This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Nasty Woman Movement redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 01:25, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Decide as a group the best term, based on popular use, for Nasty Woman or Nasty Women. There's some inconsistency across your sections. If you see others using both, you should use the term of their choice when directly discussing them, but on the page, when it's your language/description, choose a consistent phrase. I would recommend describing this decision, or even having the conversation on the Talk Page, so that future editors who come along will be able to practice your protocol. Aschuet1 ( talk) 16:03, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Ok, so, I found a source, The Washington Times, that found a name for the "movement." It actually called it the "'Nasty Women' moniker." I tried looking for sources that labeled it as the Nasty Woman Movement, but I only found a Facebook page with a mere 200 followers. I think using "moniker" would help us from distinguishing it as a movement which might stray into original research type problems. Also, I think the movement itself is really a stem of the women's movement and the resistance movement. "Nasty Woman" seems more like, as the Washington Times describes, a "barb... [that] has injected new vigor into Democrats' appeal to women to rally" (Wolfgang). Does this sound like a way we might want to look at the "movement?"
Willowwalsh (
talk)
15:46, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Here is a list of things to consider (taken from the peer reviews):
Again, this is just summarized list of what the peer reviews had to say.
Willowwalsh (
talk)
01:19, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi everyone! It looks like someone else moved the page before I could. I was going to merge this in with the entry for the phrase itself, but I'm going to hold off for a while since the two may have enough coverage to justify separate articles from one another. I figure that I'm going to wait and see how others react. Merging is still an option, but I think I'm going to leave it for right now. I did, however, remove the quotation marks since those typically aren't used on article titles on Wikipedia. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 18:08, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
@ Aschuet1 and Tokyogirl79: I just discovered this article via the Trump protests sidebar, and noticed from talk page comments that it's part of a WikiEd class. Congrats to students and teacher for that work! I have a few remarks you may want to consider:
Thanks, — JFG talk 21:07, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
I'm archiving the initial comments by editors from New Literacies, Cultures, and Technologies of Writing as they discussed how to start this article. Aschuet1 ( talk) 17:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Reception: Celebrities such as Katy Perry, Will Ferrell, and Julia Louis-Dreyfus have all publicly worn a "Nasty Woman" t-shirt in support of Hillary Clinton during the 2016 election and writers for sites such as the Huffington Post have voiced their support for the Nasty Women Project and themselves claim themselves as "nasty women." Elizabeth Warren used the "nasty woman" quote as a call to vote against Trump on on election day. The reclaiming of the title "nasty woman" has been viewed in a mostly favorable way by the political left, while some right wing sources and groups take issue with the Women's March and "nasty women."
I have found a lot of articles about people responding to the the "nasty woman" comments on Twitter, but so far I haven't found very much about general support of the Nasty Woman Project. Brittabarre (talk) 13:21, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
I wonder if the Nasty Women project keeps a list of their interviews and article features on their website? I'll check on that and see what I can find. Willowwalsh (talk) 13:56, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
I've been low-key classifying our sources on the bottom of the google doc, so we can get an idea, as a group, of which sources would be beneficial under which subheadings. *Subject to change* The good thing is that, with our existing sources, we have at least two sources for each subheading. As you can see (on the google doc), pop culture has way more sources, specifically art exhibition sources. I don't know if this would suggest that we should alter our current headings or just dig deeper to fill out the rest of the sections. Willowwalsh (talk) 13:53, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
My overview is kind of a skeleton, because I want to get an idea of the order of everything, so it seems like a logical flow from one topic to the next. If the way I order things is different from how it's ordered in the article, it probably will seem weaker, so I'll be adjusting it as we go on. Willowwalsh ( talk) 02:55, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Nasty Woman Movement redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 01:25, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Decide as a group the best term, based on popular use, for Nasty Woman or Nasty Women. There's some inconsistency across your sections. If you see others using both, you should use the term of their choice when directly discussing them, but on the page, when it's your language/description, choose a consistent phrase. I would recommend describing this decision, or even having the conversation on the Talk Page, so that future editors who come along will be able to practice your protocol. Aschuet1 ( talk) 16:03, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Ok, so, I found a source, The Washington Times, that found a name for the "movement." It actually called it the "'Nasty Women' moniker." I tried looking for sources that labeled it as the Nasty Woman Movement, but I only found a Facebook page with a mere 200 followers. I think using "moniker" would help us from distinguishing it as a movement which might stray into original research type problems. Also, I think the movement itself is really a stem of the women's movement and the resistance movement. "Nasty Woman" seems more like, as the Washington Times describes, a "barb... [that] has injected new vigor into Democrats' appeal to women to rally" (Wolfgang). Does this sound like a way we might want to look at the "movement?"
Willowwalsh (
talk)
15:46, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Here is a list of things to consider (taken from the peer reviews):
Again, this is just summarized list of what the peer reviews had to say.
Willowwalsh (
talk)
01:19, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi everyone! It looks like someone else moved the page before I could. I was going to merge this in with the entry for the phrase itself, but I'm going to hold off for a while since the two may have enough coverage to justify separate articles from one another. I figure that I'm going to wait and see how others react. Merging is still an option, but I think I'm going to leave it for right now. I did, however, remove the quotation marks since those typically aren't used on article titles on Wikipedia. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 18:08, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
@ Aschuet1 and Tokyogirl79: I just discovered this article via the Trump protests sidebar, and noticed from talk page comments that it's part of a WikiEd class. Congrats to students and teacher for that work! I have a few remarks you may want to consider:
Thanks, — JFG talk 21:07, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
I'm archiving the initial comments by editors from New Literacies, Cultures, and Technologies of Writing as they discussed how to start this article. Aschuet1 ( talk) 17:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Reception: Celebrities such as Katy Perry, Will Ferrell, and Julia Louis-Dreyfus have all publicly worn a "Nasty Woman" t-shirt in support of Hillary Clinton during the 2016 election and writers for sites such as the Huffington Post have voiced their support for the Nasty Women Project and themselves claim themselves as "nasty women." Elizabeth Warren used the "nasty woman" quote as a call to vote against Trump on on election day. The reclaiming of the title "nasty woman" has been viewed in a mostly favorable way by the political left, while some right wing sources and groups take issue with the Women's March and "nasty women."
I have found a lot of articles about people responding to the the "nasty woman" comments on Twitter, but so far I haven't found very much about general support of the Nasty Woman Project. Brittabarre (talk) 13:21, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
I wonder if the Nasty Women project keeps a list of their interviews and article features on their website? I'll check on that and see what I can find. Willowwalsh (talk) 13:56, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
I've been low-key classifying our sources on the bottom of the google doc, so we can get an idea, as a group, of which sources would be beneficial under which subheadings. *Subject to change* The good thing is that, with our existing sources, we have at least two sources for each subheading. As you can see (on the google doc), pop culture has way more sources, specifically art exhibition sources. I don't know if this would suggest that we should alter our current headings or just dig deeper to fill out the rest of the sections. Willowwalsh (talk) 13:53, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
My overview is kind of a skeleton, because I want to get an idea of the order of everything, so it seems like a logical flow from one topic to the next. If the way I order things is different from how it's ordered in the article, it probably will seem weaker, so I'll be adjusting it as we go on. Willowwalsh ( talk) 02:55, 19 April 2017 (UTC)