Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Ideas

Women in Red logo.svg

Schedule planning at the Virtual Ideas Cafe (VIC)

Women in RedAbout us

Hello! and welcome to WikiProject Women in Red (WiR), whose objective is to turn red links into blue ones. Our project's scope is women's biographies and women's works, broadly construed. Did you know that, according to Humaniki, only 19.06% of the English Wikipedia's biographies are about women? Not impressed? Content gender gap is a form of systemic bias, and this is what WiR addresses. We invite you to participate, whenever you like, in whatever way suits you and your schedule.
Women in Red warmly welcomes you!

Women in Red logo
Wikipedia - filled with knowledge.jpg
Welcome to the Ideas Cafe where we serve up ideas for Women in Red's virtual editathons! The Ideas Cafe is our planning page, where your ideas become WiR events. Here, we discuss, organize, plan, and coordinate our activities. Please join the discussion here or on our project talkpage.
Use social media to promote our work!
FacebookWiki Women in Red
PinterestOur WikiProject's board

September 2021Edit

Annual initiatives: WritersEdit

Innisfree987 (talk) 22:10, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Also: --Rosiestep (talk) 15:55, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Writers by occupation: Writers (CS) Art critics (WD) Art historians (WD) Authors (WD) Children's writers (WD) Columnists (WD) Critics (WD) Editors (WD) Essayists (WD) French speaking African authors (CS) Historians (WD) Journalists (CS) Journalists (WD) Journalists - US (WD) Novelists (CS) Novelists (WD) Playwrights (CS) Playwrights (WD) Poets (CS) Poets #1 (WD) Poets #2 (WD) Publishers (WD) Screenwriters (WD) Songwriters (WD) Translators (WD) Writers (WD) Youth lit writers (CS)

Writers (WD) by country: Argentina Austria Belgium Brazil British India Canada Czech Republic Finland France Germany India Israel Italy Japan Netherlands Norway Poland Russia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland UK Uruguay

Geofocus Latin America contest (Jul/Aug/Sep)Edit

  • Latin America quarterly contest (Jul, Aug, Sep)

Olympic & Paralympic Games (Jul/Aug/Sep)Edit

Firming up for September 2021Edit

* Women writers with WP:WPWW
** Event #208: Women writers Green tickY
** Talkpage template: Template:WIR-208 Green tickY
CONTEST (Jul/Aug/Sept) 
* Latin America (Jul/Aug/Sept) (Update for Sept) I will update on Sept 1 WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 16:34, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
** Event #205: Latin America  Green tickY I will update on Sept 1 WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 15:59, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
** Talkpage template: Template:WIR-205 Green tickY 
* Women in Olympic & Paralympic Games (Jul/Aug/Sept)
** Event #204: Olympics & Paralympics Green tickY
** Talkpage template: Template:WIR-204 Green tickY
** Event #207: Women’s leadership & empowerment Green tickY
** Talkpage template: Template:WIR-207 
** Event #188: Women's rights Green tickY 
** Template:WIR-188 Green tickY
** Event #184: #1day1woman2021 Green tickY 
** Template:WIR-184 & Template:WIR-00-2021  Green tickY
* Interwiki Women Collaboration
* Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/2021#September 2021Green tickY
* Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Events Green tickY
HI Innisfree987, I think we are good to go now. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 16:03, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
WomenArtistUpdates, agreed, I saw all has kindly been looked over by several people. Thank you all! So today is one week out. Ipigott, do you think should we ask Megalibrarygirl for a mass-message today or is it optimal to wait a bit longer? Innisfree987 (talk) 16:42, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
WomenArtistUpdates, Innisfree987: Thanks for all the useful preparatory work but I had in fact specifically suggested that we should add a link on the invitation on our plans (e.g. on the Women in Red talk page) for holding pioneering online recruitment sessions in October. This would no doubt attract volunteers willing to assist with preparations, etc., as well as potential participants interested in furthering their basic editing skills . Maybe Rosiestep could adapt the invitation accordingly (if this is indeed the right way to draw attention to this event).--Ipigott (talk) 07:55, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
I'm not exactly sure what you want it to say, Ipigott. Maybe if you draft it, I can help out? --Rosiestep (talk) 14:20, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Rosiestep: I was thinking of something quite simple like "Those interested in our proposed one-day online recruitment initiative in October can link to our discussion on the WiR talk page". But please adapt as you wish. You've always been good at preparing the invitations. Thanks in advance for your help.--Ipigott (talk) 14:35, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Ipigott: take a look now... Is it okay? --Rosiestep (talk) 15:08, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Rosiestep: Nice and concise. Looks fine to me. Thanks.--Ipigott (talk) 07:17, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Now I’m the one with a potential add-on! I just tossed it out to main talk but apparently there’s an org dedicated to improving coverage of women journalists on Wikipedia and they have a September 15 training event planned that’s on theme for our Women writers editathon; don’t know if we should mention? I don’t know any of the involved WP editors but maybe they will raise a hand. If that doesn’t happen in time to add to the invite, we could always just put it on the event page later on, so we don’t need to hold the invite necessarily. Just wanted to flag for input. Innisfree987 (talk) 17:17, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
  • As far as I am concerned everything is ready to go. The Women Do News are a well-established group who are fully capable of taking care of their interests. I suggest the best solution would be to mention their event on our announcements page although most of those interested will have seen the item on our main WiR page. As MLG has not been active since the 22nd, perhaps Rosiestep can send out the invitations.--Ipigott (talk) 19:03, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
  • No intention to impugn their capacity! Was only an idea to collaborate as we do with other established groups with aligned priorities. I don’t have any contact with them tho so sounds like just mentioning on Announcements is the way to go. Innisfree987 (talk) 19:51, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
  • That sounds good, especially as I realized belatedly that I myself do not know where our announcements page lives! Oops! Anyway, I’ll mention on 208 but anyone is free to adjust as they see fit of course. Innisfree987 (talk) 01:26, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

October 2021Edit

One-day online recruitment editathonEdit

This is also being discussed on the main Women in Red talk page

On Rosiestep's talk page, we have been discussing the possibility of initiating a one-day online recruitment initiative. It will not be one of our main monthly priorities but could/should be mentioned in the invitation.--Ipigott (talk) 18:15, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Ipigott, agree. The online event would be part of our Annual STEM Event; not an additional main monthly priority. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:28, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
Cool. SusunW (talk) 12:48, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
Sounds great! Innisfree987 (talk) 16:59, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
checkY Victuallers (talk) 10:16, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Collaboration with Women in GreenEdit

Should we also mention Women in Green's October initiative? SusunW (talk) 12:48, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

SusunW, if someone creates a unique event page for the WiG October Initiative, certainly, the WiR Invite could link to it. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:28, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
You know I have zero clue how to do that ;), but Alanna the Brave probably does. SusunW (talk) 15:47, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
I’ll keep an eye out—I think it’s planned but not yet unveiled. Innisfree987 (talk) 17:00, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
  • @SusunW, Rosiestep, and Innisfree987: I'm trying to finish plotting out details (need some feedback from WiG members), but I'll have a page up and running for the WiG editathon as soon as I can. Thank you for the offer of additional promotion/collaboration! Alanna the Brave (talk) 18:38, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
  • No rush, Alanna the Brave. We'll be promoting the October WiG Initiative in the October WiR invitation/newsletter, which will be MassMessaged around the 3rd or 4th week of September. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:36, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Annual initiative: STEM (in support of Ada Lovelace Day: Oct 8)Edit

Thanks - useful for our antipodean editathon on October 12 in Manchester and NZ. Victuallers (talk) 10:02, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Spreading evenly?Edit

A suggestion - I made it somewhere above but I think it got a bit lost, so coming back with it at the start of the month..

We often have themes like "July Julies" which are biased towards people whose names come from European origins.

How about taking the whole A-Z range of either surnames or given names and divvying it up into 12 (or 24?) and offering a list of redlinks each month? If the file was too massive we could (well, I assume someone with the technical skills could) narrow it down to perhaps one or more birth decade(s)? Just out of interest I looked at the 1921 births category (to find a manageable number: 8,448), sorted by DEFAULTSORT (ie usually surname), and looked at the first name on each page of 200 entries: it would split into 12 very roughly equal chunks at AA, BJ, CE, DE, GA, IA, KH, MB, NA, QA, SF, UA. (Obviously that was a list of blue links of both sexes, but the distribution of redlinked women in Wikidata is likely to be not too dissimilar). So we could go through a year's worth of very broad ethnicity-neutral coverage. Another idea would be to have a "born in the month" or "died in the month" each month - could alternate them, and then next year alternate the other way (born in Jan, died in Feb, one year, the reverse next year). Again, a random group of women not biased like the May Marys etc. It might appeal to some of our editors. PamD 18:56, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

PamD, I'd definitely support something less Eurocentric on the naming themes! Lajmmoore (talk) 15:25, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
PamD, I think this is a very interesting and equitable approach: Born 100 Years Ago (#born100yrsago). --Rosiestep (talk) 20:51, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
I only picked "born 100 years ago" as a way to get a large but manageable random chunk of biographies to see how they would split A-Z into 12 even-ish chunks. PamD 20:59, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
I like it too! We have a lot of events carrying over for September but less going on in October: perhaps a good time to launch? Innisfree987 (talk) 00:00, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
I love the idea of date-based themes! This would also work for destubbing and upgrading articles, and should be easy to get wikidata lists based on birthdate. (I once got curious, and worked out that I've written at least one bio article for people born in every year between 1832 and 1936.) Penny Richards (talk) 01:51, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
Penny Richards, that is amazing and awesome!
@PamD, Innisfree987, and Lajmmoore: I've moved this section into October 2021 as it doesn't seem like it'll make it into the September 2021 schedule, but not sure if October is the right time to start vs. January 2022... maybe as a contest? --Rosiestep (talk) 14:18, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Agree start of the year would be good! IIRC we will still be finishing the around-the-world contest, but no reason we can’t have two going. Contests are very popular! Innisfree987 (talk) 22:45, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Geofocus Oceania contest (Oct, Nov, Dec)Edit

  • Oceania quarterly contest (Oct, Nov, Dec)

Afro-Latina womenEdit

I think it would be great to have a focus on Afro-Latina women, who are women of Black and Latinx descent. The term is used predominantly in the States but there are many women who fit that category in Latin America. In recent years there has been more press about women (across industries) who identify as Afro-Latina 1 2 3. Hispanic Heritage month runs September 15 - October 15, so could we have an Afro-Latina focus for October? If not then, later this calendar year? Citrivescence (talk) 19:39, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Citrivescence, The Women in Latin America contest runs through September 2021. Feel free to add articles there :) You can also add a redlist of Latin American Afro-Latina women there too. Best, WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:34, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

November 2021Edit

Annual initiative: Wiki Asia MonthEdit

Geofocus Oceania contest (Oct, Nov, Dec)Edit

  • Oceania quarterly contest (Oct, Nov, Dec)


  • Film+Stage per suggestion by SL93 (they specifically mention silent film actresses) on our talkpage. The last time we did Film+Stage was in August 2019. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:22, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
This would also support the international contest meta:The AfroCine Project/Months of African Cinema/2021, which runs 1st October 2021 to 30th November 2021. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:26, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Diabetes? Women's health?Edit

  • November is diabetes month in several countries plus World Diabetes Day is November 14. Perhaps November could focus on both women diabetics and healthcare professionals (i.e. endocrinologists). Particularly with gestational diabetes impacting so many women. This could be in collaboration with WP:Medicine, Nursing, and Women's Health. TJMSmith (talk) 18:45, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
    TJMSmith, I think this is a good idea! Lajmmoore (talk) 15:25, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

December 2021Edit

Annual initiative: Women who died in 2021 (Dec 2021 / Jan 2022)Edit

Geofocus Oceania contest (Oct, Nov, Dec)Edit

  • Oceania quarterly contest (Oct, Nov, Dec)

2021 geofocus contestsEdit

--The original discussion of the continental challenge is at --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 18:27, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

I like that :) Dsp13 (talk) 18:34, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
That sounds like a fine idea to me. Penny Richards (talk) 21:12, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. --Rosiestep (talk) 00:39, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
Fine by me too but on that basis it looks as if we will be completely abandoning Canada and the US. Is that intentional?--Ipigott (talk) 11:50, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
Oh dear, I completely forgot about North America Ipigott! Looking back a the original discussion I see that you had suggested that after completing the first 5 continents, "we could then devote the four quarters of 2022 to the states and provinces of the U.S. and Canada." I guess we should just stick to the original plan.WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 19:21, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
@WomenArtistUpdates, Ipigott, Rosiestep, Antiqueight, Megalibrarygirl, Penny Richards, SusunW, Victuallers, WomenArtistUpdates, TJMSmith, PamD, Smirkybec, Missvain, HickoryOughtShirt?4, Dsp13, SarahTHunter, Abishe, Alanna the Brave, Whisperjanes, and David Eppstein: The Africa contest ends March 31st. Do we have the contest schedule sorted out yet for the rest of the year? I think it would be great if we could do so. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:37, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Re the 'original plan', if I understand it right - having 2022 for North America, with 2021 for the rest of the world - it rather feels like reinforcing existing geographical bias to me. (I'd actually be totally happy - as far as geofocus is concerned - not having any explicit focus on the UK or North America. They seem to have received a good deal of focus already on en:WP! I appreciate though that this might be overreaction on my part, and might fail to attract as many editors to participate as other schemes.) Dsp13 (talk) 20:49, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Rosiestep: If you look back here, you'll see I suggested Europe for the second quarter, South America for the third and Oceania for the fourth. Is that still OK?--Ipigott (talk) 21:11, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Ipigott, yes, I saw that, and I really like the idea of our geofocus contests each being of 3-months duration. It's just that I also saw the note from WomenArtistUpdates above (12 Dec 2020) mentioning contests of 2-months duration, and got confused if there was a decision made that perhaps I had just overlooked. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:29, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Dsp13: I tend to agree with you that there is already more than enough coverage of articles about the US and the UK. Nevertheless, if we are to continue to address the bias of men vs. women, it may indeed be useful to gear up to include more women from the individual states and provinces in North America next year. But let's see if there are any other views on this.--Ipigott (talk) 21:18, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Rosiestep and Ipigott, Yes I did throw out that suggestion for a change, but reeled it back in after I was reminded that the plan was to turn to specific states and provinces in 2022. So for the next quarter Europe, followed by South Latin America for the third and Oceania for the fourth is fine by me. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 23:35, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Ipigott: I'm a bit biased (Canadian here!), but I would argue that Canada does not have the same level of Wikipedia saturation as the U.S., and would certainly benefit from a North America geofocus event. Also, a North America geofocus could provide a boost in coverage of Indigenous and other BIPOC women in both countries, which would help address a different lack of coverage. All this aside (North America isn't planned until 2022, right?), I'm happy with the proposed quarterly lineup of Europe, Latin America and Oceania. Alanna the Brave (talk) 00:11, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
Alanna the Brave: Yes, you're quite right it's the whole of Latin America rather than just South America. I'm glad you support North America for 2022. I'm sure we can make good use of it, creating red lists on individual states and provinces beforehand. I'm pretty sure Megalibrarygirl will have plenty of historical names to add. I agree that we could organize a lot more detailed coverage of Canada too. I certainly appreciate the tremendous support we are receiving from WomenArtistUpdates on all this. It makes life much easier for me and the barnstars are really great.--Ipigott (talk) 08:32, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Remaining 2021 logos for commentEdit

@Ipigott, Rosiestep, Antiqueight, Megalibrarygirl, Penny Richards, SusunW, Victuallers, TJMSmith, PamD, Smirkybec, Missvain, HickoryOughtShirt?4, Dsp13, SarahTHunter, Abishe, Alanna the Brave, Whisperjanes, David Eppstein, IdRatherBeAtTheBeach, Lajmmoore, and Innisfree987:, I worked up drafts for the remaining logos. Please add comments here if changes are requested or point out any egregious mistakes. Barnstars will be created once the designs are finalized. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 20:36, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

WomenArtistUpdates: These look really good but I wonder whether the silhouette should be on the right-hand side of the heart in all three. That would be more consistent with the WiR logo.--Ipigott (talk) 09:57, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Wow WomenArtistUpdates, you are so talented! These are great. For me the WiR visual signature is clear and the placement good to make the regions easily identifiable. The only change that comes to my mind is maybe zooming out the Oceania map just a bit (10-20%?) so more of the shape of Australia is visible, for recognizability? But I have no idea how difficult that is—if it’s a lot of work, I wouldn’t bother, I think it’s already great as is. Thank you for making these! Innisfree987 (talk) 15:48, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
I think they are amazing! Great work. I love that you have used different women for each. Thank you for using your skills to create them. SusunW (talk) 15:50, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Such a lovely detail! Innisfree987 (talk) 15:55, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Ipigott I flipped the silhoutees . Innisfree987 I will play with the size of the Oceania map. Thanks for the postive feedback SusunW. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 16:02, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
WomenArtistUpdates, I didn't notice that detail of the different women! I think these look great. I have no idea how hard it is, but maybe for the Oceania logo (or future events) a silhouette of an aboriginal woman could be used ([1]). Of course, not all people look the same so maybe this is not relevant in the context of these logos. TJMSmith (talk) 16:11, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
WomenArtistUpdates, thank you very much. Whatever composition looks best to your eye, realizing that might already be this one! Innisfree987 (talk) 17:11, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Oceania logo: Innisfree987 Yep, I just want to be sure New Zealand and Papal New Guinea are visible in the final barnstars as well as the logo. TJMSmith I will look around for a copyright free silhouette for an aboriginal woman. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:53, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Just add they are so great! Thanks for doing it! Lajmmoore (talk) 09:16, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
WomenArtistUpdates, I'll chime in, too, to say these are so pretty! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:47, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Oceania logo: Innisfree987 I had to stick the the current map...long story, but it is kinda at the edge of the world according to Mercader so I had to take what I could get to stylistically blend in the the other logos. TJMSmith How's this silhouette? I can return to the previous, more "colonizer" image, if this doesn't look quite right. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:42, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
WomenArtistUpdates, This is what I was envisioning! I'm curious if others have any thoughts about it, but I like it. TJMSmith (talk) 01:50, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
WomenArtistUpdates, it’s terrific already, thank you so much for making these. I wish I had this kind of talent! Innisfree987 (talk) 01:58, 19 March 2021 (UTC)


Jan 2022Edit

Feb 2022Edit

Mar 2022Edit

Apr 2022Edit

May 2022Edit

Jun 2022Edit

Jul 2022Edit

Aug 2022Edit

Sep 2022Edit

Oct 2022Edit

Nov 2022Edit

Dec 2022Edit


Table of annual events/collaborationsEdit

Month Annual events Invitations to collaborate with other wiki communities
January Public Domain
February Black History Month AfroCrowd; WP:BLM
March Art+Feminism; #VisibleWikiWomen Art+Feminism; Whose Knowledge?
April Gender studies
May MayMays; CEE CEE User Group
June Pride; JuneJunes; International Women in Engineering Day (INWED) LGBT+
July JulyJulies
August Indigenous women m:Interwiki Women Collaboration
September Writers WP:WPWW
October Ada Lovelace Day/STEM
November Wiki Asia Month
December Women who died in 202x

Geofocus ideasEdit

Geofocus A-ZEdit

Seems to me that we tend to focus on the same areas over and over and I am wondering if we just did a straight alphabetical list of countries each month, if that would get more coverage of women worldwide. So for example "A" would have lists from: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, American Samoa, Andorra, Angola, Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Aruba, Australia, Austria, and Azerbaijan; "B" would have Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bermuda, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso and Burundi; and so forth. SusunW (talk) 20:09, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

@SusunW: That would be interesting. The geofocus would be filled for almost 2 years before the list would be repeated :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 03:54, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
I like this a lot. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:48, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Did we decide to do this? It does seem like a sensible idea ☕ Antiqueight chatter 13:17, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
We did "I" a while back. Nice idea to do all 26 but ... Some letters don't have any or many countries: see List of sovereign states. Three for F and for J, only one O, one Q, no W or X, one Y, two Zs. PamD 15:40, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
I've been thinking that this might be a unique way of covering geofocus for January 2021 – December 2022. Over the course of 24 months, we would cover countries at the rate of one letter per month, except for December 2022 when we would include X+Y+Z. Some letters have very few options, e.g. countries starting with the letter Q, while other letters have a lot of countries. But over the course of 24 months, this would even out. Some considerations:
Incorporate Historical States that no longer exist within the alphabet scheme?
Skip our annual May geofocus on "CEE countries" and November geofocus on "Wiki Asia Month"?
Omit US and UK? --Rosiestep (talk) 15:46, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
I don't see why not to include Historical states, as it'd flesh out the possibilites. I think we'd have to see which countries would fall under May / November first before deciding to keep/skipping over. Omitting US/UK doesn't seem right as it won't be worldwide. Whether it's a year long/two year long geofocus, the Us would be near the end of the list. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 15:58, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
How about developing this idea for the 12 months of 2021, carefully selecting countries for each month, not just one letter but perhaps two or sometimes three at a time. On the basis of the experience we gain from our June 2020 geofocus on reducing gender imbalance, we could compile a list of "deserving" countries for the whole year. Looking further ahead, in 2022, we might consider doing something along these lines for deserving cities or federal states, maybe even picking some from the English-speaking countries.--Ipigott (talk) 16:04, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Having two or more letters per month seems good as some letters are limited like PamD said i.e O/Q. Expanding on your idea, maybe in each editathon there could be a focus list of countries per letter while not excluding the other countries. It'd give a heads up to editors to know that these countries need a bump in articles. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 16:11, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Geofocus by latitudeEdit

How about a by-latitude split? Countries between perhaps equator and Tropic of Cancer, then Capricorn; countries of latitute from Tropic of Cancer north to x, then north of x, similarly for south. Or some such - sweeping across all the continents. Need to adjust the bands to make very roughly similar sizes, and perhaps accept that some countries are in more than one zone - a pity that the List of sovereign states mentioned above doesn't have a field for coordinates! PamD

Just found List of countries by northernmost point and List of countries by southernmost point - astonishingly few countries with northernmost point south of tropic of Capricorn...perhaps southernmost points gives a broader spread somehow! A fascinating pair of lists, anyway. PamD 15:50, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Geofocus by religionEdit

I really enjoyed the Arab World one last year though, and liked its intersection with Islam particularly, so wondered if maybe something like women from Buddhist countries, or similar might work? The other idea I had would be to focus on women, based on a sea/ocean area e.g. Women from the Mediterranean, Indian Ocean, etc. which might get some really interesting cross-overs? (Sorry if these have been done before, I'm still new!) (Lajmmoore (talk) 11:14, 17 February 2020 (UTC))

Geofocus by languageEdit

Not sure if this has been done before (a quick archive search didn't mention it, but I wondered about a focus on countries with lower rates of English speaking? This article gives some details based on a couple of different metrics. Countries it lists include: Iran, Egypt, Kazakhstan, Venezuela, El Salvador, Oman, Mongolia, Saudi Arabia, Angola, Kuwait, Cameroon, Libya, Iraq and Laos. It also includes China (as rate of speaking is very low, even if reading and writing is pretty high). Gives an interesting spread of places. There's probably a better place to get statistics from than that article. Cheers (Lajmmoore (talk) 06:54, 23 May 2020 (UTC))

List of countries by English-speaking population may help! Corachow (talk) 18:37, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Historical States that no longer exist?Edit

Hi All, I wondered whether a geofocus one month could be on "historical countries that no longer exist"? (I'm not sure that's the best way to describe what I mean!) It's not something I know very much about, but I've noticed places like Kingdom of Saxony Kingdom of Prussia Austria-Hungary come up on redlists. I don't know whether its a theme people have done before, or what might be possible in terms of lists, etc. I found this List of former sovereign states and there's others too. All the places that are no longer recognised would maybe be too big, so there would be a question about period or geography maybe too? Equally, sorry if its been brought up before! (Lajmmoore (talk) 09:33, 31 March 2020 (UTC))

Lajmmoore: It was done in September 2019: Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/135. Unfortunately, it didn't get much traction. --MarioGom (talk) 09:36, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
MarioGom Thanks v much! I must have just missed it! Gonna have a poke around in the page now though! Thanks (Lajmmoore (talk) 10:26, 31 March 2020 (UTC))

Politicians USA in NovemberEdit

Not really sure if this is the right place for this. US Election Day is November 3 and it's one of the biggest elections of modern history. I do a lot of work around women in politics in the US and I'd love to see a geofocus on it, especially since we will see more women coming and going from national and state politics after the election results, and we might have our first female Vice President. I think it would be a great opportunity to improve coverage about women in American politics past and present. Thanks for your consideration. Missvain (talk) 20:23, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Aotearoa New ZealandEdit

Happy New Year everyone! A few years ago (in September 2017, to be exact!) WiR ran a geo-focus on New Zealand, which produced 120 articles on New Zealand women. It was awesome to be a focus for the project! Since then, the editing community in NZ has become a bit more organised and cohesive and one of our group, DrThneed, has created a number of redlists of New Zealand women (which have been added to the WiR redlist index) which several editors are working with. We have also started holding in-person and remote editathons and editor meet-ups, including editathons on topics related to women (one on Maori women weavers is coming up this week). We're wondering if there is an opportunity in 2021 to have a WiR geo-focus on New Zealand women again, and we could back it up with some in-person editathons too and really make some inroads into our lists - and also potentially attract some new editors here. Any thoughts? MurielMary (talk) 10:07, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

MurielMary, I'd be happy to support this idea! Would it be useful to coincide it with when the three-month geofocus gets to the region? (I can't remember when that's meant to be) Lajmmoore (talk) 21:22, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Gender imbalance per countryEdit

Hello all! Just putting a vote here for another month-long focus on gender imbalance per country, like we did in 2020. The countries have altered slightly, which is interesting, and I found it fun to do! Lajmmoore (talk) 21:25, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Francophone/French language countriesEdit

Hello, so in March it is International Francophonie Day. So I was thinking we do one about countries that speak French. It would include countries such as Benin, Burkina Faso, Democratic Republic of the Congo, France, Gabon, Guinea, Ivory Coast, Mali, Monaco, Niger, Republic of the Congo, Senegal and Togo. Sahaib3005 (talk) 21:07, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Non-geofocus ideasEdit

A is for "A start"Edit

Just before we started Women in Red I completed (after work of lots of others) in writing a biography of every woman in the Dictionary of National Biography. This meant that any (UK related) women who was recognised as notable before about 1900 was in Wikipedia. Obviously the DNB did not stop there and the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography took over. That has LOTS more women - so what to do? I set out to do every women in the ODNB whose first name began with an A. I think I have made quite a dent in it. Look here or here. My suggestion is that we have a go at picking off all the women whose name begins with A (or alpha if she is ancient Greek) in any country. Our progress will demonstrate the size of the problem of doing all ~26 letters- Victuallers (talk) 09:44, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

@Victuallers: Would this just be ODNB related or any woman whose first name starts with name? For the ODNB list, there are currently just over 100 A first named women left (not bad). --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:11, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
@MrLinkinPark33: I was proposing women whose name begins with A (or alpha if she is ancient Greek) in any country. I imagined that we might be able to finish the UK and start on other countries. A demonstration of the fact that writing wiki biogs for women in just one country for just one letter is a large task. I see some arguing that the 83% blokes on wiki is because women are prevented from having wikiarticles because of notability rules or lack of written sources. These are problems, BUT they are not stopping us from adding thousands of more articles to fix the gap. Oh and thanks for your work and for noticing its just over 100 - do you have a more accurate list? Cheers Roger aka Victuallers (talk) 11:03, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
@Victuallers: Didn't get the above ping so I just saw it now. I only counted the people starting with A in the above ODNB link you mentioned. I can't confirm whether it is 100+ or not (since I don't write articles on ODNB people). Starting with A (in general) would be nice as it reminds me of the Countries starting with I contest we did last year. Also provides 2 years of contest material if we did one letter per month (see @SusunW:'s idea below) :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:14, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
@Victuallers and MrLinkinPark333: I read this thread after the latest WiR notice landed on my talk page.
Has any further progress (i.e., beyond 'A') been made? I'd be interested to help, and to help spread the word. If nothing else, could a list be made of women in the dictionary who don't have articles? I'm not sure if I have access, but it looks like access is free (?), or I can see if institutions I know hold subscriptions. = paul2520 (talk) 00:04, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
No idea as I haven't been following up with this idea. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:18, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Twitter matesEdit

We have monthly editathons now running in Edinburgh which are mainly in person. Ewan is one of the Wikimedians in Residence and they are very successful - They are badged as WiR - great!. A similar series is starting in Swansea. Last month they did nurses and this month business people. They want to be a "women in red" event. I will see if we can harmonise subjects. This is for info only I guess but is there a good place to log in-house events ? Victuallers (talk) 14:01, 19 January 2018 (UTC) p.s. I see WiR is getting mentioned by name in French! Femmes Rouge Wikipedia Victuallers (talk) 14:01, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Victuallers - I think it would be great to include in-person Women in Red events in our list here: [[Template:Women in Red]]. To that end, I just added a line for in-person events in the 2018 section. Please add whatever events you're aware of... and 2017 events, too. After you get the ball rolling, we should mention it on the main WiR talkpage so that others know to do so, too. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:21, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Update - still running. The next one is on August 16th at Edinburgh Uni Library. Victuallers (talk) 09:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
They are now Virtual and running about every week hosted by the Women in Red intern - next one is on June 13th 2020. Victuallers (talk) 11:26, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Femicon MuseumEdit

See this tweet conversation Victuallers (talk) 09:22, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

This seems cool, Victuallers, and we haven't touched this focus area before; did you reply to her? Maybe we could start an email convo with a few of us? Hey, Megalibrarygirl, I looked over the website, and wondered how easy it might be to create a redlist for this focus area, "femininity, girlhood, and the aesthetics of cute within twentieth-century video games, computing, and electronic toys"? --Rosiestep (talk) 18:55, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
I think I could try to create a redlist based on the Femicom collection. Will start. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:09, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
@Victuallers and Rosiestep: Here's a start-up redlist: Femicom Museum Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:13, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Megalibrarygirl; mega cool... mega thanks! --Rosiestep (talk) 23:38, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
I invited her to post here. I'm not sure how big the museum is and we would need her or one of us to take the lead. Its not a subject I know anything about - but I can see that its an important area. Big thanks to MLG - do feel free to tweet her. Victuallers (talk) 06:52, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Trading article ideasEdit

I was wondering if anyone would be interested in trading names of women with others who are interested in creating articles on specific topics. For example, I have many names of American women who have won prizes or been inducted into hall of fames. That way, our lists on Wikipedia and our personal lists could hopefully be reduced and we get to work on articles that are in our interests that we might not have come across already. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 05:50, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

I'd be interested in adding lists that others have created (such as yours) into the Women in Red redlist collection. Let me know if this interests you? This is because it is my hope that Women in Red is as well known for its redlists as for its created articles. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:26, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
@Rosiestep: That would be perfect. It'd help reduce the amount of people on my to-do lists and give them out to others who want to work on them. I already moved my first one here but I'm thinking on making another one on women who were/are United Nations Special Rapporteurs as that list is huge. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:29, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
That's awesome, MrLinkinPark333. Also pinging Megalibrarygirl who is really good with to-do list ideas! --Rosiestep (talk) 21:52, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
Just finished Rosiestep Megalibrarygirl. See here for the United Nations redlist. There are also women in United Nations working groups but I haven't included them in this list. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:20, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
Sweet! Thanks for taking the iniative, MrLinkinPark333! I hope everyone feels comfortable adding to our lists, but if you don't, ping me. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 01:03, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Filling out listsEdit

A suggestion of something a little different, maybe? We have a whole lot of lists that are partially filled out with articles - various women's halls of fame, for instance, or the list of National Heritage Fellowship recipients. Many of the by-year lists of Guggenheim Fellows as well. What about a month where we pick one or two of these lists and look at filling in all the redlinks? That would give us a nice filled-out list at the end of the month. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:05, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: Funnily, I was thinking of creating a list of Guggenheim Fellows names as the recipents are automatically notable as per WP:NACADEMIC Criteria #2. That'd help boost up the percentage without worrying about notability :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:39, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
@MrLinkinPark333: As would the National Heritage Fellows...and those have the advantage of being sourceable to the NEA's website. Which means that their biographies there are in the public domain...if we wanted to we could crank out the articles pretty quickly thanks to that. :-) --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:48, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: In that case, I think the National Heritage Fellows would be easier to complete as the Guggenheim Fellows does not have a lot of info on each recipient, just the notability. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:51, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
@MrLinkinPark333: No reason we couldn't suggest both for different months. :-) I'm not sure this would be a monthly challenge, necessarily...but bimonthly or trimonthly, perhaps. Besides, getting all of the Guggenheim Fellows in one go would be a bit of a tall order. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:59, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: Yep, that's why I didn't press on having them done first, because there is so many of them :/ However, I'm making a different list of names that are presumed notable based on individual criterias instead. ;) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:05, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
@MrLinkinPark333: What about other fellowships/awards? How about the Rome Prize, for instance - does that convey automatic notability? --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 18:45, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: That specific prize I do not know if it passes WP:ARTIST or WP:ANYBIO. As for other fellowships, Criteria 1-3 and their respective notes of WP:NACADEMIC are the ones I see for fellowhips. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:51, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Women with redirectsEdit

While looking through NY Times Notable Deaths 2019 I noticed a couple of women with redirects. I was wondering if there were many women who wouldn't appear on any redlist, but would need an article written. Maybe some were AfD merges but times have changed. Perhaps we can come up with some criteria for creating a new (short?) list of potential articles from these redirects. StrayBolt (talk) 20:22, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

By reference workEdit

Have individual reference works been used as a theme before? Each entry would start with at least one high-quality source (and, usually, a pre-compiled bibliography). In-keeping with aforementioned ideas re: Oxford Dictionary of National Biography and filling out lists, could pick any reasonable list from Category:Women in Red redlink lists (by dictionary), e.g., missing only 121 items for parity with the Encyclopædia Britannica Online. czar 07:31, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

@Czar: I'm late to your message but I'd be interested in a Britannica Online based one. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 15:16, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
I still keep banging away at the ODNB. One of the successes we had 5 years ago was to add every woman from the DNB. (The DNB was "the" UK biography book in the UK c. 1910.). Doing the Ency. Brittanica in date order might mean that we have a measure of success if we could do say every (woman) born before year x. Victuallers (talk) 11:32, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Compiling a list of biographies of the most significant womenEdit

I'm not too sure how much enthusiasm there is about this but as a result of the "Vital articles" discussions on the WIR talk page, I suggested it might be a good idea to draw up a list of biographies of the Fifty most significant women on Wikipedia. This could later lead to a Balanced list of Wikipedia's most significant people which would list 100 names, 50 women and 50 men. The general idea would be to show that we believe the contributions of women to our world are just as important as those of men. If there is any support on this, we could start working fairly soon on selection criteria and which areas of interest should be covered.--Ipigott (talk) 07:23, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

There is a long history on wikipedia of drawing up 'balanced' lists of articles of different types and they almost always seem to end up generating more heat than light. I strongly encourage you to either (a) find a balanced list produced by an independent party outside of wikiepdia and import it as a table or (b) focus on improving the quality and quantity of the articles in traditionally underrepresented areas. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:56, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Monthly editathon on the word vision for 2020Edit

Hello. I was wondering if one of the monthly edithathons this year could be on vision. The reason why I suggest this year is because of 20/20 vision. I was thinking of using Vision as multiple ideas together:

  • people who work in vision related fields like opticians or optometrists.
  • people who have vision difficulties or who have lost their vision
  • women who work with people that have lost their vision or have vision difficulties
  • people who have been called a visionary.

Let me know what you think! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:34, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Names (by month, e.g. April Aprils) (by holiday, e.g. Christmas Holly) (by mammals) etc.Edit

By month

Since we've been doing May Mays, I was wondering if we could do women with the name April in April and women with the name June in June. This could also apply to middle names as well. I was thinking maybe these could be added for 2021, so we could have the name themes from April, May and June. Let me know what you think! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 15:55, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps I'm too early for this, but what about Jan January? We can also do women with names such as Jane, Janet, Jenny, Jennifer, etc. What do you think?Corachow (talk) 18:15, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

By holiday

The names themes seem popular and I wondered about Christmassy names for December? Ivy, Holly, Carol, etc. (Lajmmoore (talk) 12:17, 25 August 2020 (UTC))

Don't forget Natalie, Noelle, Stella, Mary, Angel... ;) Penny Richards (talk) 16:50, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
I don't care for Christian oriented themes. Just one person's opinion.WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:24, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
@WomensArtistUpdates: Great point! To be honest I'd forgotten Christmas was to do with religion when I mentioned it - but I 100% get that it's not very inclusive. Thanks for bringing it up! (Lajmmoore (talk) 07:15, 22 September 2020 (UTC))
Eponymous Women & Animals

Hi All, I was tidying my sandbox, and I found this list I started, women who have mammals named after them. I'm not sure if it's a theme that has been done already, but I wondered whether it might be fun for 2021? The sandbox list was based on this book, which I manually searched for women from. There's also a version for Reptiles, one for Birds, for amphibians and one for Odonata. I don't think all the women were notable from the mammals book, but some definitely were. I don't mind making lists, if a) people think it would be useful and b) people could give me some tips? Lajmmoore (talk) 11:36, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Finance, Economics, BankingEdit

Not sure if/when this theme has been done before, but since Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala has been appointed head of the WTO, I wondered if a monthly focus on Women in Banking, Finance, Economics, etc. might be nice to celebrate her appointment? Lajmmoore (talk) 09:49, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Lajmmoore, I think this is a great idea! And I just checked, none of those three topics have been done. July’s looking a little thin: maybe we could add it to the docket then? Innisfree987 (talk) 22:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Innisfree987, That would be good! Lajmmoore (talk) 07:18, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Wives, mothers, etc.Edit

Something I've noticed more and more in recent years as I've done my research: more biographical dictionaries are beginning to incorporate separate articles on the wives and mothers of notable men, focusing on their achievements rather than those of their husbands and sons. Usually these are women who were previously featured as addenda in their husbands'/sons' articles. I think it could be an interesting theme to develop...maybe for Mother's Day next May? --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 05:56, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Mother's Day isn't the same day in every country, most notably it's in March (or very occasionally April) in the UK. It's also March in many European and Middle Eastern countries. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:14, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
@Joseph2302: Just a suggestion - doesn't have to be keyed to any particular month. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 00:40, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Spreading evenlyEdit

Thinking about "July Julies" etc leads me to a couple of thoughts:

  • These themes bias towards women with names based on European languages (as do the Holly/Noel etc themes). Perhaps we should spread our work around by dividing redlinked women into a-z chunks by given name ("Aaa-Ada" etc, perhaps 24 or 36?) and offering one chunk a month? Or by surname (instead, or following) ?
  • Perhaps have a "born in the month" every month of the year, then the next year a "died in", and repeat, alternating years?

PamD 06:04, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Love it! Any/all of these ideas sound good to me. Innisfree987 (talk) 06:38, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Variations on Monthly Achievement InitiativeEdit

Given the current interest in this initiative (around 575 articles added by 29 August), it might be interesting to change the targets for the coming months. For October, we might for example call for articles on women from 31 predefined countries, one for each day of the month. We could list the countries beforehand, drawing on our redlists (but perhaps leaving out those without at least 20 redlinks). We could allow a maximum of three days for each country, e.g. 1 to 3 October: Albania, 2 to 4 October: Algeria, 3 to 5 October: Angola, 4 to 6 October: Argentina, etc. Participants could list their articles both under the countries and under their own user names, giving a clearer view of achievements. Then in November, we could do something similar with occupations. Would this be worthwhile or should we just continue using the August/September model? Personally, I think variations might attract additional interest. Other suggestions for variations would of course be welcome.--Ipigott (talk) 08:57, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Pinging Rosiestep, Victuallers, Megalibrarygirl, SusunW, Antiqueight, Abishe, Nick Number, cbratbyrudd, Stuartyeates, Alanna the Brave for reactions or other suggestions.--Ipigott (talk) 17:39, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
Glad to hear there's been lots of interest, Ipigott. My thoughts: I like the idea of variations on topics each month (either nationality or occupation), but I'd be wary of making it too complicated for participants. I usually have to do some preparatory research before creating an article (which may take several days depending on how busy I am), and I don't want to have to try to remember whether I can submit an article about an Algerian woman on October 4th or an Argentinian woman on October 6th. On the other hand, I might be open to having broader weekly themes: during week 1, we write about women from western European countries, then for week 2 we write about women from Middle Eastern countries (or it could be women scientists or artists, etc.). Alanna the Brave (talk) 18:00, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
I kind of feel I should recuse myself from giving suggestions, as both this month and next my real world life is impacting my editing time. That being said, I like the idea of variations, but agree with Alanna the Brave that it needs to be simple to follow or we will end up discouraging editing. Congrats on the success. 575 articles is awesome! SusunW (talk) 18:08, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
@Ipigott: I think having a broad area of occupations/countries would work better (in my personal case). Maybe have special awards that says, for example Wikipedian who created the most (specific occupation) this month, or the most articles from (specific country, area). That way if people want the special awards, they can go for it while keeping the broad range of coverage for others who just want the 5, 10, 15 articles etc. barnstars. This monthly imitative helped me clear through some articles that I wanted to do, but didn't get around to start/finish them :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:53, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
As a relative newcomer to WiR I feel that the new monthly initiative is a great place to record and celebrate all the WiR articles written in a given month, i.e. from the monthly meetups and the #1day1woman ongoing. I find that most of my articles end up in #1day1woman as I don't want to hold them up waiting for a specific meetup to come along. My preference is that the whole recording system not become over-complicated. Oronsay (talk) 02:26, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
My thirty-ish contributions only accidentally in the list, it was work I was doing anyway, but this stretch got done quicker with this extra motivation. Stuartyeates (talk) 07:04, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the comments so far. I can see the simplicity of the current approach is appealing. It therefore looks as if any variations should be "additional extras" rather than a complete revamp. Let's see how we do in September.--Ipigott (talk) 14:58, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
I echo those who suggest we keep it simple. There are many contributions to the #1day1woman page which are currently also eligible for the Monthly Achievement Initiative, meaning articles from any country and any occupation. Requiring articles fit a certain geographical or occupational category during a short window of time will limit participation in the initiative, and might be discouraging to our membership base who will see it as more of a competition. If the initiative is all about increasing participation and increasing metrics, I'd vote to not change the current model. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:27, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
Ipigott I'm not very creative in brainstorming ways to get people to participate, but I do want to help you keep the work load at something you can handle. If that means wikignoming a lot, that's fine. Just keep me posted. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:26, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Could you review my submission, I was getting negative feedback about submitting Jenny L. Davis, a linguist and social activist because she is 'merely' an assistant professor who speaks a indigenous tongue and is attempting to revive it. CaptJayRuffins (talk) 00:12, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Edited Book IdeasEdit

We are wrapping up an edited book, Wikipedia and Academic Libraries, which is schedule for publication in September, 2021. There are other edited volumes about Wikipedia, including Levering Wikipedia and Wikipedia@20. My co-editors and I were pondering, "What will the next book be?" And, based on the submissions for our book (almost 2 years ago) we suggest that someone consider editing a book about all the activity related to Art+Feminism. Bridges2Information (talk) 18:54, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Idea: Ancient women (probably not a great title)Edit

I wondered whether this might be a nice theme for later this year or next? The redlist got fixed recently and its got a really good geographic spread and all the women lived prior to 400 CE. Lajmmoore (talk) 15:33, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

February / March: Olympics, ParalympicsEdit

I think Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/204 (Olympic & Paralympic Games | Jul-Aug-Sept 2021) can be seen as a success with 800 new articles, expansions and media (and stil counting!). I would like to see again an Olympic & Paralympic Games in February/March 2022 during the Winter Olympics and Paralympics. It's only a few months in between from the 204 Meetup, but otherwise the next one would be in July 2024... SportsOlympic (talk) 10:27, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Wow SportsOlympic!!! that is a truly impressive list :) I hope you report out to the talk page with the final tally at the end of October. (If you don't, I will be sure to). Best, WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 15:46, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Ideas page administrationEdit

Common tasks for each event.
This list is incomplete. Please add to it
  • identify sponsors and/or WikiProject hosts
  • create list of potential participants, including active editors from the area(s) to be covered
  • create editathon banner
  • create/find editathon icon
  • develop the WiR redlist, find related redlink lists
  • create meetup page, completing sections on
  • "Add these to articles" (stub templates, applicable categories, useful lists)
  • "Add these to article talkpages" (WikiProject banners, editathon banner for the event)
  • create the invite
  • distribute the invite
  • develop social media campaign (FB, Twitter)
  • We haven't been doing this but it would be great if we had a social media volunteer
  • add Authority Control if missing to all the articles created during the event
  • double-check each article for categories
  • double-check each article for talkpage banners
  • create the thank you and/or barnstar
  • develop a list of contributors (overlaps to some degree with registered participants)
  • distribute the thank you and/or barnstar after the event to the contributors
  • create Wikidata entry if none exists

Checklist for updates of virtual meetupsEdit

This section is purely administrative. It is not about the ongoing discussions of topics.

WiR generally has a variety of monthly, quarterly and annual events. WiR also sends out an “invitation” to its registered participants notifying them of those events. This is an effort to list tasks associated with the admirative tasks of updating and adding pages. We will be maintaining this list to assist with Quality Assurance. This is a working document and should be maintained to reflect current bast practices. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 16:52, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Basic overview of tasks using March 2021 as a guideEdit

Each month there will be new events and ongoing events

* Art+Activism
** Event page: Art+Activism 
** Talkpage template: Template:WIR-192
* VisibleWikiWomen
** Event page: VisibleWikiWomen
** Talkpage template: Template:WIR-193 
CONTEST (Jan/Feb/Mar)
* Africa
** Event page: Africa
** Talkpage template: Template:WIR-186
** Women's rights
** #1day1woman2021
** Template:WIR-184 & Template:WIR-00-2021 
* Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/2021#March 2021
  • Step 1 – Add each new event, by next available number, to Template:Women in Red. It will be a redlink. (topic needs to be expanded).
  • Step 2 – Using the Step 1 redlink, create a new event pages. The easiest way to do this is by either copying from the previous year’s similar event (like "Black History Month" in February) or referring to an event page from the current month, or a combination of the two.
  • Step 3 – Create a new "Talkpage banner templates" to coincide with every new event. These are the tags editors put on the article talk pages whether it's a new or improved article (example Template:WIR-193). Note, editors are welcome to add multiple talkpage templates to an article talkpage if it meets the criteria, e.g. an African woman artist would qualify for templates #186 and #192.
  • Step 4 – Update the template "Template:Women in Red navigation" to include the new events. Click on the "edit source", scroll down to "group4 = Events" and add events.
  • Step 5 – Create the invite (e.g. Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/2021#March 2021) using the previous month's invite as a go-by.
  • Step 6 – Invite and receive feedback from a sufficient number of WiR enthusiasts that all event pages, talkpage banner templates, and the invite are okay. Mark reviewed items with {{ok}}
  • Step 7 – Send out MassMessage notification.
  • Step 8 – Update Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Events, e.g. the templates embedded in that page.