This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Infobox women by region template. |
|
Infoboxes | ||||
|
Women Template‑class | |||||||
|
11/27/2012
If you look at the source document on page 7 and 11:
"Our Gender Inequality Index (GII), updated this year for *****145**** countries, shows how reproductive health constraints contribute to gender inequality."
The tables are different than the actual GII index. The statistical data set is out of 145. The reason for 146 is because of the inclusion of a country that is sovereign, but doesn't actually have programs/laws/legislative bodies that could enact change in gender inequality. This means that the total set that is utilized for ranking and statistical measures is out of 145, not 146.
Please discuss below.
Adam Marré ( talk) 10:03, 27 November 2012 (UTC)Adam
I honestly don't believe that the United Nations would make an "imaginary and probably erroneous rank". If they have, then it isn't a good source document to use for your template and you should go with a year that isn't "erroneous". Until then, I will continue to revert the changes made to match the sourced document. Adam Marré ( talk) 11:19, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
I feel there's an ambiguity between Women in Parliament and other metrics, see following example from Women in Cuba:
Women in parliament 48.9% (2015) Females over 25 with secondary education 83.9% (2005-2015) Women in labour force 42.6% (2015)
Women in Parliament refers to the proportion of parliamentarians that are women,
Females over 25 with secondary education refers to the proportion of Cuban women that have secondary education
Women in labour force does NOT refer to the proportion of work force that are women, which is by implication to be understood the same way as Women in Parliament but to the proportion of Cuban women that are workers.
To avoid misunderstanding, more explicit headings should be provided, I suggest:
Women in labour force ⇒ Female labour force participation
-- Jabbi ( talk) 14:58, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
copied from
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates
I noticed the
Template:Infobox women by region has "out of 153" in the rank for the Global Gender Gap Index (the GGG in the template). I think that needs to be removed because the number of countries in the report can vary by year; exactly how the the GGI section accommodates for it.
I'm sorry to ask the dumb favor, but I already tried to fix it once and basically broke the whole thing. (Not a good look). I'm not sure how to better describe the issue, but I've already discussed it a bit over at the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red. Hopefully this makes sense and someone can take that out? Cheers Estheim ( talk) 20:12, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
|report_year=
to generate an automatic reference and the correct number for that year. If the project wants that and can supply links to all of the relevant reference documents, I could probably code it for you. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 00:38, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
|ggg_year=
) that automatically: 1) generates the reference, 2) generates the right out of ...text, 3) adds the year where relevant. I see Jonesey95 already offered technical help. If a backup is needed, count me in. MarioGom ( talk) 13:42, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
ggg_count
and gii_count
to deal with the issue of variable count totals from year to year.
~Gwennie🐈⦅
💬
📋⦆ 15:24, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Infobox women by region template. |
|
Infoboxes | ||||
|
Women Template‑class | |||||||
|
11/27/2012
If you look at the source document on page 7 and 11:
"Our Gender Inequality Index (GII), updated this year for *****145**** countries, shows how reproductive health constraints contribute to gender inequality."
The tables are different than the actual GII index. The statistical data set is out of 145. The reason for 146 is because of the inclusion of a country that is sovereign, but doesn't actually have programs/laws/legislative bodies that could enact change in gender inequality. This means that the total set that is utilized for ranking and statistical measures is out of 145, not 146.
Please discuss below.
Adam Marré ( talk) 10:03, 27 November 2012 (UTC)Adam
I honestly don't believe that the United Nations would make an "imaginary and probably erroneous rank". If they have, then it isn't a good source document to use for your template and you should go with a year that isn't "erroneous". Until then, I will continue to revert the changes made to match the sourced document. Adam Marré ( talk) 11:19, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
I feel there's an ambiguity between Women in Parliament and other metrics, see following example from Women in Cuba:
Women in parliament 48.9% (2015) Females over 25 with secondary education 83.9% (2005-2015) Women in labour force 42.6% (2015)
Women in Parliament refers to the proportion of parliamentarians that are women,
Females over 25 with secondary education refers to the proportion of Cuban women that have secondary education
Women in labour force does NOT refer to the proportion of work force that are women, which is by implication to be understood the same way as Women in Parliament but to the proportion of Cuban women that are workers.
To avoid misunderstanding, more explicit headings should be provided, I suggest:
Women in labour force ⇒ Female labour force participation
-- Jabbi ( talk) 14:58, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
copied from
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates
I noticed the
Template:Infobox women by region has "out of 153" in the rank for the Global Gender Gap Index (the GGG in the template). I think that needs to be removed because the number of countries in the report can vary by year; exactly how the the GGI section accommodates for it.
I'm sorry to ask the dumb favor, but I already tried to fix it once and basically broke the whole thing. (Not a good look). I'm not sure how to better describe the issue, but I've already discussed it a bit over at the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red. Hopefully this makes sense and someone can take that out? Cheers Estheim ( talk) 20:12, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
|report_year=
to generate an automatic reference and the correct number for that year. If the project wants that and can supply links to all of the relevant reference documents, I could probably code it for you. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 00:38, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
|ggg_year=
) that automatically: 1) generates the reference, 2) generates the right out of ...text, 3) adds the year where relevant. I see Jonesey95 already offered technical help. If a backup is needed, count me in. MarioGom ( talk) 13:42, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
ggg_count
and gii_count
to deal with the issue of variable count totals from year to year.
~Gwennie🐈⦅
💬
📋⦆ 15:24, 24 March 2021 (UTC)