Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Pigsonthewing (talk | contribs) at 15:21, 25 May 2015 (→ORCID identifiers: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

• WT:Womensci
• WT:WOMENSCI

This project page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Women scientists This page is within the scope of WikiProject Women scientists, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in science on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women scientistsWikipedia:WikiProject Women scientistsTemplate:WikiProject Women scientistsWomen scientists Biography: Science and Academia This page is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This page is supported by the science and academia work group. Women's History This page is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History Science This page is within the scope of WikiProject Science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject ScienceTemplate:WikiProject Sciencescience

To-do list for Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women scientists: edit · history · watch · refresh · Updated 2018-09-21 Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : see Articles to be created Citing sources : List of female scientists before the 21st century, Women in computing, Women in science, Rachel Carson, Marie Curie, Nicola Pellow Cleanup : Women in science Stubs : Women in geology Verify : Rosalind Franklin, Margaret Burbidge, Francine Berman, Christiane Nüsslein-Volhard, Karen Uhlenbeck Other : Finkbeiner test (notability), Cécile Vogt-Mugnier (assessment), Emmy Noether (support nomination to be included in Wikipedia_talk:Vital_articles), Bette Korber nominated for good article and needs reviewerLLMHoopes (talk) 16:47, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4

This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

Eyes needed at Laura Mersini-Houghton

There's what seems to be some sort of POV editing going on at Laura Mersini-Houghton by a fluctuating IP editor. By their own admission they are not a native English speaker, and as far as I can tell they don't really understand the original research policy, despite my attempts to explain it. I don't want it to turn into a back-and-forth edit war here, so I think the best thing to do is to get a few extra eyes on the article to establish a proper consensus. The discussion is here. Thanks. 0x0077BE 07:31, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Women of Science Wikibomb

The Women of Science Wikibomb, held by the Australian Academy of Science, is underway. Category:Wikibomb2014 is being used for articles created during the edit-a-thon. Editors are also tweeting their progress at #ozwomensci. Experienced editors are needed to patrol, proofread and de-orphan articles. gobonobo 03:38, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

On the whole, this is a great effort -- some much-needed articles are being added. In a few cases, notability of the person in question is unclear, and those articles are likely to wind up at AfD unless they are edited to make the assertion of notability more clear. The relevant criteria, in most cases, would be WP:PROF. -- 203.15.226.133 (talk) 07:26, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Misplaced Pages struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

No pride in Marie Maynard Daly

Why is it that there is no pride reflected in this Misplaced Pages article? It discusses our nation’s first African-American woman to receive a PhD, a woman who has made tremendous strides in the scientific community, yet her Misplaced Pages page is brief, uncelebrated, and in my opinion, pushed aside. Of course I do not believe that bias should be a part of any Misplaced Pages page, but in certain ways, it is. Through my research, I have noticed that many Misplaced Pages pages dedicated to males and/or White people have an enthusiastic tone throughout the article. After an accomplishment is discussed, many phrases along the lines of, “This discovery completely changed the world of science...” are distributed throughout articles. However, while reading the article on Marie Maynard Daly, I do not come across any such celebrations. Daly’s Misplaced Pages page is a mere laundry list of events, even though these events constituted “groundbreaking work helped clarify how the human body works” (The Biography.com website). Furthermore, the article fails to mention the majority of clubs and honor roll societies she belonged to, omitting information that corroborates the success and achievements of Marie Daly. In total, the article mentions only two of the thirteen associations and honor roll societies Marie Daly was a part of. Isn’t it unfair to leave out the accomplishments of Marie Daly, no matter how small or big they are? So many other scientists are given credit to every minute success in their lives per Misplaced Pages, even those that occurred in childhood, yet Daly is not given given credit for her hard work and dedication. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheysommo (talk • contribs) 21:34, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

@Cheysommo: Which articles have an enthusiastic tone? Misplaced Pages articles are supposed to have a neutral point of view - it's one of the core policies of Misplaced Pages. Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia; its goal is to provide accurate information. The biggest problem that I see with the article is that there are no citations for her post-dissertation career. That should be fixed, and then the lead should summarize her significant contributions. If you have a reliable source that lists the associations and honor roll societies she was part of, you could add them yourself; but make sure you read about reliable sources first. RockMagnetist(talk) 15:49, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

One more thing. Generally the best place to discuss an article is on their talk page - see Talk:Marie Maynard Daly. RockMagnetist(talk) 15:52, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

IEG Renewal Request - Feedback?

Hi everyone! I just wanted to let you know that I've started a request to renew my IEG project over on Meta. You can read about the original project here and see the renewal request here. It's been pretty successful and I'm planning some big things to help with systemic bias on a larger scale - I would love any feedback! Thanks, Keilana| 16:03, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Request for proofreading of Catherine Furbish

Hi there! I am a student at Northwestern University and I am editing my first wikipedia article on Catherine Furbish. She is a botanist whose personal life-long goal was to categorize and draw all of the flora of Maine.

I request proofreading by a more experienced wikipedian, as well as any feedback you could give me. My main concern is this: I am unsure how to cite the same source more than once throughout the article. Can you give me some information about such? Much thanks! Gabiravioli (talk) 02:28, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Launch of WikiProject Wikidata for research

Hi, this is to let you know that we've launched WikiProject Wikidata for research in order to stimulate a closer interaction between Wikidata and research, both on a technical and a community level. As a first activity, we are drafting a research proposal on the matter (cf. blog post). Your thoughts on and contributions to that would be most welcome! Thanks, -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 02:14, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Two new women scientists in Spanish

There are two articles about women scientists in Spanish from the Wikimaratón Científico 2014 being held this weekend at six museums in Spain, awaiting your translation. --Djembayz (talk) 14:55, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Iota Sigma Pi

Hello, if anyone has a free moment can you have a look over this article for me - I have put it as a Start-class and I am hoping to get a DYK for it at some point. I only found it through the 'Random Article' button and tried my best to improve it. Thanks ツStacey (talk) 20:50, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Some missing mathematicians

In case anyone is looking for new articles to write, there are several women mathematicians (Category:Women mathematicians) without articles, listed at Category talk:Fellows of the American Mathematical Society. As fellows of a major academic society they presumably are notable under WP:PROF#C3 (although as usual it would be best if there were something else that we could also say about them more than just this one thing).

The ones I saw with female names are: Patricia E. Bauman, Marilyn Breen, Maria-Carme Calderer, Mónica Clapp, Jane Cronin Scanlon, Laura DeMarco, Ioana Dumitriu, Irene M. Gamba, Shelly Harvey, Jane M. Hawkins, Rebecca A. Herb, Tara S. Holm, Birge Huisgen-Zimmermann, Ellen Kirkman, Carole Lacampagne, Deborah Frank Lockhart, Susan Loepp, Claudia Neuhauser, Barbara L. Osofsky, Emma Previato, Linda Preiss Rothschild, Maria E. Schonbek, Mei-Chi Shaw, Alice Silverberg, Agata Smoktunowicz, Birgit Speh, Gigliola Staffilani, Nancy K. Stanton, T. Christine Stevens, Rekha R. Thomas, Abigail A. Thompson, Michelle L. Wachs, Judy L. Walker, Lynne H. Walling, Katrin Wendland, Elisabeth M. Werner, Anna Wienhard, Ruth J. Williams, Carol S. Wood, Irina Mitrea, Andrea R. Nahmod, Brooke Shipley, and Christina Sormani.

Possibly I missed a few more with more ambiguous names. See the category talk page for suggestions on sourcing. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:19, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

I did miss at least three: Chiu-Chu Melissa Liu (done now), Tinne Hoff Kjeldsen, and Jill P. Mesirov. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:31, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Another: Christel Rotthaus. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:28, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

All mathematicians on this list have now been added. Brirush (talk) 16:14, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! —David Eppstein (talk) 18:21, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Royal Society of Chemistry - Wikimedian in Residence; free journal access

Hi folks,

Firstly, I just started work as Wikimedian in Residence at the Royal Society of Chemistry since September. Apologies for not notifying you sooner, but I've only just discovered the existence of this project.

Over the coming months, I'll be working with RSC staff and members, to help them to improve the coverage of chemistry-related topics in Misplaced Pages and sister projects, and running public engagement events.

You can keep track of progress at Misplaced Pages:GLAM/Royal Society of Chemistry, and use the talk page if you have any questions or suggestions.

This week, we announced the donation of 100 "RSC Gold" accounts, for use by Misplaced Pages editors wishing to use RSC journal content to expand articles on chemistry-related topics (including biographies - there are a number of obituaries in the archives, for instance). Please visit Misplaced Pages:RSC Gold for details, to check your eligibility, and to request an account.

How else can I and the RSC support your work to improve Misplaced Pages? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:22, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Andy Mabbett, do the employees there have any suggestions or unique/old sources for female scientists with poor or no articles that they feel should be improved? Sam Walton (talk) 00:25, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

I've just finished there for the Christmas break, but I'll ask around when I return. Meanwhile the project page linked above has a list of requested biographies (mostly male. I'm aware!) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:29, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015

Hi there; this is just a quick note to let you all know that the 2015 WikiCup will begin on January 1st. The WikiCup is an annual competition to encourage high-quality contributions to Misplaced Pages by adding a little friendly competition to editing. At the time of writing, more than fifty users have signed up to take part in the competition; interested parties, no matter their level of experience or their editing interests, are warmly invited to sign up. Questions are welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Thanks! Miyagawa (talk) 21:49, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Misplaced Pages:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:58, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Question at the Village Pump

There is a question at the Village Pump that should be of interest to this group:

Risk in identifying as a woman editor on Misplaced Pages

--Lightbreather (talk) 02:20, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Notice and invitation

1. There is a redirect discussion that may be of interest to this group.
2. Have you heard of the Kaffeeklatsch? It is a test area for women to hear and support each other. The idea came about as a result of a discussion at meta regarding my IdeaLab proposal (yet open) for WikiProject Women.

Now that the klatsch has survived an MfD and WMF legal has said that it does not violate the non discrimination policy, I am looking for women editors who might like to join.

Although I have started a couple of discussions, they are not urgent. For now, the "Please introduce yourself" discussion is more important! I want to take it slow at first and build a small group before trying to address heavy topics or come up with big goals. For now, the klatsch is there as a sort of refuge. I hope you will consider joining, and invite other women editors, too, if you wish.

--Lightbreather (talk) 15:59, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Presentation proposal for Wikimania 2015

Hello! Victuallers and I have developed a draft proposal for a talk to be presented at Wikimania 2015. It's titled, How to pick up more women -- as in more women editors and more women's biographies. I even mention this WikiProject! The proposal review process has begun and there's no guarantee that this proposal will be accepted. That's where you come in. Please review our proposal and give us feedback. Ultimately, we hope you add your name to the signup at the bottom of the proposal which signifies you're interested in the talk (it does not signify you'll be attending the event). Thank you! --Rosiestep (talk) 21:28, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Wiki Ed "Editing Women's Studies" Brochure: Feedback requested

Hello all, Wiki Ed will be distributing a brochure to Women's Studies courses in the USA and Canada that edit Misplaced Pages as part of their classroom assignments. It will also be available on-wiki and as a pdf for anyone to read or use. I'm hoping to get some feedback on the brochure's contents -- if anyone has some time to review it, I've uploaded a Wiki draft here. We're looking to have it ready to print by March 3, so feedback would be most useful before then. Thanks everyone!

Eryk (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:19, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Turning STEM pipeline into a DYK

STEM pipeline would make a great DYK-- anyone interested in trying it? --Djembayz (talk) 03:15, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

These 17 women changed the face of physics

I'm occupied elsewhere - two elsewheres - at present, but I wanted to share this article that my husband shared with me.

• McKinnon, Mika (March 8, 2015). "These 17 Women Changed The Face Of Physics". New360. Retrieved March 8, 2015.

--Lightbreather (talk) 17:06, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Women scientists in photographs and paintings

WP:Featured pictures are a good way to get a scientist onto the mainpage, if source material is good. Anything smaller than 1500 pixels on the shorter side is likely to run into problems, though. If anyone sees a probable image, please let me know, I'll do what I can. Adam Cuerden 21:50, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Reassessment

I'd appreciate a reassessment of Natasha Raikhel, a woman scientist. Chris Troutman (talk) 03:30, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Hey there. I'll happily assess the article on Raikhell. Could you reassess Cécile Vogt-Mugnier? I'd like to get an impartial assessment to bring the article to A-class. Thanks. -Iamozy (talk) 15:12, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Women illustrators

I'm just wanting guidance on whether these women would fall within the remit of this Wikiproject. I'm tending to come across these women via tagging images for the Biological Heritage Library website and they are often illustrators of images in various scientific journals or books - although not always. I'm tending to take quite a wide interpretation of what constitutes a "woman scientist" and am just wanting to check that I'm not in error. Examples of articles I've recently included in this project are Eliza Turck as a result of her work on Familiar Wild Birds and Catharine Johnston (illustrator). These women are getting images of their art tagged to eventually be uploaded onto www.eol.org. Ambrosia10 (talk) 03:18, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

@Ambrosia10: I would say that scientific illustrators such as those you mention are within the remit of this project. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:02, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/African American women in computer science

African American women in computer science is at AfD; as is African American men in computer science.--Djembayz (talk) 04:06, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Women-specific category

Of the women fellows of the Royal Society, I notice that some are categorised into both Category:Female Fellows of the Royal Society and Category:Fellows of the Royal Society, but many more are only included in the female-specific category. As a result, the top-level of Fellows of the Royal Society contains many, many male names and hardly any female names. I'm thinking that this kind of situation is what we're trying to avoid, and that these women should be in the "Fellow" as well as "Female Fellow" categories. Or is there some countervailing consensus that I've missed? Paging @Johnbod: a WIR in this area who knows FRS-related articles far better than I. MartinPoulter (talk) 14:29, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

No they should all be in both; it has the cryptic "non-diffusing" template saying so. I'm surprized any are not, but I see on a sample this is the case (50/50 maybe). Females are a tiny % - something like 138/7000+ from memory. The male fellows are only about 2/3 complete at 5031 (+ females). If anyone adds those missing (or eg A-G) then please note this here. Johnbod (talk) 15:33, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks John, I only noticed the "non-diffusing" message after posting the above. Easy to fix: I just wanted to check before making the edits. MartinPoulter (talk) 13:04, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Just added "Fellows of the Royal Society" to 44 of these biographies, but I've only gone back to 1986 on the List of female Fellows of the Royal Society, so there are more to do if anyone wants to join in. MartinPoulter (talk) 15:05, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

You mean "up to" 1986 - I've extended to 2006, with most being ok in fact. 2007 to present need checking stillJohnbod (talk) 02:29, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

No, I check backwards: that's how I roll. :) The recent biographies that you've been involved with are indeed fine, as I'd expect: it's the biographies of earlier Fellows that almost all had this problem. Now fixed, though. MartinPoulter (talk) 09:07, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Some database reports

As part of my work I am preparing some database reports on WikiProjects. I've been using this WikiProject as a test case and I came up with these reports:

• Pages that should be tagged by WikiProject Women Scientists, but aren't
• Women scientists of contested notability – articles that are a part of the project but have a notability tag.

Let me know if you find these reports useful. Would you be interested in other reports as well? Harej (talk) 14:55, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for working on these Harej, they are quite useful. For anyone who's curious, there are 1190 articles that don't have the WikiProject banner and 41 articles with notability tags. It might be nice to have a bot run to pick up all of the scientists that are within the project's scope but don't yet have the banner. gobonobo 13:42, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

This is really really awesome! Thank you so much for this! :) @Gobonobo: Do you know of a bot that does this? I'm woefully ignorant about all things bots....but that would be incredibly useful so we don't have to go through tagging by hand. I'm also thinking that a drive to handle all the articles with notability tags could be fun - if every member worked on one article we could get it done really quickly. Keilana| 16:22, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

@Keilana: We can request a WikiProjectTagger run from Anomie's bot at User talk:AnomieBOT. Here are the instructions/caveats/options:

Before requesting a WikiProjectTagger run, please read the following:

The bot can easily handle multiple projects at a time: Everything below can be specified on a per-project basis. If there is significant overlap (e.g. articles in Category:Physicists are likely in the scope of both WP:WikiProject Physics and WP:WikiProject Biography), please consider requesting tagging for all the projects at once. The terms of the bot's approval require that each WikiProject involved approve the list of categories to be processed. In your request, please link to the discussion on each wikiproject's talk page showing this approval. If you do not do this, I will have to post at the talk pages myself and wait a week for replies. That discussion should address all of the following points: Specify which categories to process. Including "all subcategories" is possible, but in general is no longer done. Certain pages will be auto-assessed for class and importance. If any of the below is not acceptable, specify how it should be changed (e.g. "Do not set importance", "Just tag, do not assess", or "Ignore the page, don't even tag it"). In all cases, if it looks like the specified class is not supported by your project's banner I will use class=NA instead. Article redirects will be auto-assessed as class=redirect and importance=NA. Articles in Category:All disambiguation pages will be auto-assessed as class=disambig and importance=NA. Articles in any category ending in "stubs" will be auto-assessed as class=stub, unless they are already assessed as something else by your project. All other articles will be tagged with no assessment. This can be turned off, if for some reason you only want stubs, redirects, disambiguation pages, and/or non-article pages tagged. Non-article pages will be assessed with the appropriate class (e.g. "category", "template", "image") and importance=NA. Action (and class) may be specified per namespace. Note this is not necessary for {{WPBannerMeta}}-based banners, as the assessment is done automatically there. The bot can canonicalize redirects to the project banner, for example replacing {{cvgproj}} with {{WikiProject Video games}}. This will only be done if the page is going to be edited anyway, it will not be the only reason for editing the page. If you want this done, say so. The bot can add arbitrary extra parameters to the template, based on categories, page contents, talk page categories, or talk page contents. For example, it can add task force parameters, and it can do things like "Add living=yes if it is in Category:Living people, or living=no if it is in Category:XXXX deaths/executions, Category:XXXXs deaths/executions, Category:XXth century deaths/executions, Category:XXth millennium BC deaths, or Category:Date/Year of death missing/unknown". If you want any extra parameters set, specify what they are and under what conditions to add them. If you want the bot to remove existing parameters under certain conditions, that can be done too. The bot can also skip individual articles, based on categories, page contents, talk page categories, or talk page contents. For example, if WikiProject Foo wanted all articles in Category:Foo tagged unless they were also in Category:Bar or tagged by WikiProject Baz, that can easily be done. Thank you.

We'd have to make a list of categories to be processed (probably Category:Women scientists and most of its subcategories). Then we'll need consent from this project's members to proceed. gobonobo 16:35, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

@Gobonobo: That sounds super useful! If no one objects in the next few days, I think we'd be ok going ahead and tagging stuff. (Or do we need a full formal RfC?) Keilana| 21:58, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Fine with me. We might want to consider partnering with Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Biography/Science and academia. RockMagnetist(talk) 00:02, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

A full RfC shouldn't be necessary. I've started a new section below with the list of categories. I'm not sure if the bot can also add articles to the science and academia work group, but I'll check. It may mean that the bot request will require approval from that project. gobonobo 03:33, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

@Harej: Your approach to finding articles is intriguing. I'd be interested in knowing how the categories in your first search compare with the categories that I searched to get Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women scientists/missing articles. Could your search be done using CatScan? I find CatScan convenient because it can be used to create a Misplaced Pages page with links to the articles. RockMagnetist(talk) 06:38, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

A list of articles with topics of unclear notability is already part of the cleanup listing for this project (which the wikiproject page has a link to). RockMagnetist(talk) 06:50, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Bot-tagging run

Per the above discussion, we can request a bot to place the Women scientists banner on article talk pages within this project's scope. I propose we have the bot auto-assess the class of the articles and, if possible, add "|s&a-work-group=yes" to the WikiProject Biography banner.

Here is the list of categories:

As this project's scope is just biographies, I did not include Category:Women and science and have struck through Category:Fictional women scientists‎. Please discuss/add/subtract categories as you see fit. Once we have a consensus for the list of categories, the bot run can be formally requested. gobonobo 03:25, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

@Keilana, RockMagnetist: Do these categories look good to you? Anything we should add/subtract before we request the run? gobonobo 09:43, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Looks good as is. I wasn't able to find any more categories. RockMagnetist(talk) 15:43, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Gobonobo: This looks great, thanks for putting this together! :) Keilana| 15:44, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

The bot-tagging run is done. Much thanks to Anomie. gobonobo 23:11, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

New articles feed

I've added a new articles feed to the main page. It shows articles created in the past 14 days that probably fall within the scope of this project. The rules that govern which articles are included can be changed. gobonobo 23:11, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Discussion notice

There is a discussion at meta, Grants:IdeaLab/Community discussion on harassment reporting, that may be of interest to members of the project. Lightbreather (talk) 14:23, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

ORCID identifiers

I'd like to bring your attention to ORCID, the "Open Researcher and Contributor Identifier" scheme that provides unique identifiers for scientists and others. These serve to disambiguate people with the same name, and unite works published by one person under different, or variant, names.

You can see ORCID iDs at the foot of some biographies, for example, Claire M. Fraser - the data is actually stored in Wikidata.

When writing about a living (or recently deceased) scientist, please check on the ORCID website to see if they have an ORCID identifier (make sure you;re not looking at a namesake!) and add it to Wikidata. Then add {{Authority control}} to the article on this project, so the iD displays.

Misplaced Pages editors are also eligible to register for an ORCID iD; if you choose to do so, you may then include it on your user page (as I have, for example, on mine).

More information may be found at WP:ORCID.

I am the Wikimedian in Residence at ORCID, so happy to answer any questions you may have. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:21, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

• Project-Class Women scientists pages
• NA-importance Women scientists pages
• WikiProject Women scientists articles
• Project-Class biography pages
• Project-Class biography (science and academia) pages
• NA-importance biography (science and academia) pages
• Science and academia work group articles
• Project-Class Women's History pages
• NA-importance Women's History pages
• All WikiProject Women-related pages
• WikiProject Women's History articles
• Project-Class science pages
• NA-importance science pages
• Misplaced Pages pages with to-do lists