverage of Les sans pagEs see here. Our calendar of activities (we have a new group starting in Tunis). Nattes à chat (talk) 08:15, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

    We are bleeding biographies about women in porn and other sexuality-related subjects

    Please put this in your watch list: Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Sexuality and gender. I am becoming convinced that there is a concerted effort to delete pages related to anything sexual, porn, genderqueer, gay, or anything that goes against conservative values. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 17:58, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

    Coffeeandcrumbs: WiR is certainly open to assisting editors creating articles in these categories. If they join the project and tag the talk pages with WiR templates, any articles facing deletion will be displayed on the main WiR page and should attract attention. As for pornography, they are actually not doing too badly. They have over 4,000 articles, including 2 FAs and 32 GAs, many of which are among the most frequently viewed of all Misplaced Pages articles. But perhaps you should also bring your concerns to their attention on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Pornography which seems to be pretty active.--Ipigott (talk) 20:11, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

    Talk:Corinna Löckenhoff; this is shameful

    This came to my attention a couple days ago, but I've been busy. I was planning on PRODing the article as not meeting Misplaced Pages:Notability_(academics) (the only academic notability criterion I can see that has been meant is perhaps #3, elected as a member of prestigous scholarly society, although the Gerontological Society of America is less prestigous than the examples given in the academic notability guidelines). But the subject of the article has now made an edit request and has been met with more Misplaced Pages bureaucracy, and I'm not sure a PROD deletion is sufficient at this point to undo her negative impression of Misplaced Pages.

    The subject of the article made some edits, and was reverted and blocked for making COI edits. She succesfully appealed the block, and then requested some edits, and got some bureacratic boilerplate requesting a more precise edit request (although it is pretty clear what remedies she would prefer from her request). She just made one further edit updating her employer. As I understand it, her first preference would be to have the article deleted.

    There has been very poor treatment of the subject of a Misplaced Pages article, and this would rightfully be a PR black eye for Misplaced Pages if it made it into the media. Plantdrew (talk) 03:29, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

    Well, perhaps. See also Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Corinna Löckenhoff and policy at WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE. Perhaps the best thing to do is expedite the AfD so that we know whether the article stays or goes. --Tagishsimon (talk) 03:50, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
    Thanks for the deletion nomination, I thought there was something about article subjects requesting deletion but couldn't remember where to find it. Plantdrew (talk) 03:57, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
    I've contacted Dr. L to keep her in the loop, fwiw. --Tagishsimon (talk) 04:31, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

    @Plantdrew: Thanks for bringing this up here. I'd meant to do so myself earlier - Dr. Löckenhoff contacted me on my talk page a couple of days ago to ask about a resolution - but I'm afraid I let it fall through the cracks. Regardless, I'd like to get some WIR input on this. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoLo dicono a Signa. 04:54, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

    Ser Amantio di Nicolao: I'm glad you are calling for further reactions on this. Maybe the best solution under the present circumstances is to have the article deleted but I must say I think it is wrong to disallow corrections made by the person in question on the simple grounds of "COI". If these had been permitted, the article could have been maintained as it usefully documents an academic who is perhaps not yet top notch but is nevertheless contributing constructively to her field of interest. The need for secondary sources was introduced as a means of preventing articles being based solely on primary sources without any wider evidence of notability. However, when secondary sources are partly inaccurate, it should be possible to make corrections on the basis of primary sources, whether the changes come from the subject of a biography or any other editor. In my experience, as articles progress inaccuracies of this type are generally eliminated but in the case of new articles, it is not usual for them to be maintained for some time. Misplaced Pages should not be allowed to threaten people's careers by insisting on maintaining them in spite of clear contradictions with authentic sources, nor is it reasonable to expect newbies to be able to follow all Misplaced Pages's rigid rules and procedures. Maybe over the course of time existing policy on these matters could be amended. In any case, I am not very happy about how this case is proceeding. It's not good for the subject of the biography, not good for Misplaced Pages and not good for Women in Red's efforts to cover many more women academics. I would be interested to hear what other experts on new articles have to say about this, for example Ritchie333 and Yupik. It might also be of interest to Jesswade88.--Ipigott (talk) 11:42, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
    The BLP was written in a way that caused offense and alleged harm to its subject. My own view is that, out of respect for persons, an academic subject should be consulted before a BLP is written about them, but I understand this is not a view that is widely shared. There is an AfD open on this subject Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Corinna Löckenhoff. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:33, 11 January 2020 (UTC).

    What I find shocking is the response at Talk:Corinna Löckenhoff which refuses to re-implement the changes she had requested but throws down a bureaucratic response insisting that any proposed changes be presented in a particular form. It is clear what changes she is requesting, and a kinder response would have been to check that the content she proposed was sourced to the references and implement those changes. PamD 00:01, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

    I agree. This should be seen as an example of exactly What Not To Do. The Drover's Wife (talk) 00:18, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
    To be fair, throwing down a template asking for a more specific description of the proposed change is a reasonable response to many of the edit requests I've seen, whether they were requests on protected pages, COI edits or whatever. But this is a great illustration of why one size does not always fit all! XOR'easter (talk) 01:28, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

    Dr. Löckenhoff has withdrawn her deletion request. XOR'easter (talk) 05:20, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

    Glad to see everything has been sorted out on this and that Biografer has been blocked. It would have been a great pity if we had had to delete the article.--Ipigott (talk) 08:18, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

    BBC 100 Women split discussion

    Please see this. Thanks. Lugnuts 17:52, 12 January 2020 (UTC)


    Katie Bishops

    I just moved Katie Bishop to Draft:Katie Bishop to save it from speedy, it's about a North American writer, who may or may not be notable. But there is also an English author of the same name who seems to be definitely notable, and an editor at OUP, hard to say.

    All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 22:06, 12 January 2020 (UTC).

    Biografer contributions

    Biografer (talk · contribs) has been blocked as a sockpuppet; see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Mishae/Archive. Biografer did not specifically concentrate on biographies of women, but created many biographies, among them many women. The discussion above about Corinna Löckenhoff involves one of these.

    It seems possible to me that one consequence of this block is that the creations that were not significantly edited by others could be deleted under WP:CSD#G5, so it might be worthwhile to look through Biografer's page creations and making sure the ones on women are safe from this type of deletion.

    It's probably worthwhile checking them over anyway; as it says on the SPI, many of Biografer's creations were inaccurate (e.g. one that I just checked myself, Lucija Čok, said she received an honor while serving as minister of education, but actually the source said it was while she was doing something else and was given for her earlier work as minister) or in some cases involved close paraphrasing. And in the case of Corinna Löckenhoff, it seems likely that the trigger for the deletion request was the subject's reaction to inaccuracies introduced by Biografer. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:20, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

    Thanks David. Unfortunately, I see from here that they have nearly all been deleted. Fortunately most of them are about men. Maybe you and other administrators could have a look at those about women (at least some of the longer ones) and draftify them for further attention if they appear worthwhile -- or at least let us have the names of the women in question so that we can start from scratch again.--Ipigott (talk) 08:35, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

    Scraping the list, as a start here are the dozen most recently created (now deleted) and the descriptions I found by clicking on their log entries:

    Name Description Languages Wikidata
    Emily Agree sociologist Q81771862
    Tanja Schultz professor of computer science at the University of Bremen. not found on Wikidata
    Sandra Irving birth_place = Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada Q80726416
    Sonia Aissa Professor of Telecommunications at the Institut national de la recherche scientifique, Université du Québec.  Q61304644
    Amy Schmitz Elwood L. Thomas Missouri Endowed Professor of Law at the University of Missouri School of Law Q80124736
    Silvia Fresco publisher=American College of Surgeons not found on Wikidata
    Margaret Gatz professor of psychology, gerontology and preventive healthcare at the USC Davis School of Gerontology and at the USC Dor. Q57015022
    Marcy S. Friedman Friedman graduated with B.A. (magna cum laude) from Smith College in 1972 and two Q76756612
    Geraldine Downey Vice Provost for Diversity Initiatives and Robert Johnston Niven Professor of Humane Letters in Psychology at the Department of Psych Q76485855
    Rebecca S. Eisenberg Robert and Barbara Luciano Professor of Law at the University of Michigan Law School. Eisenberg graduated from Stanford Un. Q76384046
    Laura Crotty Alexander associate professor of medicine at the University of California, San Diego.  Q76202294
    Abigail Marsh associate professor in the Department of Psychology and the Interdisciplinary Program in Neuroscience at Georgetown University. Q76490837

    I'm happy to continue with the other 54 that I easily identified as female. Also, it might be an idea if I added their Wikidata Q numbers. Oronsay (talk) 13:47, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

    Q nos now added. As I said, happy to do continue with this later today if it will benefit the WIR project. Oronsay (talk) 14:02, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
    Reformatted into table. Oronsay (talk) 14:22, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
    • Thanks for this, Oronsay, a useful list. It may not be strictly kosher but the full text of most of the deleted articles can still be found on Google cache. I see David Eppstein has already been working on a few, including Nancy Combs, Lucija Čok and Caroline Forell. Many of those deleted are fairly short stubs on academics and in many cases it is not clear whether they are/have been full professors. I've looked through quite a few and it seems to me that among the first 200, the following look as if they deserve attention:
    Sandra Irving: Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada
    Sonia Aissa: Fellow of the IEEE
    Birgit Spinath: professor at Heidelberg University
    Sarita Giri: Nepalese politician and former minister
    Patricia Rae Kennedy: Fellow of the American College of Surgeons
    Leonie Cohn: BBC programme producer
    Nadeen Peterson: creative director Saatchi & Saatchi
    Elvira Khabibullina: Russian ballerina (only one ref)
    Karyn Butler: Fellow of the American College of Surgeons
    Nancy Albert: Fellow of the American Academy of Nursing
    Angelina Vorontsova: Russian ballerina
    Molly Cooke: Former president of the American College of Physicians
    If this is useful, I can continue going through the list of 644 articles, looking for worthwhile women's biographies.--Ipigott (talk) 15:27, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
    As well as the three you mention I've also been working on Angela Slavova. If you do make use of the old text through Google's cache or whatever other means, be very careful with it. Beyond the sockpuppetry itself, those articles are also riddled with misinterpretations of their sources and close paraphrasing. So it would probably be best just to go back to the sources and ignore the existing text, or at least check carefully whether the text agrees with (and is not copied from) its sources. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:43, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
    David Eppstein: Thanks for all your efforts on these. I see that in some cases you have retrieved the deleted articles and proceeded to make improvements, leaving the editing history intact. As I am not an administrator, I am unable to adopt the same approach. I think I'll therefore wait a few days and see how many of the more important ones have been retrieved by you or other admins. If the red links remain, I'll no doubt start working on a few of them, particularly those which were fairly well sourced.--Ipigott (talk) 12:15, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
    You're welcome! I actually haven't done any undeletions on these myself, and the only two that I think undeletion might still be in the works for are Tanja Schultz and Kathryn Albers. Otherwise, the discussion on whether mass-deletion was appropriate seems to be dying down. So if you want to take charge of any of these, please go ahead. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:25, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

    Here are more deleted articles, covering the creations from 2019 (there are many more from the previous two years). First some that are clearly notable:

    • Kathryn Albers, Fellow of the AAAS
    • Barbara Aldave, Loran L. Stewart Professor of Business Law Emeritus at the University of Oregon School of Law
    • Heather Anderson (economist), Brunt Chair and Professor of economics and econometrics at Monash University, Fellow of Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia
    • Anu Bradford, Henry L. Moses Distinguished Professor of Law and International Organization at the Columbia Law School
    • Federica Brandizzi, MSU Foundation Professor of Plant Biology at Michigan State and Fellow of AAAS
    • Geraldine Downey, Robert Johnston Niven Professor of Humane Letters at Columbia University, Fellow of Association for Psychological Science
    • Rebecca S. Eisenberg, Robert and Barbara Luciano Professor of Law at the University of Michigan Law School
    • Margaret Gatz, professor at the USC Davis School of Gerontology, Fellow AAAS
    • Sarita Giri, Nepalese Minister for Labor and Transport
    • Erica Hashimoto, Josiah Meigs Distinguished Teaching Professor at the University of Georgia School of Law
    • Sanne Knudsen, Stimson Bullitt Professor of Environmental Law at the University of Washington School of Law
    • Antonia Lavanne, soprano
    • Smita Narula, Elizabeth Haub Distinguished Professor of International Law at Pace University School of Law
    • Yasodha Natkunam, Ronald F. Dorfman Professor of Pathology and Director of Hematopathology at the Stanford University Medical Center
    • Elinor Schroeder, Paul E. Wilson Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Law at the University of Kansas School of Law
    • Caterina Scoglio, Paslay Professor of the electrical and computer engineering at Kansas State
    • Marika Tiggemann, Matthew Flinders Distinguished Professor of Psychology at Flinders University and Fellow of Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia

    Notability not as clear but some of these are likely notable:

    —David Eppstein (talk) 01:17, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

    References

    1. "Kathryn Albers". University of Pittsburgh. Retrieved January 5, 2020.
    2. "2019 AAAS Fellows approved by the AAAS Council". Science. 366 (6469): 1086–1089. doi:10.1126/science.366.6469.1086.
    3. "Barbara Aldave: A legal legacy". University of Oregon School of Law. May 12, 2013. Retrieved December 9, 2019.
    4. "Four Distinguished Scholars to Join Faculty". Columbia Law School. May 14, 2012. Retrieved November 26, 2019.
    5. "2019 APS Mentor Awards". April 2019. Retrieved November 26, 2019.
    6. "Eisenberg, Rebecca S." University of Michigan Law School. Retrieved December 9, 2019.
    7. "Psychological Scientists Elected as AAAS Fellows". Observer Magazine.
    8. "Erica J. Hashimoto" (PDF). University of Georgia School of Law. Retrieved December 10, 2019.
    9. "Sanne H. Knudsen" (PDF). University of Washington School of Law. Retrieved December 8, 2019.
    10. "Antonia Lavanne Gives Song Recital". The New York Times. September 26, 1967. p. 52.
    11. Jennifer Frey (2006). "Introducing Smita Narula". NYU Law Magazine.
    12. "Professor Smita Narula Appointed Distinguished Haub Chair in International Law". Pace University. 27 September 2018. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
    13. "Elinor P. Schroeder". University of Kansas School of Law. Retrieved December 9, 2019.
    • Save some time by not looking for sources on Aoyama Kisuaki, since there is no such person. The single source in the deleted article was a machine-garbled autotranslation that was taken at face value. The intended subject was Kika Aoyama (in English name order), a principal dancer in Asami Maki's ballet company who has a ja.wp entry here. Indignant Flamingo (talk) 03:59, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
      • Thanks for catching this. That looks like the level of quality control typical for these articles. There's a reason that the ones that hadn't been taken in hand and cleaned up by anyone else needed deleting. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:17, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
        • One other caution, if anyone is thinking of retrieving some of these articles and recreating them from the original markup: per this discussion on my talkpage some months back there might be some problems in doing so. Given that, and given the quality control issues, I think it would be better for us to just start from scratch on most, if not, all, of the above list. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoLo dicono a Signa. 14:57, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
          • Even thinking about this pains me, but I'll bring it up anyway. Biografer also expanded a lot of articles from substubs and redirects, using exactly the same approach to text as they did for new articles. I can't get any edit summary search tools to work right now, but the key phrase is "expanded article" in the edit summaries. Indignant Flamingo (talk) 22:46, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

    Question and request for information on this WikiProject

    Hi all. I am very impressed with this fantastic WikiProject. I would like to list this WikiProject that I am creating at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Council; I am compiling a list of active WikiProjects, and will be sure of course to include this one.

    I was wondering, might it be possible to give me one or two people whom I could include as contacts for this WikiProject? I did find Megalibrarygirl (talk · contribs) on one project page, as someone who is a resource to others here. Is there anyone else whom I can ask? --Sm8900 (talk) 03:00, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

    Sm8900. Congratulations on the good progress you are making with your project. I was interested to see it included an updated list of the most active wikiprojects showing that Women in Red is now the most active topic-based one. Our project coordinators are Rosiestep and Victuallers while as you indicated, Megalibrarygirl is also an active member. If you are happy to list members who are not administrators, you are welcome to include me too. If you need any further details of what we do, just let me know either here or on my talk page I'm also a member of several other women-based wikiprojects.--Ipigott (talk) 10:44, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
    Ipigott, that is excellent. we are going to start moving forward apace, to get Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Council revised, updated, and then revitalized to make it a fully-active resource instead of inactive as it was recently. the info you just provided is a great starting point. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 19:19, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
    Sm8900, thanks for reaching out. I'm glad to help in any way that I can. Please ping me if you'd like to chat. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:15, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
    thanks, Rosiestep. hoping to do so soon. glad to be able to help. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 20:20, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
    Sm8900 I'm always happy to be listed as a resource. I have access to several databases and can help people do research. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:11, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

    International Archive of Women in Architecture (IAWA)

    Came across this the other day while looking for information on Mary Brown Channel, the first licensed woman architect in Virginia. (Someone else on my to-create list, I find.) I never even realized it existed, yet it seems to be quite extensive, containing even a biographical database. Not sure as to the notability of all of the architects contained therein, but there's surely some fodder for future discussion/article creation. The link is here: https://iawadb.lib.vt.edu/index.php. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoLo dicono a Signa. 15:02, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

    Ser Amantio di Nicolao, wow good find. I'm surprised to find industrial designer Rowena Reed Kostellow a redlink. Well, I know what I'm doing now . HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 15:50, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
    Good find. Contains lots of names of architects around the world but for the ones I looked at it contained only rudimentary information with a single link. It could no doubt help us with our crowd-sourced redlists if someone is able to invest some time on it.--Ipigott (talk) 16:10, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
    After playing around with it a bit more, I am surprised how few of the women architects in our List of women architects are included. I'm also a bit irritated by all the January 1 dates in the various sections. But I admit it contains useful items which could enhance our own coverage.--Ipigott (talk) 16:24, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
    I also found a book called "For the Record: The First Women in Canadian Architecture" which may also be a good resource. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 16:51, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
    @Ipigott: It's not quite as well-organized as I would like, unfortunately, but it looks like a really useful starting point.
    @HickoryOughtShirt?4: Nice. You've about persuaded me to cobble together something quickly about Channel on my lunch break. Watch this space, as they say... :-) --Ser Amantio di NicolaoLo dicono a Signa. 17:51, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

    Draft:Carol L. Boggs

    Could someone familiar with notability rules please take a look at Draft:Carol L. Boggs? It was rejected at articles for creation, but she's a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Looking through past discussions, I think that's sufficient for notability, but that's way out of my wheelhouse. Thank you. SchreiberBike | ⌨  23:58, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

    I've commented there. She does pass WP:PROF#C3 but the draft is inadequately sourced for what it claims about her research. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:24, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
    I concur that she is definitely wiki-notable per WP:PROF#C3 at the very least. A quick Google Scholar check says she has an h-index of 45 and 30 articles with over 100 citations apiece, which is a strong argument for WP:PROF#C1 as well. (Yes, citation indices are fallible metrics, which is one reason why we treat them as only one way to meet one of the possible criteria of WP:PROF.) The article is maybe one solid editing session away from being mainspace-ready, IMO. It needs some comparatively minor adjustments for encyclopedic tone, and claims about the significance, impact or novelty of her research need to be supported by secondary sources, or else trimmed. We can say, for example, "She studied the giving of male nuptial gifts in butterfly species," but not "Her work on male nuptial gifts opened up a new research arena," unless some other reference (a textbook, a review article, a citation for a major award) says so. XOR'easter (talk) 14:39, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
    I've added sourcing for her fellowships. But there's something odd about the references: access date 10 October 2019 for several refs, but article created 8 Jan 2020 in editor's first edit (account created 28 December). Presumably copied from a sandbox ... but wouldn't the edits show in editor's contrib list? Is it a copy of something previously deleted? Puzzling. PamD 17:05, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

    Updating most active wikiprojects listing

    Some time ago, a listing of the most active wikiprojects was made using this query. Is anyone able to rerun it so that we have the current status? The query is actually based on the edits made to the talk pages of wikiprojects and may not reflect their overall state of activity. I was wondering whether it would also be possible to devise another query based on the number of page views for the wikiproject main pages, the average per day for the past month or the average per day for the past year. Not only would it be interesting to see how Women in Red stands today but it would be useful to see which other wikiprojects are active or important, for example in order to contact them in connection with topics of mutual interest such as our monthly priorities. Any offers? Perhaps Tagishsimon or MarioGom?--Ipigott (talk) 10:41, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

    yes, please do so. this would be awesome. thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 23:27, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
    The "Most-edited pages containing the name of a WikiProject" query has been re-run. The numbers are still not terribly important, and the bot-exclusion logic appears to be broken (even bot-heavy projects get the same number of bot-inclusive/bot-exclusive edits). WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:49, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
    Thanks, WhatamIdoing, for your rapid response and for this useful information. I see that the query was indeed rerun yesterday and that that Women in Red now tops the list. The other most active topic-based projects are wp:Academic Journals, wp:Military history and wp:Medicine. May I suggest that this update is substituted on WP:Council which still lists Misplaced Pages:Database reports/WikiProjects by changes, dated 11 July 2016, on its Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Council/Directory.--Ipigott (talk) 11:24, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
    You should suggest that at WT:COUNCIL, not here. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:26, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
    Thanks. Done!--Ipigott (talk) 16:09, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

    Women in Red most active wikiproject by page views too

    Further to the above, I have also been looking at page views as an indication of activity. Women in Red again comes out on top with 2061 page views a day on the main page and 146 on the talk page (total 2207). WP Medicine has 96 main and 115 talk (total 211), WP Military History 68 main and 101 talk (total 169) and WP Football 42 main and 122 talk (total 164). It would be interesting to see a complete listing of wikiprojects by page views if this could be automated.--Ipigott (talk) 11:52, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

    A quick look through Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Directory/All shows that with 199 active participants we are also in the lead for topic based projects, followed by Football (125), Military History (115), GLAM (95) and Video Games (85). For those which are not topic based we have Deletion sorting (449), Articles for Creation (267) and Guild of Copy Editors (96). I think I'll stop there with statistics for today although I must say I am happy to see Women in Red appears to have a leading position however it is assessed.--Ipigott (talk) 14:12, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

    Rosiestep: These details and those mentioned in the previous item may be useful for your future presentations. It's some time since we have had updated information on the rating of Women in Red compared to other wikiprojects. Thanks to the efforts of all our members and participants, we are obviously going from strength to strength. Let's hope increasing interest in the project leads to more rapid progress on overcoming Misplaced Pages's gender bias.--Ipigott (talk) 16:20, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

    Waste of my time

    Someone from the Project Women in Red asked me to translate this article. She is a Brazilian archaeologist. Now I was informed that the draft] may meet Misplaced Pages's criteria for speedy deletion. Please do not request translation of articles that meet criteria for speedy deletion. Dr. Loo 22:14, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

    Its speedy deletion had nothing to do with its content. It was because it sat there as a draft, untouched, unedited, and not proposed for promotion to article space, for six months. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:23, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
    I've requested it. I'll get it to article on restoration if I can. ☕ Antiqueight 18:08, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

    I've restored it, which any admin can do for a draft tagged for WP:G13 ("abandoned draft"). I agree the stock template message, "In accordance with our policy that Misplaced Pages is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace" is not appropriate here. Ritchie333 18:19, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

    I won't get to this til tomorrow - (I wasn't expecting such a speedy restore) but if anyone else wants to review it faster than that, go for it!! ☕ Antiqueight 18:35, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
    @Ritchie333: I had a similar problem at first with Danielle Younge-Ullman when it was still in draftspace. I was kind of frustrated about it, because I had been working on it and just got kind of busy (6 months can go by pretty fast). I got a message and before I had even logged on for the day, it had been deleted. I'm still hoping to improve the article myself when I have time, as it's a fairly short stub. Also, this happened and . It seems that G13 equates a draft not being edited for 6 months to indefinite hosting of material not suitable for mainspace, even if the draft hasn't even been submitted to AfC yet (or is awaiting a review). Clovermoss (talk) 04:13, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
    Are draft articles in user space deleted after six months too? For example, if the article had been at user:Ipigott/Cláudia_Rodrigues_Ferreira_de_Carvalho would it also have been deleted? If not, despite recommendations from AfC, there is a strong case for encouraging new contributors to keep new articles in their user space rather than in "draft" until they are ready for mainspace.--Ipigott (talk) 11:40, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
    Can someone swing by and take a look at the draft now and see if it's fair? If yes, we can pull it into mainspace. ☕ Antiqueight 12:28, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
    I swung, I looked, I pulled. Cláudia Rodrigues Ferreira de Carvalho. @Luizpuodzius: - not, as it turns out, a waste of time, but rather a good outcome :) --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:35, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

    @Ipigott: Theoretically user space drafts are exempt from the delete after 6 months rule unless they have AfC boilerplate. (In practice, the distinction is sometimes ignored.) By the way, anything deleted G13 can be refunded on request; if I'm active I'm always willing to do that unless there's a copyvio problem. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:45, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

    I'm also willing to undelete if requested - just give me a shout. I'm usually around, except when I'm pretending to have a social life. :-) --Ser Amantio di NicolaoLo dicono a Signa. 06:17, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

    Thank you. Cdefm (talk) 08:43, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

    Annette Thomas

    Hello. I've created a draft wikipedia page for Annette Thomas, a scientist who has risen to run major publishers such as Macmillan and was just named the next CEO of the Guardian Media Group. This is my first time ever creating a wikipedia page and I'm not sure how to ensure it gets reviewed and OKd. It got rejected quite quickly and then I and others made revisions and additions, but now it says the review time may be up to 6 months. Can someone help me with how to get this published? Thank you! 198.151.217.177 (talk) 17:56, 16 January 2020 (UTC)a wiki newby

    The article you originally submitted was weak on sourcing for a living person. I can see other editors have been working on it and it looks to me as if it could soon be moved to article space. Let's wait a day or two for any additions. If you intend to make further contributions to Misplaced Pages, it would be useful to register. See Misplaced Pages:Why create an account?.--Ipigott (talk) 11:51, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
    Now at Annette Thomas. Needs categories. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:06, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

    Victoria Pickett

    This article was a stub when I created it, I've expanded it since then. I think that this would probably be a start-class article now, but I'd like to have another editor's input to know if it actually is or not. Clovermoss (talk) 21:37, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

    I agree, this is start-class. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:43, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
    Thank you for your input, David Eppstein. I appreciate it. Clovermoss (talk) 03:53, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

    Queering Misplaced Pages

    Last call for scholarship applications to attend the upcoming meta:Queering Misplaced Pages conference. Visit Meta-Wiki for more info.

    Happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:45, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

    Native American women academics

    A new category I created, Category:Native American women academics, has been nominated for deletion. If you have an opinion, please see Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2020_January_17#Native American women academics to participate in the discussion. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:36, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

    Figure skating question

    Copying a question by Figureskatingfan left at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/151 in case you missed it over there: "Hey everyone, I think this is a marvelous project; it hasn't even been a month into 2020, and the results have already been impressive. Nice work, and thanks to User:Rosiestep for coming up with it. For the last year-and-a-half, I've been improving figure skating articles. One of them is Tara Lipinski, which I just added to the outcomes list. Figure skating, as I'm sure most of you already know, is a female-dominated sport; I suspect that's why most articles about the sport (especially the ones about female skaters) have been so neglected and of lower quality. So here's my question: would articles about figure skating (elements like jumps, spins, etc., for example), be within the purview of this project? Personally, I think it could." --Rosiestep (talk) 19:02, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

    @Christine (Figureskatingfan). WiR certainly acts as a community of interest in thing associated with women, which is to say WiR's ambit is wider than biographical articles. We have, for instance, Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Redlist_index#Works. Whether for practical purposes it would lend assistance to the development of figure-skating articles must be a little open to question. I see you're aware of Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Figure Skating; there's also d:Wikidata:WikiProject Figure skating - I know that Harmonia Amanda is very active in keeping competition results data up-to-date on wikidata. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:26, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
    Thanks, Tagishsimon. I haven't been in any direct communication with anyone from the fs project; most of the small group working on these articles have been generous enough to give me space to update and improve them. I admire those who keep up with the results, since that's not my thing, although it's very much needed. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:20, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
    Figureskatingfan: Thanks for bringing your interests to our attention. I have been looking at your background in some detail and am impressed with your achievements. It would be great if you could help us to improve our coverage of women in figure skating, both with new or improved biographies and by means of more general articles on the important role they play in the sport, as you suggest. I see you have been able to take a considerable number of articles up to GA and FA status, not only in sports but on poetry and other topics. I don't want to appear too persuasive but as you are already a member of WikiProject Women writers, I was wondering whether you would like to take the next step and join Women in Red (see our main page) and perhaps also Women in Green where we strive to improve articles about women up to GA or beyond. Your involvement could be an inspiring example for future work on these two projects and I'm sure you would be able to make valuable contributions yourself. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 14:53, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
    I thought that I had already joined WIR, since I've always supported the work. I didn't know about WIG, so thanks for bringing it to my attention and for the promotion of both projects. My goal is improve as many figure skating articles as I can before the 2022 Winter Olympics. As Sasha Cohen has said, most people only pay attention to fs every four years, and I'd like WP to the place where they can reliably use as a source, like it is for so many other things. I promise to return here for support in FAC and GAN when I need it. ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 05:28, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
    @Figureskatingfan: If you're interested in figure skating, there's women redlinks in World Figure Skating Hall of Fame and United States Figure Skating Hall of Fame (I updated them both today ;) ). Plus, per WP:NSKATE, there's quite of few persumed notable women figure skaters missing. Specifically, winners of national figure championships that send competitors to the Olympics i.e. Canadian Figure Skating Championships and United States Figure Skating Championships. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 03:32, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

    Ana Novella

    Can anyone assist with this bio of a Catalan sculptor? I declined a speedy but it is now at AfD: Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Ana Novella. Notability seems possible but there are no independent sources in the article. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 23:17, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

    I just now spent more time looking, and there is basically no independent coverage out there on Novella. The only source I could find and add was primary source for the Maritime Pets Museum. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:23, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
    I did a search in Catalan and there seems to be some better coverage than that. I might work on it. Kingsif (talk) 23:30, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
    All I am seeing in English is Pinterest, Saatchi art and stuff like this site where she is selling her prints for $19.99. I strongly suspect she does not meet our notability criteria, but open to surprise discoveries.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:34, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

    Art+Feminism 2020 San Diego edit-a-thon

    Hi everyone!

    I am organizing two Art+Feminism edit-a-thons this year here in San Diego, one in the Spring and one in the Fall in the lead up to the 2020 election. What is the best way for me to connect with members who might be interested in 1) participating either in-person or online and/or 2) be willing to help as a trainer/instructor/helper during these events? Any guidance is appreciated!

    Thank you! Praxis2020 (talk) 04:27, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

    Praxis2020: I see from Misplaced Pages:Meetup/San Diego/February 2020 there is a meetup in San Diego on 2 February but as far as I can see, you are not involved. I recommend that as a first step you create a meetup page of your own. Once we have dates and details, we can announce it on our main page and it can also be listed with other A+F events. If you need further assistance, I recommend you contact Rosiestep on her talk page. Hope everything works out well.--Ipigott (talk) 11:35, 18 January 2020 (UTC)]]
    Praxis2020: I see from Misplaced Pages:Meetup/San Diego/January 2020, there is also a meetup in San Diego tomorrow. It might be useful for you to go along, see how it is organized and perhaps invite participants to help with your own events.--Ipigott (talk) 11:40, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

    6,000,000 articles in the enwiki

    We currently have 5,998,072 articles in the enwiki, so less than 2,000 to go to 6 million. Could WiR create that 6 millionth article? :D -Yupik (talk) 19:19, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

    Here's a link to the count: here. Oronsay (talk) 19:32, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
    Thanks! -Yupik (talk) 19:46, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
    Yupik: There are usually about 600 new articles a day. It looks to me that to be safe, you would have to create about 200-300 new articles in one batch and you always risk being overtaken by a bot. Maybe it would be sufficient to point out that over 5% of Misplaced Pages's 6 million articles are biographies of women.--Ipigott (talk) 12:24, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
    Ipigott Or we could keep our fingers crossed and hope to make it!! 600 new articles a day huh! I don't think I can match that....... ☕ Antiqueight 14:35, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
    In the past it was achieved by editors using bots to create mini-stubs on, for example, small towns in the Chinese provinces. Theoretically we could do the same creating mini women's biographies from Wikidata, as for the Welsh wiki, etc. But I don't really think its a good idea.--Ipigott (talk) 14:43, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
    Goddess no. If we don't create them by hand, they don't count (I mean they do, cause it's a bot doing the counting but...) ☕ Antiqueight 14:52, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

    Linda Rodin

    I just rescued this from the slush pile. There are a pile of news sources, including The Daily Telegraph and Vogue, it's just that I'm a complete ignoramus when it comes to fashion, so wouldn't really know where to begin expanding it. Can anyone here help? Ritchie333 19:57, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

    Women that pass sports notability

    Hello. I've made Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women in Red/Sports Notability to show women redlinks that pass individual sports criteria listed at Misplaced Pages:Notability (sports). This list is just a start and I'll be expanding it. As per usual, these ones have to pass GNG as well. This list could help with the year long sports initiative :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 04:50, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

    MrLinkinPark333: Great idea! It will become increasingly useful as you expand it. I've added it to Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/151.--Ipigott (talk) 12:40, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

    HonFRSC

    There are some women-in-red among the recent additions to Honorary Fellows of the Royal Society of Chemistry. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:11, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

    Request of Help

    I was looking for some small help. I created an article User:Bookku/Me Too movement (Pakistan) in user namespace. Article is almost ready but before taking to main namespace Looking for help in English language Spell-check, punctuation, grammar check and corrections. Using better alternative words etc. Thanks in advance.

    Bookku (talk) 14:05, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

    Bookku, I've done some editing on the lede and in the first section, but then someone else began editing, so I'll circle back. You should probably run the draft through Earwig's Copyvio Detector as there are several instances of close paraphrasing. SusunW (talk) 16:36, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

    SusunW, First of all thanks you took so much of interest & effort for the article. I was looking for kind of edit support you were providing.

    Using alternate wordings & alternate grammar mostly takes care Copyvio that's why I requested for alternate grammar / form/ words support. That's why I did not prefer to take article to draft namespace but any how it seems to have landed up there. Sorry to know some of your corrections were lost in technical edit conflict.

    I hope & request your further support help, specially reference no. 5 needs support in close paraphrasing (word / grammar alternate usage & correction) to avoid copyvio issues.

    Thanks & warm regards

    Bookku (talk) 05:25, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

    Are there any Icelandic speakers here?

    Hi all

    I've been working on a project for a little while to try to collate as many lists of Iceland women as I can on Wikidata so they get fed into the WiR lists. Many are in English and myself and Nav Evans have been importing them into Wikidata but many are in Icelandic. Are there any Icelandic speaking contributors here who could help us understand and import the data?

    Thanks very much

    John Cummings (talk) 17:18, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

    Agnes Tait Wilson, Southern Rhodesia. Looking for advice

    For my first contribution to the 'Women in Red' project, I thought I would do a page on something that's familiar to me. And then, confidence up, delve into a page for someone who I've possibly not even heard of before. That familiar woman is my great grandmother. But I'm not sure if she'll pass the notability test. During her lifetime she became well-known mainly for her charity work eg founding the Southern Rhodesia Branch of the British Red Cross and established Womens' Branches of two political parties, but that may not be enough. Her name is shown as an Independent candidate standing in the 1946 Southern Rhodesian general election page. However, she was unsuccessful. Will this be sufficient for her be 'notable' or am I wasting my time and should move onto someone else listed in this project and turn them blue? Cdefm (talk) 17:20, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

    Cdefm I don't mean to sound flippant, but WP's notability guidelines don't require anyone to have done anything. (In my book, she sounds plenty notable.) All that is required for WP is that there are adequate secondary sources from curated reference materials, i.e. newspaper articles, journal articles, books, etc. which give enough detail of her life to demonstrate that she was noteworthy to them. Sounds like a very interesting article. SusunW (talk) 20:30, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
    Sorry, Cdefm and SusunW, but I'm not finding anything like enough about her. You might be wasting your time. Have a look at WP:SIGCOV to get an idea of what is expected. Edwardx (talk) 20:53, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
    Considering that Rhodesia "ceased to be" 2 decades before the internet, I don't really know that one can say that there aren't enough sources. More than likely will require actually looking in archives and libraries, but who is to say that Cdefm doesn't already have such materials? Maybe they don't, but I AGF that the history cited briefly above, would produce sources in local materials. It's the problem for all women of history. They were rarely covered in mainstream sources so to write about them, you have to know where to find sources locally for the activities in which they participated. The question is, rarely, do they exist, but rather can they be found? SusunW (talk) 21:08, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

    Thanks, both, for your input. I accept your point about not being able to find enough online about her and about women, in particular, not being in the mainstream news. And I agree, if I can't find enough supporting information to at least make a few paragraphs, then I need to ditch it. I have some documentation, and I believe access to some more as I know someone who has been researching the family for 30 odd years. But it is still to be seen how much, and how quickly I can get my hands on it. Most material on Southern Rhodesia, for both men and women, is not available online unless the person or topic has been used in a thesis or study, for example. Source documents are, in the main, in libraries and of course the Zimbabwe National Archives. Her husband has a page, and she was as well known and active as he was. In fact, the only reason she stood as a candidate was to oppose him. He stood in the same elections, and she thought if he gets a seat in parliament, then she wanted one too so she could debate/vote against him. They had differing political views. She was progressive for her time and reading some of her published articles and stories, I get the feeling she had a particular interest in seeing black women progress. But that's speculative and of course, can't make it into the article. Thanks again to you both. I'll see what documents I can get my hands on, and then take it from there. Cdefm (talk) 21:39, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

    @Cdefm: Your sources do not have to be online. You can cite books (give author, title, publisher, date, ISBN if it has one, and page numbers for your facts) or newspapers (newspaper title, date, page, article title, author if any). PamD 07:45, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

    2030 Movement Strategy recommendations and consultation period

    In case you are unaware, on Monday, the WMF began a 5 week consultation period regarding a recommendations core document for how we can achieve the Wikimedia 2030 vision. According to @Mehrdad Pourzaki, Information and Knowledge Manager, WMF Movement Strategy Core Team (see here):— What the community says around each recommendation will play a significant role in how the recommendations are finalized and progressed; which ones move to implementation and which ones will require amendment or further consideration, if kept at all. This is a dynamic process and we are very much interested to know how the community thinks they'll be affected by each recommendation. So I warmly encourage each of you who has time and inclination to review the core document "comprising 13 recommendations for change, principles that underlie them, and an outline of how these recommendations connect and are designed, as a whole, to help align with our strategic direction." You can review this core document on Meta, or as a PDF. If you'd prefer reading in an offline or all-in-one format, you can find a PDF of the core document here, the extended version here, and the cover note here. You're welcome to make comments on the Meta talkpage, on the WiR talkpage, or, if you'd prefer privacy, you can email the WMF Core Team. Thank you. --Rosiestep (talk) 00:04, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

    Can you link to the correct Meta talkpage? I think the recommendations have excellent potential, but I'm unclear the best place to comment. There appears to be multiple discussions, and the talkpage of the above link seems to have multiple discussions going on. It is a little unclear which is the "main" one for overall comments. Can anyone clarify? Thanks! Montanabw 01:05, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
    I think you'll find it in the basement with the broken light switch, behind the door marked "beware of the leopard". --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:46, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

    Where you can post your comments? --Rosiestep (talk) 18:57, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

    • If you want privacy, email your comments to: strategy2030@wikimedia.org
    Thanks Rosie for bringing this to our attention. I downloaded the PDF document and scanned it for "women", "female", "biography" and even "article" but found no hits. A search on "gender" turned up references to enhanced user experience, etc. As one of the encyclopaedia's most widely recognized shortcomings is the lack of gender balance, I think it is very strange that the problem has not been raised or addressed. It seems to me it is far too late to comment on this in connection with the document. In any case, I am not at all sure that a ten-year time frame is an effective means of undertaking useful improvements. The whole thing smacks of an expensive management consultancy exercise -- but perhaps I am being too critical. In any case, I've added a line to the Recommendations page.--Ipigott (talk) 11:48, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
    In this connection, I was wondering why Women in Red is not included among Wikimedia movement affiliates. It might be interesting to see how to join. Also surprised to see WikiWomen's User Group is not mentioned either.--Ipigott (talk) 12:01, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
    This page shows how it is done. User group would be the one to go for & I'd imagine WiR would qualify easily. Johnbod (talk) 15:36, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
    It looks to me as if Wikimedia Foundation releases gender equity report and the associated Gender equity report should have been taken into account. Was any effort made to bring these to the attention of those working on the strategy back in April 2018. Then, and now, we could read under Knowledge equity: "We will focus our efforts on the knowledge and communities that have been left out by structures of power and privilege." Surely there is no better example of this than knowledge about women and women's communities. I fail to understand why no attention has been given to it.--Ipigott (talk) 12:26, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
    Ipigott, I am in no way seeking to defend WMF, but once one starts down the road of delineating, where does one stop? If women are to be specifically mentioned, why not people of colour, LGBTQ+, non-cisgendered, people with disablities, the economically disadvantaged, etc. Edwardx (talk) 13:14, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
    Edwardx: Thanks for your rapid response. It's good to have a reaction from someone who has created over 4,800 articles on the EN wiki, but with respect, I believe people of colour are addressed, perhaps not specifically but rather by reference to items such as local communities, dedicated local staff, ethnicities and emergent regional structures. Women who represent some 50% of the world's population but until now account for only 17.6% of biographical articles on all the language versions of Misplaced Pages are not addressed. Gender is mentioned only in connection with the user experience. This is a serious shortcoming.--Ipigott (talk) 15:34, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
    Ipigott Thanks for the kind words. I must confess that I only looked at this one item in isolation, having little time or enthusiasm to read such WMF documents in their entirety. Edwardx (talk) 22:55, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
    There are copies of this here at the English Misplaced Pages now. Start at Misplaced Pages:Wikimedia Strategy 2018–20. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:52, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

    Row over deletions of beauty pageant winners

    See Misplaced Pages:Village_pump_(policy)#Beauty_pageants:_Award_with_own_WP_article_=_"well-known_and_significant_award_or_honor". Someone has started nominating/prodding mostly US state/national winners. Johnbod (talk) 02:58, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

    Camilla Lee Vitalievna

    Hello again -- I've just declined a speedy request on this artist/academic, after the creator created it in mainspace after being rejected at AfC: Draft:Lee Camilla Vitalievna. The article definitely needs work -- the draft might be a slightly improved version -- and the notability has not been clearly demonstrated. Can anyone assist? Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 09:34, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

    Draft: Diana de vere Beauclerk

    This is my first attempt at turning a woman blue. I selected Diana de vere Beauclerk from the list Writers/UK. She was number 134 on the list. Or alternatively, Women in Red/Missing articles by nationality/United Kingdom, 1104, Diana de Vere Beauclerk: English author; daughter of William Aubrey Beauclerk, 9th Duke of St. Albans. I'm hoping I've done it all correctly. If anyone has the time, could you take a look and guide me where I've gone wrong or what the next steps are to follow the Women in Red project standard procedures? Thanks. Cdefm (talk) 15:32, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

    @Cdefm: I've made a few minor changes to your userspace draft. Overall it looks very good to me. I would have no objection to moving it to article space. Nick Number (talk) 17:11, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
    Looks fine, but digging out some reviews of the books might be needed to demonstrate notability. A hatnote is needed to avoid confusion with Diana Beauclerk, Duchess of St Albans, born Diana de Vere. Johnbod (talk) 17:20, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
    I've added some reviews. While I'm not sure her books were tremendously influential, they seem to have been fairly widely read at the time. Nick Number (talk) 18:03, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
    I removed the name of her dad from the lead because Notability is not inherited, and what she did is more important than who sired her. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 18:13, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
    Another blow for the revolution! But you should have left the title in the next section link. Johnbod (talk) 18:24, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

    Thank you everyone for your time and efforts. I will slowly learn, I hope?! Now to the hatnote Johnbod. I had a look at what it was and how to do one. And I didn't get past grasping the first sentence, although boldly carried on reading hoping it would become clearer. But nope, the situation got worse. By the end of it, I felt I had just had a crash course in a second language. I definitely need help with this one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cdefm (talk • contribs) 18:22, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

    Someone else has done it I think. Johnbod (talk) 18:24, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
    You might get some more data, and a good quote from https://www.newspapers.com/image/34508357/?terms=Diana%2Bde%2Bvere%2BBeauclerk. It's a story about her death. Otherwise, I fear this lady will not be acceptable, her Notability being a bit scanty. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 18:26, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
    I think she's notable enough through her books, but additional sources on that side of the story wouldn't hurt to establish notability that way. It's much more likely than notability through being a society woman, as it shuts the door on deletionists asking "but what did she do?". Additional sources to use might include https://doi.org/10.1080/13645145.2017.1322168 and maybe https://doi.org/10.1080/08905495.2011.543831 . —David Eppstein (talk) 18:39, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

    Oh dear. I see I have a lot to learn.... Cdefm (talk) 18:49, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

    High five to the team! Our Lady Di is looking great. I'm so grateful you all jumped in. I just simply didn't do the Lady justice. Thanks again everyone. Cdefm (talk) 00:16, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

    Questions related to our "Public Domain" event

    In case you missed it and would like to comment, these questions are posted on the #149 talkpage Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/149: --Rosiestep (talk) 20:53, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

    • Why 1949?: Why is this focused on 1949 deaths and not 1925? I realise the laws very by country, but a number was chosen. Isn’t 1925 a ‘safer’ choice? --Nessie (talk) 18:46, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
    Maybe Scann has some thoughts on this. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:14, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

    Six millionth articles

    Maria Elise Turner Lauder

    The English Misplaced Pages has reached 6,000,000 articles with
    Maria Elise Turner Lauder,
    19th-century Canadian school teacher, writer and philanthropist,
    created by Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight (User:Rosiestep) on 2020-01-23 at 18:59 UTC.


    Misplaced Pages, the 💕 – 6,000,000 articles
    Misplaced Pages, the 💕 – 6,000,000 articles

    Articles created near the same time included:

    Congratulations! --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 22:28, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

    This is so cool...not only is the 6 millionth article about a woman, it was written by a member of WiR, and not just a member of WiR, one of the founders! Congratulations Rosiestep. We can edit! WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 22:45, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
    It is not an exact science. We can never be sure exactly which article was the one. But this article was a very likely candidate as it was created on the minute we believe that we crossed the threshold. We reached a consensus that, because of the quality of the article and other considerations, it and its creator deserved the recognition. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 22:57, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
    Maybe we can get seven million articles by February 2024. ミラP 23:36, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
    Well done, @Rosiestep:! --Ser Amantio di NicolaoLo dicono a Signa. 01:42, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
    Fantastic, Rosie, I might have guessed you would be on to it!--Ipigott (talk) 07:43, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
    Thanks, everyone! I really appreciate all the kind comments. Now then, regarding the photo we have on Commons of Maria Elise Turner Lauder... it's not in very good shape. If you think it can be improved, Adam Cuerden, and if you have time/inclination, that would be great. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:06, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
    congrats. this is really terrific!!!! --Sm8900 (talk) 01:45, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

    SCAR Medal for Education and Communication

    Hi! A while back Janstrugnell organised a multi-month editathon to create and update a stack of bios on women antarctic researchers (Signpost article; project page). The main antarctic research society (SCAR) is inviting nominations for the "SCAR Medal for Education and Communication". We have two nominations from academics in the society, but thought it might be nice to have one from "Women in Red". I've no idea if that's feasible, or whether the organisation structure of the meta:WikiWomen's User Group would make that a better option. Anyway, let us know if that might be possible - it'd be a great opportunity to further emphasise the importance of Misplaced Pages biographies in those circles! T.Shafee(Evo&Evo) 05:27, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

    Thank you, Evolution and evolvability, for this kind invitation. I think it is the first time we have been asked to put forward candidates for an award. We have Category:Female polar explorers which seems pertinent here but in February we once again intend to include Explorers (including the Arctic and Antarctica) as a priority. As I see that nominations are to be made by 4 March, we could perhaps use that opportunity to discuss the matter further.--Ipigott (talk) 09:00, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
    Thank you for thinking of us, @T.Shafee. I'll connect with you via email to get more details.
    As a friendly FYI, in 2016, Women in Red received an invitation to apply for the ITU/UNESCO Women's GEM-TECH award. Though we didn't win, we were honored to be one of five organizations shortlisted in the category "Apply Technology for Women’s Empowerment and Digital Inclusion". --Rosiestep (talk) 14:00, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
    Thanks, Rosie, but the difference here is that we are being invited to participate in nominating candidates for an award rather than competing as Women in Red.--Ipigott (talk) 07:27, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
    Correct - in this case the editathon organising team would be the nominee, and a WiR representative would be one of the three nominators providing a letter of support. Apologies that I was a bit unclear in the original post! I'm hopeful that getting additional format recognition of the value of editathons for education and communication efforts will help encourage similar projects in other societies (and help people within those societies pitch the idea to their groups). I appreciate that this is a little unusual a request - so thank you for engaging with the idea! T.Shafee(Evo&Evo) 02:18, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

    Draft: Margaret Thomas (Q21289449)

    Turning a woman blue: Attempt 2. I think I learnt a lot from looking at what others did to my first attempt and I'm hoping I've done better this time. So, while it was fresh in my mind, I thought I'd give it another go. I found Margaret on the list: Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Painters - UK number 226. She needs some hat notes as Margaret Thomas is a fairly 'common' name. I'm also not sure if I should be adding a section listing 'her' collections. Also, if anyone has the time, could you take a look and tell me what you think, or amend (it may be quicker). Thanks. Cdefm (talk) 00:23, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

    I assume you mean the user-space draft User:Cdefm/Margaret Thomas (Q21289449), right? —David Eppstein (talk) 07:32, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
    David Eppstein: Yes. Sorry, will be more accurate next time.
    Cdefm: It seems to be coming along very well. It might be useful to add a link such as this under External links to provide access to some of her works. I suggest you move the draft into mainspace as Margaret Thomas (painter) and add categories, etc.--Ipigott (talk) 07:44, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

    Ipigott I have moved her to main userspace Margaret Thomas (painter). I have added external references, but not well. I couldn't work out how to show the name of the website on the link as opposed to the link address. In regard to categories, I searched how to add these, and then lost confidence as I couldn't find a step by step by step for beginners. I copied the categories from another painter of her time and changed in readiness to add them at the bottom of her article, Categories: 1916 births, 2016 deaths, 20th-century British women artists, Alumni of the Slade School of Fine Art, Associates of the Royal Academy. Help? Cdefm (talk) 11:06, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

    PS When all the 'i's and t's' have been dotted and crossed, she'll need adding to List of British artists ? Cdefm (talk) 11:11, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

    • @Cdefm: A couple of tips:
    • There's a template {{Art UK bio}} which is useful to use - if Art UK were to totally rearrange their website (it happens) it would make it easier to find and fix links to it.
    • There's a very useful template {{L}} (it has to be "substituted" so you need "subst:L") which creates the DEFAULTSORT and birth and death categories (or "living people" category where appropriate), with minimal typing: {{subst:L|1916|2016|Thomas, Margaret}} does it all. If birth or death date aren't known, leave blank, but if clearly dead (eg 19th-century artist), type "missing" so they don't get characterised as "living".

    I've also created the overdue dab page at Margaret Thomas (disambiguation), rather than adding to the already overlong hatnote at Margaret Thomas! PamD 13:20, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

    And added her and a couple of other Margarets to Thomas (surname). PamD 13:24, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
    Another tip: when you cite any online source, please remember to give the access date: websites can change, or disappear, and if the link stops working it's important to know when the information was there, to help in tracking an archived copy of the page through the Internet Archive etc. I've found another nice source, too, re the Hunter prize. PamD 13:40, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
    PamD: Very useful tips, thank you. I have a feeling I'll be referring back to these in future articles. Some you mention are a little above my current skill set. But I'm confident I'll eventually get the hang of it all, after about attempt/article 50. The one about 'access date' I totally get, and I should've realised that without prompting. Cdefm (talk) 16:10, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
    Now, this is something I feel I can manage. Thanks! Cdefm (talk) 16:10, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
    The UK public collections are all listed at this URL. I took out one ref from a site that was also selling paintings. It's a safe bet to say that if the source is also selling art, it's probably not a reliable source.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:24, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
    ThatMontrealIP Collections list added. I managed do it in a table, but I don't think it looks very pretty, try as I might...help?
    Cdefm Did any of your research mention where she died? WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 16:25, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
    WomenArtistUpdates I searched, even on ancestry.co.uk, but I couldn't find any information on her death. I was stumped on that one. Cdefm (talk) 16:59, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
    Cdefm Well, she tip-toed off this mortal coil. She left some beautiful painting though.WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:08, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
    WomenArtistUpdates I typed in the reply box and my message went elsewhere, not for the first time! I may not have found death records as my search skills are not up to scratch. But we've remembered her, not for commercial reasons, but because she was. Cdefm (talk) 00:00, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

    Ebola vaccine researcher would make a great DYK

    Good idea, Oliveleaf4. Plenty of useful sources. See also , , . Why not make it your first women's biography? Let us know if you need any assistance.--Ipigott (talk) 07:35, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
    Thanks for encouragement; however, I don't have time to get this to DYK status, hence leaving it for someone else to try. Oliveleaf4 (talk) 21:10, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
    Judie Alimonti is a very short stub, with lots of detail that can be added from the included sources. Note that the last name is Alimonti, not Alimonte. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 22:08, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

    BBC 100 Women

    I put these women on my watchlist and just noticed that we lost one: Swietenia Puspa Lestari. Looking at the AfD, it seems to be a travesty – just one !voter. You can still see the article at a mirror site and it looks fine to me. It has 10 reasonable sources and there are more to find such as Reuters.

    Now this is someone who is being compared with Greta Thunberg, who has founded a charity, organised 1500 volunteers, represented her country at multiple conferences and been recognised by the BBC as one of just 100 women making a difference in the world. I really can't understand why she is being dismissed as not notable and of no account. Anyway, my point is that the subject was in the deletion sort category for Women but nobody, not even the article's creator, turned out to defend the subject. Perhaps our volunteers are being swamped by the volume of nominations as there are currently 67 women in that deletion category? This seems to be too many to review let alone research and vote on.

    Now 80% of success is just showing up. I invite the perpetrators to show up and explain themselves. @DGG, Bearian, and Sandstein:.

    Andrew🐉(talk) 11:50, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

    The "perpetrators" are the people who didn't bother to show up at AfD to make these arguments. It's easy for those who are interested in such discussions to follow Category:AfD debates (Biographical) or other deletion sorting lists. As AfD closer, I assess and act on whatever consensus there is in a discussion, whether I agree with it or not. Sandstein 12:32, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
    @Sandstein: The consensus of one? It should have been relisted. The Drover's Wife (talk) 12:40, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
    I would have to agree with The Drover's Wife -- one supporter is not much of a "consensus". I think that AfD discussion was closed too soon. Alanna the Brave (talk) 13:23, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
    The Drover's Wife, it is normal practice at AfD to close AfDs as "delete" if consensus to do so is unanimous, even if very few people have commented. This is because we need to conclude the discussion at some point, and community consensus, as encoded in deletion policy, is that this point is after seven days. Relisting is the exception and done only if consensus is unclear and there have been few comments. That is not the case here. People do need to show up in time if they want to make their arguments count. Sandstein 13:58, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
    I agree with the speedy close. AfD is not the place to hash out copyright nor listing issues. By that I mean (a) Afd is not the forum to argue over whether some information is possibly copyrighted - unless it's a clear cut and past, and (b) who goes on a list, or whether every subject on the list is notable, is for the talk page or other fora, not AfD. AfD is the busiest bulletin board on Misplaced Pages; it doesn't need to be cluttered with disputes that can be handled elsewhere. Bearian (talk) 14:15, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

    I have restored this to Draft:Swietenia Puspa Lestari so Andrew and others can work on it. Ritchie333 14:19, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

    Category: