| Revision as of 15:57, 3 January 2008 editBlackworm (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers4,646 edits →Neutral Wikiproject?: No personal attacks. I said nothing to warrant this.← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 15:32, 31 December 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,311,942 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Gender studies/Archive 5) (bot | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{talk header|wp=yes|WT:GENSTUD|WT:WPGS}} | |||
| {{shortcut|WT:GS}} | |||
| {{WikiProject banner shell| | |||
| {{talkheader}} | |||
| {{WikiProject Gender studies}} | |||
| {| class="messagebox standard-talk" | |||
| {{WP LGBT}} | |||
| |- | |||
| }} | |||
| |] | |||
| {{To do|target=Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Gender studies}} | |||
| |align=left|This article is part of ''']'''. This ] aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the ] for more information. | |||
| {{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Gender Studies/Navigation}} | |||
| |} | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | |||
| | algo = old(90d) | |||
| | archive = Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Gender studies/Archive %(counter)d | |||
| | counter = 5 | |||
| | maxarchivesize = 200K | |||
| | archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} | |||
| | minthreadstoarchive = 1 | |||
| | minthreadsleft = 4 | |||
| }} | |||
| == Requested move at ] == | |||
| {{archivebox|image=]|box-width=13em| | |||
| ] There is a requested move discussion at ] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. --] ] 23:52, 20 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
| #]<br /> | |||
| #]<br /> | |||
| #]<br /> | |||
| #]<br /> | |||
| #]<br /> | |||
| }}<!--Template:Archivebox--> | |||
| {{WikiProject Gender Studies Navigation}} | |||
| == Requested move at ] == | |||
| == Women and History == | |||
| ] There is a requested move discussion at ] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ] (]) 20:30, 19 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Requested move at ] == | |||
| I'm not a part of this project but while looking about for some good models to start a ] article, I've really struggled in finding one. The ] article seems to be a good example of the problem as I see it. It is pretty much a history of feminism and any information outside of that is limited to a feminist analysis of "roles" etc, without much context (historical or philosophical) provided. The ] article which purports to be "a history of female human beings" begins with the section "rights and equality" which an extremely ahistorical (and western-biased) place to start. Feminism is, after all, an ] and as such the weight it appears to be given in articles relating to women and history (which seem to be just the tip of the iceberg) is a serious problem in terms of presenting an npov. The presence of the feminism infobox in these articles is itself, imo, evidence of bias. As a feminist myself, I am concerned by this as the conflation of feminism and female simply further marginalises women and reduces this subject area to the femin(ist) sphere. A history of women (whether general or limited by class/ethnicity/nationality etc) should be balanced by context and adhere to the ]. Internal wikilinks can easily provide relevant feminist analyses.<br />I just wanted to voice this opinion here (which I hope does not offend) because I believe that it relates to your goals as to what this project '''is not'''. I believe that articles relating to feminism and feminist analyses of all subjects should be have their place in[REDACTED] but those articles should be titled as such (ie; "'''Feminist''' history in the United States") and not be represented as anything broader. And I believe that the Feminism infobox should be used only in articles relating to feminism, not articles related to women. ] 14:19, 2 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ] There is a requested move discussion at ] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ] 18:33, 19 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ==Discussion of ''Slayage'' as a reliable source== | |||
| ::You can see from teh goals and whatthis project is not that WP:GS is not about creating articles like the ones you have described. I believe you are correct to remove the feminism temlate. I would suggest you also create an alternative specifically for women's histories. There is one thing that complicates matters though, most books about women's history are feminist writings perhaps a section explaining this in such articles would be useful.--] <sup>]</sup> 14:53, 2 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ''Slayage'', a journal of ] for the TV show '']'' and related productions, is currently under discussion as a reliable at ], in case anyone has and would like to give input. ] (]) 12:48, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Proposed category: Biology of gender == | |||
| Hi everyone, | |||
| I propose we create ]. | |||
| ;Main articles | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| ;Member articles | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| --] 03:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :I '''support''' the category. Nice and interdisciplinary. There's a fair bit of related information across those articles, from quite a few different perspectives. I recommend you include ] also. Perhaps ], perhaps not. There'll be other articles people will find if you just go ahead and make the category. People can always remove articles from the category if they think they are not relevant. That's my 2 cents. Cheers. ] 14:44, 15 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::Done. --] 20:50, 20 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :The idea sounds interesting and potentially useful, but it will be important to distinguish the biology of sex from the biology of gender. The biology of sex shades into the biology of gender, so keeping the two clear of each other depends on keeping a clear focus on what is central to each. | |||
| :To be less abstract: We know what determines the ability of some individuals to produce sperm, the ability of other individuals to produce ova, and also the factors that preclude some individuals from producing either. That is sex in the "irreductible" sense. It is primarily established on the level of the genotype, but the genotype is not always expressed. Sometimes events in the womb prevent the expression of the genotype. That sexual identity has a definite effect on gender identity, but it is not the only effect. | |||
| :If nothing happens to thwart the normal development of the genitalia, it is still possible to have the development of the brain become discordant with the genitalia. That is a biological development, usually driven by abnormal hormonal levels at a crucial point in brain development. "Brain sex" is biological and has its own impact on the gender identity of individual, but it is not clear that it can overcome all other impacts. | |||
| :Learning is the factor involved with gender identity that is not biological, but it (always?) interacts with what is present biologically. John Money began his career by overgeneralizing from some experiences that indicated that children's gender identity can be determined by enculturation experiences. People in the field now seem to stress that in many cases brain sex trumps both genitalia and enculturation, but there may be cases where learning experiences throw the balance one way or the other. It may be that in considering the impact of learning experiences one has to take account of the phenotype of the individual. | |||
| :These considerations are very important for some individuals trying to understand their own sexuality, for parents who want to understand why their child's behavior is inconsistent (in their view) with their child's genitalia, etc. So it is important to get these matters clearly and objectively described. However, there is probably so much remaining to be learned that it is necessarily difficult to pin down true cause and effect relationships. Concerned individuals need to understand that there is no certain guidance, and also that (issues of abuse aside) whatever happens is not somebody's fault or even their responsibility. ] 04:38, 23 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==POV issues== | |||
| This project began as front for gender-feminists and their flunkies who are pushing an in-credible ideological point of view on gender-related articles. This project is still coming from a reverse-sexist point of view but the project goals have been generalized to the point of meaninglessness so that no one can see point of the project now. This enables the usual 'feminista'-feminist 'subversions' because no one can hold anyone else accountable to meaningless criticia. I will be glad to pull this POV tag as soon as I see reverse-sexist statements in the project deleted, specific non-sexist NPOV goals for the project, and a welcoming attitude from project people for well-sourced content that is 'problematic' to gender-feminist ideologues. | |||
| Many credible feminist authors have shown the falsehood, fraud and misrepresentation related to gender-ginning scholarship by so-called 'gender'-feminists. ] show blatant reverse-sexist research on gender by feminist scholars in ''Legalizing Misandry''. They also show how gender as a concept has been hijacked, perverted, and politicized for ideological warfare by feminists in academia and elsewhere. | |||
| To ignore these issues or to insist that only gender-ginning editors are allowed to contribute to the project's content/criteria is to pander to ideological feminist pov. Gender feminist rapes of reason are no less serious than those Al Gore illustrates in ''Assault on Reason''. | |||
| This project needs to aim at a NPOV, reason-able, and plausible take on gender to be a credible project.<small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]){{#if:{{{2|}}}| {{{2}}}|}}.</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> | |||
| :Could you please provide some examples that support your claims? Perhaps it's because I'm new to the project, but I don't see any systemic "gender-feminist" bias being pushed. ] 12:18, 28 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :I second Cowpepper's request for examples. Unless/until some are provided I'll ignore this complaint as the same baseless kind that pops up here periodically. (And always anonymously. Hmm.) --] 03:03, 11 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::Just so everybody knows the above comments from IP 128.111.95.45 were identified as trolling by the long-term vandal ]. Since making these comments they have been banned. As noted by Cowpepper & Alynna, the comments are both baseless and time wasting - this user ''was'' in fact responsible for all of the periodic trolling comments left on this page since October 2006--] <sup>]</sup> 21:33, 11 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Actually I think before the spinoff there were some issues (I brought one up ), but I don't see any POV issues any more... I think he's just ranting. ]<sup> <nowiki>(</nowiki><small><font color="#cc9900">]</font></small> <font color="#cc9900">/</font> <small><font color="#cc9900">]</font></small><nowiki>)</nowiki></sup> 23:48, 11 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Brooklyn Museum of Art. == | |||
| The ] has now opened its web pages on the 1979 work, ] by artist Judy Chicago. This includes a database of the women featured in the work, in particular the 999 Women of Achievement depicted in the tiled floor. | |||
| I have transferred the list of names shown on the floor from the database to the Dinner Party article (although I fear the number does not reconcile with the 999 stated). | |||
| This now provides another list of articles of notable women which Misplaced Pages needs to develop. Needless to say more than half the links are red. Any help in turning these blue is welcome. ] 09:41, 28 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Many of these links simply need redirect pages. I've created a few, and will come back to it later. ] 16:18, 28 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == ] article == | |||
| Hi, could someone please check out the ] article for consideration of this project. Thank you! ] 19:51, 5 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Women by country articles == | |||
| I encountered the new article ] and was curious if it formed part of a series, relating to various countries. It turns out there are some articles like ] and ], although there are some differences between focus on roles, social status, legal rights, etc. Is there any effort to make coverage and nomenclature of these articles systematic? Looking above, I also see there are History of women in X articles too. If the contents could be sorted out, it seems like it would be worthwhile and avoid systemic bias if there were articles with similar approach for all countries. ] ] 19:20, 13 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Proposed re-write of ] as per ] == | |||
| I'm proposing a re-write of Feminism into ]. The discussion is at ] at talk:feminism and the re-write page is in my user space ]--] <sup>]</sup> 17:51, 29 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::This re-write is almost ready if any one has any comments please drop by the ] or the ] | |||
| == Peer review requested == | |||
| Hi. ] is up for peer review ]. Your comments are welcome. ] 18:30, 10 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Proposed WikiProject == | |||
| A WikiProject for ] and ] related articles has been proposed. For more information and to express interest, please visit ]. Thanks! --]<sup>]</sup> 00:12, 19 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==User:Fl1942 prodding of articles== | |||
| {{User|Fl1942}} is ("deleting") a lot of articles that are about women's organisations or that are critical of (child) prostitution, women trafficking and rape (], Durbar Mahila Samanwaya Committee, All Bengal Women's Union, Tulasa, and others). Many of these articles are notable, so I have deprodded them. He has taken revenge on me by reverting all my edits (see on ]). Can someone else please keep a watch on future proddings? --] 15:23, 21 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :This message area isn't terribly active so you might do better by keeping watch yourself possibly reaching out to other editors on each of those articles and contact an administrator if they actually violate WP. As much work as it may seem each article has to stand on its own merits so if something comes up for AfD then rally more support to quickly address the most pressing issues. Improving articles is the best way to keep them. If the user seems to be disruptively editing then take it to admin for support and advice. ] 15:31, 21 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::Without prejudice to the notability, or not, of these organizations it does seem that Fl1942 is editting tendentiously. The reverts, without explanation across a number of articles seem to be retaliatory. Contact a ] about this--] <sup>]</sup> 15:43, 21 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==TV pregnancies== | |||
| Hi all, I started ] in my userspace. Originally I wanted to write about how TV deals with actresses who become pregnant (such as the ] case) and how TV either acknowledges or hides the pregnancy in the fictional universe of the show. However, I've also set aside space for reality pregnancy shows like the ones on Discovery Health. I would appreciate community comments before I finish it up and move it to article space. Thanks! ] 03:17, 28 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Gender studies about Misplaced Pages == | |||
| This is not clearly mentioned in this WikiProject's aims and non-aims: Is there any place where I can find gender studies about Misplaced Pages, both its articles and its contributors? For example, how many users are men/women, how many WikiProjects are headed by men/women, etc. Obviously the board of the Wikimedia Foundation is very strong in women, but does the same balance apply through all levels? If there are any imbalances, could there be any flaws in the design that should be addressed? Etc. I guess these questions fall outside of this WikiProject, but then, where do they fit? Any hints appreciated. I guess it would sort under ], but I didn't find anything there. --] 21:37, 29 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Well as far as I know there is no systematic research into the gender break-down of wikipedians - I'm not sure that it would be possible to undertake a completely accurate one since not all wikipedians reveal their gender. To be honest these are not a wikiproject's concern - wikiprojects look after articles. What you seem to be proposing is independent research the foundation itself may be interested in such a project--] <sup>]</sup> 22:58, 29 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Portrayal of women in video games == | |||
| I just wanted to alert this project to the fact that an article you tagged, ] as an AFD on it, and if someone here wants to bring it up to acceptable quality they might consider rescuing it. -- ] 21:05, 3 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == I hope there is no gender / sex bais here == | |||
| The first article appears to be a feminist proclamation. There are actual definitions far outside intended diatribe, and I am begininning to feel misandry. For instance when discussing feminists call for an end to patriarchy, their political position probably is from a singular point of view. ] 20:34, 4 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Wikipdia is ] and not a ]. Please read ] to see how to use a talk page properly.--] <sup>]</sup> 22:04, 4 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Which article is "the first article" that you're referring to? ➪]! 22:41, 4 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::comments removed by BobV01 have been reinstated. If you wish to retract a comment strike it by placeing it in between<nowiki><s></s></nowiki>. It is considered bad form to remove comments that have been quoted or replied to - see ]--] <sup>]</sup> 21:00, 5 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Gender-neutral language proposal at MOS talk == | |||
| Dear colleagues—You may be interested in contributing to a lively discussion (which I hope will form consensus) ]. ] 15:09, 5 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == ] could use a review == | |||
| The artcle ] makes many references to the two female members of the group as "girls". I believe that the article would be improved if all or very nearly all of these references were replaced with a better term. -- ] 18:34, 8 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :I think this has been completed. ] 13:36, 18 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Has the {{Tl|Gender bias}} template ever been used effectively for an article cleanup? Nothing is using it as this time. / ]<small> ] ]</small> 02:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :As far as I know it has had no use yet. Apparently some sections in ] could use it though--] <sup>]</sup> 12:28, 18 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::It's currently a ]. I'm leaning ''Delete'' since it seems unused. / ]<small> ] ]</small> 20:22, 19 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Women writers deletion proposal == | |||
| People may be interested in this debate: ] ] 15:45, 25 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Category advice wanted == | |||
| I've just come across the following category structure. ] contains ]. ] is only in the latter, ] only in the former, and ] in both categories. | |||
| Obviously the categorising is incomplete, but how would one take this forward without redundant categorisation? The women are of interest to gender studies folk, but also key to Zimbabwe's literary history. It would be inexcusable (for multiple reasons) to make the higher cat the sole preserve of male Zim writers. Should we split the higher category into ] and ], although the numbers are not conducive to this? Or should we lose Cat: Zim women writers in favour of ]? | |||
| Sorry if this has been previously discussed - I can't suss it. ] | ] 18:38, 11 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :I'm no expert so just as a suggestion I would eliminate the minor gender categories in favor of just the writers one then on that category page simply note that these are female writers and update it until there is at least a handful to justify their own category. One is a lonely number! ] 18:58, 11 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::See ], which says | |||
| ::::''"For example, separate categories for actors and actresses are not needed, but a female heads of government category is valid as a topic of special encyclopedic interest. That category, however, does not need to be balanced directly against a "Male heads of government" category, as historically the vast majority of political leaders have been male by default. Both male and female heads of government should continue to be filed in the appropriate gender-neutral role category (e.g. Presidents, Monarchs, Prime Ministers, Governors General.) (See ] for details on female and male singers by nationality categories.)"'' | |||
| :::The usefuluness and acceptability of women writer categories was established in numerous lengthy CfD discussions earlier this year, so the existence of the category is agreed, and there does not need to be a separate ]. | |||
| :::As to categorising Zimbabwean women writers, there is a simple rule to apply: they should not be removed from any other appropriate category because they are in ]. So a Zimbabwean female novelist should be in ] and in ]; but a Zimbabwean female essayist should be ] and ] (because there is no Zimbabean essayist category). | |||
| :::Hope this helps. --] <small>] • (])</small> 22:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| It does help, but leaves me struggling with the § ''after'' the one you quote: | |||
| :''"Whenever possible, a valid occupational subcategory should be structured and filed in such a way as to avoid "ghettoizing" people, but at the same time, Misplaced Pages rules about redundant categorization should also be respected."'' | |||
| Which is a nicely unhelpful statement if ever I saw one. I don't think creating lots of sub-cats is going to get us out, either, because a) the numbers are comparatively small and b) Yvonne Vera is not unusual in having written novels and short stories, produced publications for the National Gallery, and interviewed people for newspapers - so dividing by novelist/essayist/etc may not be appropriate. | |||
| Sorry if I seem to be looking for probs, but I don't do much cat work on en:wp, so am nervous of stuffing up. If you say shove 'em all in both ] and ], even tho these are mother & daughter cats, I'll go ahead and do so. Cheers, ] | ] 23:20, 17 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :No, I'm sure you ain't looking for probs, just trying to get your head around some rather complex conventions :) I'll try another way of explaining it, in case it's clearer. | |||
| :#put all the Zimbabwean women writers in ], ''and'' | |||
| :#also put them in either or both of ] and ], as appropriate | |||
| :#If they are in ''neither'' of ] and ], then also put them in ] | |||
| :I hope that's a bit clearer than my first attempt. But don't worry too much if you get it wrong;[REDACTED] has strong no-biting rules :) --] <small>] • (])</small> 23:53, 17 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::I just thought of another, more succinct, way of describing the convention: ''categorise the person as if there were no gendered categories, and then ''add'' any appropriate gendered categories''. So an Irish woman who writes modernist poetry would go in ], and then (adding gendered categories) in ] and ]. --] <small>] • (])</small> 00:04, 18 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::That's smart. And easy to remember :-) ] | ] 19:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Never stopped me getting bitten! But many thanks, will do as above. Much appreciated, cheers, ] | ] 00:04, 18 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==help rescue article== | |||
| Hi; the article ] just avoided AFD. There's a germ of a very good article there dealing with the treatment of reproduction in fiction, but at present it's an unsourced list. Help editing would be appreciated, and I'm adding the project tag to the article. --] 19:29, 11 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| I don't know if there is anybody interested in being involved in this article. It isn't a bad little effort, but it is not my area of expertise, (or interest in fact!) My role has mainly been to try balance the various POV editors who appear to try to massage the article more to their way of thinking, and I am getting tired of the role. In any case I welcome some additional voices who can help improve the article.--] 12:07, 14 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks for the note Slp1. I'll have a look and see if I can be of any help--] <sup>]</sup> 14:41, 14 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==Women athletes in ancient Greece== | |||
| ] says: "in ancient Greece only men practiced sports". ] says: "a strong emphasis was placed on the physical fitness of men as well as women. Despite their physical fitness, women could not compete in the Olympic Games, according to the Olympic rules (they competed in the ] instead)." ] says: "The ancient Heraea Games, dedicated to the goddess Hera (also spelled Heraia) is the first sanctioned (and recorded) women's athletic competition to be held in Olympic Stadium." (etc.) -- We need to reconcile these. -- ] 13:48, 17 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :I suggest making specific changes on appropriate articles and support with references if possible. If you get any grief ask for help as articles need to be accurate. ] 20:39, 17 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Gender and Judaism == | |||
| There is a related article ] whose development should probably be coordinated/merged/sub-main'd with this article. A topic has been created to discuss this: ]. Best to all, ] 03:50, 2 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks for the note Egfrank - will have a look--] <sup>]</sup> 11:57, 2 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Hi! ] is a current ] candidate. Expansions of the article (it was two sentences long when I found it) are welcome. ] (]) 21:58, 18 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks for the note Punkmorten. I'll try and help out there if I can--] <sup>]</sup> 00:45, 19 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Category:Female models nominated for deletion == | |||
| {{cfdnotice|Female models|date=2007 November 20}} | |||
| ==Women in the professions== | |||
| In part as a result of the discussion on the Female models CFD, I have begun a project to write articles on women in various professions. The first such article to discuss the topic generally and link to the sub-articles is ] - I drafted this much-needed article and it was promptly tagged ] (6 minutes after posting the item, tagged stub). I've been adding some of the numerous cites available on the topic. Please feel free to help out. | |||
| The larger context is that although these are all well-studied topics, some editors in[REDACTED] feel that categorizing female professionals (or ethnic professionals) as such is ]. Consequently there have been numerous deletion discussions on ], ], ], and so on. Some categories (]) have been deleted; others have survived. ] is the general guideline on the topic and it states that an intersectional category is appropriate where an article can be written about that topic. As I suspect most people involved in this project know, the history of women in various occupations (and the history of gendering of occupations generally) is a significant topic in ], ], and ]. Help on this project would be greatly appreciated. | |||
| One problem that we face is that editors with little experience in or knowledge of the field tend to see this interdisciplinary topic as ], and tend to police it rather heavily (I'm feeling uncharitable at the moment so I'm going to allude to the differences in levels of policing of ''fictional'' topics and academic topics especially those pertaining to gender and ethnicity.) So basically any stub has to have (1) a topic sentence that explains it; and (2) an extensive list of references ''from the start'' to justify and explain to people that this is a well-studied topic. Anything more, or less, is likely to get slapped with tags, AFDs, and so on. | |||
| --] (]) 17:37, 26 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Magazine article that may be of interest == | |||
| Magazine article that may be of interest; by Jerry Saltz; New York magazine; pages 130-131. And ] 01:30, 28 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| ] could use some cleanup. -- ] (]) 22:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==Merge proposal== | |||
| I've proposed that ] and ] be merged. PF is a stub with no refs and PFM has some good refs. They're both the same thing (basically). Come join the discussion ]. Thank you. ] (]) 20:38, 31 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Fat feminism & Amazon feminism == | |||
| <small>partial cross post from ]</small><br/> | |||
| ] and ] are full of original research and Amazon feminism might have plagiarism issues. If anyone can help with these articles please do. I am thoroughly uncertain of Amazon and Fat feminism's notability - at the moment they almost look like hoax articles due to the serious amount of OR on those pages. I'm going to give them 3 weeks to improve - if they can't be sourced and rationalized by then we'll have to send them to ]--] <sup>]</sup> 13:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Neutral Wikiproject? == | |||
| This WikiProject seems to express gender neutral aims. However, its "to do" list seems to betray bias. Why do most if not all of the articles to "expand" deal with women or women's issues, and most if not all of the articles to "review" deal with men or men's issues? Put another way, is this truly a project for "neutral documentarians" as stated on its page, or is it more of a collective of pro-feminist editors? Is the anti-feminist position welcome here? Would an editor having an opinion that most Misplaced Pages articles on gender issues are edited predominantly from a feminist point of view, with women possibly being overrepresented as editors, be welcome in this WikiProject? Thanks for any response. ] (]) 07:19, 3 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :Blackworm the "to do list" is added to by contributors. Any one can add to list. Please be aware of ] and ]. This is a project for editors who want to work on and develop pages within category gender studies and the related areas, that is all--] <sup>]</sup> 14:36, 3 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::You have no evidence of either an AGF or SOAP violation, and I take the accusations as unprovoked personal attacks. If someone could please directly answer my questions without making personal attacks, I would appreciate it. ] (]) 15:57, 3 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 15:32, 31 December 2024
| This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Gender studies and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
 | This project page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Requested move at Talk:Gender self-identification#Requested move 20 September 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Gender self-identification#Requested move 20 September 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. --MikutoH 23:52, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:List of people killed for being transgender#Requested move 19 October 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:List of people killed for being transgender#Requested move 19 October 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Raladic (talk) 20:30, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Masculine fragility#Requested move 4 December 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Masculine fragility#Requested move 4 December 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 18:33, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
Discussion of Slayage as a reliable source
Slayage, a journal of Buffy studies for the TV show Buffy the Vampire Slayer and related productions, is currently under discussion as a reliable at Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Slayage, in case anyone has and would like to give input. Daranios (talk) 12:48, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
Categories: