Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red/Archive 75

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 70←Archive 73Archive 74Archive 75Archive 76Archive 77→Archive 80

Art+Feminism 2020 San Diego edit-a-thon

Hi everyone!

I am organizing two Art+Feminism edit-a-thons this year here in San Diego, one in the Spring and one in the Fall in the lead up to the 2020 election. What is the best way for me to connect with members who might be interested in 1) participating either in-person or online and/or 2) be willing to help as a trainer/instructor/helper during these events? Any guidance is appreciated!

Thank you! Praxis2020 (talk) 04:27, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Praxis2020: I see from Wikipedia:Meetup/San Diego/February 2020 there is a meetup in San Diego on 2 February but as far as I can see, you are not involved. I recommend that as a first step you create a meetup page of your own. Once we have dates and details, we can announce it on our main page and it can also be listed with other A+F events. If you need further assistance, I recommend you contact Rosiestep on her talk page. Hope everything works out well.--Ipigott (talk) 11:35, 18 January 2020 (UTC)]]
Praxis2020: I see from Wikipedia:Meetup/San Diego/January 2020, there is also a meetup in San Diego tomorrow. It might be useful for you to go along, see how it is organized and perhaps invite participants to help with your own events.--Ipigott (talk) 11:40, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for responding! I will look up their next event and start there as you suggest. 66.75.225.244 (talk) 17:11, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Carol L. Boggs

Could someone familiar with notability rules please take a look at Draft:Carol L. Boggs? It was rejected at articles for creation, but she's a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Looking through past discussions, I think that's sufficient for notability, but that's way out of my wheelhouse. Thank you. SchreiberBike | ⌨  23:58, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

I've commented there. She does pass WP:PROF#C3 but the draft is inadequately sourced for what it claims about her research. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:24, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
I concur that she is definitely wiki-notable per WP:PROF#C3 at the very least. A quick Google Scholar check says she has an h-index of 45 and 30 articles with over 100 citations apiece, which is a strong argument for WP:PROF#C1 as well. (Yes, citation indices are fallible metrics, which is one reason why we treat them as only one way to meet one of the possible criteria of WP:PROF.) The article is maybe one solid editing session away from being mainspace-ready, IMO. It needs some comparatively minor adjustments for encyclopedic tone, and claims about the significance, impact or novelty of her research need to be supported by secondary sources, or else trimmed. We can say, for example, "She studied the giving of male nuptial gifts in butterfly species," but not "Her work on male nuptial gifts opened up a new research arena," unless some other reference (a textbook, a review article, a citation for a major award) says so. XOR'easter (talk) 14:39, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
I've added sourcing for her fellowships. But there's something odd about the references: access date 10 October 2019 for several refs, but article created 8 Jan 2020 in editor's first edit (account created 28 December). Presumably copied from a sandbox ... but wouldn't the edits show in editor's contrib list? Is it a copy of something previously deleted? Puzzling. PamD 17:05, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
It's been accepted as Carol L. Boggs. Thanks all for the help. SchreiberBike | ⌨  18:57, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Could someone do a pass on this article for me?

I wrote an article on Megan Rosenbloom and submitted it for DYK and it got flagged as promotional. I don't know what is wrong with it, figured someone else could maybe make a pass and try to make it more encyclopedia? Thank you! Jessamyn (talk) 02:03, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

I looked at it and the article does not strike me as being an advertisement. That said, the language in the lede could be very slightly toned down and rewritten, with most items in the introduction could be moved down to a career section. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:16, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
Thanks so much, I took your advice. Jessamyn (talk) 02:50, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Invitation to attend event

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Meetup/San Diego/March 2020/International Women's Day Wikipedia Edit-a-Thon . RightCowLeftCoast (Moo) 03:54, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Feedback

I am a fan of this project (found out about some women i had no idea existed who did great things in history), but please drop the Valentines' day theme for Women in Red this month. Many of editors of this project are from countries where Valentines Day is not a thing (Poland, New Zealand, Arab countries, etc) and it defeats the purpose of it. For February, come up with a different theme for Women in Red. It's not hard. thanks 41.102.71.57 (talk) 18:30, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello! Of course, we don't want to be off-putting, but ... what Valentine's Day theme? The red heart on the page is just the project logo; it's been there since April 2016. XOR'easter (talk) 18:37, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
It's in the February with Women in Red newsletter (above). I must say I was surprised to see Valentine's Day being celebrated in late January when the newsletter was broadcast, but I skipped over it and moved on. Oronsay (talk) 18:54, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
I thought it was rather clever of Rosiestep to match the red heart in the recent invitation image with that of Women in Red. But I fully understand the concerns expressed above. In fact, a number of countries have officially banned Valentine's day (although I don't think there are any problems in New Zealand). We experience the same difficulties on the EN Wikipedia in connection with Christmas and the New Year with the result that we usually opt for something vague like "Seasonal Greetings". We should perhaps be more careful in future. For clarification, though, the new "themes" this month are Explorers, Black women and Women in horror. Fortunately, I don't think there will be any objections to our focus on International Women's Day on 8 March.--Ipigott (talk) 10:54, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
Indeed, I placed the Valentine's image on the February invitation. I didn't mean to be insensitive, yet I was by not thinking it through more carefully or seeking opinions on this talkpage. I apologize for that. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:38, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Daisy Edgar-Jones

Bringing attention to the DRAFT for Daisy Edgar-Jones - actress has at least 2 notable roles and media coverage. Co-star Paul Mescal from upcoming series Normal People has been published. Starklinson 07:58, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

@Starklinson: I've promoted it to mainspace - Daisy Edgar-Jones. It may or may not now get nominated for deletion; we'll just have to wait and see. --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:29, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Lady Laura Troubridge

Hi everyone. I picked up Troubridge from Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Writers - UK number 180, Laura Troubridge, Q28325435. But it seems there is a little confusion over two women with the same name. One is known as Lady Laura Troubridge (nee Gurney), the other as Laura Troubridge. The file Q28325435 seems to have both women as one. I was too far gone in my research to turn back by the time I realised, so decided to finish the article I was doing on Lady Laura Troubridge (nee Gurney), and then follow it up with a second article on Laura Troubridge. To make way for the second Laura (and not to confuse myself) I've moved the article I've written from my user to main userspace. I haven't put authority control or categories into the draft article yet, as I'm not sure if something needs to change in wikidata (Q28325435) first to split the two women? Can anyone advise me what to do? Cdefm (talk) 18:46, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

This article now links to Wikidata (Q84512674). I suggest Q28325435 should be completely deleted as it is indeed very confused. Any items pertaining to (Q84512674) could then be added there. Perhaps our Wikidata expert Tagishsimon could sort it out.--Ipigott (talk) 08:13, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
Sounds fun. I'll take a look later today. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:34, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
I think we're good. There are two people with similar names, both novelists, both with a father or a mother called Gurney. Both wikidata iteams look as if they have the right data for the right person, and the wikipedia article is attached to the right person. I've not check all of the IDs on the earlier wikidata record; there's a possibility that some are for the later record; equally a possibility that they're not. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:49, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
Epic hatnote there! Disam page needed? Johnbod (talk) 17:41, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you everyone!!! I'm now tackling the second Laura, the one who is now Q28325425. The whole web seems to have confused the two women, additionally the second Laura has more than one 'professional' name by which her works were known. And then, some people confuse these two women with a third, Una, Lady Troubridge. It's a maze out there. Wish me luck! Cdefm (talk) 12:13, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

PS Diambuguation page still way above 'my pay grade'. I've haven't even tried one of those yet. But it looks like I've cracked the hatnote. Whoo hoo! Cdefm (talk) 12:14, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Cathy Whims

Hello! I expanded the Cathy Whims article back in March 2019. I'm considering a Good article nomination, but I'd love to get a bit of feedback from project members here first. I'm not concerned about notability, but is the article long enough to be promoted? Also, are there places to search for possible images for the infobox? Thanks for any article improvements or feedback in advance. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:26, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Another Believer I think the article needs to broaden coverage if it is to be reviewed for GA. Dr. Blofeld and Montanabw were my mentors in GA. They said the article should be at about 15,000 bytes of text before final editing. That seemed really daunting to me on my first nomination, but making the article as comprehensive as possible, typically requires at least 8,000 - 10,000 bytes of text. A search of Google makes me think that kind of coverage is not going to be easy to come by. I typically avoid working living women up for Good Article, as maintaining the status as their lives change requires a good deal of commitment, but if you really want to go for it, I wish you luck. SusunW (talk) 20:32, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
SusunW, Thanks for your feedback! ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:38, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
Another Believer: Susun has offered some very sound advice. Nevertheless, from time to time much shorter articles are promoted to GA. Among the most recent promotions, Willard Ryan is considerably shorter than Cathy Whims (although ORES continues to give it a C class). It seems to me that the weakest item in your article is the lead. You should develop it further on the basis of the main achievements mentioned in the article. It would also be useful to check for recent news to make sure the article reflects any important developments. Perhaps you could contact the subject for a photo suitable for Commons -- and possibly date and place of birth. I would then encourage you to have the article reviewed or simply go for GA where constructive comments will follow. It might be useful to bring it to the attention of WikiProject Women in Green which specializes in promoting women's articles to GA and beyond. Hope this helps.--Ipigott (talk) 11:37, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
Ipigott, Very helpful, thank you! ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:51, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Idea for new community workspace

Hi. I would like to create some kind of collaborative workspace where coordinators or members of various WikiProjects would gather and provide updates and information on what is going on at each wikiproject, i.e. regarding their latest efforts, projects, and where interested editors can get involved.

For those of you at this very active WikiProject, your input would be very helpful, so I wanted to get your input on whether you'd be interested in helping me to make this happen.

we are discussing this proposal right now at:

* Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Idea for new community workspace

Please feel free to let me know what you think of this idea, and please let me know your preference, regarding the options above. if you do not see any need for this idea, that is totally fine. However, I think that the majority of editors lack awareness of where the truly active editing is taking place and at which WikiProjects, and I would like to do whatever I can to help make people more aware of where the activity is, what they can do to help, and also which areas of Wikipedia offer ideas and efforts that might help them in their own editing activities. Please feel free to let me know.

thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 18:48, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

redirects, disamb, and miscellany

I wrote an article on Nancy Clarke (entrepreneur) today. As there was a redirect from Nancy Clarke to White House Chief Floral Designer, I searched wikidata and realized there are 3 women with this name already in various projects, so hopefully I converted the redirect page to a disamb page correctly. When I went to make a redirect page for Ann Clarke, it already exists as well, but it redirects to Bryan Clarke. Weird thing is there is no mention of an Ann on his page, so I searched wikidata and there appears to be a Canadian painter (aka Ann Clarke Darrah) but no article on wp. As there is no article to blue link the artist to, I am unsure about creating a disamb page and totally unclear if it is simply acceptable to repoint the existing redirect to a page that actually mentions Ann Clarke? And then when completing the wikidata entry for Nancy Clarke (Q84607970), I get the message that I must add a source for claims that she is Afro-Caribbean and speaks English. I have no idea how to do that. She was a manumitted slave and a free woman of colour as confirmed here[1] and that she spoke English is confirmed here[2]. Can someone who has more skill with this help or advise me what to do? Thanks! SusunW (talk) 20:14, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata & the redirect sorted. As we don't know who Bryan Clarke's Ann was, we're not in a position to do a DAB. Obvs, someone may steal the redirect back. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:54, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
Thank you Tagishsimon, it just quickly went way over my skill level. Truly appreciate the help! SusunW (talk) 21:15, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
I asked the editor who created the redirect from Ann to Bryan why they'd done so, and they gave me a link to a source which explained all. So I've now added info about Ann Clarke (immunologist) at Bryan Clarke and at Frozen Ark, as she was the subject of an episode of BBC Radido 4's The Life Scientific which of itself goes a fair way to establish notability. And I've made a dab page at Ann Clarke, though I wonder how many dab pages we need for Ann(e) Clark(e) and whether the reader would be better served by just one! PamD 18:38, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
Ann Clarke (immunologist) is now blue. PamD 11:25, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
And there are just two dab pages: Anne Clark and Ann Clarke (both of which include Ann) with incoming redirects. PamD 12:03, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Good work, PamD. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:09, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Excellent PamD! I knew posting it here would facilitate improving the encyclopedia, but had no idea it would lead so far in integrating so many more women. Thanks for the assist. SusunW (talk) 15:28, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Women in Green

Thanks to considerable support, WikiProject Women in Green which until now has been a task force of WikiProject Women is now a wikiproject in its own right. It will of course continue to work closely with WP Women, Women in Red and related projects. Anyone interested in upgrading articles about women to GA status or higher is welcome to participate in the project.--Ipigott (talk) 11:35, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Fantastic news! Wishing much success to the WikiProject, its contributors, and its enthusiasts. Bravo! --Rosiestep (talk) 06:38, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

18.25% as of 10 February 2020

We are moving the needle! 18.25% as of 10 February 2020! Congratulations one and all! --Rosiestep (talk) 06:39, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Proposed Articles

I would like to submit new pages on feminist activist and entrepreneur Amy Nelson, as well as The Riveter, a company she started that acts as a modern union for working women (political advocacy, office space, events, etc.).

I work for The Riveter and understand Wikipedia’s conflict of interest policies. Therefore, I have created drafts here and here, so independent editors can objectively review them for neutrality and notability.

Thank you in advance for your time and feedback. Hannahh206 (talk) 18:19, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

@Hannahh206: Thanks for taking this approach, Hannahh206; much appreciated. The Amy Nelson article seems well-written and sourced, and neutral in tone; the subject appears to me to pass WP:GNG. I'd be happy to move that to mainspace as is. I think the best approach is to use {{Connected contributor}} on the talk page; I'll vouch for the article's neutrality. Exactly the same deal for The Riveter, but two observations: 1) you launch into specifying its focus in sentence one, without explaining what it is ... presumably some sort of American organisation; 2) The final paragraph comes close to marketing; I'm okay with retaining it, but it might trigger other people's spam sensors. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:08, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
Tagishsimon: I nearly always agree with your assessments but in this case it seems to me that the sources are directly connected to Amy Nelson or her company in the form of interviews, etc. Before we recommend moving this to mainspace, it would be good to have a couple of truly independent sources. We need to be careful about articles created by those with COI concerns. I'm not suggesting we should not accept the article but I think it would be useful to have one or two truly independent secondary sources.--Ipigott (talk) 19:32, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
Quartz, Forbes, CNBC. These may be interviews; they are not sources directly connected to Amy Nelson or her company. YMMV. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:35, 5 February 2020 (UTC)


@Tagishsimon: I made some changes to the draft page on The Riveter based on your feedback and added a Connected Contributor template. Let me know if you feel that one’s ready for main-space.

@Tagishsimon:@Ipigott: it seems you two disagree as to whether Amy Nelson qualifies for a page. What is the proper way for securing a decision one way or another? Would a third tie-breaker vote from a third editor be the proper etiquette? Hannahh206 (talk) 18:12, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@Hannahh206: I've promoted both articles - Amy Nelson and The Riveter (organization), and added a declaration on Talk:Amy Nelson. Ipigott is right that more, & more independent, sources are desirable; and I hope in the fullness of time these are added. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:58, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Women in Red at the University of Edinburgh

The University of Edinburgh has just taken on their own dedicated Women in Red intern, Laurarose2019. Through a series of monthly workshops, we aim to bring inspiring female role models to prominence and combat the erasure of women’s achievements from history.

For more information or to follow the progress of our contribution to the project, please visit the blog at https://blogs.ed.ac.uk/wir-ed/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurarose2019 (talk • contribs) 12:41, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

This is wonderful news, Laurarose2019. What a big leap for our community, indeed! We certainly wish you and the University of Edinburgh the very best. Please do keep us informed regarding progress. Also, if you have questions or comments, just let us know. Best, --Rosiestep (talk) 16:34, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
Yes, fantastic initiative from UofE. Good luck, Laurarose2019, and do let us know if you need a hand with anything. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:01, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Dictionary of Women Artists (Draft:Laura Troubridge)

Dictionary of Women Artists. An international dictionary of women artists born before 1900. By Chris Petteys.Boston: G.K. Hall & Co., 1985. I'm half way through an article on Laura Elizabeth Rachel Troubridge (1858-1929) m. Adrian Hope. Draft:Laura Troubridge I'm struggling a little to 'gel' her career together as there's some confusion between women with the same or similar names, and she changed her 'professional' name a few times through out her career. I found a reference to her in the Dictionary of Women Artists but can't find a view the actual record online. Can anyone help me? Cdefm (talk) 12:23, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Cdefm, I cannot find a copy of that on-line either. You can request her entry in it here Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request and possibly they will find it. I did try to check the books at archive.org and hathitrust. While I did not find that book there, there are plenty of mentions and I did find this lovely photo of the other Laura Troubridge, which since it is from 1912 can be loaded to commons. I'm happy to do it for you, but perhaps you know how or want to learn how. SusunW (talk) 15:10, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
SusunW Thank you, I'll try the Resource Request and take a look at HathiTrust. I have added external links to some of her works at HathiTurst, so this could be a new one? Please feel free to add the picture to the other Laura, Lady Troubridge. I'm having to learn Wikipedia tech at such a fast rate my brain is starting to smoke. I'm thinking, if I master one additional skill with each article...I'm doing great. Cdefm (talk) 15:24, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
I totally get it Cdefm. Wiki tech is not intuitive for me and I am constantly having to seek out someone with higher skill levels and magic wands to help. I'll be glad to load it to commons. SusunW (talk) 15:29, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
Cdefm fwiw I've put together a disambiguation page Lady Troubridge. I think the Laura page you're currently drafting might best be launched as Laura Troubridge (diarist) to leave the Laura Troubridge page as a disambiguation page. In other news, Cdefm, you have enough edits, I expect, that you don't need to go through Articles for Creation; you can move your own drafts to mainspace (or ask here). Whatever works best for you. THank you for the articles. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:28, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Tagishsimon I'll launch the one I'm working on now as (diarist), although during her time she was an artist. It's only after she died that her diaries became 'famous'. But then people should read the article, no? Thanks for info re: moving to mainspace. Although it may be a dangerous thing to let me loose like that. But who doesn't like living dangerously...Cdefm (talk) 18:31, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Cdefm, glad to see the resource exchange was able to provide the article for you. It's a great tool to know about and I hope that the article was helpful. SusunW (talk) 16:00, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
Yes! Thank you for the tip SusunW I've just finished my draft. It's turned out the longest yet. It was like putting together a puzzle when you just knew some of the pieces were missing. My writing skills are not the greatest. If you're feeling brave, I'd appreciate a second opinion. It's Draft: Laura Troubridge Cdefm (talk) 16:29, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
Cdefm: You have been doing a really good job on the diarist article. I would nevertheless recommend that you try to expand the lead to reflect her major achievements. When you are ready, move the article into mainspace yourself and add pertinent categories, authority control and defaultsort. Congratulations on advancing so quickly with Wikipedia editing. It looks as if you are going to be one of our major contributors.--Ipigott (talk) 14:11, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
Feeling rather sheepish. I misunderstood your use of 'lead'. But never fear, there are a good group of people of in here to right my wrongs. Don't knwo owhat I'd do without them! Cdefm (talk) 19:13, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback Ipigott I found her difficult to piece together and I lost confidence that I had gone astray and got a touch of verbal diarrhea on this one. So the encouragement was much needed. I'll see what I can do about the lead to reflect her major achievements. But I'm not holding out much hope, online sources are running dry. I have a feeling there will be an obituary or something, and possibly mentions of her work, in some of the London newspapers at the time eg The Times, but I only have access to The Guardian which at that time was local to Manchester (I think?). Cdefm (talk) 14:39, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Cdefm I've tweaked the lede a little; it's mainly a question of summarising key points from the body of the article, rather than needing any more info or sources. This is another staggeringly good article which does a fine job of describing the subject; it's now more than ready to be pushed into mainspace. As to losing confidence, that's your Dunning–Kruger effect ... the more you know about the subject, the less satisfied you are with your work on her. The rest of us, much lower on that curve, think the article marvellous :). I think you have to face it that you have to push your children out into the world whether you think they're quite ready or not, and then get on with the next one. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:58, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
Well I never....I've learnt something new today. The Dunning–Kruger effect . I didn't know such a thing existed. Very interesting and I'm so impressed I'm now looking for someone to accuse of having it, just so I can use the term. And you are so right, I am guilty as charged! And, thank you for the tweak. To the rescue again. Are there virtual cups of coffee available? I think I owe you one Tagishsimon
It really is a superb article. Well done! The Drover's Wife (talk) 16:47, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
Are there emojis on wikipedia...where's the 'clap my hands' emoji? Thanks. I'll try over come my Dunning–Kruger effect Cdefm (talk) 19:13, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
The Manchester Guardian was produced there until the 1960s, but I think from the late C19 was sold and read all over England & Wales & had become, as now, the leading "left" paper. Our article could be clearer on this frankly. Johnbod (talk) 16:05, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification Cdefm (talk)

Draft:Nell Brooker Mayhew

Hello again -- I found the above artist who died in 1940 in the nearly G13-eligible heap; it looks sourced and notable but was declined as not meeting the artist guideline so perhaps I'm missing something. Hope someone can help! Espresso Addict (talk) 03:44, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

There's currently only one painting in a "notable museum" referenced. Johnbod (talk) 04:39, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
I had thought that inclusion in encyclopedia/dictionaries plus being the topic of a book might meet the general guidelines. Espresso Addict (talk) 05:04, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
I found a couple more sources by searching for her maiden name. I can't remember which notability guideline says inclusion in a "Who's Who" type dictionary helps notability; she is in three of them. I've added the new sources and moved it to article space. Other eyes most welcome.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 05:24, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
Never a bad idea to bring these kinds of cases here because it's not uncommon for AfC reviewers to throw the baby out with the bathwater and decline stuff that's actually notable. The Drover's Wife (talk) 05:28, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Script to detect unreliable sources

Main page: User:Headbomb/unreliable

I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. The idea is that it takes something like

  • John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)

and turns it into something like

It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.

The script is new, and I'm still expanding coverage and tweaking logic, but what's there already works very well. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 09:26, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Boffin does stats on women in wikidata

Magnus Manske has done an exercise involving lots of charts & graphs ... a sort of Alice's Restaurant of women items in wikidata. - http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Magnus_Manske/Women_in_properties --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:49, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Magnus is a great man, but this needs interpretation. The bottom line seems to be that women's WD pages have few properties assigned, compared to men. I will leave it to others to judge how surprising or alarming this is. Johnbod (talk) 17:27, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
Indeed, Magnus is a great man, and I find the work to be very interesting, but like Johnbod, I agree that it needs interpretation. Per Victuallers has an opinion? --Rosiestep (talk) 16:16, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

URL shortener

Thanks, Rosiestep, for including the URL shortener for WiR on our main page. I was wondering if you or anyone else could place it in a box under shortcut on the right hand side of the page. It looks rather frightening where it is now.--Ipigott (talk) 12:57, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Ipigott, frightening? Oh my. If you could provide an example of what kind of box, e.g. perhaps one that's used on another Wikiproject mainpage, I I can move the URL shortener there. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:45, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
Well not really frightening for me but perhaps for some of the newcomers who look at the page. I played around quite a bit but couldn't find how to move it tidily. I was hoping one of our more technically minded friends would show up and solve the problem - if it is a problem. Let's leave it for a while and see if we get any help. Otherwise I'll devote an hour or so to doing it myself. Unless you think it should be kept where it is.--Ipigott (talk) 13:57, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
Rosiestep: OK, I figured out how to put it in a box and move it to the right but I'm not sure it should be right at the top. Anyway, I think it is a slight improvement.--Ipigott (talk) 15:20, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
Oh, I like how you did that, Ipigott. That is a better way to display it. Thanks. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:08, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
I hope people will realize what it's for and how it works.--Ipigott (talk) 16:34, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
I've tweaked things so it would line up better and emit the proper HTML. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:46, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, Headbomb, that's exactly what I wanted to do. Looks much better now.--Ipigott (talk) 07:52, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Raketaka

Hi All, I started a draft for Princess Raketaka of Madagascar, but I have got into difficulty - it seems that there are two death dates? Perhaps for more than one person? But I can't seem to disentangle them from my reading via google translate. Most of the sources are in French and one or two in malagasy. I wondered if anyone could take a look at the Talk Raketaka page and see what you think? This is the wikidata link I worked from: http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q67165290 (Lajmmoore (talk) 20:50, 15 February 2020 (UTC))

Firming up for March

Still time to voice your opinion here regarding out March events. Thank you. --Rosiestep (talk) 01:42, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for making an early start on this. It would be good to receive feedback from as many of our participants as possible.--Ipigott (talk) 11:32, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Cropping photos

Would anyone be able to help me crop this photo [3] for Rosario, Princess of Preslav? The photo currently has three people in it, she is the one on the left. Also if someone could help with this photo [4] for Feiping Chang, who is on the far right. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 05:45, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Sure: File:Royal Wedding Stockholm 2010-Konserthuset-400 (cropped).jpg, File:Feiping Chang (5820571256).jpg. I highly recommend everyone go to the Gadgets page in their Commons Preferences and turn on CropTool, as it's perfect for this kind of task. Nick Number (talk) 06:14, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
@Nick Number: Thank you so much!! -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 15:48, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Deletion of Headbomb's articles

As Headbomb has been a very constructive member of this project, I looked up his article creation record and was surprised to see that the majority of his articles have been deleted. As he has being trying to include new articles and redirects on academic journals, I was surprised to see how many of the original articles had been deleted. Even the acceptance of his own articles (e.g. The Journal of Historical Biography, Education (journal), is questioned. Maybe we have contributors who could look into this more closely.--Ipigott (talk) 14:56, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

The majority of my articles haven't been deleted (you can find those here), what has been deleted is a bunch of redirects to deleted articles (usually systematic redirects to academic journals, based on ISO 4/MathSciNet/National Library of Medicine/Bluebook abbreviations, I often create those during deletion discussions to understand how often a journal is cited on Wikipedia). If you want to see what the real tally is, I have created in the neighbourhood of 35,000 pages, with ~300 of those being deleted and maybe 3 actual articles I created deleted over 13 some years.
Concerning The Journal of Historical Biography I created this as a redirect to Journal of Historical Geography by accident, and requested a WP:CSD#G7 deletion. I'm really not sure how that's nefarious. For Education (journal), see User talk:Headbomb/Archives/2019/December#Education (journal). If you want to AFD it, go right ahead.
I'm also not sure what this has to do with WIR. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:06, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
Headbomb: Thanks for responding to this so quickly. I'm really sorry if you found my message offensive. It certainly wasn't my intention. The reason I though this would be of interest to WiR is that you are an active participant in the project and have been helping us along, mainly from a technical point of view, for some time. I noticed, however, that over the past 24 hours you had not only helped us technically but had advised on content in response to a message on our talk page. I therefore thought it would be interesting to look up your new article count to try to identify your main field of interest. While academic journals may not appear to be a topic for Women in Red, it is nevertheless of major interest, especially in connection with biographies of women writers or women in science. Thank you for sending the link to your mainspace articles including redirects, from which I see that over 98% of all your creations have in fact been redirects. These are of course a very important part of the encyclopaedia and it is thanks to people like you that we have easier access to articles. From the link to your user space, we can see that you have created a variety of useful articles on science topics, journals and biographies (although not yet on women). As for "The Journal of Historical Biography", I understand your explanation. I have also needed to delete several of my own articles because of bad titles, etc. "Education (journal)" looks fine to me even if it has a confusing title. I certainly am not pressing for its deletion. I also note, by the way, that quite a number of your articles listed as deleted have since been recreated by other editors and continue to be on mainspace.
The reason I brought this up is because I thought some of our other members might be interested in investigating some of the deletions but as you seem to be reasonably happy about how things are progressing, that may not be necessary. This exercise has however taught me a useful lesson and that is that the Xtools mainspace article count excluding redirects is not necessarily a good reflection of an editor's creative work. Finally, I note from two of your more recent lists, that there are a huge number of academic journals which are not yet the subject of Wikipedia articles.--Ipigott (talk) 17:09, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
Didn't find it offensive, just puzzling. Concerning "a number of your articles listed as deleted have since been recreated by other editors and continue to be on mainspace" those are typically the result of a page move that overwrote an existing redirects, like moving 'Foobar (journal)' to 'Foobar'. As for articles on women, well being in physics, the situation here is actually better than in most science, at least in as much as all our big shot women have pretty decent articles, from Emmy Noether, to Chien-Shiung Wu, Carolyn Porco, Caroline Herschel, and the like, so there's very few low-hanging fruits left. I did improve Wu experiment fairly substantially, and I'm nominating it for a GA right now (I do need to tackle the review feedback soon though). I would have liked to do more for Women studies journal, but The Vintage Feminist (talk · contribs) beat me to it years ago. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:10, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
Headbomb: As a result of all this, I've just been looking into your background and was interested to see you are a native French speaker now teaching physics at Dalhousie University in Halifax. (I actually docked in Halifax and stayed with friends in Moncton when I first arrived in Canada in 1968.) I've also read about all the useful work you did for Wikimedia in Frankfurt and your participation in Wikimedia conferences and editathons. Great stuff! Given you interest in the history of physics, despite the absence of low-hanging fruit, perhaps some further investigation will reveal one or two names deserving Wikipedia articles. In any case, it would be inspiring if you could create at least one new biography in connection with our focus on women in March. The Wu experiment looks like a good candidate for GA. It's very technical but even so, you could mention it as a candidate for Women in Green. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 18:15, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
Truro, not Halifax, and I resigned last August. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:22, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
OK. That was not clear from the sources I found. Same general area though. On the "Wu experiment", it looks to me as if the ORES rating would be much higher if there were more in-line references, especially at the end of each paragraphs. You might also consider introducing Harvard referencing although that is not really required. Otherwise the article looks very well presented.--Ipigott (talk) 18:39, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Assorted drafts on women from G13 sweep (Draft:Elizabeth Anne Wood, etc.)

I did a sweep of stale/abandoned drafts coming up for G13 until my wrists gave out. There were a few more drafts on women that I postponed, if anyone is interested in adoption. Most of these will need work and several appear only of borderline notability. (If the subject is definitely not notable at present that information would be worth appending.)

  • Fannie Quigley American pioneer; deceased (abandoned, contributor still intermittently active) [promising, imo, but not an area I work in](Moved to article space by ThatMontrealIP).
  • Rosa Lachenmeier Swiss painter/photographer; translation from German; living (declined) [quite well developed] -- moved to mainspace--Ipigott (talk) 11:59, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Cäcilia Böhm-Wendt German physicist; deceased; microstub (abandoned, one-off contributor) [I did a bit of Googling without coming up with much on this; would perhaps need a German speaker and/or access to print records]
  • Draft:Elizabeth Anne Wood American sociologist, publishes on sex work; living (declined) [Google Scholar citations moderate on her works]
  • Draft:Kathrin Christians German flautist; living (declined) [borderline, bit promotional]
  • Draft:Yvonne Jones (artist) Welsh artist; living (multiply declined, alleged possibly paid) [this is probably the least promising]

Thanks! Espresso Addict (talk) 03:16, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

I found a little more on Cäcilia Böhm-Wendt, enough to turn the draft from a microstub into a stub. There could be more in German-language sources. XOR'easter (talk) 17:09, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
I moved Fannie Quigley to Article space. Widely covered in good sources.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:10, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, all. There's a huge amount of potentially viable content to be found in the G13 categories (>5%) but it's hard to find amidst the dross. I don't know if there's any way of automating a search for drafts on notable women among abandoned/rejected drafts? Particularly if one could find it earlier in the cycle, before the creator has given up on Wikipedia entirely. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:12, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
I have no experience in the area of Wikipedia coding, but I do do some coding here and there. it seems to me that one just needs to access the Wikipedia API, then sort for a) draft space, b) expiring soon, and c) some mention of "she" or d) is in a women-related category. Not a complicated coding job for someone who knows how to access the API.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:33, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
  • @Espresso Addict: I really like that you have pre-vetted all these good topics. Cäcilia Böhm-Wendt is widely cited, and I have added some sources tot he ones XOR'easter added and moved her page to article space. Thanks.
Thanks, ThatMontrealIP. Actually I felt a bit guilty at dumping them all on WiR's doorstep, but there's all the 40 or so others I postponed that are not about women to rehome, too. On finding them automatically, categories aren't usually attached to drafts unless they've been draftified from mainspace (a surprisingly common phenomenon). I wondered if the Wikidata lists of women might be of service? Espresso Addict (talk) 01:20, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

A non-registered ex officio member?

I cannot register as a member of this project, but would let it be known, for the record, that I am fully supportive of your remediative work to produce and expand articles for notable individuals, articles in many cases that are very long overdue. I invite people to engage me at the latest article that you see me editing, if I can be of any help. It is only my lack of availability to such important works as WIR that makes me sad to remain non-logging. Cheers, a former Prof (who, having been real-world harasssed as a logged editor, no longer does so to edit) 2601:246:C700:19D:7C8D:56CB:34EB:ED61 (talk) 18:04, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Amir Talai (Draft:Amir Talai)

Not sure if WIR does men who support women, but he did hold a sign at Women's March that went viral over the internet. Cwmhiraeth's claim that the topic fails to meet WP:NACTOR, subject not having had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows or stage performances. and CAPTAIN RAJU's claim that He does not seem to meet the notability criteria for Entertainers in the AFD (which wasn't posted to any deletion sortings, which would have changed the AFD outcome) are both 100% false because his NACTOR claim is established in the notable work section in the Draft:Amir Talai infobox. I'm too busy with other stuff in WP to improve the article, but was wondering if anyone could do that. Ping LovelyLillith who started the AFD. ミラP 18:27, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

@Miraclepine: Go read Wikipedia:Canvassing. The above was not a good idea. It is possible to bring an AfD to a thread like whilst satifying Wikipedia:Canvassing. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:16, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon: The AFD is actually three years old, and I was gonna check if anything has changed since then. ミラP 19:19, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Adma Jeha d'Heurle

Newly created article Adma Jeha d'Heurle by Mkraetzer was speedily deleted by HickoryOughtShirt?4 after being tagged for deletion by Dede2008 for multiple (mostly valid) reasons — It was written as an obituary, used the sort of promotional language that one expects in an obituary, and could well have been a copyvio, although the claimed A7 speedy criterion was clearly invalid and should not have been used. In any case, as a distinguished professor of psychology it appears to me that she passes our academic notability standards, particularly WP:PROF#C5. If anyone wants to try again, with a more encyclopedic version, there are sources at [5] and [6]. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:07, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Tara McGowan AfD

Hi all! An AfD was opened a few hours ago for the Women in Red article Tara McGowan. With the major caveat that I originated the article, if you asked me yesterday I would seriously have thought this would be a total WP:SNOW -- it has 26 (!) more-or-less WP:RS, including several very strong in-depth WP:RSP, two full-length magazine profiles (which the New York Times even called "glowing profiles"), and on and on. If that doesn't pass WP:BASIC ... - Astrophobe (talk) 17:10, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

A "first" for women in the British Army

Take a look at this - McKeever, Vicky (19 February 2020). "British officer becomes first woman to pass grueling entry test for elite Army unit". CNBC. Retrieved 21 February 2020. - There are similar articles in other media too. It might be enough for at least a stub. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:31, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Guyanese Girls Rock

I was doing a little bit of searching for information about classical music in Guyana and came across this page: https://guyanesegirlsrock.com/women-history-valerie-rodway-patriotic-classical-music-composer/. The blog from which it comes looks like it has some potential, although there's a lot of dross to sort through; I think many of the people featured wouldn't pass muster at the notability guidelines. Still, some would, and it's nice to have some kind of jumping-off point for Guyana - it's easily one of the more under-covered nations out there, as far as I can tell. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 15:46, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Margaret Bonds

I've just gotten the chance to join a local chorus in a performance of the Credo by Margaret Bonds (likely the first anywhere since its premiere in 1972), and I thought I'd take the opportunity to revisit her article, which was one of the first longer-form articles I wrote for this site, way back when. (Not sure I'll be able to, given the number of other things on my plate.) The article itself is in decent shape, but could stand some reorganization and expanding...and the referencing especially needs some work. Anyone else fancy taking a look and seeing what can be done? I think the article might be workable up to GA status, at least, if not more.

(If you're in the DC area and would like more information about the performance, please shoot me an e-mail; I'd be happy to provide details. As to how I got involved in the Bonds resurrection project, that's a very interesting story, but one which is much too long for these shores. I'd be happy to share it sometime, though. :-)) --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 15:37, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Ser Amantio di Nicolao: Interesting article. Although it goes right back to 2006, you still remain the dominant contributor. If you want to bring it up to GA ranking, the first thing to do is to make sure each paragraph is backed by adequate inline referencing. That was not considered so important at the time but it is now. As we are dealing with black women this month, it would be a great opportunity for you to refresh your memory and try to be more specific on the sourcing. Maybe we can find other enthusiasts to work on improvements. If you really want to collaborate on this, we could see what we can do together over the next week or so. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 21:03, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
@Ipigott: This week is right out for me, I'm afraid - I'm shooting to have at least some improvements to the article made by April 25, which is the date of the concert. I'll have to dive back into New Grove in a week or two and refresh my memory. There's been a lot of recent scholarship on her as well, thanks to the donation and archiving of her papers. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 22:27, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
@Ipigott:,@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: I put a reference for each of the existing sentences. I did not change the text, but I would suggest to revise the Fuller's book, some parts are quite similar and the Fuller's book is a 1994 copyright. Hope this will be a good start for an happy editing for someone else without bothering with boring stuff. Elisa.rolle (talk) 22:33, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
@Elisa.rolle: Thanks very much for the advice. I have a copy of Fuller; I'll take a look when I have a moment. Thanks also for the referencing; it'll give me a chance to fill some things out. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 22:40, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Another interesting news item

Possibly off-topic, but the first thing I thought was "why is the editing interface and referencing process so 1980s if they are taking in $120 million a year in donations"? It is indeed a strange situation, like a well-funded corporation that manufactures its products using an unpaid volunteer army.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:39, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Anna Laverty

Hi! I’m trying to write my first Wikipedia article on a music producer called Anna Laverty. I was inspired to do it by reading about Women in Red in the news. Laverty has been active for about 10 years, has won an industry award, and has worked on some high profile and successful recordings. However, I haven’t been able to establish notability. Can someone please have a look at it? Corey AppleCorey (talk) 20:05, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

@AppleCorey: The subject passes WP:GNG based on refs such as 7, 8 & 11. I've promoted the article to mainspace at Anna Laverty; with luck the deletionists will leave it alone, but we'll see. Thanks for writing it; very welcome. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:31, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
One strategy you may find useful User:AppleCorey is to include the best refs at the beginning of an entry. You can always duplicate a ref to include it in the lead even if it already used further down by using the ref name=xyz format and the ref name=xyz/ enclosed in great than less than signs.. I hope that makes some sense. Good luck. FloridaArmy (talk) 23:38, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Perhaps. I took the view that the subject was not particularly notable for a specific thing, so much as for her general work; and that she merited an article based on GNG - she has press coverage - rather than any more specific claim. In such cases it can be hard to make notability stand out in the body of the article; if reviewers do not diligently check the refs they may, at AfC, reject it; and in mainspace, may AfD it. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:46, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks heaps for the help. I think that’s a good tip about the references. I think the subject is notable because of the combination of her recordings with famous artists, her TV appearances, awards, and community work. Maybe I could have made that clearer in the lede AppleCorey (talk) 23:51, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

“I just go on doing, as they say, my thing. I believe this takes a certain courage.”

Nice article about one of our members, with a thank you to Ser Amantio di Nicolao (P.S. the quote suits you well) for kindly mentioning the Women in Red community. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:40, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you kindly. I shall always mention Women in Red when given the chance. :-) (As for the quote, I'm glad you like it - Barber is one of my favorites, and has been for years.) --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 20:16, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
And also a thank you to its author, Stephen Harrison. In a way, the article is a good demonstration of what Wikipedia cannot do. The Wikipedia biography of Steven Pruitt gives an accurate but rather dry summary of his achievements while Harrison's carefully structured interview reveals a person we would all like to have as a friend. Sometimes I think it is unfortunate that we are so limited in our use of primary sources. But thank goodness we have external links.--Ipigott (talk) 11:26, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
THIS^ ☕ Antiqueight chatter 14:13, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Wonderful quote and interview, @Ser Amantio di Nicolao:! Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 06:12, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
Great interview Ser Amantio di Nicolao and thanks for the shoutout about the Saami! :D -Yupik (talk) 21:50, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
@Yupik:, @Antiqueight:, @Ipigott:, @Clayoquot: - thank you kindly. With apologies for the delayed acknowledgement - I've been down several different rabbit holes this week, some Wiki-related, some not. Next week appears to be more of the same, alas. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 03:14, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Help? (Draft:Nitta-Jo, etc.)

I would be happy to have help with:

FloridaArmy (talk) 21:33, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

I added a few sources to Nitta-Jo, who appears to be very notable. There is good coverage in French, but I can't see the full text in Google Books to extract the content. I did manage to get her birth date out of a snippet in Google Books.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:52, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
@FloridaArmy: I promoted the first of those, Nitta-Jo thanks to your work and ThatMontrealIP's refs. The article could do with better categories. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:41, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
I also promoted Australian Women in Music Awards. For general reference - I'm generally pretty happy to look at any decent-quality drafts if people here want me to look at them so they don't languish in the queue with all the rubbish. Being able to promote content we should have without having to dig through dreck is always a pleasure. The Drover's Wife (talk) 23:56, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

@FloridaArmy: - can you tell us anything else about Jane Jennings? That she was on the cover of some sheet music and someone once said something a bit patronising about her makes her sound non-notable even despite her lengthy filmography. Were any of those roles lead roles? Is there anything about them? I've previously had words with that reviewer for declining notable stuff but this one does need some expansion/further context before it goes live. The Drover's Wife (talk) 23:59, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

As I'm sure you know, many online sources only offer snippet views. She was an older supporting actress during the silent fil era. The notability criteria for actors is:
"Actors, voice actors, comedians, opinion makers, models, and celebrities:
Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.
Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following.
Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment
I bolded the key bits. She meets two of three criteria. Note that criteria 3 is "or". And she was defi itrly prolific. Wikioedia has poor coverage of early films and she's already noted in the casts of more than 20. FloridaArmy (talk) 00:07, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
She arguably meets "prolific". There's no evidence in the article, one way or another, as to whether her roles were significant, which is the q. I think TDW was asking. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:15, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Yep. It would help a lot if we could say anything more about her. We're not saying this stuff to be critical, we're giving feedback because we like your work and want to see these articles approved. The Drover's Wife (talk) 00:22, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Regarding Jane Jennings: I might suggest asking Lugnuts for advice, as he has extensive experience working with WP:FILM. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 03:16, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Looks like the article has been moved from draft to mainspace. Ping me if you need any more help with this. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 09:30, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Requesting help with Ruth M. Arthur

Hi all! I noticed that one of my favourite childhood authors wasn't on here, so I was going to start writing an article about her. The big problem though is that I don't seem to be finding much at all about her online and paper sources in this country don't cover her. Would anyone be willing to help out? I've put the info I could find out about her on a subpage of my userpage and created a list of her works based on the info in the databases of the British Library and National Scotland Library. Strange coincidence: someone created a beautiful article about one of her books yesterday! Thanks for any and all help! -Yupik (talk) 05:57, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

There's probably enough in https://www.enotes.com/topics/ruth-m-abel-arthur together with her publication list, to launch an article? --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:30, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
& http://sf-encyclopedia.uk/fe.php?nm=arthur_ruth_m --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:34, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Review (1972) of the Little Dark Thorn: [7]
Review (1974) of After Candlemas: [8]
Review (1966) of A Candle in Her Room: [9] --Elisa.rolle (talk) 18:41, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
You've found some amazing sources, thank you (and ClarityKTMpls too)! I've launched the article out of userspace into the main article space, but right now there's still not a lot of text. This is a lot of commented out text with sources inside the article itself, if anyone is inclined to play connect the dots. I'll also continue working on it to make sure it stays out off the deletion list. :) -Yupik (talk) 00:41, 4 February 2020 (UTC) 
If we have anyone who can add Japanese names to Wikidata, this author's name in Japanese is ルース・M.アーサー. For some reason, Wikidata isn't letting me, perhaps too many languages already in my babel box :D -Yupik (talk) 01:16, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
@Yupik:, just swang by and filled your request: by the way, Rûsu M Āsâ (ルース・M・アーサー) applying the same fat (2-byte) dots be better if someone jumps in and multiple it on jawp. Ping me anytime you find wikidata lacks Japanese scribble. (; --Omotecho (talk) 18:18, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

question about a deleted article

Hi WiR, I recall that someone connected to this project has the ability to bring back articles that have been part of a batch delete. Dante6 was operating as a sockpuppet and consequently all articles they authored were deleted. The article on surrealist artist Fanny Brennan was deleted in this batch. I can see the old article on wikiwand and it doesn't look like a copyright violation. If someone has the time and inclination to reverse the deleted article it would save some time. I may be mis-remembering the thread (it might have been that these articles can NOT be resurrected). Thanks for any assistance. Best, WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:31, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Here you go: Fanny Brennan. I took the Wikiwand text, which (let's hope) is a copy of the deleted article. I found a few more sources. My take is that she was more of a socialite than a serious painter, so notabiliity is there but not terrifically strong. I say that as there is scant coverage of her art career, but there are obituaries in the NY Times, Washington Post and LA Times. Also, if you are hanging out with Picasso, Giacometti, F. Scott Fitzgerald and Tristan Tzara in Paris, you have got at least some connections.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 03:23, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
Thanks ThatMontrealIP! I will add a link to her tiny paintings to the article. Quite nice IMO. Best, WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 20:02, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
WomenArtistUpdates, is there a list somewhere of the deleted Dante6 articles? If other notable women's articles were deleted, we might want to recreate them, too. Thanks. --Rosiestep (talk) 22:57, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
You mean Dante8, I think. But in this case the deleted version was created by JaneSwifty. Dante8's deleted contributions include Emily Aviva Kapor, Cerys Cooksammy-Parnell, Margaret Breckinridge, Michal Rubin, Varsha Vinod, Urmi Basu, and Usha Narayane. JaneSwifty's include Josephine Gordon Stuart, Takahashi Mizuko, Mary Elizabeth Nottingham Day, Maud Crofts, Mary Pickup, Eveline MacLaren, Lolita Roy, Madeline Wookey, Thereza Grisólia Tang, Marthe Simard, María Asunción Sandoval de Zarco, Olga Petit, Yoshiko Mibuchi, Ai Kume, Masako Nakata, Mabel Malherbe, Anna Louise James, Ekaterina Fleischitz, Aida-Cruz Del Rosario, Ram Phrommobon Bunyaprasop, Caterina Cybo, Naima Ilyas al-Ayyubi, Marai Larasi, Calina Lawrence, Jeanetta Reese , Crispian Jago, Rita Jensen, Anna Lisa Jermen, Marie "Blanche" Wittmann, Linda Burnham, Vivian Rothstein, Mary Jean Collins, Carol Giardina, Marilyn Salzman Webb, Dewa Agung Isteri, Beata Bladh, Valpuri Urpiainen, Constance Forsyth, Freda Farrell Waldon, Kalthouma Nguembang, Fatimé Dordji, Menen Liben Amede, Nihal Naj Ali Al-Awlaqi, Rodjaraeg Wattanapanit, Elizabeth Kayissan Pognon, Grace Kodindo, Semane Setlhoko Khama, Elizabeth Pulane Moremi, Debra Baptist-Estrada, Sophia Báthory, Erika Mitterer, Christine Messiant, Jane Vialle, Zinaida Lazda, Marie-Louise Sibazuri, Lina Bögli, Susan Armitage, Sy Koumbo Singa Gali, Isaura Gomes, Embet Ilen, Grace Kodindo, Françoise Foning, Semane Setlhoko Khama, Fatimé Dordji, Cicely Nott, Lucia Olofintytär, Ernestine Gwet Bell, Henriette Schrader-Breymann, Jenny Hyslop, Natalya Durova, Adélaïde de la Briche, Marguerite Brésil, Elizabeth Hopkins, Else Strantz, Francisca Pizarro Yupanqui, Eunice Dennie Burr, Elizabeth Garlick, Enid Joske, Fifi Hawthorne, May Howlett, Irene Melville Drummond, Rose Muir, Beatrice Clugston, Elizabeth Hopkins, Emma Octavia Lundberg, Mary Childs Nerney, Virginia Houston, Karolina Juszczykowska, Zekira Besrević, Roza Sober-Dragoje, Wilhelmina Seegmiller, Olga Stastny, Clara Raven, Fela Perelman, Constance Forsyth, and Faya Ora Rose Touré. Another article Carol Ann Drazba is currently under AfD. I haven't looked at the actual deleted content to see how relevant or notable they are and I would caution against looking for and copying old versions as there were apparently copyvio issues with them. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:42, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi Rosiestep, Just to close the loop from your question to me, I noticed the missing article on Fanny Brennan because she was included in the surrealist template and her name kept showing up as a red link as I was working on an article about Atelier 17. I don't have access to a list of all the deleted articles. Best, WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 02:47, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, @WomenArtistUpdates and David Eppstein. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:54, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Siobhán McHugh

Thoughts on this draft? Not mine.. FloridaArmy (talk) 23:50, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Duly promoted. Good find. (Needs cats) --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:54, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Julie Carpenter

This got declined, for what seems spurious reasons. I don't have time to review, but someone else here might. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 00:40, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

It is a slightly annoying article, and I can see why it was declined. The subject is certainly notable (e.g. a Forbes interview) but pretty much none of the well-enough written assertions made about the subject have inline refs, so whilst it's all believable stuff we're left wondering from whence it sprung. And then, all that said, WP:MINREF - the reason given for the decline - lists "statements likely to be challenged" and "contentious material", none of which seem to figure in this article; and so on the face of it, whilst it is very regrettable that there are not more inline citations, the article does not seem to fail MINREF. On the basis of notability, and because the reason for declining seems plain wrong, I'll promote this. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:28, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Lots of A+F editathons in March

I see that almost 30 physical editathons around the world have already been announced on Category:Wikipedia meetups in March 2020 in connection with Women's History Month. But many, many more are posted on the internet, including: Brad Graduate Center, Belkin Gallery, National Museum of Women in the Arts, ´West Kowloon, Hammer Museum, Asia Art Archive, Nanaimo Museum, Wexner Center, Live Art Development Agency, to name just a few. For a more comprehensive listing, see Art+Feminism Events. I think it goes without saying that members of Women in Red would be happy to help new contributors as far as time permits. Our resources, e.g. red links, meetup pages for March, and resources are there for all to use. In due couse, we hope to receive reports of editathons, especially lists of new participants and new and improved articles.--Ipigott (talk) 08:22, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Ipigott You should be able to find those reports here: https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/campaigns/artfeminism_2020/programs Vexations (talk) 13:34, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Vexations: Thanks for the link. It's possible to get a good general overview from these lists but it is far more useful to receive reports which comment on the difficulties encountered, the number of new participants who continue to edit and the number of draft articles which were either never added to mainspace or which were deleted. I was hoping the Swedes could put together something along these lines, preferably in a wiki format with standard wikilinks.--Ipigott (talk) 16:46, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
I'd like to offer some words of clarification as I'm contact through other channels with the lead organizers (employees) for these 2 events.
A+F, a Wikimedia User Group and a Women's History Month initiative, focuses on in-person meetups (mostly in March and April) where participants (mostly new editors) improve (not create) articles. Women in Red has historically been (and is again in 2020) the "online node" for A+F events, providing a engagement opportunity for those who want to participate in A+F but can't get to an A+F event, and for those editors who participated in an A+F in-person event who want to continue editing once their in-person event is over. See also: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red#Art+Feminism 2020 San Diego edit-a-thon
WikiGap is a Wikimedia Sweden initiative; it's a collaboration between WMSV and the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. WikiGap in-person events are held throughout the year (many are in March) at Swedish embassies around the world. The events focus on content (new and improved articles) and participatory gender gap (mostly attended by new editors). When new articles are created on en-wiki by new editors, deletion can be an issue; see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red#WikiGap Tanzanian women. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:45, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
All around Australia on the weekend of 7-8 March (for International Women's Day) we're in partnership with the National Gallery of Australia and holding edit-a-thons in most States under the Know My Name banner. Most of the Sydney artists on the list are of living people. Hopefully the "Has works in National Gallery of Australia collection" will get them over the line. Oronsay (talk) 19:55, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Endocrinology professor with notability tag

Hi, would anyone like to take a look at Jerilynn Prior and assess whether she is notable, and either remove the notability tag or nominate the article for deletion as you see fit? Dr. Prior is a full professor whose specialty is the menstrual cycle and female endocrinology. Her official bio is here. She is a friend of mine so I can't assess her notability myself. Cheers, Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 22:52, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

I've removed the tag. Opinions will vary as to whether she meets WP:GNG or WP:NACADEMIC. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:49, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
I do wonder, en passant, whether the Notability tag - especially if left on an article for years - is consonant with BLP. Put another way, if an article starts "This person may not be notable enough for Wikipedia", that's us passing a not very positive judgement on the person. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:48, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
That's an excellent point, and thanks for removing the tag. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 23:16, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Elizabeth A. Muller

This draft that needs a lot of work but also has some interesting aspects. I haven't yet investigated her notability but at the least might be one to watch. FloridaArmy (talk) 23:50, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

She's noted prominently in the Richard A. Muller article and I see they wrote a book together. FloridaArmy (talk) 23:54, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Maybe. Right now I think we're seeing a COI edit. The user's other article, Deep Horizontal Drillhole Disposal appears to be an advertisment for a controversial technology. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:56, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
I agree with the COI assessment and have left an inquest on the concerned editor's talk page. I looked over some of their work, and unfortunately it seems to be riddled with WP:OR and content I would consider to be native advertising, so any editor involved in a cleanup should keep an eye out. SamHolt6 (talk) 01:36, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. I left a note at Talk:Horizontal drillhole disposal. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:41, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Desktop is dead

Yeah. I'm going to be out of commission until I get funds together for a replacement of some sort. I can do a little bit on the laptop, but the laptop isn't really made for this kind of thing.... Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs 22:38, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Sad to hear. Get well soon, Adam's machine! —David Eppstein (talk) 20:34, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
Well, my daughter has done a TON of work on her laptop, but I know what you mean. I am thinking of buying one so I can get out of my home office once in a while. My best to you, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 05:06, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Archive_75&oldid=1073228467"