Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red

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

And related projects

What specific efforts is WikiProject Women in Red making to reduce/improve the content gender gap?
  • We maintain lists of blogs, conferences, contests, discussions (Wikipedia; Wikimedia), editathons, Inspire grantees' projects, mailing-lists, meet-ups, newspaper articles, scholarly articles, social media campaigns, workshops, etc. We use Wikidata to manage several aspects of the project because of its size and scope.
  • We hope to collaborate with international festival organizers (example: Litquake).
  • In addition to needing editors to write the articles, several key volunteer positions have been identified: Data Coordinator; Promotions/Events Coordinator; Lead Coordinators for each language.
  • We hope to establish a teaming arrangement with the Wiki Education Foundation as we believe university students are important to this endeavor. We would like to build on the education outreach efforts described by User:Kruusamägi (Wikimania submission: Possibilities for university cooperation: Estonian example) "Every academic year more than 500 articles on Estonian Wikipedia are created as part of local cooperation with universities."
  • Work together with the Wikimedia Chapters
  • Build on Wikimedia's "Address the gender gap/FAQ"
How can I help? Who can join?
Anyone can join! You do not need to have edited Wikipedia before, nor is the project restricted to women. Any help you can give, big or small, is greatly appreciated! To get started read our primer.

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

Help!: recruiting for a research projectEdit

Apologies if this is an inappropriate place to post this. Please direct me to the appropriate forum if this is the case.

I’m a graduate student researcher undertaking a study on how women learn to participate in Wikipedia and factors that enable them to persist as contributors. I’m currently seeking individuals who self-identify as women and actively participate in Wikipedia authorship. Interviewees will be asked to sit down with me for an hour long Zoom, Skype, or phone call. I cannot offer any incentives beyond the opportunity to reflect on your participation and a digital copy of our interview transcript.

If you fit this criteria and are interested in being interviewed, please let me know. Thank you for considering! Feel-flourish (talk) 16:46, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi there Feel-flourish and thanks for letting us know about your research project. It sounds like an interesting initiative. Any insights likely to support the involvement of women contributors will certainly be useful. In this connection, if you have not already done so, you might find it useful to look through some of the research already undertaken in this connection. Take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Research. and Wikipedia:Gender gap. As you have already started making some useful additions to women's biographies, it might be useful for you to become a member of Women in Red — just click on "Join WikiProject" on the main Women in Red page. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 09:57, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Hi Ipigott, thank you for the links to the Women in Red research page. I've definitely read much of the research featured here, but it's very useful to see it all in one place. I will surely be getting involved with writing some biographies of women and becoming a member of Women in Red. My research is currently in a pilot phase, but I will certainly add it to the WIR research page and the Wikipedia Research Network page upon completion. Thank you, again! Feel-flourish (talk) 14:37, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Feel-flourish When I started, it was pretty much luck ... hope that a mentor finds you and helps you walk through the minefields. In general, the technology is difficult, writing for wp is the opposite of academic research, and a general knowledge of how to find sources and identify those that will be considered reliable by the community is necessary. Since the development of this project, in many ways it is easier, as there is a very supportive and helpful environment of collaborators with a broad knowledge here. I am happy to speak with you if you desire. You may contact me through the e-mail on my page. SusunW (talk) 17:40, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Feel-flourish I've been editing consistently for about a year and have a lot of thoughts about this! Feel free to email me! (Lajmmoore (talk) 18:58, 8 July 2020 (UTC))
Feel-flourish I'd love to talk. I've been editing almost a year. Feel free to contact me. AMM Pittsburgh (talk) 21:21, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
Feel-flourish I'd love to chat - I've been editing a couple of years now and have hosted a few events through Art & Feminism. Terasaface (talk) 03:05, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Terasaface, AMM Pittsburgh, Lajmmoore, thank you all for your interest in this project, the first phase of which has concluded. I tried to take this notice down from the talk page, but maybe it's against the rules to do so? I am so thankful to this really kind community and the editors who generously gave their time to speak with me. I learned so much and was inspired to increase my involvement here. I will definitely reach out to you when ready to launch into a second phase. Thank you, again! Feel-flourish (talk) 12:11, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Seeking some more editors at Cleavage (breasts)Edit

Hi all, I hope that you're well in this crazy time period. Aditya Kabir has been trying hard to improve and increase the detail on Cleavage (breasts). I was hoping some editors from here might be able to have a look at check if some of the language and phrasing could be improved, in my mind it is a little sensational (just to be clear - this may have predated Aditya's edits). I come from an anatomy bent and I don't feel I have the experience to edit this article with appropriate nuance - am posting here as I think there will probably be a broader group of editors present that can have a look from more than one perspective.

The article came to my attention after a notification at WikiProject Anatomy talk page and a small side-issue relating to intermammary cleft which was merged. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:39, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

I completely agree on the sensational part. Not just what predated me, but also stuff that I put in (it is easy to be influenced by the language of you sources). Also I am not a native speaker of English, so some sensationalism might escaped by notice. Need real help here. Aditya(talkcontribs) 00:34, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
I think my opening comment is, does the person depicted in the lead image know they're being used in a significant Wikipedia article. It seems the picture originated from a Flickr scrape taken in 2005. It would be nice to get a shot of a consenting Wikipedian in its place. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:08, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
Yes, using that as the lead image seems ... not very good. (There does appear to be a self-created Wikimedia Commons upload used later in the article, Image:BBCleavageTopView.JPG, under "Cross-dressing".) XOR'easter (talk) 17:59, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
The description indicates that's a cross-dressing man wearing breast forms, though, so probably not the most representative picture for a lead image. There are hundreds of images in c:Category:Cleavage_(breasts) so I'm sure a better one can be found. Spicy (talk) 18:05, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
I see that the lead image has been swapped out. Next concern: while it's definitely a better picture, should we be foregrounding the rather ... non-preferred term for the Roma people? I mean, yes, WP:NOTCENSORED, "that's just what the painting is called!", etc., etc., but still, it's very ... ehh? XOR'easter (talk) 03:33, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
So many images in this article are awful. I removed the "downblouse" image, though I expect there may be pushback. Do we also not have neutral photos of bras, that don't look like male-gaze (semi) nudie photos? Yuck. -- Now, having written this and just visited the commons category of bras, I want to pour bleach on my eyes, for the awful collection of objectifying imagery we have. I'm not sure I examined all of them thoroughly, but the answer may well be, no we do not. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:27, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Side comment - funny in an odd way, but maybe not. I've been wondering why we're dealing with this, those of us who got liberated since the Bettie Page and Hugh Heffner eras where men discussed women's bodies in this fashion, as though it were all some intellectual debate. But at least someone brought it here, where it can be elevated a bit. We don't censor, and there's been a few challenging things on the Main Page like this. As an admin, I've deleted my share of entries by a habitual sock who is sure we want to see an image of what he has to offer. Surely, we wouldn't have another article like this, would we? Oh, yes ... there's Buttock cleavage, and I'm transported back to high school male chit chat. My oh my. — Maile (talk) 00:18, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
The Commons category associated with that article is full of pictures that don't even look like they were taken with the subject's knowledge, much less their consent. Someone who has the time should really go through and nominate all of those for deletion (if I get the time, I might just do it myself). TheCatalyst31 ReactionCreation 04:14, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
@Maile66. Thanks; I just thought the article would need a bit more perspectives and thankfully this is a fairly active venue that might be able to help out. --Tom (LT) (talk) 09:16, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
@TheCatalyst31 working in the anatomy space, I have definitely encountered a large and gratutitous amount of quesitonable content on Wikicommons, and most of it I think (1) does not have any place there for quality reasons and (2) I doubt consented to be stored forever more on a public domain website. It's a very upsetting process when you look at relevant deletion discussions where the consensus has almost always been to keep. I do wonder if some editors there want to preserve the images for non-encyclopedic reasons. The weird and very specific categories of those sorts of articles seems to support this theory. Anyhow for these reasons I tend to stay away from Wikicommons where possible these days. --Tom (LT) (talk) 09:16, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
@TheCatalyst31: Drop me a line when you start. An extra voice never hurts in an XFD.
People, the article has been improved significantly, thanks to Calliopejen1 and Spicy along with others (including probably me too). Would you people take another look at it?
BTW, the original lead image is gone, and the Hals painting is part of the history section. The new lead image has been found by Calliopejen1 and put in after a discussion. I find it very satisfactory, Calliopejen1 is not as excited though. Aditya(talkcontribs) 07:19, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
@Aditya Kabir: I already nominated one of the more egregious ones, and was waiting to see how that one went before doing a mass nomination. (So far it's gotten no attention at all, which sadly isn't unusual for FFDs on Commons.) TheCatalyst31 ReactionCreation 12:18, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
How about a snowball? Can we all just say what needs to be said there? Aditya(talkcontribs) 13:00, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Comprehensive overview of under-representation of women on WikipediaEdit

I have just come across David B. Grinberg's article "Unraveling Wikipedia's Mystery Over Women's History" which was posted on Good Men Project on 8 July. It covers Women in Red in some detail, with pertinent comments from Rosiestep and, in particular, Victuallers.--Ipigott (talk) 09:17, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the link Ipigott! It is a very good write up of WiR's mission. Always nice to see Rosiestep and Victuallers recognized. I hope the article gets new editors to the project, and encourages existing women and even more good men editors to participate in WiR. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 14:57, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the link. Nice article! --Rosiestep (talk) 17:44, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
Thrilled by the article (and comments above) and David mentions the stupendous Carol Ann Whitehead and Susan Dolan (who hosted the WiR event last year at the Pankhurst's house in Manchester on Ada LoveLace Day). Victuallers (talk) 22:01, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

How to record nationality on Wikidata?Edit

I invite your feedback on a property proposal for nationality as a cultural identity over on Wikidata. The proposed property is meant to offer an alternative to "ethnic group" and to nationality as defined by citizenship. Your comments are welcome. Thank you. Qono (talk) 04:51, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for posting this Qono. No, no, no, no, no, how many times does this have to be said. Women weren't allowed to be citizens in most places in the world until 1957. How in the world would you classify them? "Other"? SusunW (talk) 22:52, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
SusunW, I think this is part of the reason for the property proposal. Wikidata has nationality based on citizenship and it has "ethnic group", but it doesn't have nationality in the general national-cultural-context sense recorded by authorities like the Union List of Artist Names and Netherlands Institute for Art History (RKD). The property that I'm proposing would allow us to record how these reliable sources are describing a person's nationality in this general sense independent of that person's legal citizenship status. Qono (talk) 23:18, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
The field is useless as far as women are concerned. No source will give you that. We are lucky to find sources at all, much less ones that account for whether or not a woman was a citizen of her country of birth or that of her husband. I have literally seen 3 sources that even discussed that a particular woman lost her citizenship upon marriage. I would venture that the great majority of them, simply assume if she was born in/influential in x she was xian. SusunW (talk) 23:27, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
SusunW, The property is actually meant to capture the general, assumed, ambiguous sense that you describe: "if she was born in/influential in x she was xian"—but I see how, with the lack of sources for women, more assumptions would be made than for men and I agree that that is problematic. Qono (talk) 23:44, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Literally, the only 3 women for whom I know nationality was ever discussed in sources is Marie Curie, Maymie de Mena, and Marquesa del Ter. Each of them lost their citizenship on marriage which resulted in historians misidentifying them for years as French, Nicaraguan and Spanish. Ethnicity is about the only classification marker that makes sense for women, IMO, and that battle keeps coming around from those who want to list nationality in article ledes and eliminate ethnicity entirely. SusunW (talk) 23:57, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
SusunW, it's a complicated issue, and your input is valuable. Thanks so much for participating. Qono (talk) 00:10, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Patricia MernoneEdit

The latest crop of recent acquisitions at the National Portrait Gallery include a drawing of Patricia Mernone by Norman Rockwell. I've been interested in starting an article (the NPG is notoriously tight with its notability requirements), but I can't find a whole lot of information online. I thought I'd throw it to the group to see if anyone with an interest in sports might like to take a crack at's very much outside of my sphere of interest, I'm afraid. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 15:06, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

I do have a particular interest in women in auto racing, so I'm happy to give it go, thanks! Penny Richards (talk) 01:52, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
@Penny Richards: Awesome - looking forward to reading it! --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 05:52, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: Here she is: Patricia Mernone. She might very well still be alive, btw, or at least I didn't find any evidence otherwise. Penny Richards (talk) 16:16, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
@Penny Richards: Awesome, thanks - looks great! I've done a bit of tweaking. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:35, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Sexism in infobox templateEdit

Hi everyone, in my gnoming of articles on politicians, I've noticed that the fields of many infobox templates on Indian politicians include "Father" but not "Mother" (or "Parents", which I've seen elsewhere). It's a blatant assumption of patrilineal importance at the expense of women.

Now aside from that, my view is that the fields for relatives, spouses, and children should only be filled with those who either have a WP article of their own, or where a reference is supplied showing notability. But that's a sideline to the father-only problem.

I'm hopeless at templates, so if anyone knows their way around them and feels like hunting down the source, please do. Here's an example. Tony (talk) 08:51, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

That article uses the standard Template:Infobox officeholder. It appears some individual editors just aren't adding both parents, if either are even relevant. Kingsif (talk) 15:47, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Yes. It's a bad look when the unfilled "Father" field occurs so often, in the absence of a "Mother" field—as if you'd never think of putting a female relative in there. Tony (talk) 04:39, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Tony1, Your view about showing only notable relatives, spouses, and children is also Wikipedia's guideline for those fields for "infobox person" and related infoboxes. For example, the Explanation field for the "parents" parameter begins with "Names of parents; include only if they are independently notable or particularly relevant." Similar statements appear for "children", "mother", and "father". See Template:Infobox person. Eddie Blick (talk) 01:15, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Eddie, thanks. That is widely ignored, sadly. Tony (talk) 04:40, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
One now-blocked editor has created articles starting with Asha Devi Yadav, using a tailored version of the infobox officeholder template, which doesn't include "mother=" but does include "Father=", with capital "F", which would make it not work even if they added a name. I wonder where they copied it from ? @Tony1: Have your discoveries all been this editor's creations? If so, it might now stop. PamD 05:52, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Pam, I'll keep track of that and report back if necessary. Tony (talk) 05:55, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Lists of American Academy of Arts and Sciences elected membersEdit

One big new list in three parts, originally created by HRShami:

Due to the typical vagaries (present/absent middle names, etc.) some of the redlinks may already have articles waiting for them. XOR'easter (talk) 18:54, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm sure you've already thought of this, but the missing women on the list would be a good candidate for listing at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Fellowships. And if others don't know about that redlist, it's a collection of hundreds of women in various academic fields who are all likely notable through WP:PROF#C3. Very helpful for finding missing women to create articles about. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:05, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
I've just checked the 2006 members and, after updating links, have found only one without an article – Helen Bowdoin Spaulding. In 2007 there are two – Alexandra Leigh Joyner and Helen M. Piwnica-Worms. I will continue over the next few days. Oronsay (talk) 18:20, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Great! Thanks for joining in. XOR'easter (talk) 18:55, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Unanswered questionsEdit

I just noticed there are a couple of posts on the Talk page of Meetup 151 | Focus on Sports | 2020. I am not able to answer them myself. Hopefully one of the team can drop by and respond. Oronsay (talk) 21:09, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

@Tagishsimon: @SusunW: Thank you both for responding. Oronsay (talk) 22:22, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Tamayo Kawamoto notability?Edit

Hi all! Awhile back, I decided to clean up Draft:Tamayo Kawamoto (a rejected AfC draft) with new sources, thanks to an earlier recommendation on this talk page. Originally, I thought "Of course she's notable! She composed music for early, notable video games". Now that the draft has been sitting at AfC for over a month, I'm rethinking her notability.

Long question short - Does she meet WP:ARTIST or WP:MUSICBIO (#10) as a composer/musician for video games, or should I let this one go? My biggest hurdle has been finding reliable sources (this, in the bottom left, is the only significant one I could find), since she is Japanese, worked in a pre-internet era, and game composers weren't always credited with their names during the time. Most of the sources I've found are not independent, but they do meet WP:SELFSOURCE and can verify the info (at least to my eyes). This is where I'm stuck, basically. I'd appreciate anyone willing to help. - Whisperjanes (talk) 02:26, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Art competitions at the Summer OlympicsEdit

Hi all. I've started work on the often overlooked art competitions at the Summer Olympics. For those who didn't know, between 1912 and 1948, the arts programme was part of the Olympics, with medals awarded for architecture, literature, music, painting and sculpture! This has unearthed some very interesting biographies that I'm sure members of this project would enjoy, including:

These are just the ones I've created in the past 24hrs. Each one (so far) has a detailed biography on Olympedia (the replacement for Sports Reference) as a great starting point. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 12:49, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

How did I not know about art competitions at the Summer Olympics?! Very cool. I wish they would return even if the format evolved. Thanks for sharing, Lugnuts. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:32, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
I know - great eh?! Glad to help. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 16:26, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
For a full list of pages I've created that are inscope of this project, run this query from WP:PETSCAN. New articles added daily. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 17:20, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Draft:D IndumathiEdit

Anyone want to review this article? Very low h-index in Google Scholar, but otherwise a tidy little article. I'm not that familiar with professor notability rules. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:13, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

This is a good start. I am not an AfC reviewer (too few edits still). Usually WP:PROF notability focuses on awards, fellowships, and editorial board participation. Also of note, I believe that YouTube is not considered a reliable source WP:RS. I generally include an infobox and fewer headings for shorter articles. I appreciate that you've included frequent footnotes. Good luck with the article creation process and happy editing! 02:38, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Lots of pics of modern female artistsEdit

Hi all! I came across these poorly categorized photos of female artists from around the world this morning when looking for something related to the Kiasma art museum. There are lots of them that could be used in articles if anyone has use for them. I'm slowly (cropping some) and adding them to these artists' Wikidata items too, so they should show up in the Wikipedias that use automated infoboxes too. Some of these artists might have Commons categories of their own, in which case that cat could be added to the image. -Yupik (talk) 06:58, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Christina MillettiEdit

Is this author and professor notable? FloridaArmy (talk) 11:57, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

UPDATE: Entry has been flagged as likely paid promotion. FloridaArmy (talk) 14:08, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Kirstin InnesEdit

Assistance in getting this draft approved was requested over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women writers; I'm raising it here in case anyone would like to take a look. I'll be linking it on the creator's talkpage as well. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:49, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Sarah VowellEdit

Not the usual fare for this page, but: I was doing an AWB run of articles the other day, and noticed that someone had put a ton of "citation needed" tags on Sarah Vowell. I think there's an overabundance, personally, but regardless, it requires some looking from someone better acquainted with her career. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:53, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Ser Amantio di Nicolao: I fully agree with you that this is over the top. It reminds me of one of my Latin teachers who loved using red ink all over our work. I thought most of us had by now realized how important it is to encourage editors rather than reveal every minor shortcoming. Perhaps you remember the days when we were all told to "fix it" rather than just post a list of errors on talk pages. I must say that's what I still try to do but it may not be the most efficient approach to reviewing. But on the more positive side, Vowell has not yet been AfD'd.--Ipigott (talk) 14:45, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
I'm going to combine some of the "citation needed" tags for now so it's at least somewhat readable. I understand wanting to improve verifiability, but this is what the article looked like before the IP edits that added most of the tags - seems a bit disruptive. - Whisperjanes (talk) 06:08, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

New Fellows of the British AcademyEdit

The ten women who were elected FBA this month who are missing from Wikipedia are now included on the Redlist of Fellowships and are also all in Wikidata, with references to the award and their workplaces. So, ten more with guaranteed notability are waiting to be written up. Oronsay (talk) 04:02, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@Oronsay: Could that page potentially include Guggenheim Fellows as well? Collecting them is going to be a bit of a process, but it's something I keep thinking I need to get started on. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:56, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
Ser Amantio di Nicolao Guggenheim Fellows have been collected here -Guggenheim Fellowship. Deleted very recently was the category called Category:Guggenheim Fellows. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:14, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
{{ping|Oronsay} I'd seen the deletion discussion - not sure how I feel about it, to be honest. I was thinking more along the lines of female Guggenheim Fellows, rather than all Fellows. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 03:38, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Ser Amantio di Nicolao I was making a suggestion of where to find an existing list of Guggenheim Fellows to then find female Guggenheim Fellows. So perhaps you could add an explanatory statement on the Redlist of Fellowships and link to that page rather than create a red list. If anyone wanted to make that their focus they could work from that source. Sorry I didn't explain that more fully in my comment. Also the site on the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation often has a photo of the recipient. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 14:42, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
@WomenArtistUpdates: Apologies - apparently my woolly brain was woollier than I realized yesterday. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 14:47, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Ser Amantio de Nicolao were you hoping for something like Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Guggenheim Fellows? I've put some of the earlier ones up there Dsp13 (talk) 20:40, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Dsp13! I'll bookmark that page and use it. Did it take you long to create? WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 15:20, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
pleased if it's useful! Maybe an hour? Dsp13 (talk) 21:51, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
Dsp13 Yes indeed it is useful. I used it to find Doris Spiegel. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 20:50, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
Dsp13 Yes, that's exactly the sort of thing I was looking for. I'll try to start adding a few over the next few days/weeks. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:23, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Jane Cocking GloverEdit

Throwing this one out to the hive mind as well.

I've been working on some articles about artists from Washington, D.C., and my work on Pietro Bonanni (about whom more later) has led me to a couple of figures about whom I'd like to write. One is Jane Cocking Glover, who was the wife of a prominent Maryland attorney and long resident in Washington during the nineteenth century. Ordinarily I'd see her name and the dearth of sources and move on, but her portrait was accessioned by the National Portrait Gallery a few years ago, and as I've mentioned above, their notability requirements are fairly strict. Consequently, I've cobbled together this article, but I'm wondering if there isn't more than can be done to expand it. Please feel free to take a look. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 18:00, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@Frederika Eilers: That's great, thanks - I wouldn't have thought to look at either of those. I'll have a look, thanks. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 00:30, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Interesting that there's an English poet, Richard Glover (poet) (1712–1785) whose key work is an epic Leonidas ... and a son of Charles Carroll Glover and Jane Cocking is Robert Leonidas Glover (1819-1850). I can't trace a connection between the poet and the Maryland attorney, but who knows. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:06, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon: Glover family history is proving to be frustratingly opaque, I'm finding. (There have been multiple Charles Carroll Glovers, for one thing.) I know the name well (viz. Glover Park), but putting two and two together is difficult. Doesn't help that there's a contemporary conductor named Jane Glover about whom the vast majority of the sources are. As yet I haven't been able to find anything about the Charles who was married to Jane. I'll try and do a bit more digging tomorrow, see what turns up. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 03:49, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
I'll have another poke around much later today; like you, a confusion of CCGs & not much light. Working from the poet forwards (b/c I'd like the Leonidas connection to be true) gives us another redlinked Richard Glover, 1790 MP for Penryn [2] & [3] and no US connection beyond the poet-father having property in South Carolina. (A recommendation from the DNB about the father's work: "His ponderous 'Athenaid,' an epic poem in thirty books, was published in 1787 by his daughter, Mrs. Halsey. It is much longer and so far worse than 'Leonidas,' but no one has been able to read either for a century.") --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:42, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon: Of note: if there was a pendant portrait to Jane's, of her husband, I've been unable to trace it. (Working back through the Corcoran's disbursement lists, there's no record of a portrait of him anywhere in their disbursed collection. Certainly none in the Portrait Gallery.) He's proving to be an intriguing cipher. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 13:55, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Charles Glover (1780-1827)
Charles and Jane Glover were parents of Richard Leonidas Glover, as noted above. The Riggs War, 1913 to 1916: Reform and Revenge by Paul Ryscavage, pp.40-41 states RLG is the father of Charles C. Glover, the banker who is ruining our searches; his article claimed his father's name as Charles, but on no authority. I've amended it to RLG with Riggs as the citation. There's a sentence in Riggs on our Charles: "settled in Washington DC in 1799, became an attorney, rose to prominence in the civic affairs of the young city". There are a couple of footnotes in that book on p.55 (2. & 3.) which may point to more info. (No joy on the Leonidas connection to the English poet. His son died childless; there may have been another son, Captain Glover, but no trace I've found. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:53, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
One of the footnotes points to Charles Carroll Glover, by Allen C. Clark; Records of the Columbia Historical Society, Washington, D.C. Vol. 39, [The 34th separately bound book] (1938), pp. 141-152. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:36, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
We need "Charles Glover, a Pioneer Resident of Washington" by Charles C. Glover, Jr., in the Records of The Columbia Historical Society (v31-32) ... it's at ... I have a copy, but I presume you have JSTOR access. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:08, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon: I don't, actually, have JSTOR access. Alas. But a little further digging found this: Eminent and Representative Men of Virginia and the District of Columbia in the Nineteenth Century: With a Concise Historical Sketch of Virginia. Between this and one or two other sources, that's enough to bolster the family connection to Charles the banker. I'll update Jane's article accordingly shortly - thanks for the help! --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 01:16, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: per Wikipedia:WikiProject_Resource_Exchange/Resource_Request#Charles_Carroll_Glover, you're about a minute away from having JSTOR access (as well as another 28 or so resources). --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:23, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon: Ooooh. Either Christmas came early this year, or my birthday came late. :-) --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 04:26, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

August 2020 at Women in RedEdit

Women in Red | August 2020, Volume 6, Issue 8, Numbers 150, 151, 173, 174, 175

Online events:

Join the conversation: Women in Red talkpage

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

Social media:   Facebook |   Instagram |   Pinterest |   Twitter

--Rosiestep (talk) 18:49, 26 July 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Just a note to let everyone know that I've added in more indigenous women to my list and rearranged the Sámi women list to bunch similar ones together. So now it's easier to focus on say Sami women writers if one is so inclined. :) -Yupik (talk) 12:25, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Articles on women newly madeEdit

Hi. In June and July 2020, I've created these articles about women:

I'm not sure how to incorporate these into the WIR project. Thought you may want to know about them. Seven Pandas (talk) 12:33, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you, Seven Pandas; good work. WiR's metrics are driven from wikidata; your articles will have been picked up by virtue of their sitelink from wikidata, so there's mainly nothing to be done. It is possible to put banners on the talk page, but not obligatory (nor do I know much about this custom). --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:04, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Rfc: Why participation of Muslim Women on Wikipedia as editors is too low?Edit


If you feel interested in, then kindly do share your inputs on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Islam#Why is editorial participation of Muslim women on Wikipedia so low?

Thanks and regards

Bookku (talk) 01:45, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Your list of reasons seems reasonable, especially the language barrier. It seems like the discussion has evolved by to consider not only muslim women contributors, but also the prevalence of biographies covering muslim women. We do have a few listed on our redlist of religion and in october 2018, there was a focus on religious women. There are some very talented individuals in this group in terms to data analysis, so I look forward to see if there is an way to measure the dearth of muslim women on wikipedia. As for contributors, I am not sure how to address that other than outreach programs. I remember outreach by Sara Stierch on other platforms, namely facebook, to get more women involved. Fred (talk) 05:08, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Wall of MomsEdit

Greetings from Portland, Oregon. I've created a new page for Wall of Moms about a fierce group of women. Improvements welcome. ---Another Believer (Talk) 04:30, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

National Women's Soccer League expansionEdit

There is an ongoing discussion at Talk:National Women's Soccer League#NWSL in LA, where an editor is objecting to the notability of the league's Los Angeles expansion team being the first majority-woman owned professional sports team in the US. Input from project members would be helpful on reaching consensus. Seany91 (talk) 07:04, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Bernhardt of GermanyEdit

I started Helene Odilon and I used a source that states that she has been named the "Bernhardt of Germany", but I can't find what Bernhardt the source is referring to. SL93 (talk) 19:13, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Apparently I was belittling the actress by including her marriages before her career, despite the fact that I would do the same with an article about a man. I have always included their personal life in the first section. SL93 (talk) 19:31, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
I would assume that it refers to Sarah Bernhardt. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:38, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for the article SL93. The essay pointed to in the edit comment, Wikipedia:Writing about women#Relationships, provides what seems to be well-reasoned advice to define women by their careers rather than their relationships - and that extends to the ordering of this information in the biography. Perhaps you could give some thought to modifying your approach? --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:48, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
I understand, but I don't like bad faith assumptions and I wasn't trying to define her by her relationships. If I wanted to belittle someone, I would make absolutely sure that everyone knew that. SL93 (talk) 19:51, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
It was resolved on the editor's talk page, but if I must reconsider my approach based on gender, when does the equality begin and when does it end? For example, I open doors for both women and men. My best friend doesn't do that anymore for anyone because a woman called him misogynist when he did it. I had to second guess helping a woman mail carrier with carrying a heavy package down the apartment complex steps, just like I would have done for a man mail carrier. I didn't even help because I didn't want any backlash. SL93 (talk) 20:23, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
The criticism concerns the article, and not your intent, but I think it is valid. When I look at the version of the article as you initially wrote it, on my laptop screen, I see only a short lead section, an infobox with a portrait of her, and the rest of the screen taken up by a large "Marriages" section. You may well not have intended it that way, but putting things in that order has the effect of emphasizing her marriages and de-emphasizing her stage career, where it is fair to say that the article defined her by her relationships. The marriages section (as it still exists) is flawed by a lack of dates which makes it difficult to determine how it all connects to her career and whether her marriages were brief affairs quickly ended in divorce or whether they were long-term marriages punctuated by other events. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:39, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
@David Eppstein: The sources have no dates. Do you want me to remove the whole section which removes most of the English sources that I could find, and in turn would make there be little proof of notability per Wikipedia's strict guidelines? If someone has dates, I welcome them to help me because I did try looking for them. SL93 (talk) 20:43, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
I'm not advocating removing the sources on her marriages, but if you think doing so and leaving only the material about her stage career would call into question her notability, this suggests that maybe you really are thinking of her as being defined by her relationships and not by her stage career. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:15, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
  • @David Eppstein: Wow. I guess I need to break it down for you - 1) Most English sources barely mention her 2) I can't read German 3) I have dealt with this shit before in regards to sourcing. SL93 (talk) 21:17, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

I was fascinated by her career so I created the article. My attempt to create an article on someone who deserves it made me receive animosity, even though I came here to ask for help. I tagged the article for speedy deletion. SL93 (talk) 21:40, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

I declined the speedy. The article is worth keeping - it may require work, but I don't think it ought to be deleted wholesale. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 00:21, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
I only requested deletion so I wouldn’t have to deal with incredibly rude people like David Eppstein. SL93 (talk) 02:19, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Curated redlist for Spanish-English translationsEdit

Of late, I've gotten a little stalled on translating articles from Spanish Wikipedia. For the benefit of anyone who's looking to work on some, I've compiled a list of good candidates for translation, based on notability, references, and article length. It's not all women, but there are quite a few. Nick Number (talk) 21:35, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Number: thanks for starting this. I translated one (Marcela Huaita Alegre). Do you happen to remember the talkpage template I should use for translation attribution? It would be great to add these to existing or new lists in the WIR Redlist index although that may be time-consuming. Cheers, TJMSmith (talk) 23:44, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
@TJMSmith: Cool, thanks for turning one blue. I'll remove it next time I edit the list. The tag is {{Translated page}}. I'd use something like {{Translated page|Marcela Huaita Alegre|es|small=no}}, as the wide format fits better with WikiProject templates. The full guideline is at WP:HOWTRANS. Nick Number (talk)

Gendered categoriesEdit

Both Wikipedia:Categorization/Ethnicity, gender, religion and sexuality and WP:non-diffusing say gendered categories should be non-diffusing "in most cases", but don't go into explaining when they aren't. Because a lot of Category:Female singer-songwriters by nationality and Category:Male singer-songwriters by nationality subcategories do not bear the corresponding tag and the categorisation of the included pages doesn't follow the rule either, it seems best to ask the WikiProject first before doing any changes. Is there any case where gendered categories for musicians are diffusing? 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:34, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, 1234qwer1234qwer4 - this is something I've been meaning to raise for a while. It seems to me that we're inconsistent. I've been treating female singer categories, for instance, as if they're non-diffusing, but that has been questioned by other editors. Meantime, we've accepted that other female musician categories, such as Category:American female classical composers, are non-diffusing as a matter of course. I'm easy either way, but I think we need to pick a standard. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 00:25, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
I vaguely thought the pattern was non-diffusing where there's a genderless category and a gendered/female subcategory; and diffusing if all articles are placed in gendered categories only (and the genderless parent category is not used). --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:00, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
The question of this topic is exactly when "the genderless parent category is not used". 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 10:37, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
I agree - we need, I think, to come to a consensus on this topic. It seems generally clear, but when I've started trying to follow the non-diffusion rule with, say, certain categories of singer, I've run into a lot of pushback. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:25, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: Do you remember the usernames? It would probably be useful to ping them to increase participation. From the little number of replies, it seems this is a topic in that not many are interested right now. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 21:54, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
I remember talking to Koavf about the issue, and to Lugnuts about something similar - I'm sure I had other discussions, but with whom I honestly don't remember. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:14, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

RfD of Charlotte ProudmanEdit

I invite editors to join in at the discussion happening at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 30#Charlotte Proudman. Thanks. - Whisperjanes (talk) 23:58, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Metrics woe?Edit

I suspect our metrics are on the blink again; it's not v.credble that Reports bot would find so few bytes to add to the July metrics over the last two days. User:The Earwig has helped on this in the past & I'll escalate in their direction should the ill-looking pattern continue. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:56, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for identifying that, Tagishsimon. Also, User:WP 1.0 bot hasn't been updating the various "women" projects properly (e.g. User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Women writers) since 27 July, for which I created a ticket on Github yesterday. --Rosiestep (talk) 12:26, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
I've noticed similar problems with a number of bots and tools over the past two days. I wonder if some major updating initiative is slowing everything down. There was a similar situation about two weeks ago in connection with all the WikiProject updates. It seemed to right itself with no specific call for action.--Ipigott (talk) 12:56, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
Indeed, it has righted itself (or, at least, been righted without escalation from us. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:24, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
I don't think the statistics are fully fixed. I check my contributions via xtools and the article I wrote on 31 July is not listed. Oronsay (talk) 19:03, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
Which article? I'm seeing a 29 July from you, but nothing for the 31st. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:07, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
Not about a woman, Australian Academy of Law. Oronsay (talk) 19:09, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
Okay, I see what you mean - not showing up via xtools after more than 24 hours. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:13, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
Tagishsimon, After 3 or 4 exchanges with folks through Github, the issue seemed to resolve yesterday, August 1st, for which I'm grateful. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:19, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

August brainstormingEdit

Now that we are moving into August, I thought it might be useful to sound out feelings about our monthly priorities and indeed on whether we are offering the best opportunities for increasing the proportion of articles about women and their achievements. I see that in July, for example, by far the most popular "priority" was #1day1woman with some 300 new or expanded articles, substantially more than all the other priorities together. Apart from considerable interest in BLM, participation in the others was pretty low. In reviewing new articles about women, I have also noticed that a fair number carry some kind of general Women in Red tag on their talk pages although they are not specifically included in any of the listings on our events pages. While this ensures considerable increases in the stats on our WiR pages, it might also indicate that we are not covering the priorities our editors are most interested in. As a result of all this, in August we have decided to keep to just two new priorities, "Indigenous women" and "Countries headed by women". It is hoped this will provide additional encouragement for participation on these topics.

Looking further ahead, it would be useful to have more reactions from our members and contributors on how we should develop our focus for September and the coming months. Are the monthly priorities a good idea or should we have more events stretching over longer periods? What topics should we be repeating on a year-to-year basis and what new topics deserve special consideration? Is the supporting information on our site what new and continuing contributors need to understand our objectives. Do we provide assistance for identifying the names of women or related topics requiring coverage? And finally, how useful are our monthly invitations to participate in specific events?

Please feel free to help us along with any reactions or ideas you may have on these items or indeed on the project as a whole. It might be useful to respond here but we also look forward to specific suggestions for the months ahead on our Ideas page. Let me finish by saying how much I enjoy monitoring all the additions and improvements which come in every month, helping us to make incremental progress on the stats for women on the English Wikipedia. While short informative articles account for a substantial proportion of our progress, I have noted increasing concern with quality -- as can be seen from the number of articles created on WiR which reach GA rating or higher. Keep up the good work and let us know how we can do even better. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 12:48, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

  • I enjoy what I see as a monthly challenge to find articles I can create on the chosen topics, sometimes way outside my comfort zone. I've managed at least one solid stub with sound references and appropriate incoming redirects and surname page entries, for each editathon so far: here's the list. But I'm a non-specialist retired layabout gnome, pottering around Wikipedia falling down time-sink rabbit-holes. My other article creations are a pretty random collection - see my user page for a list. PamD 14:49, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Personally, I find the broader monthly topics to be most feasible: I've enjoyed contributing to the annual Indigenous women event in August over the past couple of years, as it allows for a big range of occupations/geographical locations. Narrower topics such as "July Julies" are (while interesting!) much more challenging to find article candidates and sourcing for. I'd love to see a larger WiR contest event again sometime, similar to the World Contest -- it's not so much about prizes (barnstars might be a simple enough incentive), but I really like the energy generated when a group is aiming for a collective goal together (e.g. X number of new articles in 2-month period). Alanna the Brave (talk) 15:25, 31 July 2020 (UTC)-cc Encyclopædius--Ipigott (talk) 16:01, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Hi Ipigott, I like the on-going, year long #1day1woman. I really enjoyed the year long Focus on Suffrage last year and I think I have read that you are considering a year long Olympics focus, which would be exciting for me if we could incorporate the artistic medals.

    I like the recurring annual events of Public Domain, Black History Month, Art+Feminism.

    I generally do not participate in the geo-focus events. My suggestion would be to make some of the events quarterly instead of monthly. For example, if a geo-focus was continental, North American & South America, Asia, Africa, Europe & Australia/Oceania it would broaden the focus, appeal to a wider audience, and be easier to maintain administratively. FWIW, Public Domain could be expanded to quarterly or year-long, although most of the action occurs in the Wiki Commons area, and might not boost the metrics.

    It might be worthwhile to have an event called something like "the last mile" which would encourage participants to learn about how Wikidata and the Commons can be used to improve articles. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 16:15, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • I like both the monthly priorities and the ever-once-and-awhile longer events (like the BLM one going on right now). Even when I don't complete a monthly article in the month an event is assigned, I usually start drafts on topics I wouldn't find otherwise (which can always then be completed for the #1day1woman later). Also, I agree with Alanna the Brave that broader topics are easier to get into. The "Women from where?" is an example of a really great topic (especially for researching underrepresented areas), but I felt the choices of regions were a tiny bit narrow (and the redlists were shorter to choose from, since they were auto-created from wiki-data), making it harder to get started.
    So, I think specific topics like those are really important, but the choices in them maybe need to be as broad as possible? Or, I wonder if there is a way to ask or remind the WiR community to get involved with adding to the redlists before a monthly event starts, so that we can collectively buff up the amount of choices in each topic? It would at least get us thinking of who we might want to work on ahead of time. In the more specific event topics, sometimes I find someone I want to research later on in the month, and so I'm not able to finish before the month is up. Just a thought. - Whisperjanes (talk) 04:04, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't think WMF are offering grants for contests at the moment. I agree that we're due another big contest though. I could of course set up a 50,000 article creation challenge for WIR, the destubbing one already has nearly 2400. That might encourage more people to contribute. † Encyclopædius 09:23, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Encyclopædius -- I find the 50,000 article creation challenges a bit overwhelming, honestly (my contributions are hardly a drop in the bucket). A smaller, more feasible collective goal might be more appealing for participants (e.g. 2500 or 5000). Alanna the Brave (talk) 12:33, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Well if you consider that (the last time I looked) we typically get between 1500 and 2000 on average a month in one year that's already about 20,000. 50,000 isn't that excessive. The 50,000 Challenge isn't a contest but a long term goal. In fact I actually originally proposed a 100,000 Challenge which had support from several members here. You could probably do a contest and aim for 5000 articles though with the prizes going to whoever creates the most articles when we hit the 5000 mark.† Encyclopædius 12:43, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Maybe we could arrange a series of "contests" for the various continents, not necessary with prizes other than virtual recognition. As suggested above, we could take them on a quarterly basis. In alphabetical order, we could have Africa (October to December 2020), Asia (January to March 2021), Europe (April to June 2021), Latin America (July to September 2021) and Oceania (October to December 2021). If these are successful, we could then devote the four quarters of 2022 to the states and provinces of the U.S. and Canada. If we do this, there would be no need for additional geofocus priorities.--Ipigott (talk) 15:02, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
I do like this idea of quarterly geofocus "contests" by continent, Ipigott. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:18, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
I like the idea too, and virtual recognition would likely work just fine -- I took part in a GA review backlog drive this year, with participants receiving various barnstars according to their contributions, and the drive was quite successful. Alanna the Brave (talk) 23:28, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
Rough draft of list of countries. Please note that country grouping are subjective and I have used multiple sources, therefore Turkey appears in both Asia an Europe. A more thorough examination would reveal if a country has been left out. I have intentionally tried to exclude territories. I am unfamiliar with any longstanding policies regarding countries like Burma and Palestine and would not want to offend/irritate any one. If there are known issues, please feel free to comment. Thanks WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:28, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Africa = Algeria, Angola, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cabo Verde, Cameroon, Central African Republic (CAR), Chad, Comoros, Congo, Democratic Republic of the, Congo, Republic of the, Cote d'Ivoire, Djibouti, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Eswatini (formerly Swaziland), Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Sudan, Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe[1]
  • Asia = Afghanistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Brunei, Cambodia, China, Cyprus, Georgia, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Lebanon, Malaysia, Maldives, Mongolia, Myanmar (formerly Burma), Nepal, North Korea, Oman, Pakistan, Palestine, Philippines, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Syria, Taiwan, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Turkey, Turkmenistan, ,United Arab Emirates (UAE), Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Yemen[2]
  • Europe = Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, North Macedonia, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Uzbekistan[3]
  • Latin America is generally understood to consist of the entire continent of South America in addition to Mexico, Central America, and the islands of the Caribbean whose inhabitants speak a Romance language. = Argentina, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Mexico. Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Uruguay, Venezuela[4]
  • Oceania = Australia, Micronesia, Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, New Zealand, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu[5]
  1. ^ "List of countries in Africa". Retrieved 3 August 2020.
  2. ^ "List of countries in Asia in alphabetical order". Retrieved 3 August 2020.
  3. ^ "Countries". WHO Regional Office for Europe. Retrieved 3 August 2020.
  4. ^ "List of countries in Latin America". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 3 August 2020.
  5. ^ "Oceania Facts for Kids | Geography | Continents |". Facts for Kids. Retrieved 3 August 2020.
WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 16:55, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
Ipigott, Rosiestep Pinging you to find out if you would like me to continue refining this list, or if you already have one you want to use. Please let me know if I should continue working on it (checking that all countries recognized by the US State Department are on it etc.). Thanks. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:34, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Wow and thank you, WomenArtistUpdates. I think you've done a fine job with this research. As long as information closely correlates with the Wikipedia articles for these continents, it should be ok. But I will defer to Ipigott as I think he has more expertise in this area than I do. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:41, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
WomenArtistUpdates: Thanks for all this useful preparatory work. Unfortunately, I was not able to access your source for Africa, no doubt owing to legal difficulties for those of us who are based in Europe. However, your listing looks fine to me and covers exactly the same countries as those listed on List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Africa although some of the individual names are not exactly the same. I'll look more carefully at the other lists later. If we decide to go ahead with Africa for October to December, the top priority will be to expand our redlists. In particular, I think we need to develop crowd-sourced lists for the countries where the principal language is English as the Wikidata lists are not likely to offer much help. Any assistance you and others can offer in this connection would be greatly appreciated. (We might also consider collaborating with the Swedish initiatives in support of some of the African countries.)--Ipigott (talk) 08:25, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
It's probably worth noting that one issue with geofocus on a country is that countries change over time. For example, when do notable women from, say, the Kingdom of Bohemia or the Mayan Empire or the Hittite Empire get covered? The borders don't really map very well to any modern state. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 08:49, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Thank you Ipigott and Rosiestep for the feedback. I am so used to NOT using Wikipedia as a source, that I didn't do the (now) obvious thing of starting there. Starting with Africa, I'll review the appropriate wiki pages and then double check with a second source. Ipigott, that link works now. It was an error on my part. And I agree, the big job will be creating the red lists. It is beyond my expertise, so making the lists is the best I can do to help. Adam Cuerden, you are right that borders and countries change over time, and I would add, all the time. I propose that for this project we list the current countries as a starting point. If an editor wants to do an article on a subject from Bohemia, Timbuktu, or Van Diemen's Land they can do it during that continent's quarter. I wouldn't know where to begin to try to assemble a list of all the countries that ever existed. Best, WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 20:31, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Ipigott Here's a second draft (with coding and notes) WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 18:40, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
List of countries based on the Wikipedia articles List of sovereign states and dependent territories by continent and Portal:Latin America, reviewed for completeness using the US State Department's Independent States in the World Fact Sheet, July 16, 2020.[1]
note: Wikipedia has articles for regions (List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Africa, List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Asia, List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Eurasia, List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Europe, List of sovereign states and dependent territories in North America, List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Oceania, List of sovereign states and dependent territories in South America) which have subtle differences from the main List of sovereign states and dependent territories by continent. List of sovereign states and dependent territories by continent was selected for completeness and lack of duplication. For purposes of the quarterly WIR geo-focus editathons, the continent of North and South America, excluding the US and Canada, are combined for the region Latin America.
The countries of Taiwan and Palestine have been included though their status as countries is disputed.
  1. ^ "Independent States in the World". United States Department of State. Retrieved 6 August 2020.
  • Hi All, Just to add I really like the geofocus months & I really like the narrow focuses we sometimes have too! Saying that I'm happy to edit along with the majority - it can be quite hard to find people to make pages for with the obscurer places. I'd be in favour of the WikiData/WikiCommons theme idea too. I'm trying to add more and more people to wikidata, but it would be great to connect what we do individually with WIR. I get confised with what themes have been done - but I wondered about time periods as a future theme (which could be global too) and as broad/narrow as we liked? e.g. pre-1000 CE or born in 1985, for example? Thanks so much for all the organising - I really enjoy contributing to the project! (Lajmmoore (talk) 18:30, 6 August 2020 (UTC))
  • @WomenArtistUpdates: Egypt is in both Africa and Asia, because of the Sinai Peninsula. You can find out more about countries located in more than one continent here: List of transcontinental countries. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 19:06, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the information Finnusertop and the link to transcontinental countries! The Sinai Peninsula! I will update the note. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 20:22, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
WomenArtistUpdates, sounds like Women from Transcontinental Countries could be a theme! Lajmmoore (talk) 08:11, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
Lajmmoore, Oh, Women from Transcontinental Countries sounds so exotic :)! I don't think we could get the competitive spirit going for that one though. As a betting person, I think Oceania will rule. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 15:10, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Removing one article from the red, againEdit

The other day I noticed Menen Liben Amede had been deleted for reasons discussed here. Not having faced the problem of restoring a deleted article, I sought advice; I was told I couldn't simply undelete the deleted article, despite it wasn't a copyvio. Since the original article was created by cut-n-pasting other articles about Ethiopia (which I had written), I did the same, creating a new & hopefully better version. -- llywrch (talk) 20:33, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Can this article be put in article name spaceEdit

I came across one article Draft:Women in Ismailism. Personally I feel this article may grow better in article name space in longer run but some how seem to fail at stricter article for creation reviews. I don't know what needs to be done to put such articles in article namespace.

Bookku (talk) 13:51, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Bookku I see there is considerable discussion of women in Isma'ilism. Perhaps some of the material and sources could be included. The article also needs to be copy-edited and more wikilinks need to be included. It would probably be better if those familiar with the topic participated in this. Maybe Ogress could help.--Ipigott (talk) 15:11, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Women in STEM event - 16 AugustEdit

Hi all, just a quick note to say that the University of Edinburgh Women in STEM student society are hosting an event on Sunday 16 August 1pm-5pm GMT with Dr. Jess Wade. If anyone would like to come join us and/or help add to our worklist of names to edit/create then you're more than welcome. Book here. Many thanks, Stinglehammer (talk) 13:43, 3 August 2020 (UTC)


It's not that I haven't been doing restorations of women, but it's a little hard to argue that, for example, Ethel Smyth, likely the most acclaimed female composer of operas before the modern period, and who accordingly had an article long before WiR existed, is a Woman who was in Red, nor Harriet Jacobs, or Jenny Nyström, or Lucy Arbell or Julie d'Aubigny - all women who deserve attention, but who we weren't responsible for bringing to attention. Although the terrible state of Featured Pictures as regarded women likely justifies a bit of bending the rules, I think that's probably a bit too much.

That said, I absolutely love the latest restoration I did, and it is very much for a Women-in-Red-created article. Behold, Hazel MacKaye!

Trying to spend a bit of time working through all the stuff I said I'd do and haven't yet. Sándor Vay, Elleanor Eldridge, Inter-Allied Women's Conference (once I actually have access to my files for that one again, anyway), and so on. Still, I'm happy to add some things to the to-do list, so suggest away! Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 06:23, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

@Rosiestep: Adding her to the queue. Probably going to hold off briefly, as I kind of want a more colourful image for FP #500, which is likely to be either the next one I do, or the one after that, depending on if Sándor Vay passes. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 20:00, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Happy to make some suggestions, Adam Cuerden, you do such beautiful work!
JeanElmslieHendersonFindlay   Done

Jean Elmslie Henderson Findlay, Scottish author   Done

SusanBMerwin1916   Done

Susan B. Merwin, superintendent, Kentucky School for the Blind   Done

-Penny Richards (talk) 18:15, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

@Penny Richards: The last two aren't large enough to pass FPC, but I'll do a quick cleanup of both. I did grab a larger copy of Susan, but still not big enough to pass, and there's no obvious way to get higher-resolution copies. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 13:29, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Oh, while we're at it...   Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 13:29, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

"Une femme"Edit

For those of you who are fluent in French, I recommend you take a look at the ironic page on the French wiki Wikipédia:Pastiches/Une femme. You'll note all her "achievements" have been reported in the press simply because she is a woman rather than a man. If you don't read French, you'll find all the background you need at ‘A woman’: Wikipedia page records trials and achievements of invisible women from France 24.--Ipigott (talk) 09:17, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

That is such a brilliant page. Wasn't it translated in Wikipedia:Signpost recently? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 11:20, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Interesting one, On side note, If one wants to have interesting eye opener here on en Wikipedia itself, I suggest to collect status of women mentions from each of countries article. For example en-Wikipedia article France#Society rightfully brags ...France is one of the world leaders of gender equality in the workplace... Same time fails to mention issues, may be intimate Partner Violence is there in France too.USA#Family structure takes note mainly on women fertility and abortion rates talks of women rights issues to the least. Usually countries names get highest view hit ratio and that is nice place to see how all each one of them fare.
Bookku (talk) 11:29, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

HathiTrust ProTip for US based editors: ask and ye shall receiveEdit

If you write historic biographies and you're based in the U.S. you know HathiTrust is an excellent place to check for sources. One of the reasons is even though they get many (most?) of their books from the same mass scanning project as Google Books, they actually research the copyright status of books more carefully. In the US a book can be public domain for a number of reasons, not just its age. So in many cases Google Books will indicate something is still in copyright and hide it from you; but HathiTrust will have the same book on full view and will correctly indicate that it has fallen into the public domain. Not only is this good for sourcing, but it means it means you may be able to find photos you can use from books as late as 1963. I've gotten a bunch of great photos this way such as the one on Nora Lawrence Smith. HathiTrust even has a handy "download this page as PDF" button that is perfect for this, import the PDF into a graphics program, crop the photo and boom.

Here's the tip: if you find a book dated from 1925 to 1963 on HathiTrust that you can search but not view, it is possible the copyright was not renewed but HathiTrust just hasn't noticed yet. You can go check. Anyone can look up book copyright renewals at this page at Stanford. Try title, author and publisher and try a few different versions of names. If you find no renewal record and are therefore confident the copyright is lapsed, click the Feedback link on the top line back at the HathiTrust site. Ask them to check the copyright on the book for you, be sure to identify it fully (such as with the URL) so they know which book you are talking about.

I found a potential source on Sunday and did this, and lo they had opened the book up for full view by Tuesday morning! Unfortunately this tip is not great for non-US editors, because HathiTrust only concerns themselves with US copyright law. As a result I'm told they block access outside the United States to avoid legal issues. Cheers and happy hunting. --Krelnik (talk) 17:55, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

All good advice. Note, though 1) that googlebooks are very open to being asked to open up access to books, using the feedback link associated with their books. I've requested they do his for tens of books over the years, and they've come through in every case. 2) as you allude, Hathi take a *really* conservative view of copyright on non-US publications, for non-US users - "access is also restricted for users outside the United States to works published outside the United States after and including 1880"; the Internet Archive takes a much more liberal approach and often has titles available that are restricted within Hathi. (Hathi's approach has the irksome effect of preventing a UKian seeing a PD UK text, but allowing a USian to see it. IMO wars have been started over smaller causes.) --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:10, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Oh,interesting. My past experience with Google has always been anything that starts with "Ask someone at Google to..." is just not gonna go anywhere. Did you use the "Report a Problem" link that is in tiny text way down at the bottom of the Google Books page for the book in question? This also gets me thinking, does anyone make a browser widget or something that will help automate the process of jumping between the three services (Google/Hathi/Internet Archive) while looking at the same book? --Krelnik (talk) 18:28, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Yes, 'report an issue' -> 'I have a question or feedback about a book' -> 'I’d like to see the entire book, and I believe the book is in the public domain'. Set out your PD argument. A human will respond; they're always lovely. & yes, the widget you describe would be handy. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:10, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Sorry state of women's colleges people pagesEdit

One thing I've been noticing recently is just how much work there is left to do for many pages relating to women's colleges. If anyone is in the mood to create a list, List of Scripps College people for Scripps College does not yet exist and very much should. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 14:54, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

This sort of thing? Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by education/US - Scripps College. But few items have employed by or educated at Scripps. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:37, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
Tagishsimon, thanks for the link to that; I wasn't aware that existed! Regarding finding people for the list, there are already 43 bluelinked people categorized as alums and 14 as faculty, per Category:Scripps College people, so it's just a matter of going through that. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 20:53, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Elizabeth Willing Powel at FACEdit

I and GreenMeansGo have a FA nomination at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Elizabeth Willing Powel/archive1. Anyone with experience reviewing featured articles is invited to add their comments. Thank you! --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 16:26, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Farah BakerEdit

I just closed the AfD for this as "keep", but the article needs serious work. Can anyone deal? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:39, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

In the newsEdit

This article from the Washington Post features interviews with two WiR members Rosiestep and Another Believer:
Covid-19 is one of Wikipedia’s biggest challenges ever. Here’s how the site is handling it.
---- WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 20:07, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Miriam Jiménez RománEdit

Any thoughts about this one? Seems pretty dubious for WP:NPROF given Google Scholar citation counts. I'm also not seeing much to satisfy GNG. Perhaps she'll have an obit or two in the next few months in a relevant journal if she's as important as the draft claims? Calliopejen1 (talk) 07:29, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for mentioning this one, Calliopejen1. I found plenty of authority controls for Miriam so a Wikidata item would be suitable, if someone has time and inclination. Also, I reached out to the editor, a newbie, here: User talk:Warriorwoman1967#Women in Red. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:25, 10 August 2020 (UTC) - all contributions welcome. --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:56, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
In answer to the notability question, yes, she appears to me to be extremely notable within her field, on a par with Juan Flores (professor), with whom she co-published. By way of illustration, a 8pp review of their magnum opus The Afro-Latin@ Reader in Transition. I've no doubt we should have an article on her; well worth an investment of time to push the article beyond the reach of deletion. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:29, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
FYI, the draft was declined. I probably won't go back to work on this but invite others to do so! Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:51, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
Her citation counts definitely aren't good enough to argue for notability via WP:PROF#C1 but that's unsurprising for a field where book publishing and book reviews may be more important than journal articles and citations. However, the draft also lists no books authored (The Afro-Latin Reader is an edited volume, which counts for much less) and no published reviews of books, so it makes no case for notability via WP:AUTHOR. It merely states that she has published some articles, which is never enough without evidence that what she published has made an impact. There do at least exist published reviews of The Afro-Latin Reader, which can be added to source that part of the draft [4] [5] [6], but they're not enough for notability by themselves and I didn't find anything else. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:02, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

The article has now been promoted - Miriam Jiménez Román. At least a couple of Afro-Latino/a websites list her as a leading & important Afro-Latina. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:51, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Susie Rayos Marmon - Nominated and awaiting DYK approvalEdit

I've nominated the new Susie Rayos Marmon article that I created for the August 2020 Indigenous women edit-a-thon for DYK. It's my first time submitting a DYK, and I would love any feedback and support. Please let me know if I missed a space within this WikiProject for this type of request. Thank you! --Ahsoka Dillard (talk) 02:16, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Tehilah Abakasanga and ÖfuurëEdit

If there is someone here who likes to write about fashion and fashion brands, this Nigerian-Canadian entrepreneur is missing an article (as is her company). Not sure about the notability requirements for this field beyond being mentioned a lot in independent sources, which she passes. Also would fit in the BLM campaign that's still going on :) -Yupik (talk) 09:12, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

There might be other people in this article who would pass the notability requirements too. -Yupik (talk) 09:19, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
Return to the project page "WikiProject Women in Red".