Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red/Archive 134
 | This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 130 | ← | Archive 132 | Archive 133 | Archive 134 | Archive 135 | Archive 136 | → | Archive 140 |
Janine Rainforth
Hi I'm trying to create my first wiki page about Janine Rainforth, Draft:Janine Rainforth (COI declared) but struggling. It's a musician with notability - seems to be ok for final publication in those terms - but the tech side proving harder. Been advised to redo the references/ the citations but currently cannot see the Edit button allowing for corrections on the draft..! Any input or assistance with this very welcome. Passionate also about improving representation on Wiki and the WikiProject Women In Red. Thank you Lndnfr (talk) 10:49, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- Lndnfr Welcome to Women in Red. I am not the person to help you with technical stuff, but there are folks here who have tools and gadgets that can format refs. I input them manually using the drop down boxes labeled "cite" and select "templates" from the editing box in the traditional version of WP. There is a screen shot of what I am talking about in our primer. Hopefully that will be helpful to you. I do not have a clue how to use visual editor nor the technology that automatically fills out the name, url, dates, publisher, etc. for a citation. That said, if you need research help, feel free to ping me. SusunW (talk) 15:17, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Lndnfr Hallo and welcome: I hope you'll edit some other articles too, on people where you don't have any COI. A couple of points to remember:
- Wikipedia always refers to people by surname, not given name - I've fixed these
- no spaces before or between references - I've fixed these
- make sure your reference shows the reader what the source actually is: author if any, date, name of publcation or website, date you accessed it if it's an online source, as well as the basic title of the article. I've upgraded a couple of yours which just appeared as "Rainworth" and "Janine Rainworth".
- There's a lot to learn about editing Wikipedia but it's an interesting journey. Happy editing! PamD 15:49, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- Another point: you have her date of birth in the infobox but not in the text, and you don't indicate whether any of the sources support it. If not, then you must remove it. All information about living people needs to be sourced to WP:RS, even more than all the rest of the content of the encyclopedia. Yes, you probably "know" it, as you have a COI, but you must not put it into a Wikipedia article unless it is published elsewhere. (And official sources like Companies House data at gov.uk can't be used to support a date of birth. per WP:BLPPRIMARY - probably not relevant here, but a discussion I've had repeatedly about a newly-elected MP this week!) PamD 15:53, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- OK, I fell down the rabbit-hole of tidying up this article, edit-conflicting with @Tagishsimon along the way. Please remember, in future, that when you reuse a reference you can "name" it, say "xyz" and then just add <ref name=xyz /> to use it again. I've merged together several reused references. PamD 16:38, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Lndnfr But, the "Works" section: what are these? Albums, individual tracks, films, books? Please look around at similar articles (eg Maximum Joy for a start) and produce a "Discography" split into albums and singles, or whatever is appropriate, remembering that album titles go in italics and song titles in double quotes. Thanks. I haven't touched that section as I haven't a clue what to do with it. PamD 16:42, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Lndnfr And while the father/Olympics connection is fun, I can't find any published source to connect John Rainforth with Janine. So it shouldn't be in the article, even if you "know" it. PamD 16:58, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- I've promoted the article to Janine Rainforth ... I was satisfied the refs got us to GNG or NARTIST, or nearest offer. Thank you to PamD for consolidating the refs, which I came back to do & found done. Any & all remaining issues can be sorted out in mainspace. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:20, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- Like cats, for instance. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:23, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello I'm overwhelmed with the amazing responses and help offered for this article - invaluable - thank you @PamDthank you @SusunW thank you @Tagishsimon !! And yes I hope to do more articles - it's been a bug bear so this WikiProject Women in Red is really a great impetus. Way to go. And I will now study carefully the advice and help here to be able to apply more to this and further article drafts. Lndnfr (talk) 17:50, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- Lndnfr: Glad to see you've become a member of the project. Just let us know if you run into any further difficulties.--Ipigott (talk) 10:46, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you Lndnfr (talk) 19:15, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
- Lndnfr: Glad to see you've become a member of the project. Just let us know if you run into any further difficulties.--Ipigott (talk) 10:46, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello I'm overwhelmed with the amazing responses and help offered for this article - invaluable - thank you @PamDthank you @SusunW thank you @Tagishsimon !! And yes I hope to do more articles - it's been a bug bear so this WikiProject Women in Red is really a great impetus. Way to go. And I will now study carefully the advice and help here to be able to apply more to this and further article drafts. Lndnfr (talk) 17:50, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- Like cats, for instance. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:23, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- I've promoted the article to Janine Rainforth ... I was satisfied the refs got us to GNG or NARTIST, or nearest offer. Thank you to PamD for consolidating the refs, which I came back to do & found done. Any & all remaining issues can be sorted out in mainspace. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:20, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
Jess Wade - Observer article today
FYI - ‘Why are they not on Wikipedia?’: Dr Jess Wade’s mission for recognition for unsung scientists --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:17, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. Just what we need to encourage participation in this month's STEM event. I've added it to our Press page.--Ipigott (talk) 14:50, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
- Women in STEM (link to the WiR event) --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 16:08, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
- This is a fabulous article, and very inspiring! Chocmilk03 (talk) 00:10, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
- A good read. Jess' enthusiasm for the subject comes across in videos of her presentations and speeches in a great way. I wish I had that sort of enthusiasm and dedication. She is to Wikipedia writing what Hannah Fry is to maths - a new role model for the world. Now, who's for Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Jesswade88? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:55, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not, I'm afraid. I'm a great supporter of Jess Wade, but I have not noticed her do anything except write an article a day. Now, that's very impressive and important, arguably more important than being an admin - but an admin needs to be more of a gadfly than solely a content creator. We shouldn't downgrade her content creation work to a support role, which is what an admin really is. --GRuban (talk) 16:09, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
- I expect she has no wish to be an admin. Unfortunately, among the things "I have not noticed her do" are keeping up with developments and debates on Wikipedia. The interview reads, as usual, as a time capsule from 2012. A small example: she told some American podcast that interviewed her earlier this year (advertised here) that the WMF has about "250 employees" (I think it was - certainly under 300). In fact they have been well north of that for some years ("By 2022, it employed around 700 staff and contractors.." according to Wikipedia, 550 the year before). She has in the past apologised on this page for mis-stating the % of male Americans among editors, but has gone on doing it. I'm very doubtful that various other statements she makes are true, or still true, or supported by recent research. Since she has such a high media profile it is a pity she can't be bothered to be accurate, or recognise changes over the last decade. No doubt User:Tagishsimon will be along in a moment with a torrent of abuse. Johnbod (talk) 04:48, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
- I'm surprised she manages to find time to research, teach, deal with the press, and continue to add articles to Wikipedia, without having to keep up with such peripherally interesting stats. Perhaps she could be given some updated figures to refer to? Espresso Addict (talk) 00:13, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
- As the other example mentioned above showed, she does not absorb "updated figures" when they are given to her. The employee number was just a small and simple example, indeed peripheral to the gender issues she is normally asked about, but she is the same on these. You yourself recently expanded on the amount of press she does; it's a pity that much of what she says is inaccurate. Johnbod (talk) 02:55, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- I dunno, Johnbod. Your criticism seems incredibly petty, misplaced and generally sad. Is there any need to gild those observations with abuse? --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:11, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
- Well, all too predictably, you seem to think so! Johnbod (talk) 02:55, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- I'm surprised she manages to find time to research, teach, deal with the press, and continue to add articles to Wikipedia, without having to keep up with such peripherally interesting stats. Perhaps she could be given some updated figures to refer to? Espresso Addict (talk) 00:13, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
- I expect she has no wish to be an admin. Unfortunately, among the things "I have not noticed her do" are keeping up with developments and debates on Wikipedia. The interview reads, as usual, as a time capsule from 2012. A small example: she told some American podcast that interviewed her earlier this year (advertised here) that the WMF has about "250 employees" (I think it was - certainly under 300). In fact they have been well north of that for some years ("By 2022, it employed around 700 staff and contractors.." according to Wikipedia, 550 the year before). She has in the past apologised on this page for mis-stating the % of male Americans among editors, but has gone on doing it. I'm very doubtful that various other statements she makes are true, or still true, or supported by recent research. Since she has such a high media profile it is a pity she can't be bothered to be accurate, or recognise changes over the last decade. No doubt User:Tagishsimon will be along in a moment with a torrent of abuse. Johnbod (talk) 04:48, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
- On that note, one of Jess Wade's articles is nominated for deletion right now: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Indira Raman. --GRuban (talk) 17:28, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
- Nominated by herself. Johnbod (talk) 04:48, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not, I'm afraid. I'm a great supporter of Jess Wade, but I have not noticed her do anything except write an article a day. Now, that's very impressive and important, arguably more important than being an admin - but an admin needs to be more of a gadfly than solely a content creator. We shouldn't downgrade her content creation work to a support role, which is what an admin really is. --GRuban (talk) 16:09, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
- A good read. Jess' enthusiasm for the subject comes across in videos of her presentations and speeches in a great way. I wish I had that sort of enthusiasm and dedication. She is to Wikipedia writing what Hannah Fry is to maths - a new role model for the world. Now, who's for Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Jesswade88? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:55, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
I would appreciate input at this AFD. All opinions welcome.4meter4 (talk) 17:06, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- The result was delete, fwiw - Athena Massey. (Same result as the first AfD.) --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:18, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
Linda Oubré, former president of Whittier College
I could use some help with Linda Oubré's page. She is a former president of Whittier College. One note that may be relevant is that the Whittier College nickname is 'The poets'.
In 2021 JohnyPoet started an article on Linda Oubré, and it was reviewed unsuccessfully at AfC. I saw it in the set of expiring pages, did some editing, re-submitted it to AfC, and @Cabrils accepted the article.
Fast forward to 2023, and Oubre's departure from Whittier in the middle of 2023 is not without controversy. Now, Oubré's Wikipedia article is accumulating statements that are certainly negative, and sourced with original research and blogs. The edits originate from IP addresses and some single person accounts (ProudPoet, Quakers2017).
I have tried bringing this up on the talk page, but that conversation has not been helpful. Any thoughts on the best next steps? DaffodilOcean (talk) 17:54, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
- Right now I've warned two IPs and a redlinked account, left a comment on the talk page, and asked for page protection Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection/Increase#Linda_Oubré. Seems to me there is quite a lot of content supported by reliable sources which is being excluded from the page, and, equally, quite a lot of content sourced to e.g. the alumni blog, which is an unreliable source. It might be reasonable to put together some bullet points on talk, listing a) reliable and unreliable sources and b) topics that could be addressed based on reliable sources. It does seem like Oubré's page is missing any insight into her term at Whittier and the issues pertaining to her leaving.
- Meanwhile I'm kinda surprised that the edit war has not reached the Whittier College page, which seems to have only one short sentence on the whole affair. The possibility is that a section on the Oubré period might be a useful addition there? --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:07, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Tagishsimon makes an interesting point that the controversy has not reached the Whittier College page. I got as far as adding Oubre as notable faculty to the page, but that was reverted.
- Thanks for everyone's help so far, this degree of reverting exceeded my experience by quite a bit. DaffodilOcean (talk) 02:09, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
Spare Rib access
Hello again -- Trying to find a review of Catherine Merriman's short-story collection Silly Mothers (1991) in Spare Rib, which has been digitised by the British Library and used to be available, but it now tells me that it can't be accessed from the UK, presumably due to Brexit. (The idiocy of a British publication about British feminism, digitised by the British national library only being available to non-Brits...) I was wondering if anyone here could see it? I'm particularly interested in a usable reference; Google Books [1] gives issues 231-239, year 1992, page=23 but frustratingly fails to give the issue! Thanks for any assistance, Espresso Addict (talk) 01:34, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- It's not UK specific as far as I can tell, but an issue for everyone. The Jisc archive for it now states
We regret to inform you that as a result of the UK leaving the EU the full run of the feminist magazine Spare Rib, hosted on the Jisc Journal Archives platform and digitised by the British Library, is no longer available. We know this resource was used by researchers, activists, students and teachers, not only in the UK but around the world and greatly regret having to suspend the resource. It is unclear whether or when it will be possible to make the resource available online again. We are sorry for the disruption and disappointment this may cause. Information about why the Spare Rib online resource has been closed can be found on the British Library’s website."
- And while some issues are available on the Internet Archive, it's only the earliest 50 or so. So not the one you're looking for. SilverserenC 01:58, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oh, and here's a news article about this very specific thing. SilverserenC 02:00, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, Silver seren -- The article states "but the suspension never occurred", which definitely seems to be wrong. There's some information now I poke around about copyright issues (EU vs British) but it suggests it is permanently down globally. What a waste! Espresso Addict (talk) 04:10, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- It looks like, according to the Jisc link, the only available access for now is in person, per "
The full run of hard copy magazines is also available to British Library readers on site at the British Library in St Pancras and Boston Spa
". SilverserenC 04:19, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- It looks like, according to the Jisc link, the only available access for now is in person, per "
- Thanks, Silver seren -- The article states "but the suspension never occurred", which definitely seems to be wrong. There's some information now I poke around about copyright issues (EU vs British) but it suggests it is permanently down globally. What a waste! Espresso Addict (talk) 04:10, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
Edith Vosburgh Alvord photo
I believe that the "fair use" photo in the Edith Vosburgh Alvord biography is actually PD as it was published at least as early as December 1927 in the Michigan Club Bulletin, p. 72. I don't know how to indicate this info on the fair use page or how to move the file to Wikimedia Commons, but hoping someone else can sort it out. In the meantime, I've uploaded two additional PD photos of Alvord to Commons and created a category there, c:Category:Edith Vosburgh Alvord. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:22, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- I've amended the WP file copyright tag, and moved it to commons. --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:41, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, Tagishsimon! --Rosiestep (talk) 16:56, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
Inspiration from Toronto Public Library
Hello all, I've been looking various GLAM Wikiprojects, and TPL has a short redlist with several women, who I thought members might be interested in, inc.:
- Cecelia Jane Reynolds (former enslaved person with strong ties to Toronto; subject of book and Toronto City Hall exhibit)
- Julia Tribe (Toronto-based costume and set designer, with costume designs in our Special Collections in the Arts)
- Martha Mann (famed Toronto set designer who died in 2019, with many archival materials held in our Arts Department at Toronto Reference Library)
- Women's Musical Club of Toronto (local organization promoting music in Toronto, with many archival materials held in Arts Department of Toronto Reference Library)
Cheers Lajmmoore (talk) 09:16, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
Inspiration from University of Victoria Libraries
As above, but a different organisation, suggestions include:
- Art history: Margaret Peterson
- Gender & women' studies: Victoria Status of Women Action Group
Cheers, Lajmmoore (talk) 09:26, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
If anyone has time and expertise to look at Rekha Sharma (Indian politician), that would be great. I have reverted the most recent edit as promotional. The article still reads promotional. The edit history is complicated. I'm not sure whether to go back to a much better-sourced version such as this, but the information about her response or that of NCW to crimes against women varies a lot between the versions. Thanks. Tacyarg (talk) 20:14, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
Idah McGlone Gibson
Wikidata: Q122891382
Since it's October and we're adding folks with a G in their name, I have long wanted to write an entry for Idah McGlone Gibson, but I wonder if she'd be considered important enough. She was a journalist and a columnist, and in her day (late 1800s to about 1930), she was syndicated by hundreds of newspapers and quoted by hundreds more. I've done quite a bit of research on her very interesting life (she was by today's standards a celebrity interviewers, chatting with everyone from First Ladies to baseball players to performers), but while I've done lots of edits on Wikipedia over the years, I've never done an article for you. Do you think Ida McGlone Gibson might be a worthy subject for one? Not sure what the criteria are! DonnaHalper (talk) 14:58, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hi, DonnaHalper. I did a little research on Ida McGlone Gibson/Idah McGlone Gibson and found several reliable sources about her. It appears to me that she does meet WP:BIO notability requirements. Thanks for "finding" her and I hope you write her article! Regarding how to structure the a biography about a woman journalist, you might browse through this category for inspiration, Category:19th-century American women journalists, and/or this one, Category:20th-century American women journalists. If you have any other questions, you are warmly welcome to ask them! --Rosiestep (talk) 15:44, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you SO much for the reply. Being new at writing an entry for you folks, I want to make sure I do it right. I'm a visual learner and I may need someone to help walk me through how to start the entry-- I don't know all the code that one uses. (I've written many books & published many articles and I love doing research, but I've never done an entry for you nice folks, and your way of doing things is something I need to learn. To be honest, I don't always understand the written instructions ...) And yes, apologies for the typo-- I believe she was born "Ida" but she began spelling her name "Idah" to stand out, and it certainly worked. I'm excited about telling her story. I can think of a few other forgotten women who deserve a bio too, and perhaps I can tell theirs as well. Much love to you. DonnaHalper (talk) 16:08, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
- DonnaHalper: You'll find some basic guidance at Help:Your first article but I would be happy to help you along. You could start putting something together in user:DonnaHalper/Idah McClone Gibson and let me know when you would like me to take a look. Don't be too worried about making mistakes. The important thing is to make a start. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 17:28, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
- My deepest appreciation. I am gathering up my research now. I gave a talk about Idah at a conference earlier today and it's amazing to me that someone who at one time was syndicated in over 600 newspapers (and widely quoted) is today nearly forgotten. I want to do my part to change that. Thanks for your kindness and your offer to look over what I'm writing. Much love to you. DonnaHalper (talk) 22:43, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
- First, apologies for the delay-- I just got unexpectedly laid off from my job; so, that has kind of been on my mind the past few days. Meanwhile, I have an incredibly stupid question. I'm ready to write, and you suggested I put something together on the link you provided. When I do that and I hit "submit," it will or it won't be published on Wikipedia? I don't want to put it up for public consumption until you and the others tell me it's suitable and meets your standards. Plus, I don't know how to do a heading for it, or stuff like that. I have done a lot of edits over the years, and I know how to create internal citations, but I'm a newbie when it comes to writing an entire article in the style that Wikipedia uses. Much love to you. DonnaHalper (talk) 20:37, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
- DonnaHalper: You'll find some basic guidance at Help:Your first article but I would be happy to help you along. You could start putting something together in user:DonnaHalper/Idah McClone Gibson and let me know when you would like me to take a look. Don't be too worried about making mistakes. The important thing is to make a start. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 17:28, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you SO much for the reply. Being new at writing an entry for you folks, I want to make sure I do it right. I'm a visual learner and I may need someone to help walk me through how to start the entry-- I don't know all the code that one uses. (I've written many books & published many articles and I love doing research, but I've never done an entry for you nice folks, and your way of doing things is something I need to learn. To be honest, I don't always understand the written instructions ...) And yes, apologies for the typo-- I believe she was born "Ida" but she began spelling her name "Idah" to stand out, and it certainly worked. I'm excited about telling her story. I can think of a few other forgotten women who deserve a bio too, and perhaps I can tell theirs as well. Much love to you. DonnaHalper (talk) 16:08, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
- DonnaHalper Very sorry about the job :( ... hope you're okay. If you start the article at user:DonnaHalper/Idah McClone Gibson then it is not being published as an article in mainspace, but is merely a draft in userspace ... so in the way you have asked the question, when you hit submit it will NOT be published on Wikipedia. It will need to be moved into mainspace when it is ready to be moved. Meanwhile any number of us stand ready to get involved in helping format aspects of the article - references, headers, &c ... don't worry about any of that sort of stuff. Finally, noting your comments below, you need to be aware of Wikipedia:No original research, which in essence says that whatever you claim in the article needs to be backed by a source you can cite. I look forward to seeing your article: but no rush, take as much time as you need. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:38, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
- Not to worry. I've done many, many edits for Wikipedia over the years and they are never my original research. They are always backed up by references from reliable sources. This will be too, I promise! As for my job situation, still in a bit of a shock. 30 of us got downsized, with little warning. So, I'm just going to work on Idah's bio, teach my classes until the semester ends, and try to keep a sense of humor. Thanks for your concern. DonnaHalper (talk) 03:56, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
- DonnaHalper Very sorry about the job :( ... hope you're okay. If you start the article at user:DonnaHalper/Idah McClone Gibson then it is not being published as an article in mainspace, but is merely a draft in userspace ... so in the way you have asked the question, when you hit submit it will NOT be published on Wikipedia. It will need to be moved into mainspace when it is ready to be moved. Meanwhile any number of us stand ready to get involved in helping format aspects of the article - references, headers, &c ... don't worry about any of that sort of stuff. Finally, noting your comments below, you need to be aware of Wikipedia:No original research, which in essence says that whatever you claim in the article needs to be backed by a source you can cite. I look forward to seeing your article: but no rush, take as much time as you need. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:38, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
- I've already gotten some feedback to what I've written thus far. I'd welcome yours too. I'd also welcome some help on how to cite Ancestry.com-- nobody ever taught me how to cite a census document or a marriage document, for example-- not everyone is a subscriber, so if I want to cite the Michigan marriage record for Idah McGlone and Henry Gibson, how do I do that? Much love and I welcome your comments. I am determined to write a good bio of Idah! DonnaHalper (talk) 20:57, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- I'll park this long bio here fwiw - Idah McGlone Gibson in History of Los Angeles county (1923) 214-216 --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:33, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, I saw it a few weeks ago. Thanks for re-sending it! It contains some useful info, and a few things that aren't entirely accurate-- as with most media figures, Idah worked hard to construct her own biography, and back then, few newspapers did much fact-checking. For example, she shaved quite a few years off of her actual age, as many women of her generation felt they needed to do. And her son Kenneth wasn't really her biological child; he may or may not have actually been adopted-- he was her sister's son, but after her sister passed, Idah took Kenneth in, and the newspapers always reported that Kenneth was her son. Anyway, that aside, I have a ton of research about Idah-- who really was a very influential reporter in her day. I am just trying to verify a couple of other things about her life, and I am just about ready to begin writing. I really appreciate the support! DonnaHalper (talk) 16:04, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
Okay, I've got about half of it written and I posted it where you told me to. Please let me know if I am on the right track and doing it the way you want it done. Worked hard on it-- eagerly awaiting your feedback! DonnaHalper (talk) 07:58, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- @DonnaHalper: Excellent; thank you Donna. I've put some feedback on the draft's talk page - User talk:DonnaHalper/Idah McClone Gibson. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:55, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, I went back and re-wrote the entry, taking your helpful comments into account and incorporating many. I apologize if I still am doing the citations wrong. Let me know if this version is more like what you were seeking. DonnaHalper (talk) 06:46, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
Donna Halper's article on Idah McGlone Gibson has now been published, fyi. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:38, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
Hoa Nghiem at AfD
Vietnamese theoretical physicist. Could do with expert eyes. I fear the subject does not meet WP:PROF the way it is usually applied, but the article's creator has drawn attention to the particular situation in Vietnam: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hoa Nghiem. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 05:37, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
- After reading the Google translation of the first source given in the article, I've given it a "Keep". Quite unusual for a young Vietmanese woman to win such an important award. This is Thidhoang's first article and I hope there will be many more. In my opinion, cases like these should not be subject to the strict acceptance rules applied in the West.--Ipigott (talk) 06:53, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
I created a draft for Aella, an American Internet personality who is very active on Twitter. Any help with finding sourcing would be appreciated. Thriley (talk) 06:01, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
- My mistake. An article has already been created: Aella (data scientist). Thriley (talk) 06:03, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
Lane Bess also at Afd
One of the first women civilians to go into space. Is that a call to notability? I've posted it, but any help is appreciated. Thanks. scope_creepTalk 13:08, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
- I thought this was a women. It is a man. Businessman. Forget it. scope_creepTalk 13:20, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
- Understandable confusion. Lene, Line and Lone are girls names but Lane is used mainly for boys.--Ipigott (talk) 08:14, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
- I thought this was a women. It is a man. Businessman. Forget it. scope_creepTalk 13:20, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello again -- I've declined a speedy on this borderline draft on a Hungarian economist, CEO of the Centre for Budapest Transport, but the creator has been blocked for promotion and it needs quite a bit of work. Does anyone feel like taking it over? Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 08:28, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
Hi there, I had this draft declined for not having enough independent sources as I was still learning the ropes. I made additions, but hit a wall with it - I feel bad abandoning it entirely, so posting here if anyone would like to take this the rest of the way. Thank you! Eventhisacronym (talk) 18:53, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Eventhisacronym: Appears to me to meet GNG, so promoted as Gabriela Bucher. Thanks for the article. Try to avoid AfC if you can ;) --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:37, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you!! Eventhisacronym (talk) 19:41, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
I've added her to Bucher, the surname list, and added a few more wikiprojects on her talk page. PamD 20:22, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Karin Bonelli (musician)
Draft:Karin Bonelli is very nearly ready for publication. Please help polish and tweak (er, fine-tune?). I'll promote shortly (if someone else doesn't get to it first). Cheers Cl3phact0 (talk) 06:28, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- I've promoted this. There was a sources section at the foot' not sure what that was about and for now I've hidden it. Karin Bonelli. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:05, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. Not sure what the extra "sources" section was either but there are probably some good alt refs there, if anyone's looking. Another minor point: do we use "flutist" or "flautist" (or does anyone even care about these things anymore)? -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 20:17, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
- I'd go with flautist fwiw, but on no authority. T'other thing I noticed was that the image lacked an OTRS permission from the photographer; if the uploader doesn't arrange for one within the week the image will disappear. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:09, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. Not sure what the extra "sources" section was either but there are probably some good alt refs there, if anyone's looking. Another minor point: do we use "flutist" or "flautist" (or does anyone even care about these things anymore)? -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 20:17, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Jess Wade
| concern troll |
|---|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
As somewhat of a figure head and media spokesperson of the effort to boost the number of women included in Wikipedia, is anyone else here concerned (or have they even noticed?) that the number of new biographies written by Jess Wade is falling at an ever increasing rate, and the ones she is producing are becoming smaller and more basic? I am pretty sure this isn't because she is nearing her goal of rebalancing Wikipedia, but it also surely cannot be because she is finding it harder to find people to write about. Others here may know differently. James W. Reader (talk) 10:14, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
|
Sources enough for BLP stub for Rituparna Chatterjee?
Rituparna Chatterjee is journalist from India.
I could come across following two intro reports and a memoir by herself. whether those are enough for a stub article ?
- Chatterjee, Rituparna. The Water Phoenix: A Memoir of Childhood Abuse, Healing and Forgiveness. India, Bloomsbury Publishing, 2020.
Bookku (talk) 12:30, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
"Mary Steichen Calderone (July 1, 1904 – October 24, 1998) was an American physician and a public health advocate for sexual education. Her most notable feat was overturning the American Medical Association policy against the dissemination of birth control information to patients...." - 2/3 of her bio has been removed for the 2nd time, which seems prima facie excessive to me. Someone might like to take a detailed look. Thanks. Johnbod (talk) 21:01, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- Good to see the article has been rewritten and is now back more or less to its original size.--Ipigott (talk) 08:10, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
Can Marguerite Philippe be saved?
Thought I'd mention Marguerite Philippe, currently up for deletion. This was created for WIR a few months ago. The editor who created it is now identified as a banned or blocked editor. I'm wondering if it would work to copy and paste the contents of this article under a slightly different title wording - and a different editor - so as to save the work itself. Or would this backfire on some level? — Maile (talk) 01:48, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Maile66, you can simply contest the speedy deletion. Provided you aren't the sole editor of the article, all you have to do is remove the CSD notice, and it won't be deleted. -- asilvering (talk) 01:54, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- Well ... bummer ... here's another one like that - Lotte Pritzel - created by a banned or blocked editor, but the content is good. Hate to lose these. — Maile (talk) 01:56, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
I can't save the ones that Bri already destroyed, but I removed the ones still available. Glad I could prevent active negative harm to Wikipedia in time. It's too bad that there were several notable women whose articles were deleted in the name of punishment and not in the name of making an encyclopedia, which is what we're supposed to be here for. SilverserenC 02:02, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- My sentiments exactly. Thanks for doing that. Glad I thought to post here. I just couldn't bear to see those two articles deleted. Wikipedia should have alternative rules for something like this. — Maile (talk) 02:13, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- The usual response I get is "You can just go to WP:REFUND to get them back", except that the admins over there whine and complain if you request a G5'ed article and constantly push the "You should ask the deleting admin" line, despite that having nothing to do with the request. Why does the person who was just going through the CSD category deleting things get to be in charge of whether an article is restored? It's complete nonsense. SilverserenC 02:15, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
Another recently-deleted Slowking article that might be worth rewriting: Tina Pizzardo (1903 – 1989), Italian mathematics teacher and anti-fascist. Sources: [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:20, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- Here's also the content of the article when it existed: https://web.archive.org/web/20221110233155/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tina_Pizzardo SilverserenC 04:28, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- If you use any of that content, do check it carefully against the sources. I think one of the reasons Slowking was originally blocked was sloppiness leading to serious inaccuracies in the biographies they created. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:10, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red - November 2023
See also Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 08:21, 26 October 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Help?
I am in serious need of a source, 昭和史事典: 金融恐慌からインベーダー・ゲームまで [Encyclopedia of Showa History: From the Financial Crisis to the Invader Game] that I cannot seem to find and no one has picked up at the RX. Sue is trying to find it as well, but it isn't widely available. Anyone have access to the University of Kentucky Library in Lexington, Ohio State University Library in Columbus, University of Michigan Library in Ann Arbor, University of Wisconsin Library in Madison, Princeton University Library in Princeton, Yale University Library in New Haven, University of Massachusetts Library in Amherst, Stanford University Library, or the UC Berkeley Library? The source seems to be the most comprehensive lexicon entry on my subject and I am trying to finish the article this month for our peace editathon and WIG's around the world editathon. Any help would be fabulous and very much appreciated. SusunW (talk) 14:15, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- David Eppstein it occurs to me that you are at UC Irvine and while that isn't particularly close to Berkeley, perhaps through the UC Library system you could acquire this source? No problems if you can't, but I am truly in need of it. SusunW (talk) 17:01, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- I can definitely make interlibrary loan requests but they generally handle those by making a scan or photocopy of the requested pages and sending that to me rather than the actual book. So I would need to know the relevant page numbers from the book, not just its title. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:42, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- David Eppstein if you click on the link above "RX" the complete citation is there, along with the Hathitrust search results pages, 349 (main article), 494, 499, and 505. I will be forever grateful if you can find it. And, yes, a scan is perfectly fine. SusunW (talk) 20:08, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- @SusunW I live close to Japan and sort of collect out-of-print, Showa-era Japanese books. 昭和史事典 is cheaply available from secondhand bookshops in Japan so I was going to offer my assistance -- I'd be happy to spend a few bucks for a copy -- but I see you're already getting help. Do let me know if you need additional helps! BorgQueen (talk) 09:29, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- BorgQueen what a nice offer. Thank you. If David Eppstein cannot find it, I'll let you know. Sue wasn't able to find it. Fingers crossed at this point, as from the WP.ja article on Matsuoka, it's a critical source. SusunW (talk) 14:07, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- I found it in my library catalog and sent an interlibrary loan request. I have no idea how long it will take them to process it. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:40, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you so much David Eppstein. I genuinely appreciate the help. SusunW (talk) 21:50, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
- I found it in my library catalog and sent an interlibrary loan request. I have no idea how long it will take them to process it. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:40, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
- BorgQueen what a nice offer. Thank you. If David Eppstein cannot find it, I'll let you know. Sue wasn't able to find it. Fingers crossed at this point, as from the WP.ja article on Matsuoka, it's a critical source. SusunW (talk) 14:07, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- @SusunW I live close to Japan and sort of collect out-of-print, Showa-era Japanese books. 昭和史事典 is cheaply available from secondhand bookshops in Japan so I was going to offer my assistance -- I'd be happy to spend a few bucks for a copy -- but I see you're already getting help. Do let me know if you need additional helps! BorgQueen (talk) 09:29, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- David Eppstein if you click on the link above "RX" the complete citation is there, along with the Hathitrust search results pages, 349 (main article), 494, 499, and 505. I will be forever grateful if you can find it. And, yes, a scan is perfectly fine. SusunW (talk) 20:08, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- I can definitely make interlibrary loan requests but they generally handle those by making a scan or photocopy of the requested pages and sending that to me rather than the actual book. So I would need to know the relevant page numbers from the book, not just its title. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:42, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
@SusunW: See [7]. It's entirely in Japanese, and my scan didn't end up very straight, but it's been ocr'd and should be sort of readable through translate. Her article is in the center column of the first page. They ended up sending me the whole book so I can copy other pages (or redo the copy of these pages if they are too unreadable) until I send it back. I don't plan to keep that link up permanently, so please make a copy for yourself if you need to and don't use it as the link for the reference in your draft. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:21, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- David Eppstein thank you so much. I have saved the link on my computer and yes, can read it. The only other thing is, is there an editor or author given? Truly appreciate your help. SusunW (talk) 22:31, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- Will check tomorrow when I'm back in my office where I left the book. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:32, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- @SusunW: There's a preface signed by the editor-in-chief (三木 正, Miki Tadashi?) with a table of authors: [8]. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:11, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- David Eppstein, muchas gracias mi amigo. I truly, truly appreciate your help with this. That's the last bit I need on it. It often does take a village to write an article. SusunW (talk) 15:02, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- You're welcome! —David Eppstein (talk) 15:09, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- David Eppstein, muchas gracias mi amigo. I truly, truly appreciate your help with this. That's the last bit I need on it. It often does take a village to write an article. SusunW (talk) 15:02, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- @SusunW: There's a preface signed by the editor-in-chief (三木 正, Miki Tadashi?) with a table of authors: [8]. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:11, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- Will check tomorrow when I'm back in my office where I left the book. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:32, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
Members of Women in Red (and of all other wikiprojects) now changed to participants
Alerted by this category check, I see that members of Women in Red and of other projects such as WP Women have undergone a bot-activated category change on their user pages as a result of a discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1. Traditionally we have distinguished between participants in events and members of the project. If we accept this change, then we will need to revise our presentations. And what should we do now with Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Participants?--Ipigott (talk) 07:26, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- This doesn't seem like an overly problematic change to me. "Participants" is probably less likely than "Members" to scare-off new editors anyhow, which seems like a plus. (I might be missing some technical angle that implies laborious and tedious tasks involving ad nauseum renaming of n pages.) Re: the nomenclature for participant list(s) of Women in Red meetups/edit-a-thons, couldn't these simply be renamed "WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup participants" or "[...] Editathon participants" (or somesuch)? Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 08:12, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reactions, Cl3phact0. I'm a bit surprised your think we might have been scaring-off new members. I have not experienced any such problems myself and would be interested to hear from anyone who has experienced difficulties. Some of us spend considerable time and effort encouraging contributors to join the project and helping them along when they do so. From here you can see that some 150 editors have signed up since the beginning of the year while many others have simply added the WiR template to their user pages. (Others have contributed to our events and talk pages without specifically registering anywhere.) Before it was (inadvertently?) extended to various templates and renamed Category:WikiProject Women in Red participants, our old Category:WikiProject Women in Red members listed over a thousand individual names by mid-October. You are right in supposing the substitution of "participants" will require considerable extra work unless someone can devise a clever bot-driven approach.--Ipigott (talk) 09:59, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- My technical knowledge of the under the bonnet aspects of how all the parts here fit together is limited. The categories for a few other groups in which I participate actively have also recently been similarly renamed from "members" to "participants" (e.g., WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors participants). The perceived exclusivity of "membership" came up more than once in discussions about the proposed change. Also, for ref: I did notice that on my User page, this change was made automatically (possibly a batch operation via HotCat); this one apparently by a helpful editor (maybe via script?); whereas I was obliged to manually change WIR (ehem, from red to blue). Again, this was my own not particularly disruptive experience and doesn't involve anything deeper than my User page – hence my willingness to chime in on this arcana. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 11:18, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Cl3phact0 and Ipigott: when categories are renamed through the categories for discussion process, the members of the categories are normally moved by bot shortly after the category page is moved. In the case of Category:WikiProject Women in Red members, most members are included because they have Template:User WikiProject Women in Red on their user page. The template was updated to the new category name on 19 October, then the category page was moved to the new name early on 20 October, without leaving a redirect. Cl3phact0 saw the redlink soon after that and updated their user page. The remaining members from the old category were moved to the new one later on 20 October, generating the alert Ipigott saw. Clicking on the red link for the old category shows it is empty so everything should be up to date. TSventon (talk) 19:21, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, TSventon, for these explanations which I had already detected by looking at a variety of user pages and other pages associated with the category change. Your explanations do not explain why the project was not informed of the proposal and was therefore unable to comment before the change was implemented. I find this very strange as it now means we will either have to try to sort out the ensuing confusion or simply leave things in the mess it has created. As no one seems to have any real interest in the change, perhaps this is the best solution. We should perhaps be grateful that we are dealing only with a category change and not with the status of "member" or "participant". I note, for example, that many wikiprojects continue to refer to members and membership and have maintained user page templates using "member".--Ipigott (talk) 20:14, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- Ipigott, my explanation may help other project members/ participants who are interested, if any. You may be ahead of me, but the notice required by the WP:Categories for discussion is tagging the category page, which was done here. Notifying interested projects and editors is optional, which is possibly why it wasn't done. I presume we could object to the category name if we (the project) wanted to. I don't think this affects the wording of project pages, and the template still says "member", not "participant". TSventon (talk) 21:26, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- TSventon: Yes, thanks for your explanations which might well be of more general interest. I'm sorry I missed the alert in connection with the proposed category change but I don't often pay much attention to categories unless I created them myself. I'm pleased to see no one seems to be too bothered about this category change. It is likely to cause less trouble than a general change from member to participant. For Women in Red, it is interesting to note that the category WikiProject Women in Red participants was actually created in May 2017 and was, I believe, used mainly in connection with participation in events. But apart from changes related to the history of categories, we probably need to think seriously about how we refer to participants in events and how we encourage editors to sign up as members/participants in the project. For the time being, let's just see how well we cope with the category change without undertaking any further action. I've made minor changes to Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/New members and for the time being will leave it at that.--Ipigott (talk) 06:21, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
- Interested to see that this renaming generated further discussion here, and glad to see there was no lasting objection. For info, a few editors have been updating a surprising number of backlinks from other category and project pages, which looks like it's now finished. While I was contributing to that task, I noticed various WikiProjects that had subpages or headings using "Participants" even while their category was called "Members", and vice-versa, and it never mattered before. I therefore don't think there is any need for any WikiProject to rename or revise the sub-pages or headings that still use "Members". – Fayenatic London 12:58, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, Fayenatic london. In the light of your comments, I think we can continue our efforts to attract new members in the hope that most of them will be active participants in our events. I should perhaps also point out that our project also welcomes contributions from those who are not members/participants and we are always happy to see comments from anyone interested in the project on our talk pages. If you come across any further discussions in connection with participants vs. members, it would be useful if you could bring them to our attention.--Ipigott (talk) 14:14, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Interested to see that this renaming generated further discussion here, and glad to see there was no lasting objection. For info, a few editors have been updating a surprising number of backlinks from other category and project pages, which looks like it's now finished. While I was contributing to that task, I noticed various WikiProjects that had subpages or headings using "Participants" even while their category was called "Members", and vice-versa, and it never mattered before. I therefore don't think there is any need for any WikiProject to rename or revise the sub-pages or headings that still use "Members". – Fayenatic London 12:58, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- TSventon: Yes, thanks for your explanations which might well be of more general interest. I'm sorry I missed the alert in connection with the proposed category change but I don't often pay much attention to categories unless I created them myself. I'm pleased to see no one seems to be too bothered about this category change. It is likely to cause less trouble than a general change from member to participant. For Women in Red, it is interesting to note that the category WikiProject Women in Red participants was actually created in May 2017 and was, I believe, used mainly in connection with participation in events. But apart from changes related to the history of categories, we probably need to think seriously about how we refer to participants in events and how we encourage editors to sign up as members/participants in the project. For the time being, let's just see how well we cope with the category change without undertaking any further action. I've made minor changes to Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/New members and for the time being will leave it at that.--Ipigott (talk) 06:21, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
- Ipigott, my explanation may help other project members/ participants who are interested, if any. You may be ahead of me, but the notice required by the WP:Categories for discussion is tagging the category page, which was done here. Notifying interested projects and editors is optional, which is possibly why it wasn't done. I presume we could object to the category name if we (the project) wanted to. I don't think this affects the wording of project pages, and the template still says "member", not "participant". TSventon (talk) 21:26, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, TSventon, for these explanations which I had already detected by looking at a variety of user pages and other pages associated with the category change. Your explanations do not explain why the project was not informed of the proposal and was therefore unable to comment before the change was implemented. I find this very strange as it now means we will either have to try to sort out the ensuing confusion or simply leave things in the mess it has created. As no one seems to have any real interest in the change, perhaps this is the best solution. We should perhaps be grateful that we are dealing only with a category change and not with the status of "member" or "participant". I note, for example, that many wikiprojects continue to refer to members and membership and have maintained user page templates using "member".--Ipigott (talk) 20:14, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Cl3phact0 and Ipigott: when categories are renamed through the categories for discussion process, the members of the categories are normally moved by bot shortly after the category page is moved. In the case of Category:WikiProject Women in Red members, most members are included because they have Template:User WikiProject Women in Red on their user page. The template was updated to the new category name on 19 October, then the category page was moved to the new name early on 20 October, without leaving a redirect. Cl3phact0 saw the redlink soon after that and updated their user page. The remaining members from the old category were moved to the new one later on 20 October, generating the alert Ipigott saw. Clicking on the red link for the old category shows it is empty so everything should be up to date. TSventon (talk) 19:21, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- My technical knowledge of the under the bonnet aspects of how all the parts here fit together is limited. The categories for a few other groups in which I participate actively have also recently been similarly renamed from "members" to "participants" (e.g., WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors participants). The perceived exclusivity of "membership" came up more than once in discussions about the proposed change. Also, for ref: I did notice that on my User page, this change was made automatically (possibly a batch operation via HotCat); this one apparently by a helpful editor (maybe via script?); whereas I was obliged to manually change WIR (ehem, from red to blue). Again, this was my own not particularly disruptive experience and doesn't involve anything deeper than my User page – hence my willingness to chime in on this arcana. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 11:18, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reactions, Cl3phact0. I'm a bit surprised your think we might have been scaring-off new members. I have not experienced any such problems myself and would be interested to hear from anyone who has experienced difficulties. Some of us spend considerable time and effort encouraging contributors to join the project and helping them along when they do so. From here you can see that some 150 editors have signed up since the beginning of the year while many others have simply added the WiR template to their user pages. (Others have contributed to our events and talk pages without specifically registering anywhere.) Before it was (inadvertently?) extended to various templates and renamed Category:WikiProject Women in Red participants, our old Category:WikiProject Women in Red members listed over a thousand individual names by mid-October. You are right in supposing the substitution of "participants" will require considerable extra work unless someone can devise a clever bot-driven approach.--Ipigott (talk) 09:59, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Ipigott: OK! I see that this project has a list page, Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/New members. This is currently the sole member of Category:Women in Red new members – how about speedily merging that category back into its parent? If you agree, this can be done instantly under WP:G7. – Fayenatic London 08:30, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Fayenatic london: I've looked at G7 but it is not clear what action I should take. I do not think it would be a good idea to replace the category with Category:Women in Red participants as you attempted but I would be prepared simply to have it deleted, leaving only cat Women in Red on Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/New members. Please provide simpler instructions on how I should ask for the category to be deleted.--Ipigott (talk) 09:21, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Ipigott: thank you, your consent here was sufficient, and I have implemented that now. – Fayenatic London 09:27, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Fayenatic london: I've looked at G7 but it is not clear what action I should take. I do not think it would be a good idea to replace the category with Category:Women in Red participants as you attempted but I would be prepared simply to have it deleted, leaving only cat Women in Red on Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/New members. Please provide simpler instructions on how I should ask for the category to be deleted.--Ipigott (talk) 09:21, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
I came across Draft:Mary Manning (photographer) who I think may meet notability guidelines. Thriley (talk) 10:04, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- I've added this work which may help with WP:NBLP (WP:PHOTOGRAPHER?). -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 17:04, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
Draft:Rachel M. Brownstein
An article about Rachel M. Brownstein (d:Q123200955) was recently declined via AfC. She seems to easily meet GNG and very much like someone who whould be of particular interest to WIR. Am I missing something? Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 09:50, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Promoted - Rachel M. Brownstein. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:13, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Cl3phact0, I don't think the article shows that Brownstein meets WP:GNG, which requires significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. The Brittanica and CUNY profiles, for example, are not independent. Did you mean she meets another notability guideline such as WP:NAUTHOR? TSventon (talk) 10:21, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- TSventon, you are right: I should have used "WP:SNG" rather than blanket "GNG". Both WP:PROF and WP:AUTH seem to apply here – possibly other criteria as well. In any case, it would strike me as odd that we wouldn't want this article (simply based on her published books and critical response to same). -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 16:38, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- I agree that it is good to have the article given her published work. TSventon (talk) 21:32, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- TSventon, you are right: I should have used "WP:SNG" rather than blanket "GNG". Both WP:PROF and WP:AUTH seem to apply here – possibly other criteria as well. In any case, it would strike me as odd that we wouldn't want this article (simply based on her published books and critical response to same). -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 16:38, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Cl3phact0, I don't think the article shows that Brownstein meets WP:GNG, which requires significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. The Brittanica and CUNY profiles, for example, are not independent. Did you mean she meets another notability guideline such as WP:NAUTHOR? TSventon (talk) 10:21, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- There are multiple published in-depth works about her books. Whether you consider these as the sources required for WP:GNG or the critical attention that would pass WP:AUTHOR, she appears to have a clear case for notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:02, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
Protests & Suffragettes event
Hello all, I'm (virtually) at a Protest & Suffragettes with @Lirazelf event & there's lots of new edits coming through! Lajmmoore (talk) 14:21, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Including a new article, Annie Walker Craig, suffragette rock thrower & general arsonist, should anyone wish to give it a once-over. Subject passes GNG by virtue of any number of contemprary news stories about her activities. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:44, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
Rachel Reeves book
OK so The Women Who Made Modern Economics by Rachel Reeves is in the news for all the wrong reasons (plagiarism, including lifting text from Wikipedia unacknowledged), but has anyone got access to the list of 10? 12? women she writes about, to make sure that we've got good articles on them all? If anyone has the book it might or might not be considered a WP:RS for expansion! I can't find a list of chapters on a quick Google around. The book got glowing reviews until someone spotted the sloppy copying. PamD 11:30, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- These Harriet Martineau, Mary Paley Marshall and Joan Robinson, Janet Yellen, Gita Gopinath and Christine Lagarde are from here & here mentions Beatrice Webb, Rosa Luxemburg, Elinor Ostrom, Esther Duflo, but I expect there's more - it's very hard to tell who is covered - of them it looks like Marshall's needs most work as there's quite a lot unreferenced Lajmmoore (talk) 13:16, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Anna Schwartz is a further name on the the table of contents page. 13:29, 29 October 2023 (UTC)TSventon (talk)
- @Lajmmoore Thanks. That's 10. I can't remember whether it was 10 or 12. was hoping to find a neat list of chapters somewhere, eg publisher site, but no joy.
- Another interesting book is by Kerri Andrews, Wanderers: a history of women walking which has chapters on 10 women literary writers who walked (so not a general history of women's hiking as the title suggests, eg involvement in Kinder Trespass). Harriet Martineau features again. We have articles on all but Linda Cracknell. PamD 23:13, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- PamD The Google books link here provided by Lajmmoore has a table of contents. Chapters 1 to 9 name individuals and chapter 10 is about "Women Managing the Global Economy", presumably including Gita Gopinath and Christine Lagarde. TSventon (talk) 00:15, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- @TSventon Ah, I found a different Google books record which didn't show the chapters! Thanks. PamD 00:33, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- PamD The Google books link here provided by Lajmmoore has a table of contents. Chapters 1 to 9 name individuals and chapter 10 is about "Women Managing the Global Economy", presumably including Gita Gopinath and Christine Lagarde. TSventon (talk) 00:15, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Lily Monze - Zambian politician
Hello I started an article for Lily Monze a Zambian women's rights activist and politician, but I'm struggling to see what other pages I can mention her on. Usually I follow the blue links, but there's not so many in the article. very greatful for pointers and/or help Lajmmoore (talk) 09:16, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- It's a puzzle: I looked for Minister of State for Planning and Finance for Zambia, and the nearest I could find was Ministry of Finance (Zambia). There's a list of past ministers, but she's not there and there isn't a gap for 1973-1975, and the current minister listed in that article appears in the government website for the Ministry of Finance and National Planning, so the name of the ministry has evolved at some point. So why isn't she appearing there? As the holder 1970-1981 is a red link, so no sources, if you have a reliable source showing that she was the minister in 1973-75 then add her, sourced, to that page instead of him. I've Googled John Mwanakatwe but not found any RS with dates of his being the Minister, though he probably ought to have an article as he had a state funeral! PamD 10:46, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- No mention of her here: https://guide2womenleaders.com/Zambia.htm PamD 10:52, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- But this says she was the first Zambian woman to get a degree, which doesn't seem to be in the article (category needed too, if we can find which university it was from!) PamD 10:56, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- And I've made Monze (disambiguation) as the hatnote at Monze would have been overloaded PamD 11:20, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks so much @PamD - will pick these up this week! Lajmmoore (talk) 13:17, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- And I've made Monze (disambiguation) as the hatnote at Monze would have been overloaded PamD 11:20, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- But this says she was the first Zambian woman to get a degree, which doesn't seem to be in the article (category needed too, if we can find which university it was from!) PamD 10:56, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- No mention of her here: https://guide2womenleaders.com/Zambia.htm PamD 10:52, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Names and birth/death years are easy additions, so in this case it'd be Lily (name), Monze (disambiguation) (already linked), and 1936. Also if it is known where she was born/has lived, you can add her to the articles for those cities, as usually they already have a "notable people" section. Curbon7 (talk) 00:54, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- I've added her to List of women's rights activists.--Ipigott (talk) 16:46, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Ángeles Ortega and Juani Ruiz
I have recently created two biographies of trans actresses from Spain on the Spanish Wikipedia. I don't have much experience creating articles in the English version, so I list the articles here in case anyone is interested in translating.
Peridotito (talk) 07:39, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
Draft:Dubravka Oraić Tolić (declined via AfC)
Dubravka Oraić Tolić is described as a "Croatian theorist of literature and culture, poet, essayist, and translator." The draft needs work (poorly referenced, some machine translated copyvio possible, general tidying-up, etc.), however, she seems like a good candidate for inclusion (notability via WP:AUTH and/or WP:ACADEMIC). There are articles about her on Armenian, Bulgarian, Croatian, Russian, and Ukrainian wikipedia, and a quick search turns up a fair bit (significant body of published work, national biographic encyclopaedia entries, various awards and scholarly academy memberships, numerous wikidata "Identifiers", etc.). I don't have any of the relevant languages, but this article might be worth a closer look by someone who does. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 09:28, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Several sources are listed in the Croatian article. Seems notable enough to me but needs work. Users Moto65 ZG and TomislavGorsic have no previous experience. I see her American Scream has been published in English.--Ipigott (talk) 15:21, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- I converted many inline external links into references, and promoted it as Dubravka Oraić Tolić ... clearly notable. Doubtless the article could do with more work, but that can happen in mainspace. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:56, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi team, yesterday, I was working on a draft for Karla Hernández-Mats. It's my first time creating a page with an electoral history, would someone mind being another set of eyes? I'd love copy edits and/or suggestions of anything that should be added before its moved out of drafts. Thank you so much! Eventhisacronym (talk) 17:54, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
WiR on social networks
A couple of months ago, we had a discussion on whether we should have a presence on Mastodon and how we should deal with Twitter, now that it has been renamed X. Has any progress been made with these items or should we simply continue to include Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest and Twitter on our invitations and on our Social media page. Has any attention been given to other social networks such as Reddit or Telegram? Our presence on Twitter and Pinterest seems to have been particularly effective in attracting interest but maybe we could do more. Maybe for some of these sites, we could provide a centralized service which would not require constant updating on each of them. I'm afraid I have no competence or spare time to deal with these matters myself but they seem to me to represent an important aspect of our activities and an additional means of providing access to our WiR articles.--Ipigott (talk) 09:15, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red/Archive 133#Recording improvements on Twitter. (TLDR - not much interest in maintaining social media besides Pinterest). --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:10, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- Pinterest certainly seems to be useful but does anyone know to what extent we are still contributing to Facebook, Instagram and Twitter? If there is no longer much activity there, we should perhaps not be including them in our invitations, etc. I believe Oronsay has an interest in some of these.--Ipigott (talk) 08:14, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- I'd like to save Twitter and am happy to be one of the posters. Despite all the negatives, Twitter is where I learn of awards, fellowships and then update Wikipedia. Most of my Aussie connections are still using it and I go there several times every day.--Oronsay (talk) 19:05, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- I could try and pick up Instagram again - if @Rosiestep & I can sort the log in - but I couldn't post in the same intensity I did previously. We do get tagged on Instagram's stories which shows that people use it for promotion! Lajmmoore (talk) 11:29, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- RE: a Telegram channel - perhaps we set one up - see if it is useful & if its not delete it after 6 months? Lajmmoore (talk) 11:31, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- I would participate in a TG channel if there were one. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:25, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- A telegram channel which posted new WiR articles and updates from the project would work I think ... I wonder if that process could be automated Mujinga (talk) 11:15, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- I would participate in a TG channel if there were one. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:25, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- RE: a Telegram channel - perhaps we set one up - see if it is useful & if its not delete it after 6 months? Lajmmoore (talk) 11:31, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- I could try and pick up Instagram again - if @Rosiestep & I can sort the log in - but I couldn't post in the same intensity I did previously. We do get tagged on Instagram's stories which shows that people use it for promotion! Lajmmoore (talk) 11:29, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- I'd like to save Twitter and am happy to be one of the posters. Despite all the negatives, Twitter is where I learn of awards, fellowships and then update Wikipedia. Most of my Aussie connections are still using it and I go there several times every day.--Oronsay (talk) 19:05, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Pinterest certainly seems to be useful but does anyone know to what extent we are still contributing to Facebook, Instagram and Twitter? If there is no longer much activity there, we should perhaps not be including them in our invitations, etc. I believe Oronsay has an interest in some of these.--Ipigott (talk) 08:14, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
Proposal we delete the icon and links to Facebook, Instagram and Twitter on our
- WiR footer Template:Women in Red navigation
- the side menu of all our active and new pages
- the bottom of our monthly announcements Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/2023
- and other instances where it appears.
For deletion as drafter of proposal --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 18:00, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Twitter--Oronsay (talk) 19:05, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Facebook & Instagram--Oronsay (talk) 19:05, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Facebook --Rosiestep (talk) 10:45, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
Ipigott Lajmmoore Oronsay RosiestepIt seems like there is interest in maintaining the links out to Twitter and Instagram. No one seems interested in the Facebook page, so I will start deleting that link across the WiR pages. Also, it seems like a lot of sites I visit are keeping the twitter logo and not updating to the new X. Almost like a statement to express unhappiness with the new ownership. I think we should stay with the little blue bird. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 23:01, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, WomenArtistUpdates, for seeking opinions on this and for future action on Facebook. Deleting links from our pages should of course not prevent anyone from discussing our activities there or on any similar sites.--Ipigott (talk) 06:25, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Do we know whose account the Facebook page is linked to? @Victuallers @Rosiestep - as we're reassessing things, maybe that account should be archived and deleted? Lajmmoore (talk) 08:04, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Lajmmoore, I know it's linked to my personal account... maybe also to Jane023? When I get back from wikiconferences, you (or someone else) can walk me through with archiving/deleting it. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:40, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Yes it's linked to my account and I do check my fb daily, but I tend to ignore the WiR page, which has a few other watchers. The fb feed was a straight-through post from Victuallers' Twitter account, but that was years back and today who knows how that stuff works? I agree it was always minimally helpful at best (the "likes" mean nothing to me and I can only respond to messages, of which the overwhelming majority seem to be rarely related to Wikipedia. I have only helped a handful of people over the years, and doubt that it serves any greater purpose. It would be nice to know if we actually drew anyone in from the fb page (my bet is no). If the page only included instructions how to get here and post a question, it would probably be more useful. People expect a quick response on social networks, and I am far from quick at anything, these days. Jane (talk) 09:17, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- I think that's a good idea, just to have a presence on fbook that links to here. Mujinga (talk) 11:13, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Yes it's linked to my account and I do check my fb daily, but I tend to ignore the WiR page, which has a few other watchers. The fb feed was a straight-through post from Victuallers' Twitter account, but that was years back and today who knows how that stuff works? I agree it was always minimally helpful at best (the "likes" mean nothing to me and I can only respond to messages, of which the overwhelming majority seem to be rarely related to Wikipedia. I have only helped a handful of people over the years, and doubt that it serves any greater purpose. It would be nice to know if we actually drew anyone in from the fb page (my bet is no). If the page only included instructions how to get here and post a question, it would probably be more useful. People expect a quick response on social networks, and I am far from quick at anything, these days. Jane (talk) 09:17, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Lajmmoore, I know it's linked to my personal account... maybe also to Jane023? When I get back from wikiconferences, you (or someone else) can walk me through with archiving/deleting it. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:40, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Do we know whose account the Facebook page is linked to? @Victuallers @Rosiestep - as we're reassessing things, maybe that account should be archived and deleted? Lajmmoore (talk) 08:04, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
Discussion at Notable American Women, 1607–1950
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Notable American Women, 1607–1950#Exhaustive list of entries, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. Beccaynr (talk) 15:01, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
"Invisible in the Hyperlink Network - One Hundred Weeks of the Wednesday Index"
This Medium article regarding ... gender diversity in the biographies linked from 26 English Wikipedia pages...
, may interest some of you. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:59, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- Interesting reading. But Medium is increasingly paywalled, and is currently paywalled for me. In this case Firefox Reader View seems to have bypassed the wall, but perhaps authors of pieces like this should be encouraged to put their works on a more open platform? Is there a freely-readable version of this that I can link to from my social media? —David Eppstein (talk) 21:20, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- For some reason the link above gets me it all in the UK. Interesting. The drastic changes to Philosophy in July, part of the GA process, mostly consisted of Further reading etc being thinned - much copied to an "outline" article. But, especially as the article has expanded since then, cutting the "Women in philosophy" section entirely seems odd, though there is a main article. Otherwise, many article show steady/substantial progress. Johnbod (talk) 21:36, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, interesting. I tend not to mess with the articles about bigger, more abstract concepts (which is part of the problem, I realize), but even the places I usually plant incoming links to new biographies, like hometowns and colleges, it's not unusual to be adding the first woman to the list of alumni or notable residents. It's always worth emphasizing the importance of "weaving in" as part of article creation. Just hitting "publish" shouldn't be the last step. Penny Richards (talk) 21:42, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- The Philosophy changes are annoying! I spent a bunch of time trying to improve the situation on these and similar pages. To that end, others here may find the redlinks at User:Dsp13/Gendered_link_bias of interest. Dsp13 (talk) 22:39, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
AfC drive throughout November
I hope some of our contributors will participate in this month's Articles for creation backlog drive. You don't need to be a supporter of WikiProject AfC to help things along. AfC submissions now run back over four months and quite a few of them are biographies of women or articles about women and their achievements. It can be really frustrating and disheartening for new contributors to have their work included in this time-consuming process, especially in cases where the subject of their article is obviously notable. I have noticed that many of them simply give up and never return to Wikipedia editing. Today I decided to promote a couple of pending AfC women's biographies myself and will try to cover many more over the next few weeks in the hope that we can reduce the AfC process to weeks rather than months. If you are an administrator or reviewer, why not spend a few minutes of your day-to-day editing time rescuing deserving articles from this process? If not, you can bring pertinent articles to our attention.--Ipigott (talk) 16:39, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- And for those that would like a link directly to the AfC women on hand, there's Wikipedia:AfC sorting/Culture/Biography/Women to work on. Definitely seems short enough to get through. SilverserenC 19:07, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- Good to have this list, Silver seren. We can see those we have covered as the names change from blue to green.--Ipigott (talk) 20:43, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- I see there were about 174 on 31 October, over 70 on 5 November and 61 on the 6th. It's good to see so much activity.--Ipigott (talk) 09:45, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Grethe Fatima Syéd - Norwegian writer, academic, and translator
Hello, can anyone please provide an opinion about the notability of Grethe Fatima Syéd (per English Wikipedia notability guidelines)? Kk.urban (talk) 18:11, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- I would think that yes, we would absolutely want an article about a writer and scholar of her stature (who, as it happens, has also translated Seamus Heaney, Gertrude Stein, Henry James, Roald Dahl et al. into Norwegian). WP:SECONDARY sources in English might be a bit thin, however, in my view there is ample material for WP:NPROF, WP:AUTHOR, and WP:ANYBIO. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 20:07, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- PS: Assuming that that was the question behind your request for an opinion. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 20:38, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- Here's what I was able to find to get you started on such an article, Kk.urban.
- Gimnes, Steinar (March 10, 2016). "Grethe Fatima Syéd: Olav Duun. Kunsten, døden og kjærlighetens dikter" [Grethe Fatima Syéd: Olav Duun. The poem of art, death and love]. Edda (in Norwegian). 103 (1): 70–74. doi:10.18261/issn.1500-1989-2016-01-07. Retrieved October 21, 2023.
- Nilsen, Gro Jørstad (July 11, 2023). "Bør vi legge ned litteraturvitenskapen?" [Should we close down the study of literature?]. Bergens Tidende (in Norwegian). Retrieved October 21, 2023.
- Thorvik, Hannah Bull (March 3, 2023). "Mener Solstad's Kvinner Er Sjablonger" [Think Solstad's Women Are Stencils]. Klassekampen (in Norwegian). Retrieved October 21, 2023.
- Helle, Oda Vige (October 16, 2019). "Jeg har nok vært en surmaget grinebiter hele livet" ["I've probably been a sour-faced grump all my life"]. Vagant (in Norwegian). Retrieved October 21, 2023.
- Hoem, Knut (June 22, 2019). "Viltert og sjarmerende om Torborg Nedreaas" [Wild and charming about Torborg Nedreaas]. NRK (in Norwegian). Retrieved October 21, 2023.
- Hegge, Per Egil (August 22, 2015). "Grethe F. Syéd med glitrende bok om Olav Duun" [Grethe F. Syéd with a sparkling book about Olav Duun]. Aftenposten (in Norwegian). Retrieved October 21, 2023.
- I hope that's helpful for your article writing efforts! SilverserenC 21:16, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- See here for a list of her published books.--Ipigott (talk) 06:12, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
- Kk.urban: Do you intend to start creating the biography yourself or did you bring it to our attention in the hope that it would be created by another contributor? If so, I might be able to help out.--Ipigott (talk) 08:18, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
Comment: Please note that there is an open RFD concerning the article on on Simple Wikipedia. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 09:29, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- We also have Draft:Grethe Fatima Syéd by 92starwriter (first article) which was refused by WikiDan61 on 20 October. In the light of the above, over the next day or two I'll try to tidy it up and bring it up to mainspace standards.--Ipigott (talk) 10:02, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- I've now worked on the article and moved it to mainspace. For some reason, I cannot get the subject's name to display in bold. I hope sooner or later authority control will display links to her works. If not, someone might like to create a list of the most significant Norwegian titles, possibly with translations in English.--Ipigott (talk) 13:27, 28 October 2023 (UTC) Fixed the bold problem - I was not permitted to add an apostrophe s to the name of the newspaper!--Ipigott (talk) 13:35, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you sir for bring my draft article to the live page.92starwriter (talk) 92starwriter (talk) 10:19, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for getting back to me, 92starwriter. I see that considerable improvements to the article have since been made by Cl3phact0. If you intend to write any more articles about women, please let me know and I'll try to help you along.--Ipigott (talk) 15:44, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Women in Religion edit-athon
Hi everyone,
If you're in San Antonio, TX, we of the Women in Religion WikiProject, a sister project of WIR, would like to invite you to an edit-athon we're conducting at the American Academy of Religion on Friday, November 17, 10 am - 12 pm CST. If interested, please contact User:RosPost for more information. Best, Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:19, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Jody Freeman
Hello, As part of my work at Beutler Ink, I am submitting a series of edit requests to update the Jody Freeman article, which has an "advertisement" banner, as well as unsourced and biased text. Since I have a COI, I'm proposing article improvements at Talk:Jody Freeman instead of editing her biography directly. I am currently seeking assistance to update the Memberships section, and I've proposed removing the "advertisement" banner, if any WikiProject Women in Red members are interested in taking a look. Cheers! BINK Robin (talk) 20:20, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
AfD Alvine Kamaha
Noting this AfD here (which some members have already come across) Lajmmoore (talk) 23:54, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- Fluent French speakers particularly welcome as most of the news coverage is in that language. Espresso Addict (talk) 04:07, 9 November 2023 (UTC)