Open main menu

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red

Frequently asked questions (FAQ)

"Komm rein, mach mit", meaning "Come, join us".


Contents

Curators and dress historiansEdit

I have been adding museum curators and dress historians to Wikidata. Not all of them meet Wikipedia's notability criteria, but many do, and all of ones I added have references/citations (some better than others, of course). Is it appropriate to add worklists for these occupation categories to this project? - PKM (talk) 22:14, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes, without hesitation. We seem to have redlists covering curators and fashion designers. Costume historian (Q51095439) is not currently covered. Are there other occupations to be looking out for? Or have you added Field of Work properties to wikidata items? --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:24, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
I've added and linked the list for Costume historians. Many of them are also curators or professors. My intention was to add both occupation and field of work, but I got a bit sloppy on field of work - I intend to go back and fix that. There is also occupation textile historian, but those have a very high overlap with costume historian (we might make a query that looks for one without the other to reduce duplication?). - PKM (talk) 01:39, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Misguided templateEdit

Can anyone fix Template:WIR-109 which for some reason is linking to Meetup 111: Geofocus The Ancient World? See Talk:Edris Allan.--Ipigott (talk) 08:33, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

A purge seems to have fixed it. How does it look to you? --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:40, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
You're right. Seems to have been a cache problem. I closed Firefox completely. After reopening, all was fine. I have a nasty habit of leaving Firefox open from one day to the next. In future, I'll restart it every morning.--Ipigott (talk) 17:14, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
I just fixed it with this edit. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:16, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, but even after your edit it was still not working for me. Now I've cleared the cache, it is.--Ipigott (talk) 17:26, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Leading with Wikipedia: A brand proposal for 2030Edit

This may interest some of you: Leading with Wikipedia: A brand proposal for 2030. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:11, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

tbh, I'd rather they spent the money on tools that work rather than fatuous branding exercises. I'm in the camp that thinks WMF executive are more than semi-detached from an understanding of the needs associated with the websites they have charge of. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:15, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
Yes, it would probably be a good idea to base everything on Wikipedia. I remember I was once very surprised to be called a Wikimedian rather than a Wikipedian. Wikimedian has always sounded mathematical to me.
It's a bit like the discussion some of us have been having on Women in Red. Once a brand is widely recognized it's just as well to keep it. But why wait until 2030? What's wrong with 2020?--Ipigott (talk) 17:23, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
On that subject. UNESCO partnered with volunteers, ourselves and our French sister project Les Sans Pages last year to run editathons to fix the gender gap with March 8th. This year they are partnering Wikimedia... Victuallers (talk) 10:43, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Karin SchnassEdit

Karin Schnass, an article I created (based on her being awarded the Start-Preis, "the highest Austrian award for young scientists"), has been prodded, apparently by or at the instigation of the subject, with the rationale that "several women of higher reputation in the same area of math/cs have no page". On the one hand, I don't feel that this is a valid rationale (name them and we can add them to our redlists of people who should have a page; for instance Kjersti Engan certainly should have one). And although many Start-Preis recipients have no article, I think that they mostly should, and making even fewer of them have articles is not an improvement. On the other hand, I am somewhat sympathetic to the subject's desire to stay out of the public view. So although I am tempted to de-prod this, I haven't done it yet. Anyone else here have an opinion on what to do in this sort of case? —David Eppstein (talk) 22:32, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Neither of the reasons adduced are good. Other things exist. Info could be found elsewhere. I'd deprod, not least since there is not an objection to the dissemination of the information, given that it has been made available by the subject. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:51, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
The Start-Preis is awarded to 6-8 young scientists pa, with a research grant. Presumably most are Austrian. I rather doubt recipients would pass an AFD if it is the main claim to notability. Same with the Sloan Research Fellowship (see a few sections up), or a Royal Society Research Fellowship. Johnbod (talk) 01:49, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
It seems to me that both the Wittgenstein Award and the Start-Preis are highly significant Austrian awards, both in terms of prize money and recognition. While nearly all of those who have received the Wittgenstein have Wikipedia articles in German and English, we seem to have a great deal of work to do on the Start-Preis. I'm sure Karin Schnass would feel more comfortable if the other 2014 recipients were also covered. I strongly suggest that the article should be maintained and I hope David Eppstein will continue his coverage of award-winning mathematicians.--Ipigott (talk) 08:26, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Pleased to see that the article in not under threat any more. Victuallers (talk) 10:38, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Our Birthday in May, Founders meeting and 18%?Edit

It will be exactly four years since we started Women in Red and it looks as if "the founders" will meet for the first time in May. (There must be "a story" in that). When we started in May 2015 we guesstimated that the %age of women was 14-15% and that was confirmed when this project built Wikidata based tools to get an accurate figure. Since then you have organised >100 editathons and we've partnered with Universities, UNESCO, United Nations, the BBC and now UCI and we have 19 sister projects in different languages (never mind counting countries). We were a finalist for a UN award. Not bad considering we have no (paid!) staff or budget, just a lot of people volunteering their time. There is a lot of moaning about the gender gap and Wikipedia as #5 web site is fairly in the firing line. However old fashioned biographies were typically only 8% women. Wikipedia allows anyone to improve that percentage.... thank you again for your help. In May we have arranged an editathon at UCI and I am thrilled to say that Rosie and I will be there. SO! Four years since we started, first time the founders have met and can we please celebrate 18%? I remember the joy of achieving 16% the wait to get to 17% and a we have had a very long pregnancy but we're expecting 18% very soon.

If anyone if thinking of creating a virtual or remote in-person events then I have promised to get a cake! At the mo I only need four of five slices but love to buy a big one with "Four Years and 18%" written on it Victuallers (talk) 10:22, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

On Friday, May 17th, we'll be at UCI. I'm hopeful we can do another event on Saturday, May 18th, in Los Angeles, and yes, there will be more cake! Any ideas? --Rosiestep (talk) 03:50, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
Hoping I can join in the festivities in Irvine, but an LA-on-Saturday event might work even better for me, so keep us posted on that. Also maybe loop in Wikimedians of Los Angeles? There's also a San Diego user group. Penny Richards (talk) 15:40, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
I look forward to your celebrations in Los Angeles but the way things are going at the moment (with coverage of the backlog of ungendered Wikidata entries), I don't think it's realistic to expect the WHGI stats to reach 18% in May. Unless of course we introduce some special incentives for creating more women's biographies, maybe by writing more stubs based on Wikidata entries. We should perhaps also target 18 July when it will be exactly four years since Rosie made the first entry for the Women in Red wikiproject (initially Project XX).--Ipigott (talk) 12:38, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
It took us about 10 months to add 0.3% (26 March 2018 - 7 January 2019). Factoring in the backlog issue, we need to add another 0.3% or thereabouts to get to 18%. December is more likely, I'm afraid. --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:28, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
As Victuallerss and I will be in LA on Saturday-Sunday, May 18-19, it would be lovely if we could attend a Wikimedians of Los Angeles event. I'll reach out to some of their organizers via another channel. Thanks, for the suggestion, Penny Richards. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:47, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Looking for stats on percentage of biographies about women by language and by countryEdit

Hi all

I have a request from the Icelandic delegation at UNESCO on Icelandic representation on Wikipedia. I know there used to be a tool to measure this but when I try to go to it it says page not found. They want to know:

  • Percentage of biographies that are about women on the Icelandic Wikipedia
  • Percentage of biographies about Icelandic people across all language Wikipedias (or maybe English, French, Icelandic, Spanish etc)

Does anyone have any pre-written queries that would work for this?

Thanks very much

John Cummings (talk) 15:52, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

@John Cummings: I'm afraid right now you need to work out percentiles yourself; here is a first pass for the two questions ... I'll maybe do more work later to work out the percentiles automatically:
  • Percentage of biographies that are about women on the Icelandic Wikipedia
  • Percentage of biographies about Icelandic people across all language Wikipedias (or maybe English, French, Icelandic, Spanish etc) -
Oops ... the below give you gender splits for Icelandic people, not percentile of Icelandic versus non-Icelandic people ... more later & sorry about that.. The 'all language wiki' reports count individuals once, no matter how many wikis they have articles on.
  • this - based only on country of citizenship, country for sport or (mistakenly) country - all language wikipedias (but excluding and commons, source, etc)
  • this - based only on country of citizenship, country for sport or (mistakenly) country, plus born in a locality in Iceland - all language wikipedias (but excluding and commons, source, etc)
--Tagishsimon (talk) 16:44, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
So whilst I wait to find out if it's possible to count huge numbers of biography articles, here are some cobbled together stats, taking the count of all articles from WHGI and the count of Icelanders from the reports above:
  • EN wiki - 1,604,512 biography articles, 3,027 Icelanders (citizens and born in) = 0.19%
  • DE wiki - 71,1125 biography articles, 1,388 Icelanders (citizens and born in) = 0.20%
  • FR wiki - 557,780 biography articles, 1,388 Icelanders (citizens and born in) = 0.19%
  • RU wiki - 403,160 biography articles, 564 Icelanders (citizens and born in) = 0.14%
  • IT wiki - 366,014 biography articles, 953 Icelanders (citizens and born in) = 0.36%
  • ES wiki - 363,983 biography articles, 705 Icelanders (citizens and born in) = 0.19%
  • IS wiki - 9,314 biography articles, 1,496 Icelanders (citizens and born in) = 16.06%
--Tagishsimon (talk) 18:11, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
And, finally for now, Iceland's population is circa 0.005% of world population, so taking that as a rough metric, they're punching well above their weight. --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:26, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Interesting to see that there are over twice as many Icelandic bios on the EN wiki than on the IS.--Ipigott (talk) 20:54, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
I see from here that 16.42% of the 7,443 biographies on the IS wiki are about women. Don't know on what exactly these numbers are based but they do come from the Wikidata Concepts Monitor.--Ipigott (talk) 21:08, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Good work. That's presumably the new version of the now dead Denelezh's tool, and pretty much exactly the thing John was looking for in the first place. My wikidata report gives 16.78% ... unsure where the discrepancy arises from except perhaps WDCM specifying "Last update: 2018 September 03". --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:25, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Tagishsimon: It's been around for quite some time. Denelezh's tool came later. As you're something of a Wikidata specialist, I was surprised you did not know about it. It's comprehensive but unfortunately it's not updated very often and therefore not really suitable for our WiR stats. As you noted, the current version is from last September.--Ipigott (talk) 07:35, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
The vast extent of the hinterlands of my ignorance is without compass, Ian. --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:30, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
Now that's just the kind of quote I could use myself from time to time. Nicely put!--Ipigott (talk) 10:41, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

@Tagishsimon:, thanks so much for this, exactly what we needed. John Cummings (talk) 20:22, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia, including thousands of women's biographies, headed to the moonEdit

An interesting news article about a time capsule on its way to the moon, carrying "a 30-million-page archive of human knowledge"--English speaking Wikipedia. 30-million page library is heading to the moon to help preserve human civilization. MauraWen (talk) 12:19, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Cornell March 8 editathonEdit

Cornell, with its editathon on women and the arts, is just one of many institutions set on improving coverage of women on March 8.--Ipigott (talk) 08:58, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Spanish women in the Civil WarEdit

Hi. I am trying to work on a series of articles about Spanish women in the Spanish Civil War so I can more easily identify more notable women where articles can be written, and, because unlike some wars (See World War II), women's involvement in this war is almost non-existent. It also seems very important given the upcoming elections, where on both the left and right, the role of women in Spain has become an issue. I am not as familiar with the topic as I would like to be, and I have not really written broad general articles of this sort in quite some time. If anyone can assist in editing articles with me on my user space until the whole series is ready to go, that would be appreciated. (Or is it better to mainspace them even if the whole series is not mainspace ready? Thoughts?) The ones that are feel almost publish ready that could use a second or third look include:

Any assistance appreciated. --LauraHale (talk) 15:24, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi there, Laura, and thanks for making this tremendous effort on women in the Spanish civil war. I see you have already been to a great deal of trouble on all these articles. I have looked at one or two and to me they seem more or less ready for mainspace. Maybe it would be a good idea to wait a day or two for further reaction and possible contibutions to your draft articles. I'm pretty busy today but I'll try to get back to them tomorrow. Great stuff!--Ipigott (talk) 11:56, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for looking at them. I have a footer I want to use, and I worry that if I put it in the main space with lots of redlinks, it will be problematic.Once compiled, I am hoping to get a good list of women without articles. Just hard at times without being an expert, and the topic being tremendously polarizing in a broader context inside Spain. Most of the important scholarship comes from the outside. (Even Spanish librarians recommend me English speaking authors as a consequence.) Beyond that, there are some issues regarding the veracity of information around women that make it hard to trust some sources. The best example of this is on the issue of Milicianas in the Spanish Civil War, and the description of some as prostitutes. There is every reason in many case to label them as such by both sides in the Civil War for people's own ideological reasons, but how true is that? Many of the milicianas themselves disagree with that in their own writing. There is a similar issue when it comes to Communists, with both the right and many on the left disliking them as a result of the purge. How do you balance those sourcing issues when it comes to the actual text and organization? And how much background is needed to cover the topic so people have the proper context for these problems? Babbling but trying to do a good job given that there is no existing framework to kind of build on. --LauraHale (talk) 16:23, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
This topic really interests me, and I think you're doing an excellent job on these articles, LauraHale. IMO, they are ready for mainspace. IMO, redlinks within an article are fine/important; they tell us what's missing. As for balancing the sourcing issues, that's the toughest part. I like using the Notes section of a document (efn template) as a way of describing alternate viewpoints, even if it's just date of birth. Have you started a list of redlinks? Pinging our Librarian in Residence, Megalibrarygirl, who might have some ideas about that... but for sure, I'd like to see a link for the "redlist" here. Thanks for your efforts with this, Laura; I know this is a broad and difficult topic. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:48, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
@LauraHale: I have a contact that may be able to help identify sources in Spanish to help. I'll see if he has any useful information! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:41, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
As a Spanish speaker and someone who became familiar with recent Spanish history during extended stays in central Spain in the 1960s, I am not at all surprised at the difficulties Laura is experiencing in finding reliable sources for these articles. In the Franco era, it was almost a criminal act to give accounts of the successes of the Communists, while actual publication was forbidden. That is why the history of the civil war has been very warped. Only recently, with for example discussion of the removal of Franco's remains from the Valle de los Caidos, are we entering a period in which the merits of each side can be openly discussed. I think Rosie has made an excellent suggestion in regard to notes. SusunW has made very good use of them in her own articles. I hope to be able to help further with Laura's articles when I have more time over the next few days.--Ipigott (talk) 18:27, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
There is a reference to Clara Campoamor in one article. A source says that a militiawoman was responding to Clara Campoamor about her calling them prostitutes. The only reference I could find was in a feminist thesis. I couldn't find more sources than that one that I would consider terribly reliable, so I went to a university library to ask for assistance on this. They asked me if I was reading Nationalist or Republican sources, and it really appears to matter little in the specific context but elsewhere it is a huge issue. I'm waiting for a researcher with privileges to get me access to some things at the National Library of Spain to see if I can actually resolve that one. But Spanish writers are ones that academics, outside of historical memory ones, are not preferred. They are viewed as way more intrinsically biased than outsiders. Hence, I am relying more on English sources than I would otherwise when writing about Spanish themed topics. Then backing that up with Spanish sources to help fill in major holes. Working pretty well so far.
Might try footnotes if I find more contradictory narratives. (I've just been warned by two Spanish feminist to be careful about writing in the language of the oppressor as taking babies away from mothers because the state worries about communist indoctrination is not "their children were handed over for adoption" but "the state kidnapped their children." And barring any evidence of the prostitution, it is more a slander against than it is a fact about these women. Stolen baby issue is much more in the news because of recent court cases. But how do you neutrally word any of that without making women lose all appearance of agency? It is much easier to do that in a biography than in a broad topical article, even if the article focuses on a narrow subset of a topic.)
Will try to mainspace them next week or so as I know I have some major typo issues in a few. I also completely drop words sometimes. (Not on purpose but writing just gets away from me.) Once done, I can work on a list of red linked women. Thanks again for feedback. --LauraHale (talk) 21:58, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Mainspaced them yesterday. Just wanted to drop a comment and say thank you very much to @Ipigott: for all his assistance. :) --LauraHale (talk) 16:15, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

I was very happy to help with all these, Laura. You've really done an amazing job and filled an important gap in Wikipedia's coverage of Spanish history. For those interested in looking at the 19 articles in more detail, they can all be found under Category:Women in the Spanish Civil War.--Ipigott (talk) 16:40, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
  • There is perhaps one other interesting aspect which remains to be covered here: women writers and women fictional characters in connection with the Spanish Civil War. Here are a couple of sources to whet your appetites: [1], [2]. Anyone interested?--Ipigott (talk) 17:25, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Late to the party (as when am I not?), but I wonder if there might not be something of interest to be mined from Martyrs of the Spanish Civil War as well? There are, as I recall, a number of groups of nuns among the martyrs who have been beatified. I'm not up on my reading about Catholicisim, but I wonder if there's a story to be told about the role of nuns and other women religious in the war. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 18:19, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Edith M. BairdainEdit

Came across this while stub-sorting. Not likely to survive at present - main source is Findagrave, main assertion of notability that she was first female PhD in field X in university Y - not enough. But the "click for more" text on Findagrave suggests an interesting life and googling suggests that she and husband were cited in various things. Can't do much, on phone today, but someone might like to try to rescue her? PamD 08:04, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Found a 1970 paper they wrote on "Psychological Operations Studies -- Vietnam April 1970". Could be an interesting story. PamD 08:17, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
@PamD: I found some good coverage of her from the 1960s. During that time and prior, women were very involved in technology, but this is exactly the point in time where they began to get sidelined and driven out. She was one of the founders of Society for Information Display but that information isn't available on their site or anywhere else. This bio is a good example of how women get "erased" from history. She's buried in these newspaper articles and was obviously an expert with interesting ideas... so what happened? *sigh* Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:16, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
@Megalibrarygirl: Interesting life it seems - where her Findagrave discreetly says "She and her husband, Dr. Fred Bairdain through their company, Asyst, traveled the world advising the state department and Department of Defense on matters related to foreign conflicts", it turns out that they wrote the definitive work on PSYOP in Vietnam! Have added it. Thanks for your work on her too. PamD 18:22, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
She was totally interesting, PamD! I love the picture of her on the Find-a-Grave. I would love to be able to add it to her article. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:27, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Well I suppose there's the provision under fair use for portraits of deceased people, surely? But on the other hand I suppose Findagrave isn't a reliable source so there's no proof that it's actually our Edith. Pity, that. PamD 23:02, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Maybe you could ask Sandy Lyle to upload the photo on Commons or simply add it to the EN article.--Ipigott (talk) 12:19, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Commons helpEdit

I've been working on adding a Commons category by year to all the images that are posted in the Outcomes section of every Women in Red event page. I do it one by one by one by one: click on the image, add the category, click back to the event page; repeat. Time consuming to say the least. Is there a way to batch add the Commons category to all the images on a particular Women in Red event page? For example, last night, I was working on adding the 2017 Commons category to all the images from August 2017 #1day1woman. I got as far as "Miss Noyes, daughter of Crosby Stuart Noyes". There are still so many after that which need to be categorized; plus September 2017 #1day1woman, October 2017 #1day1woman, etc. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:13, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

I can understand your frustration, Rosie, but I am not too clear on why you think it is so important to add the WiR Commons category to all these images. Most of the images I have added to Commons over the past four years have been in connection with articles I have created or enhanced for Women in Red but I have not been adding WiR cats. If the only reason for adding a Commons category is to show how many images have been created as a result of work on WiR, then I'm sure there are many, many more which have never been included in media outcomes. Do you really think it is worthwhile spending lots of time on this type of categorization? It might be more productive to work on other priorities, especially article creation. I must say, my timetable seems overloaded with article creation and improvement assignments for the next few weeks -- so I don't really think I can help out. For the future, though, I would be happy to add a WiR category to all the pertinent new images I upload on Commons. "Category:Media supported by WikiProject Women in Red - 2019" is quite a mouthful. Couldn't it be reduced to "Category:2019 WIR media"?--Ipigott (talk) 08:08, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
Ipigott Thanks for your thoughts. I am hopeful that a Commons Admin could add it in one fell swoop to all the images on a given event's page. Keeping my fingers crossed. Like you, most of the images I have added to Commons over the past four years have been in connection with articles I have created or enhanced for Women in Red and I didn't add many of them to an events page; that's ok. I'm doing it going forward, and I see that others are doing so, too. Looking at the big picture, I think documentation is important, ergo why I created Commons cats by year for images created as aresult of work on WiR. Conversations with @Roger: regarding the importance of adding images to Commons has been inspirational. The Conversations with #VisualWikiWomen campaign leaders have been inspirational. So creating the Commons cats comes from a multitude of reasons why I think it's important to tag images associated with our work with an appropriate Commons category. As for reducing it to something shorter, perhaps that can be done (e.g. as a redirect?) but I don't know how to do it. Maybe a pagestalker does? If it is possible, "Category:2019 WIR media" would need to be tweaked as in the wiki movement, "WIR" is the acronym for Wikipedian-in-Residence, so we should come up with something that avoids confusion. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:53, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
Whether an editor on Commons has sysop rights would be irrelevant for this issue. Other than the normal deletion/restoration/so forth, the admin kit doesn't enable any special functionality wrt categories. There is Cat-a-lot which can perform batch tasks, but it isn't enabled here on en.wiki, and it only activates on category pages or on user contribution pages. If the files are not otherwise grouped by some other category or by some user the it's useless. There is also Visual File Change, which can run custom queries, but it also is not enabled on en.wiki. However, you might be able to find someone who is tech savvy to write a custom bit that would allow it to make batch tasks based on all the images available on an single en.wiki page, such as this one. But as far as I'm aware, that would have to be custom built for this issue, and I haven't the slightest idea how difficult that would be. GMGtalk 16:06, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
@GreenMeansGo: Hopping in here for a sec to note that, in fact, Cat-a-Lot is enabled as a script here on the English Wikipedia. It's a bit tricky, and I don't quite remember how, but if you like I can dig up the instructions later and let you know. :-) --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:47, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
Oh really? We got it enabled on the English Wikiquote and it's been a life saver, but I believe I asked about it at the village pump a few months ago about using it here and didn't really get anywhere. GMGtalk 16:49, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
No wait. I think I was asking about Visual File Changer now that I think about it. GMGtalk 16:51, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
GreenMeansGo, Do the instructions at c:Help:Gadget-Cat-a-lot#As your user gadget not work? Copying that code into Special:MyPage/common.js should work (Cat-a-lot, as with any script, should work as a user script as well as a gadget.) Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:54, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
I haven't tried it. I usually stay well away from editing my .js if I can, lest I find some way to block myself and delete my account accidentally. Now what we do need, if you can figure out how to make it work, is a way to force cat-a-lot to enable on any page (not just cats and contribs) and treat all files and links as targets. This came up previously here and we never really found a solution. But it would totally solve the problem Rosie is having here. GMGtalk 16:59, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
I realize I didn't fully respond to Ipigott's comment... yes, it would be a good habit, going forward, to add this category (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Media_supported_by_WikiProject_Women_in_Red_-_2019) when we upload an image associated with our scope. If someone forgets or doesn't wish to do so, no worries. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:18, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Current romantic fictionEdit

If an Australian author's modern romantic fiction novels get translated into German, Spanish and umpteen other languages, you'd think you could find some WP:RS about her, wouldn't you? Is anyone out there an expert in modern popular fiction and can find anything about Elizabeth Haran to improve her article? PamD 17:14, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Not really. These days, that sort of book hardly ever gets reviewed in RS, so any coverage is likely to be heavily PR-lead. The translations are indeed a good argument, but I have to say the pageviews aren't impressive. These days AFD for popular culture articles seems populated by a regular death squad largely operating on autopilot, so good luck! Johnbod (talk) 18:32, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

First female Prime Minister of Estonia: Kaja KallasEdit

Kaja Kallas is due to become the first female Prime Minister of Estonia. However, her article needs significant help. Are there any Estonian or Russian speakers or anyone at all that may be able to assist in improving this article. It has the chance of being featured at "In the News" section of the Main Page.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 06:13, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Coffeeandcrumbs: Thanks for this. I've tidied it up a bit. I'm surprised there is nothing about her earlier relationship with Taavi Veskimägi, once finance minister, and their son Sten. Other relationships have been mentioned in the Estonian popular press. There are also lengthy interviews in Estonian which reveal quite a bit about Kallas' political priorities. Perhaps ExRat would like to help out on this. After all, it is International Women's Day and Kallas is quite an imposing figure.--Ipigott (talk) 11:04, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Ananke MagazineEdit

I am happy to share with you the special, digital edition of Ananke Magazine (www.anankemag.com) published on Mar 7, 2019, celebrating HERstories. The story about me is the story about us, Women in Red, so I am very pleased to see how they used our logo all over the page... the beautiful graphics depicting us. Enjoy. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:45, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

A lot about Women in Red and not much about you, Rosie. Nevertheless, it's an good overview. I see that Ananke is published in Dubai and has many interesting articles about women from the Middle East. It might be useful to see how many of them are notable enough for Wikipedia biographies. Perhaps we should also write an article about Ananke Magazine itself. You can find earlier issues of Ananke here.--Ipigott (talk) 11:47, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Articles created during UNESCO's Wiki4Women Delhi edit-a-thon getting flaggedEdit

Dear team,

We did the #wiki4women edit-a-thon on 8th March with the UNESCO, as most of the editors worked on English Wikipedia their articles are getting deleted and getting flagged as not notable. I request the team to please help us. Outreach Dashboard: https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/UNESCO_India/UNESCO_Wiki4Women_Edit-a-thon_Delhi_(8_March_2019)/home Articles getting deleted by this user: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Zia_Mann

Note: Apologies for writing in a messy way, don't want the articles to get deleted before I wake up next morning in India

Thanks in advance :) -- Sailesh Patnaik (Questions) 20:18, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

I've listed the articles below. Those marked as copyvios are beyond hope, unless there is someone around who wants to rewrite them from scratch. Suggest, if action is taken on any of these, we annotate the list below. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:59, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
So far, at least five have been speedy-deleted by RHaworth: three as copyvio (Sunita Kamble, Shima Modak, and Kanika Tekriwal) and two as A7, unfortunately without restoring the associated drafts (Kiran Kanoji and Monika Shukla). RHaworth also protected Kanika Tekriwal against any future re-creation. I'm not completely convinced that the A7 cases are notable enough to survive an AfD, but I think these are bad calls for speedy deletion (Kanoji won a medal as a parathlete at a Marathon, and won an award from the United Nations; Shukla is a Humboldt Fellow). Note that per WP:CSD "The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines." So probably the first step is to ask RHaworth to reverse this decision on these two articles. Reversing a copyvio decision is much less likely, however. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:05, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
The three G7s have been draftified. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:22, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Kanika Tekriwal was also reported as an A7 when I looked. She is a sad example of how repeated cack-handed attempts at an article make it more difficult for a valid article to succeed. I have not protected draft:Kanika Tekriwal so there is a route.
On a separate issue, I view the edits of Zia Mann (talk · contribs) with puzzlement, not to say suspicion: surely no one can create eight articles 2K to 3K bytes long in the space of an hour? What is happening? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:57, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for draftifying the three articles, RHaworth; much appreciated. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:11, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
RHaworth, my guess is that they had prepared them in advance. I made some improvements to Zia Mann's articles, but did not deal with sourcing. --Rosiestep (talk) 23:51, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Article on Chinmayi Arun has been proposed for deletion already. It has no references at all. -- Rohini (talk) 17:22, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
It's also largely copied from [3]; that's labeled as CC-BY, so we don't immediately have to delete it, but the copying does require attribution. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:39, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
  • I've created Women Transforming India, as some of these women are recipients of that award. The article could perhaps usefully list all the winners for the three years the award has been in existence - might get back to that tomorrow. PamD 00:12, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

The articlesEdit

Hi everyone thanks for working on it. I was curious can we somehow recover the deleted articles and move it to my sandbox. So that I can work on them during my free time. --Sailesh Patnaik (Questions) 17:57, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
Those that were not copyvios, yes - the draft versions are listed, above. Those that were copyvios, no - they need to be redone from scratch. --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:15, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Cancer research editathonEdit

I've just come across an interesting news item on a successful UK editathon on women in cancer research, once again inspired by Jess Wade.--Ipigott (talk) 11:38, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Pah! "According to the Wikimedia Foundation, less than 1 in 20 Wikipedia biographies feature women", linked a to a WMF blog giving 16.78%. I've submitted a comment requesting a correction. I used to be a member of the CRUK press team, but standards seem to have slipped considerably. Johnbod (talk) 13:43, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
They've corrected it. Johnbod (talk) 22:53, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

nn:Wikipedia:Wikiprosjekt Kvinner i raudtEdit

Great new... The 21st language version of Women in Red -Norwegian nynorsk- was added to Wikidata today. In this regard, I was thinking it would be good to have a mailing list of all the talkpages of all the language versions of Women in Red separate from our en.wiki list international list, which may not be up to date. And then it would be appropriate (and professional) for us to stay in touch with them with our monthly Invite. Is anyone up for developing the list? --Rosiestep (talk) 14:39, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Rosiestep: This is good news. We now have both the Norwegian wikis (NO and NN) developing their own versions of Women in Red. As for the mailing list, I think we should be careful not to overload other-language projects with monthly invitations to our WiR events. It might nevertheless be useful to invite active members of related wikiprojects to become members of our EN WiR if they are interested, in this case Trondtr. We should perhaps also be doing more to develop the Meta-based women's user group and provide more information there about our "multilingual" presence.--Ipigott (talk) 08:56, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
I made this suggestion as I think each language version of Women in Red is working very independently, and there might be synergies if the 21 communities knew about the other language events. I think including individual editors on our general Opt In mailing list is fantastic; and that list grows every month. But I think communicating with the various Women in Red language organizations is important, too. I'm not sure if on-wiki is the best way vs. an alternate communication channel. As for announcing the en-wiki Women in Red events on Meta (the WikiWomen User Group talkpage), that is a good idea. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:41, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Carolee Schneemann on ITNEdit

Carolee Schneemann, Visionary Feminist Performance Artist, Dies at 79. Please help improve this page if you have the time. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:59, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Stats for Finnish and Northern Sámi WikipediasEdit

Last week there was a contest on the Finnish Wikipedia (https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Viikon_kilpailu/Viikon_kilpailu_2019-10) to create articles about women and other people who do not identify as male. It was a success in my opinion, because in the course of a week, 156 new articles were created, very few of which were stubs. Moreover, the percentage of articles about women rose from 18.67% to 18.76% by the end of the week. So out of a total 141,220 articles about humans, 26,499 were about women and 42 were about people whose gender was unknown, trans, muxe, etc. Today I ran the same queries for the Northern Sámi Wikipedia and was pleasantly surprised to find that a whopping 30.43% of biographies are about women! (Granted we only have 506 biographies, but still!) Biographies of all sorts are the subject of the joint monthly competition for the no-, nn-, and se-wikis (https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Konkurranser/M%C3%A5nedens_konkurranse_2019-03), so maybe we'll have to push that up to 50% :) Some good news to start off the day with! -Yupik (talk) 07:45, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

This is great news, Yupik. Your competitive environment is obviously having an impact. Keep up the good work.--Ipigott (talk) 09:03, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Need for more women's biographies promoted in The ScotsmanEdit

More encouragement from Ewan McAndrew, Siobhan O’Connor, Dr Sara Thomas and Dr Alice White in Women scientists being whitewashed from Wikipedia.--Ipigott (talk) 08:28, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

"Women in Climate" Editathon - Exeter (UK) - 12 AprilEdit

Moira Paul (talk) 17:19, 12 March 2019 (UTC)I came across a wiki editathon on Eventbrite at the University of Exeter, focusing on Women in Climate. The organiser is happy for me to post it here, and it is open to non-uni people as well as students and staff. Link to editathon on eventbrite

I've booked a slot so I can learn more about starting pages rather than just editing them.

Rosie on EuropeanaEdit

Rosiestep presents her background and aspirations in some detail on Europeana, a site I highly recommend for those interested in Europe's cultural heritage. As a knighted Serbian, Rosie obviously fits in nicely.--Ipigott (talk) 20:01, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Requesting urgent helpEdit

Hi,

Just a while ago I completed my second article on Wikipedia namely Aurat_March - a Women's Day related article. while I was amidst to make correction and review request on various Wikipedia women projects. Some one has placed speedy deletion notice on the article for perceived copyright issue.

While most of the places I have tried to write in my own language, some of the third person statements reported by news portals may still need little corrections. While personally I do not think that is a serious copyright issue which can not be dealt with little more paraphrasing. But frankly I do not know how to deal with situation. Please help me either in necessary update or help me in transferring it to my sandbox page.

Bookku (talk) 13:21, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Max page limit/size/entries of redlink list pagesEdit

Hello, I added a limit to Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Scientists of 5000 entries, due to ListeriaBot not being able to edit the page anymore and the massive size making the page slow to load. Even with a max of 5000 entries (which about halved the size of this specific page) the page continuous to load slowly.

My recommendation would be to limit at least every page to a sensible number of entries, would like to get some thoughts and or opinions from you about this. Thanks, Redalert2fan (talk) 22:47, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

First, I support your change, RA2F; thank you. Clearly the page as was, was broken. Next, that's a particularly poor redlist for two reasons: 1) it lists occupations covered in other lists and 2) it doesn't include subclasses of the occupations it's querying for (albeit for the obvious reason that to do so would leads to a timeout). Given the length problem, ideally it would be constrained to scientific occupations not covered in other lists; and it would include subclasses of occupation.
Like you, my preference is for shorter lists; I created by-country lists of actresses, painters, politiciaans and writers a year or more back to provide a larger set of smaller redlists. Ipigott spoke in favour of retaining the single large list of actresses, which lists an arbitrary 5k of so of the ~37k actresses; I don't understand why; now seems a good time to rehash that discussion.
My preference would be sub-2K lists, fwiw; anything larger I find unwieldy. But, I acknowledge there are contra-issues in splitting lists (e.g. on what basis; who will do the work; do more smaller lists work for all users given we know some, like Ian, have a preference for large lists). --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:22, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
@Redalert2fan and Tagishsimon:: First of all, I'm glad to see this problem has been sorted out and the scientists list is being properly updated once again. It seems to me that if 5,000 is still liable to cause updating problems, then perhaps we should establish a rather lower maximum length. The reason I like the "single large list of actresses" (and similar longer listings) is that it provides a useful overview or starting point. As I am fluent in a number of languages, I frequently use these longer lists to identify articles in several of the other wikis before I actually choose names on which to start new biographies. I usually write about people who died long ago as I am interested in historical figures and it is easier to incorporate relevant images. By using the longer lists, I can find names from several different countries by doing date-based sorts. Otherwise I would have to go through many different country-based lists. Of course I find the separate listings by country useful when concentrating on one language or nationality but in some cases they do not display the names of all the interesting historical figures as countries such as Italy and the Czech Republic have changed their names over the years. One of the more recent features which I find very useful is the sitelink column where I can often find the names of women who have been covered extensively in other languages but not in English.
It would be interesting to know the extent of computing resources required to run these lists and whether there is indeed a significant difference between updating the longer and shorter lists every day. If these resources are indeed significant, it might be reasonable to reduce the listeria update to, say, once a month. I'm sure that would be adequate for our purposes.--Ipigott (talk) 08:53, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Drafts for women in tabletop RPGsEdit

I have a few articles that I moved to draft space to work on them, and was wondering if anyone can help me find sources to improve them. BOZ (talk) 23:25, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Caryn MarooneyEdit

There is a discussion on merging this article into Facebook. It certainly looks to me as if the biography of such a prominent business executive deserves to be maintained in its own right.--Ipigott (talk) 08:20, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Lots of AfDsEdit

I don't know whether there's been some change in the software but suddenly today there are huge numbers of new AfDs at both Wikipedia:WikiProject Women/Article alerts (46 new or relisted) and Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Article alerts (66 new or relisted). Most days there are only a handful, I don't think I've ever seen numbers like this before and they aren't the work of any one single deletionist editor! Just to alert anyone who doesn't see these on their watchlist and wants to have a look. PamD 10:22, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks PamD for drawing our attention to all these. There do indeed seem to be quite a few which deserve to be kept.--Ipigott (talk) 12:24, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Return to the project page "WikiProject Women in Red".