Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7→Archive 10

Please comment at AfD

There are a lot of questionably notable articles being nominated for AfD as a result of the Neelix "kerfuffle". I will post links here to the women I notice as I go through the list, unless someone objects.

I think that is all of them. JbhTalk 22:31, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

@Jbhunley: If the talk pages of these articles are marked with {{WikiProject Women}}, the related AfD will be listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women/Article alerts when the bot next updates that page, soon after 09:00 (UTC) each day. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:18, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
@Redrose64: Thank you. That is good to know. I know this project likes to try to save articles on Women where they can and I could not find a DelSort category to tag them. I will look for {{WikiProject Women}} on talk pages. Is it just {{WikiProject Women}} or {{WikiProject Women writers}} etc. as well? JbhTalk 00:39, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Pages tagged {{WikiProject Women writers}} get listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women writers/Article alerts. In that page, I see that some of the above names (e.g. Tania Fiolleau and Bukola Oriola) are already listed. You can find out which WikiProjects have article alerts set up by checking Wikipedia:Article alerts/Subscription list, note that there are several ways that the Article Alerts system can detect a page: the two main ones are by the the presence of a particular WikiProject banner on the talk page, the other is by the talk page being in a particular category. At Wikipedia:Article alerts/Subscription list, I see that Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Women's football task force/Article alerts is updated from talk pages that are in Category:Women's football task force articles; Wikipedia:WikiProject Women artists/Article alerts is updated from talk pages marked with {{WikiProject Women artists}}; and so on. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:36, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Will do, thank you. JbhTalk 12:50, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Jessica Alba undue weight

This article could use eyes. Note the third paragraph of the lead as well as the undue weight overall on sexuality which overshadows the work of the actress. The undue weight diminishes the real work of actors which isn't effortless as the focus in this article on physical appearance implies.(Littleolive oil (talk) 19:27, 16 November 2015 (UTC))

I've moved that third paragraph to the talk page.(Littleolive oil (talk) 19:41, 16 November 2015 (UTC))

Ada Lovelace Day on Dec 10 at DYK

Please see DYK -Two Ada Lovelace Days? 10th December is her 200th birthday. A little over 3 weeks away. — Maile (talk) 22:06, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Meetup/Saskatoon/ArtAndFeminism December 5th 2015

A New editor requested me for help on a Meetup event in my talkpage regarding this event Wikipedia:Meetup/Saskatoon/ArtAndFeminism December 5th 2015,Would be obliged if anyone with with knowledge on Meetup on help.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 23:16, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Hedy Lamarr

Thought the video might interest some people here. I may keep the article in mind at some point!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:04, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Vicky Jenson

In my efforts to help improve coverage of notable women, I have been going back and looking at articles I have edited in the past. One such article, Vicky Jenson, has really surprised me on second look. When I first worked on it, in 2011, it was on the road to being deleted - which is absolutely stunning for an article on one of the only women to have ever directed an Academy Award-winning film. Although it is true that she "co-directed" the film (and another one that was nominated for an Academy Award) this should not diminish the achievement at issue. Also, her work has primarily been with animated films, which I frankly find to be even more impressive, since animation direction is probably even more male-dominated than direction of live-action films. I am continuing to find sources that add dimensions to this subject, and would like to aim to make this a featured article. Cheers! bd2412 T 05:25, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

@Bd2412: on the road to being deleted - which is absolutely stunning for an article on one of the only women to have ever directed an Academy Award-winning film
Don't know much about the movie industry, but there are lots of articles about topics of less interest to the wikipedia community that do end up in the wiki-trash-bin which shoudn't. Just my $.02 Ottawahitech (talk) 17:29, 15 November 2015 (UTC)please ping me
I have substantially improved the article. I am going to see if some images can be found. bd2412 T 16:44, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

GAR for Bra

Bra, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. sst✈(discuss) 04:28, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

You're invited! Women in Red World Virtual Edit-a-thon on Women in Religion

You are invited! Join us remotely!

World Virtual Edit-a-thon on Women in Religion

  • Dates: 5 to 15 December 2015
  • Location: Worldwide/virtual/online event
  • Host: Women in Red (WiR): Did you know that only 15% of the biographies on Wikipedia are about women? WiR focuses on "content gender gap". If you'd like to help contribute articles on women and women's works, we warmly welcome you!
  • Event details: This is a virtual edit-a-thon hosted by WiR. It will allow all those keen to improve Wikipedia's coverage of women in reigion to participate. All levels of Wikipedia editing experience are welcome.
  • RSVP and learn more: →here←--Ipigott (talk) 11:10, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Women in Technology

I tried to tag some articles with Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Technology, but it appears that the project is inactive even though there is a link to it from this wproj. Can anyone shed some light? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 19:19, 12 December 2015 (UTC)please ping me

Noob question

So we basically just tag every single women biography with the project banner? If so I would expect far more articles than the current count of ~5000. Category:Living people contains 740,850 articles, and if 15% of them are women, that should result in 111,127 articles. I can use AWB to help project tagging, if you want. ssт✈(discuss) 11:12, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Or do you want to progressively tag articles in different categories, instead of blanket tagging all articles within Category:Women (recursive)? ssт✈(discuss) 11:20, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
You can take a look also at archive about project tagging. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 11:28, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation. So basically articles not covered by any other women projects (such as musicians, actors, politicians, etc.) should be tagged with this project. That makes sense, so I just tagged the talk pages of about 180 articles about women cricketers with the {{WikiProject Women's sport}} template. Or did I miss anything? ssт✈(discuss) 12:48, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
@SSTflyer:, that's what I tag women in sports with. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:29, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
SSTflyer That would be awesome. Those of us who have been manually tagging all the new files know what a chore it is, but if we are to ever get an idea of what is being AfDed, what is in need of improvement, what is a potential GA, and even a real statistical base, we need things categorized and tagged. Any help is appreciated! SusunW (talk) 17:34, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
You're welcome. I am happy to help. sst✈(discuss) 02:52, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
  • What is you guys' relation to the other women biography projects? Some articles are tagged for "Women scientist", "Women authors" etc. Should that have a banner tagging for WP:Women as well or do you subsume those projects within your own? Also sometimes importance rating may vary between subprojects - for example I would consider Hillary CLinton top importance for WP:WOMEN but mid or low importance for WP:WOMEN WRITERS. Should she have two banner tags then?·maunus · snunɐɯ· 18:10, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
No Maunus, they should be tagged with one banner for the appropriate project. See above "articles not covered by any other women projects (such as musicians, actors, politicians, etc.) should be tagged with this project" is the goal. SusunW (talk) 18:19, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
More explanation, since the other women projects roll into the notices for this one, the critical point is being notified or alerted. As long as one woman related project is tagged, we will be notified. If that makes sense. Multiple tags can be applied, of course, but the goal is to make sure all have at least one. SusunW (talk) 18:35, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Another a noob question here (and I mean Wikipedia-noob, not just WP:WOMEN noob, which I realize is what SSTflyer must have meant based on the fact that OP knows how to make a fancy signature and reference a template without actually posting the template). So if I've been "watching" multiple woman-related projects, including WP:WOMEN, does that mean I'm getting duplicate notifications about anything tagged as a subproject of this one? I've been very engrossed in another project, so I haven't paid as much attention yet as I would want to. Just trying to make sure I won't miss anything if I remove the rest and only watch this one for now. Thanks! Permstrump (talk) 20:01, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
Permstrump I don't think alerts go to individuals, but if you look on the main page of this project you will see AfDs, GA nom, peer reviews etc. for the umbrella groups if I am not mistaken. If you want to see conversations on talk pages, I think you will have to watchlist them all. But pinging Rosiestep who has much more experience at this kind of thing. SusunW (talk) 03:17, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi Permstrump. It's the project that gets notified such as here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Women writers#Article alerts. And SusunW is right; if the article talkpage already has a "woman" project banner, it doesn't have to have additional ones, though there's no harm if it does (e.g. Women's History and Women Scientists). Also, doing it by hand is painful. Even using AWB is painful. But there's a bot which does talkpage banners and that's the way to go. We just have to delineate which cat's pages get which banner. We do have to be thoughtful, and we do need to post the request on the project talkpage to allow for comments. --Rosiestep (talk) 03:39, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Article alerts pages may be watchlisted, so it is possible for individuals to be made aware that such-a-page related to WikiProject Foobar is at XfD, etc. I explained much of this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women/Archive 5#Please comment at AfD. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:55, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Redrose64 you are amazing. Thank you for your repeated help and willingness to share what you know. The technicalities elude me and I am very grateful that you are always willing to lend a hand to help explain or clarify, or just fix whatever is an issue :) SusunW (talk) 16:49, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

It is one thing to re-invent the wheel another to play with category space

Sorry, removing category space simply cannot leave a page on wikipedia with no category. As all wikiprojects have category space to have assessment, just for a few editors here to think a project can exist without assessment, is not enough to have a project page with no category at all. JarrahTree 09:08, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Can you restate this another way? I am not sure what you mean by category space? I don't recall that the project has advocated for categories to be decreased ever, in fact we have consistently asked for more and improved categories. If you are talking about the importance rating for project banners, there are many projects that don't use the scale. I don't recall which ones, but I am sure someone has a list. SusunW (talk) 16:41, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
I put a partial list at Template talk:WikiProject Women#Importance; I can expand it if you like, but can't guarantee that it will be a complete list. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:26, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Redrose64 Thank you again for your technical knowledge. That link goes exactly to the points of the previous discussion. This project is about increasing biographies of women across a variety of fields and expanding articles on women's works. If Biographies doesn't have an importance rating, why would it make sense for this project to have a rating scale? SusunW (talk) 00:39, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Choice of "logo"?

I kind of wanted to inquire about this image which is used as the project's logo. There's nothing exactly wrong with the image itself, but might it be more within the spirit of the project to have a picture of women drawn by a woman? Or perhaps a portrayal of real women? Just something to consider. Of course, I defer to project members, and especially women, if they're attached to the current image. --BDD (talk) 14:52, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Long discussion in the archives about the image. Real women evoke too much controversy. People assume you are limiting the scope to the person's persona. If you would like to propose another image, feel free to post one for comment. SusunW (talk) 15:11, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Special prize for Women's articles in a writing contest

Hello. I want to invite you to participate in a writing contest about three state museums in Madrid (Museum of Romaticism, Museo del Traje and National Archaeological Museum), from December 14, 2015 till January 14, 2016. There is a special prize for the participant with more points thanks to articles listed in the category for that prize. You can join it in every language. More information in GLAMing Madrid Challenge. Thanks. --Millars (talk) 00:45, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Talk:A_Rape_on_Campus

Opinions needed in the discussion "Debunked and retracted" or "retracted"? on Talk:A_Rape_on_Campus re:Jackie's story in Rolling Stone. I'm commenting about it here because someone on the talk page said I was canvassing by posting this comment under feminism. The article is tagged for WP:Feminism and WP:WMNHIST, but the women's history project says it's for articles about women up to the mid-20th century, so that's probably a mistake. Permstrump (talk) 16:01, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Not being familiar with rules resulted in my bio to be deleted

Hi all I had a Wiki bio Page"Maryam Hashemi" which was useful to many people , it was up for about six years, i remember whenever I did any update as long as I could provide the right references there was never any problem, I hadnt updated it for a long time and I realised many information was out of date also incorrect so I updated some parts and made sure I have been providing enough references and evidence , As I was doing this I kept noticing the information was not being updated event though it was being saved and I thought it was my internet connection on my tablet playing up and didn't ralise that another editor was changing the details back at the same time and I was very surprised when I found out it was only then, so I changed the details according to what he was suggesting and mentioned I wasn't aware it was being edited as he thought I was getting into an editing war with him . It was after seeing the message that I read about "request edit " but I wasn't fully aware where I should put that request I noticed a lot of editting rules that I wasn't aware of, so I mentioned it somewhere where I thought a discussion was hapening regarding the changes and mentioned what changes I was doing and I thought it would be enough if I clarify it. The day after I noticed the page was deleted and there was the mention that I didn't sign after the messages and what I had done was not cool.

I understand the laws regarding personal bios and it absolutely makes sense but it defiantly felt like I had triggered many red lights and wiki police after me and had to teach me a lesson for not being cool and deleted my page, which is a shame and im not sure if it's at all possible to get it back. Mahashemi (talk) 22:02, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Maryam Hashemi still exists. The first Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maryam Hashemi happened in 2007 and, with very little discussion, resulted in it being deleted then. It is currently being once again discussed for deletion. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maryam Hashemi (2nd nomination). — Maile (talk) 22:16, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi there - Here's a table that lists 4 women-related articles I'll commit to the most: User:LeoRomero/scxc. Please let me know there if you'd like to help me, or if there are any women-related Articles or Projects you'd like me to help you with. You can also copy-paste my Responsibility Table to create a Cooperation Table of your own - at the SCXC Page, or anywhere else. - Thanks and Mabuhay! - LoRETta/LeoRomero 18:19, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

And how is it relevant to this WikiProject? sst✈(discuss) 17:38, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Because it led to this: Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias/Gender gap task force/3D2Do. Thanks for the question SSTflyer. Hope to read more questions/concerns/suggestions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countering systemic bias/Gender gap task force/3D2Do. - Kindest, and Mabuhay! - LoRETta/LeoRomero 18:57, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Women's history project into task force?

Should the women's history project become a task force of this one? WhisperToMe (talk) 01:24, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

@WhisperToMe: what would be the advantages and disadvantages of turning a wikiproject into a task force? Ottawahitech (talk) 19:22, 12 December 2015 (UTC)please ping me
@Ottawahitech: It could allow both projects to combine and use their talents together. Women's history is an aspect of the experience of women and it may be a way to recruit more female editors. Now there may be a disadvantage if existing members on either side want to have their projects remain separate. WhisperToMe (talk) 09:58, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
Rosiestep will have some valuable insight here, since we made Women in Red a taskforce of this project. There are pros and cons, but I am unsure which of the issues we have discussed on WiR are technology related or process related. SusunW (talk) 17:25, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
@WhisperToMe, Ottawahitech, and SusunW: We've talked about developing task forces under the WP:WikiProject Women umbrella and maybe it's time to re-open the conversation. Another thing we might want to consider when there's an inactive "women's" project is having its talkpage redirect to WP:WikiProject Women; I'm not sure if that's ever been done, but it might make sense? --Rosiestep (talk) 01:48, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
@Rosiestep: If the inactive project is converted into a task force I suppose the talk page from the old project could redirect to the task force. If not, it could redirect to a "noticeboard" for the subject WhisperToMe (talk) 21:03, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Category:Women translators at CfD

Just a head up: Even though Category:Women translators is not officially part of the deletion discussion it looks like its deletion is discussed by some. Ottawahitech (talk) 03:00, 26 December 2015 (UTC)please ping me

Category:Women translators, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for merging or deletion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 04:42, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Use of pink in templates about women's topics, feminism, etc?

Discussion isn't going to result in any guidelines here, so hatting

I believe that templates on Feminism, "women in..." topics, should use pink in the header, in a way similar to how U.S. college and university templates use their respective school colors (for example: Template:University of Houston or Template:UCLA). This is because, in 2015, just about all industrialized societies have associated pink with femininity. The average "man on the street" or "woman on the street" in China, Brazil, Singapore, Germany, Japan, or the United States would assign pink to a topic about women. This wasn't always true in every country (for example in the U.S. in the 1920s it was reversed, with blue preferred for girls) but it is true today in 2015.

Using pink could draw more attention to the topic, attracting people interested in discussing gender and gender differences. I had intentionally used in pink in several templates I wrote myself (for example Template:Women's prisons in the United States, Template:Girls' schools in Texas), and likewise blue for templates related to boys' schools (for example Template:Boys' schools in California ... such male-oriented templates do not exist for prisons) and I had also applied this change to one of the feminism templates (I forget which). Also for the "women in..." I had applied some external template changes (adding the color tag to each instance).

Now another user stated a belief that the use of pink was sexist and showed me a BBC article. I was already aware that it "pink and blue" were not biologically programmed as such into people, but the article does make some interesting points:

  • "Even the association of pink with femininity today can backfire if it’s not used in the right way. Pink is often used for breast cancer campaigns, but researchers at Erasmus University Rotterdam found that when women were shown adverts dominated by the colour pink, they were in fact less likely to think they’d contract breast cancer themselves or to donate money to a cancer charity. The authors ::don’t believe this was because they hated the colour pink, but because when they were reminded of their gender so overtly, the adverts felt so personally threatening that it set off denial mechanisms." - This is a good point to bring up. We don't want other women to feel turned off if they are reminded too much of their gender, but I would like to hear from other Wikipedia editors to see if this would be the case.
  • "But there is one way at least in which pink can be useful for both women and men. Back in 2002 researchers in Switzerland who were keen to increase the response rate to surveys, found that printing questionnaires on coloured paper made no difference, unless the paper was pink, in which case 12% more people filled it in." - This is the reason why I support using pink, because it can attract attention to women's topics in this way.
  • There is also "There’s one famous study showing that women treated the exact same babies differently[...]" but I don't know if this is applicable to these templates.

WhisperToMe (talk) 13:53, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Oh lord no - that would be utterly counterproductive. Marking everything to do with women in pink, while treating men like actual people, is the sort of thing that you can only get where you've got men making those editorial decisions (and boy does it make it obvious). The Drover's Wife (talk) 13:55, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
@The Drover's Wife: I did the same thing with boys' schools related templates, but using blue. Does this mean that in this instance boys are also not being treated as people? (with prisons, there is no sense in making male-oriented templates as in virtually all countries most prisons are for men) WhisperToMe (talk) 14:20, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
I agree with The Drover's Wife ... this is a bad idea. and, these aren't Universities where the colour identity is controlled by a single institution. Frietjes (talk) 13:56, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
While it's true that there's no one institution that controls this, it is common for feminist organizations to use pink:
From Girl Culture: Studying girl culture : a readers' guide - Page 473:
"[...]of pink with femininity has been strategically used in gendered terms to convey strength and pride: pink is the color of Breast Cancer Awareness Month, and many feminist groups have adopted the color pink as a sign of empowerment."
WhisperToMe (talk) 14:57, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
I must state unequivocally that I seriously dislike pink--anything pink is likely to make me disinterested in the subject. SusunW (talk) 15:08, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
As I go through I notice all the Catholic archdiocese templates use bright gold (I don't know if the Roman Catholic Church specifies exact RGB values like the U.S. universities do), and California templates also use a golden color (again, I don't know if the State of California specifies exact RGB values like the U.S. universities do). If pink isn't the best choice what color is? Is there any other color associated with women today in popular media/society? WhisperToMe (talk) 01:34, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
You're not getting it: the idea that topics related to women need their own specific colour, while topics related to men need a colour relating to their actual area is the whole problem. Making it pink would make it worse and make it utterly obvious that a man had initiated that one, but the gross systemic bias is the same. It makes sense to have a theme colour for specific universities and specific religious, because they're discrete topics: it does not make sense to do that for, y'know, women. It doesn't help navigation and it sure as shit doesn't draw attention to the topic - or at least not the kind of attention you want (i.e. not "wtf Wikipedia male editorial staff). The Drover's Wife (talk) 02:32, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
In some subjects the role of women is absolutely considered to be a "discrete topic" (Wiktionary defines discrete as "Separate; distinct; individual; non-continuous."). For example: prison. Very few women are in prison, after all, and their biological needs are different from men. This is why people write books specifically about imprisonment of women, and why there are articles about that Whenever somebody talks about "gender-oriented programming" in prisons, it's about women. That's why Wikipedia has an article on incarceration of women.
Another example: Single-sex education in public (government) schools in the U.S. Some school districts are opening them to try to increase student performance. Not everyone agrees on whether they are a good idea. For example here is one article talking about it: Law Street Media and The Atlantic and The Dartmouth - In the case of single-sex public schools, both boys' education and girls' education are explored as distinct subjects. The schools themselves are defined by the fact that they are single gender.
I am a man but... I would be cautious in always assuming a person wanting to use pink is a man, because again:
  • "[...of pink with femininity has been strategically used in gendered terms to convey strength and pride: pink is the color of Breast Cancer Awareness Month, and many feminist groups have adopted the color pink as a sign of empowerment."] - While not all women-oriented/feminist organizations use pink, some do so and make a point of it and I think they would disagree that the use of a color to represent gender is inappropriate.
Remember that humans are attracted to color in general. The very CNN article Frietjes mentioned stated that pink attracts more survey responses in both men and women. Of course the same article said that some women may not want to be reminded too much of their own gender. That in my view is a valid point to make in this discussion and that is why I suggested if maybe there was a better color.
WhisperToMe (talk) 07:41, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Look, if you want to use pink with feminism topics, head over to WT:FEM and initiate a discussion there. WikiProject Women has nothing to do with feminism. As for using pink with women topics, TDW has a point here. I would suggest, at most, using a pink border for infoboxes. sst✈discuss 14:00, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
@SSTflyer: I'll be happy to move this discussion to another place, although much of what was discussed was not only the feminism template but various templates on single gender schools and women's prisons that I had started.
This project says it is "to improve Wikipedia's coverage of women's topics." - I believe that feminism is a subset of that, and that single gender education and the incarceration of women would also be subsets of the coverage of women.
Using pink as a border is an idea I like, but I don't know how to draw a border. If there's code on that I'd like to see it. As I've said, in many cases gender is a discrete topic: we could indicate it, but not too strongly.
WhisperToMe (talk) 23:58, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
WhisperToMe, for whatever it's worth, I have no problem using pink to flag women's issues, so long as some equivalent is done for men. I don't like how women are suddenly not supposed to like pink because it's associated with us. Just to add an interesting factoid, it has been found to be calming in prisons. :) SarahSV (talk) 00:10, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
SlimVirgin Yes, they use pink at Tutwiler Prison in Alabama. I would agree that it could be a very calming color. Anyway I was using blue for the equivalent templates related to boys' schools in various U.S. states. In the case of single gender schools, there are discussions on how to educate boys from inner city neighborhoods. WhisperToMe (talk) 00:16, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
This is an embarrassing Wikipedia gender gap news story waiting to happen, and the sort of thing that makes me not tell people I edit Wikipedia because I'd get laughed at for being associated with. I wince at dudes talking about "pink reminding women of their own gender" or about how women react to babies when there's a basic and obvious issue of "topics referring to men are discussed in the context of the issue, the same topics for women must be branded pink for the ladies!". It's sexist and it's embarrassing: border or no border, the issue is sailing right over your head. The Drover's Wife (talk) 00:35, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
WhisperToMe, I think the argument is not so much against the use of pink, it's the marking of women (using any colour) as somehow not the default. So it would depend what you're going to do for the male equivalent of the thing you're using colour for, assuming there is an equivalent. SarahSV (talk) 00:55, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
@SlimVirgin: In this case I had used this shade of pink] and this shade of Blue].
1. In the United States the norm is coeducational education, so having single-gender schools either for boys or for girls is not as common, especially with public (government-funded) schools. In regards to American schools that I'm not trying to say that "women are not the default while men are the default" - it's that educating either gender separately is not the default.
2. In the case of prisons, men's prisons are treated as the norm: it's the way the topic is structured. The Federal Bureau of Prisons has a page just on women inmates but not one for male inmates. The Texas Department of Criminal Justice has a page dedicated to women death row inmates while they don't do the same for men.
WhisperToMe (talk) 01:04, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
I don't see a problem with using pink for girls' schools and blue for boys', though I note that you've used a light shade of pink and a dark shade of blue, so I'd change that, preferably by darkening the pink. But I don't think you should use colour for women's prisons and let men's prisons remain unmarked. SarahSV (talk) 01:08, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
I'm fine with using a different shade of pink in school templates.
As for prisons, a lot of templates on that subject use gray (for example the TDCJ templates). I wouldn't mind using gray for the templates on women's prisons, so the same color would be used for general lists of prisons by state/territory and those templates specifically about women's prisons.
WhisperToMe (talk) 01:17, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
Feminism (for me) is about correcting all the ways in which women and issues of interest to women are regarded as not the default. What's good for women's prisons is good for men's. If you want to distinguish them through colour, that's fine (in my view), but do it for both, and if you choose a dark authoritative blue, choose a similar tone for the pink. SarahSV (talk) 01:35, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
I'd be fine with using a more authoritative color for women. However I haven't written any templates for "men's prisons" because the overwhelming majority of prisons are for men. (for example: Template:State prisons in Louisiana shows that there is one prison in the whole state for women versus 11 current and former prisons for men, and Template:TDCJ-CID prisons shows that there are six units for women versus 53 for men) According to Table 4 of this Bureau of Justice statistics document (on page 2): in 2012 there were 1,410,208 male prisoners under US jurisdiction while there were 101,289 female prisoners.
On Wikipedia I have tried to correct the "men are the default" somewhat by changing instances of "this-and-this prison houses death row" to "men's death row" or "death row for men" to indicate that not everyone is designated to be held in that facility (states that use the death penalty hold women on death row in separate prisons). However since the gender distribution of long-term (post-conviction) prisons is overwhelmingly male, I never made separate templates for men's prisons and doing so would be very redundant.
WhisperToMe (talk) 02:43, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
FORGET pink, it's SO last century!! If you insist on giving women's Wikipedia topics a signature color, take a hint from Women in Red and make the choice strong and decisive. As Gloria Allred once said about the evolution of her own distinctive wardrobe, "I've see the fuchsia, and it works." — Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 02:22, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
Hey, stronger colors like red or fuschia would be cool! :) WhisperToMe (talk)
Like. --Rosiestep (talk) 04:54, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
There are lots of strong shades of pink and lavender (color). SarahSV (talk) 05:01, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
Late to this part, but no. don't. even. go. there. Especially on infoboxes! Let's not "Pink it and shrink it." Montanabw(talk) 07:28, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
I'm not here to say "yes" or "no", nor to suggest any colours. I'm here to say that doing it as a border is not difficult, you use the |titlestyle= parameter just as you do for a coloured background. A coloured border is preferable to a coloured background, because it allows the links to be their normal blue colour and not violate WP:CONTRAST. See for example the navbox at Libby Lane#External links. This one is done with the {{Anglican navbox titlestyle|bishop}} template, but it comes down to |titlestyle=background: #FFFFFF; border-bottom: #7F1734 5px solid; border-top: #7F1734 5px solid; - here, the #7F1734 is the colour  . --Redrose64 (talk) 12:07, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
Than you so much! I'll try it out and see how it works :) WhisperToMe (talk) 17:10, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
I tried Deep Carmine as a border at Template:Women's prisons in the United States as that's a color used by the Women's Prison Association on its website http://www.wpaonline.org/WhisperToMe (talk) 17:35, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
It's not the tech, it's the ghettoizing of "women get special colors but men don't need them" that bugs me. Also, for navboxes and infoboxes, the design gurus are apt to say it' atypical... and do we really want to segregate, for example, sports figures? Really? If we wanted to be fair, do we REALLY want to create pink and blue versions of {{Infobox person}} and fix million of articles to be "boy" or "girl?" Or go around and outline the infobox for, oh, Serena Williams in pink? dear god, no! Montanabw(talk) 21:12, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
I don't know about infoboxes but for navboxes it's quite common: U.S. colleges and universities, the Catholic church, California-related templates, etc. they're colored. While the first have specific RGB hues I don't know about the other two. I don't think that colors belong in infoboxes and I haven't seen people do special colors with those.
Whether it makes sense to mark gender depends on the topic: In some cases it makes zero sense since the literature doesn't discuss gender differences. In the case of prisons, they are gender segregated (there are very few coed prison programs out there), and "women's incarceration" is treated as a specialized subtopic of prisons/incarceration.
WhisperToMe (talk) 21:35, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
Most topics can fit into multiple categories; personally I don't want to see infoboxes start having multi-coloured borders, or for a lot of discussion time to be expended on what colour should have primacy. isaacl (talk) 22:06, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
  • @Montanabw and I worked with several others for almost a month on the image and colors for Women Writers; we aren't re-addressing those colors right here and now, right? And if not, then specifically, what are we opposing or supporting in this talkpage section? It's become quite confusing. --Rosiestep (talk) 22:01, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

4,644 articles already tagged by WikiProject Women!

I understand that tagging of articles for this wikiproject has been done by individuals and not by a BOT - so it looks like this project is quite active, even if no one here "talks" a lot, LOL. For those who may want to help tagging articles this is what I would do (do others have better ideas?}:

  1. Start at Category: Women
  2. Make sure this project's tag (banner) is already on its talkpage
  3. Click on the first item in Category: Women which at the moment happens to be Category:Women by behavior
  4. Repeat step 2
  5. Click on the first item in Category:Women by behavior which at the moment happens to be Category:Women activists
  6. Repeat step 2 (Category talk:Women activists is still not tagged right now - so go ahead and tag it)
  7. Category:Women activists contains both subcategoires and individual articles, go ahead and tag all the talkpages.
  8. Continue "drilling down" until all women categories and articles in this category branch are tagged
  9. At this point you can start working on a different brach of the category tree.

Am I making sense? Ottawahitech (talk) 19:53, 12 December 2015 (UTC)please ping me

Are you saying, Ottawahitech, that if we put the WikiProject tag on the categories pages, the WikiProject Women tag will automatically go on the pages within the category??? If so, that would be the awesome!!!! :D Megalibrarygirl (talk) 00:17, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
Unfortunately not (as far as I know). Every talkpage has to be tagged individually for the page to be included in the assessment table of this wikiproj and for Article alerts to be generated here. So a category that is nominated for deletion after it has been tagged, will show up in the alerts section, and the same goes for articles, reditrects, etc. Ottawahitech (talk) 00:33, 13 December 2015 (UTC)please ping me However, if all the categories are tagged it will help a BOT tag articles, I think? Ottawahitech (talk) 00:35, 13 December 2015 (UTC)please ping me
@Ottawahitech and Megalibrarygirl: After founding WP:WikiProject Women writers, we put together a list of categories on the talkpage, asked for comments, and after about a week, got a bot to add the talkpage banner to all the cats in our list. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women writers/Archive 1#Bot request. We repeated this 3 or 4 times over the course of a few months. That project is pretty robust now with >900 categories, and >24K articles in its scope. Shall we do it? I'm in! -- (talk) 01:07, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
@Rosiestep: Impressive! More than 24K articles in roughly two weeks. Those BOTS sure earn their living. Having said this I still think that while we are waiting for the BOT to start, individual editors may want to continue tagging. Ottawahitech (talk) 01:29, 13 December 2015 (UTC)please ping me
No no, not in two weeks; the project has been around since August 2014. --Rosiestep (talk) 01:40, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
I vote yes. Because someone keeps saying we don't have consensus to make changes I want it to be very clear, if it isn't already that I am totally in favor of using technology to add talkpage banners to the categories we previously have identified in great detail for that list of "AxelNewArtBot config" search string. (Would that we could get this done "in about a week" Rosiestep :) )SusunW (talk) 03:25, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
I still find the count of 4,644 articles appallingly low. I suggest requesting a bot to tag all articles in Category:21st-century actresses (recursive) with the {{WikiProject Women}} template. This category and its sub-categories contain a total of more than 8,000 articles (checking via AWB). sst✈(discuss) 07:30, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
@SSTflyer: this project now has 7,634 articles tagged. I agree, and so do many others here, that a a bot should tag all articles. I personally don't understand why it has not already been done for subcategories of Category:Women. Ottawahitech (talk) 20:20, 30 December 2015 (UTC)please ping me
@Ottawahitech:, I think we have to list the subcategories, too, not just the main category. I think we've started that in the below subsection, "Bot request". There's also a discussion somewhere, can't find it now, about initially tagging all the women's biographies which have a corresponding de-wiki article with Frau category. If memory serves me right, @Redrose64: knew more about actually request the bot run than anyone else that comes to mind. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:46, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Bot request

For WikiProject Women artists and WikiProject Women writers, we set up a bot request to automatically add the project banner to article talk pages. If we want to do the same thing, there are instructions at User talk:AnomieBOT under 'WikiProjectTagger run'. We can basically pick the categories (perhaps most of the subcategories of Category:Women writers) and let the bot do the work. We only need approval for the cats from this project's members. Unless we'd be somehow modifying the project banners for WikiProject Biography, I don't think we need their permission to proceed (though they might have useful input) (paraphrasing @Gobonobo 1 September 2014). Feel free to add or strike categories from this list. If there are no objections in the next week, I'll put in a request at AnomieBOT to add the Women banner to the articles in this list. --Rosiestep (talk) 03:48, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Categories within the scope of this WikiProject
Category:Women by behavior

👍 Like That seems like a very short list of categories, but I am still in favor of any of it being automated. SusunW (talk) 04:23, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

👍 LikeAutomate, please. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:26, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

 Works for me. sst✈(discuss) 07:34, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Adding Njeri Rionge to this wikiproject

I tried adding Wikipedia:WikiAfrica/Stubs/Njeri Rionge by tagging its talk-page with WikiProject Women but I don't think it worked. Help? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 18:55, 24 December 2015 (UTC)please ping me

@Ottawahitech: Seems to have worked fine - why do you think it didn't work? Sam Walton (talk) 19:03, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Ottawahitech it worked, Women is on the talk page, but it is tagged as a draft. Why would that be? SusunW (talk) 19:08, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Because in this edit, the parameter |class=Draft was included. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:43, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
@Redrose: are you saying that draft articles are not in the scope of this wiki-project? Ottawahitech (talk) 20:05, 30 December 2015 (UTC)please ping me
@Ottawahitech: No. What gave that impression? --Redrose64 (talk) 21:19, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
@SusunW: How else should articles from the Incubator of Project WikiAfrica be marked? Ottawahitech (talk) 20:09, 30 December 2015 (UTC)please ping me

Is this project experiencing more deletions than most?

I just checked the alerts section of this project and counted 21 wp:AfD s. Isn’t this a rather large number considering this project has only 3,953 articles listed ? Ottawahitech (talk) 05:18, 19 November 2015 (UTC)please ping me

That is a lot at AfD, and I wish there were far few. For what it's worth, though, this project has far more articles under its general purvue than 3,953 as all the other "women" projects are affiliated with this one. --Rosiestep (talk) 05:32, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm not terribly surprised - there are a lot of projects going on to expand Wikipedia's coverage of women in areas less-likely to have rock-solid obvious notability guidelines, and Wikipedians have always been a bit gung-ho about nominating people and things they're unfamiliar with. It is also (deservedly) inflated at the moment by people cleaning up the godforsaken Neelix mess, which that it ever happened is a bit of a reflection about how bad Wikipedia has been on women's issues for a while. The Drover's Wife (talk) 05:53, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
I think it may be a good idea for all the regulars here to get autopatrolled, that will keep smaller articles out of the eyes of the NPP/AFD patrollers. Anyone who can find their way here and get autopatrolled isn't going to be putting up cruft, and we could all benefit from not having to be constantly distracted by AfDs. Also, for those who seek DYK but aren't autopatrolled, those of us who are could put up a small stub of something that's being sandboxed, and the lead editor can still get DYK credit based on a 5x expansion. Montanabw(talk) 22:36, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
From WP:PERM:
  • Autopatrolled (add request · view requests): The autopatrolled flag is granted to users who are active in the creation of new articles. This tool is granted so their creations are auto patrolled in Special:NewPages. Unlike other requests, any user may nominate an editor for Autopatrolled, even without that user's consent. A user who wishes to have this flag generally should have created at least 25 articles and must be trusted, experienced, and must have demonstrated they are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, especially WP:BLP and Wikipedia:Notability.
So, if you've created at least 25 articles, click here. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:49, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Megalibrarygirl push that button (okay, link) you should definitely get autopatrol status. SusunW (talk) 19:22, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
SusunW I clicked the button! I'll let you know how it turns out. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:25, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
I see this project still has only 4,276 articles listed in its assessment table. This is probably just a tiny portion of the articles that it should tag. Has Anyone here tried to approach user:BHGbot which "exists for a single purpose: to tag the talk pages of articles and categories with the tags which identify the articles as being within the scope of a particular WikiProject". Just curious. Ottawahitech (talk) 22:34, 1 December 2015 (UTC)please ping me
@Ottawahitech: I think we have repeatedly asked everyone we could think of. But Rosiestep was working on some sources last I knew. SusunW (talk) 23:53, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
The bots require a consensus on what to tag, but after a long discussion no consensus was reached. We could try reviving the proposal. RockMagnetist(talk) 00:34, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
@RockMagnetist: sure, let's talk about the tagging proposal[where?] again. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:52, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Looks like there are more articles slowly trickling in: I see roughly 300 more articles since Dec 1, 2015. (count is now 4,586). Ottawahitech (talk) 01:43, 9 December 2015 (UTC)please ping me
21 of 3,953 is roughly half a percent (0.53%). It is not a large number. —Pengo 08:11, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Part of the reason for the AfDs is to remove non-notable pageant related articles, which are mostly brief bios of girls and/or women. Removing all the fancruft, much of it inserted by paid editors for the pageant companies, is no slight against coverage of women on WP. I fully support more bios of women who have done something more meaningful then look good in a bikini and meet WP:GNG. Legacypac (talk) 19:14, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

@Legacypac: you say those articles are not-notable-fancruft, but it appears the "community" disagrees. When checking Wikipedia:WikiProject_Lists/Article_alerts#AfD one can easily see that a dozen of your nominations ended with a close of Keep. Ottawahitech (talk) 19:37, 30 December 2015 (UTC)please ping me
Ottawahitech presumably you are looking at the Miss Earth annual articles listed at the link. If you read the group AfD you will find that was not a clear decision, but one where the closer exercised a lot of judgement. I don't agree with that close but its not so wrong it is worthy to appeal. After the AfD about 80% of each article was pruned as fancruft/incorrect etc, so while the titles stand for now, the unsourced and fancruft content is all deleted which was the point of the AfD. If you look at the pageant winner articles I've nominated a high percentage get deleted or redirected. Legacypac (talk) 22:41, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Bill Cosby issues

I probably have to step back from this one, because it's making me very angry. But there seems to be a movement among supporters of the accused sexual predator Bill Cosby to keep his mugshot off of Wikipedia, even off the page Bill Cosby sexual assault allegations, supposedly because his photo is unflattering, prejudicial, of marginal value, or (perhaps) because his drugging and sexual assault charges, accompanied by $1 million bail and the possibility of a 10 year prison sentence, are only a "Class II" felony. See discussion here and here (on Jimbo's Talk page).

Am feeling a little lonely here, wondering why Justin Bieber and Mel Gibson (among others) have their public domain mugshots here on Wikipedia, but dear old "I-fooled-almost-everyone-playing-a-friendly-lovable-gynecologist-named-Dr.-Huxtable-on-TV" Bill Cosby can't have his mugshot posted, even for articles describing the crime for which he is accused. Please weigh in and help. Thanks. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 23:31, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

The mug shot is at top of Bill Cosby sexual assault allegations now. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:19, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

RfC on Talk:Charli XCX

You are invited to comment on a request for comment at Talk:Charli XCX#RFC: MOS:SURNAME and articles related to Charli XCX. Thank you. sst✈ 01:29, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

University press sources

I was just surfing through American university book presses to see what they have on women. I'm amazed, but probably should not be, about the wealth found there. University of Alabama Press is what I have open at the moment. I typed "Alabama women" into the search box and pulled up 276 books that cover a wide range of subjects, both fiction and non-fiction. These university presses are a bounty of possibilities. — Maile (talk) 14:54, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

And can I just say Thank you Maile66 for your work adding new sources for people to check on the Hall of Fame inductees in the articles I've been creating. SusunW (talk) 15:33, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
@SusunW: It's the one (and maybe only) thing at WP I actually feel useful at doing. It can be daunting for a newbie to find sourcing to contribute to content. Applause to you and @Rosiestep: on putting those lists and templates together. An FYI for future thought. If any of these lists ever become submitted as a Featured List Candidate, at that watering hole they like the extra separate column for Refs. Like New Jersey Women's Hall of Fame. If not thinking of FLC, the issue is somewhat irrelevant. Not suggesting you (or anyone else) re-do anything, because just mentioning it. — Maile (talk) 17:02, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Maile66 Good to know, but heck, I am finally "sort of" proficient at DYK, hardly understand Good Article criteria but am working on it. FA is totally beyond my scope at this point ;P but we shall see what 2016 brings. SusunW (talk) 17:13, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to a virtual editathon on Women in Music

Women in Music
  • 10 to 31 January 2016
  • Please join us in the worldwide virtual edit-a-thon hosted by Women in Red.

--Ipigott (talk) 10:06, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Birmingham Archives and Heritage

Anyone interested in helping expand women's history in Birmingham, as reflected in these archives? Philafrenzy (talk) 11:19, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Well, somebody nominated the article for Speedy Deletion, so I removed the tag. Hopefully, this new article won't be deleted. Also, I added that this refers to Birmingham, England, not Alabama's largest city of Birmingham. Thanks for creating it, by the way. I'm sure it will come to good use.— Maile (talk) 13:14, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! Philafrenzy (talk) 14:26, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Women/Archive_5&oldid=1076158757"