Women Project‑class | |||||||
|
Women in Red | ||||
|
Women in Green Homepage | Current Featured Content | DYK | 2024 Goal Tracking | Events | Talk/Discussion |
|
||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 270 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 15 sections are present. |
As WiG is focused on core articles about women, I thought I'd take a wee look at the gender gap in the list of vital articles. What I found was sadly unsurprising. Of each of the biographical categories, only one ( entertainers, et al) represents women at above the Wikipedia-wide average of 19.64%, with 33.7% of its entries being women. For the others, women make up:
This means women together make up roughly 16.4% of level-5 articles, dropping down to 10.3% of of level-4 vital articles and then even further to only 9% of level-3 vital articles.
All this has gotten me thinking about how we can close the gap a little on the vital articles list. As women were most under-represented in the category of scientists and mathematicians, I opened a discussion about adding some more glaring omissions. But even if all of my suggestions were added, this would only bring it in line with politicians and religious figures. If we wanted to bring the gap up to the Wikipedia-wide average, then (not accounting for removals) we would need to add over 500 women to the V5 list; about 180 women to the V4 list; and at least 10 women to the V3 list. -- Grnrchst ( talk) 19:14, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
The biography of the recent Nobel Prizewinner in Medicine, Katalin Karikó, would benefit from the attention of this project. Perhaps someone would like to nominate it for GA. If so, although I am no expert in medicine, I would be happy to help with copy editing. Initial work should in particular remove citations from the lead and make sure they are appropriately included in the body of the article. It may be sensible to wait for a few days until details from continuing press coverage have been added to the article.-- Ipigott ( talk) 05:55, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
There are currently three vacancies on the Hot 100. Since the project is getting an influx of new participants this week, I figure this is as good a time as any to make sure the Hot 100 actually has 100 articles. Is there a usual process for moving future suggestions up? I could see there being disagreement about what names to add, and I see a few in the future suggestions list that should probably be removed rather than promoted. Nearly a third of the suggestions seem to be Sri Lankan women added by one person without regard for how prominent they are (I'm tempted to WP:BOLDly remove that part of the list). And another thought, for months where there's not an editathon, maybe we could start choosing a "woman of the month" from the Hot 100 where everyone collaborates on that specific article during the month to get it closer to GA. Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 21:25, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
As our 5th edit-a-thon is drawing to an end, I thought I'd move the backlog list over from there. Below are the GA nominations from June-September 2023 that are still waiting for a review:
Please feel free to look over any and help get this backlog down! -- Grnrchst ( talk) 19:27, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
I am considering to improve some articles about Dutch given names. I've recently nominated Femke as good article. It is not very long, but I don't think such articles have to be, although the GA review could prove me wrong. Are there more people here interested in improving articles about women's given names? – Editør ( talk) 13:48, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Hatshepsut is in our hot 100 and is one of the the few level-3 vital articles on women that haven't yet been brought to GA or FA (along with Frida Kahlo, Catherine the Great and Florence Nightingale). In January 2023, Gingermead posted a request for input on our talk page and opened a peer review regarding the work they had done on Hatshepsut, with the intention of nominating it for GA. However, Gingermead was blocked not long after opening the peer review, as the account was found to have been a sock-puppet of a user that had been banned a year before for abusing multiple accounts.
This leaves us with a problem, as the article's main contributor (with 31.9% of authorship) can't take it any further and none of the other contributors have authored more than 10% of the article, which is the threshold for one to not be considered a drive-by nomination. Given how far this article has already come and how important it is to our project, would anyone here be interested in adopting it for further work and a possible future GA nom? It would be really good if we could get this one over the line. -- Grnrchst ( talk) 20:43, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
Article on a Canadian First Nations woman which has now turned green and is submitted for DYK nom ( Template:Did you know nominations/Matooskie). If anyone has any improvements they wish to make to the article, comments, or input at the DYK nom please let me know! Thank you GnocchiFan ( talk) 15:45, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi everyone! We're approaching the end of 2023, so I'm just starting a thread here to discuss WiG goals from this year and for next year. We've powered our way through 2023 Goals #1, #2, #3 and #4 (big thank you to our newest project members for their contributions). This year we also introduced Goal #5 to boost group peer reviews of Peer Review requests and Featured Article Candidates, and I think we've just reached our goal of reviews for 15 articles -- most received feedback from at least two WiG participants (and all from at least one). If you have a chance, please take a look at the Peer Review request for Pamela Stephenson, which has been open for three months but only has comments from one WiG reviewer.
Planning for 2024:
That's it for now -- I hope you all are safe and well and looking forward to the holiday season. Best, Alanna the Brave ( talk) 02:45, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
I've nominated Lashauwn Beyond for GA status, if any project members are interested in reviewing or otherwise improving. Thanks! --- Another Believer ( Talk) 18:50, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
I have nominated Emmy Noether for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 ( talk) 20:32, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
at User:Ezlev/Women in the Hawaii Territorial Legislature. Lots of work to be done if anyone is interested! — ezlev ( user/ tlk/ ctrbs) 21:38, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi all, I've put up an offer on the Reward Board which may be of interest. Basically, I'll give the {{ Systemic bias barnstar}} to anyone who gets an article listed in Women in the Australian House of Representatives or Women in the Australian Senate to GA status. Ping me if you complete one :) GraziePrego ( talk) 04:28, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
There's still work to do on the summer backlog! But as the seasons continue to change, I thought I'd compile our backlog for the autumn season of 2023 as well. This includes leftovers from
our last edit-a-thon. I have provisionally commented out December, as the list would be too long to deal with otherwise.
Please do help review these articles if and when you can. The quicker we can cut down on the backlog, the more incentive people have to submit their articles on women and women's works! Grnrchst ( talk) 16:38, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello all! I just found out about this WikiProject and came over here to see about contributing. I already submitted an article I wrote about a woman for GA review this month (and also submitted it for DYK) so I guess I was already kinda contributing without realizing, LOL. But anyway, I'm here because I spent a pretty good chunk of time last night improving the article for photographer Sarah Bahbah. (It came up as a suggestion for editing on my homepage, I worked on it until I felt the flag templates on it didn't apply anymore and removed them.) I don't think the article is really at GA level yet, and in particular I think a lot more could be added to the Career section, but I had already stayed up way later than I meant to working on it and I needed to go to bed hahaha. But yeah, just bringing it to the attention of the folks here in case anyone wants to pick up where I left off and expand the article more. Not a priority since she's not on the Hot 100. :) KRKwrites ( talk) 17:42, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
Are any articles about women that become GA within the scope of the project? Are candidates for GA within the scope? Governor Sheng ( talk) 19:32, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
There's an upcoming month-long drive to review GA nominations and reduce the backlog, and I've spotted a few Women in Green members who have signed up so far -- this would be a good opportunity to tackle some of the leftover 2023 GA nominations about women that Grnrchst has been tracking (see summer and autumn lists!). If anyone is thinking about giving reviewing a try for the first time but isn't sure where to start, you can check out the official reviewing instructions or ask for advice right here at WiG. Alanna the Brave ( talk) 01:35, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
The core contest is back and ... since the 2021 reboot we've not improved a single biography of a woman during the contest and I was hoping somebody here would be willing to break the streak.
The Core Contest—Wikipedia's most exciting contest—runs from April 15 to May 31. The goal: to improve vital or other core articles, with a focus on those in the worst state of disrepair. There is £300 of prize money divided among editors who provide the "best additive encyclopedic value". Signups are open now. Cheers from the judges, Femke, Casliber, Aza24. —Femke 🐦 ( talk) 18:51, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
Hey all, hope everyone's had a good start to their new year. I've been thinking lately about getting started with the coordination for our next edit-a-thon. Per our discussions some time last year, I figured it would be a good idea to do a "Back in time" theme this year, focusing on women throughout history in order to address our tendency towards recentism. Like the Around the World edit-a-thon, when we had a map showing pins in each country where we nominated or reviewed articles about women and women's works, I was thinking we could have a timeline template set up that shows our progress on articles throughout history.
Provisionally setting the date for June 2024, would anyone else here be interested in joining in and/or helping out with this? I'm more than happy to take the lead on this one, in order to give @ Alanna the Brave a bit of a break, but I just wanted to gauge interest before setting up the page. -- Grnrchst ( talk) 15:34, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi everyone, hope you've all been doing well these past few months. It's almost May, so I've had a look at our backlog of GA nominations of articles on women and women's works. Here's what we've got to work on:
If you're interested in taking one of these on for review, please do! Remember we also have articles to review from last year, so check out the above lists as well. I hope you find something interesting to read about in these articles, and hope to see the backlog cut down a bit as well! -- Grnrchst ( talk) 09:06, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
We have a mediocre article on pioneering archaeologist Katherine Routledge on enwiki, but fr:Katherine Routledge is GA- if not FA-level. If there is anyone who is interested in expanding it by translating from French, it could be an easy win for WiG. See also Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Archaeology#Katherine Routledge in the french version. – Joe ( talk) 09:08, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Women Project‑class | |||||||
|
Women in Red | ||||
|
Women in Green Homepage | Current Featured Content | DYK | 2024 Goal Tracking | Events | Talk/Discussion |
|
||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 270 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 15 sections are present. |
As WiG is focused on core articles about women, I thought I'd take a wee look at the gender gap in the list of vital articles. What I found was sadly unsurprising. Of each of the biographical categories, only one ( entertainers, et al) represents women at above the Wikipedia-wide average of 19.64%, with 33.7% of its entries being women. For the others, women make up:
This means women together make up roughly 16.4% of level-5 articles, dropping down to 10.3% of of level-4 vital articles and then even further to only 9% of level-3 vital articles.
All this has gotten me thinking about how we can close the gap a little on the vital articles list. As women were most under-represented in the category of scientists and mathematicians, I opened a discussion about adding some more glaring omissions. But even if all of my suggestions were added, this would only bring it in line with politicians and religious figures. If we wanted to bring the gap up to the Wikipedia-wide average, then (not accounting for removals) we would need to add over 500 women to the V5 list; about 180 women to the V4 list; and at least 10 women to the V3 list. -- Grnrchst ( talk) 19:14, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
The biography of the recent Nobel Prizewinner in Medicine, Katalin Karikó, would benefit from the attention of this project. Perhaps someone would like to nominate it for GA. If so, although I am no expert in medicine, I would be happy to help with copy editing. Initial work should in particular remove citations from the lead and make sure they are appropriately included in the body of the article. It may be sensible to wait for a few days until details from continuing press coverage have been added to the article.-- Ipigott ( talk) 05:55, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
There are currently three vacancies on the Hot 100. Since the project is getting an influx of new participants this week, I figure this is as good a time as any to make sure the Hot 100 actually has 100 articles. Is there a usual process for moving future suggestions up? I could see there being disagreement about what names to add, and I see a few in the future suggestions list that should probably be removed rather than promoted. Nearly a third of the suggestions seem to be Sri Lankan women added by one person without regard for how prominent they are (I'm tempted to WP:BOLDly remove that part of the list). And another thought, for months where there's not an editathon, maybe we could start choosing a "woman of the month" from the Hot 100 where everyone collaborates on that specific article during the month to get it closer to GA. Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 21:25, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
As our 5th edit-a-thon is drawing to an end, I thought I'd move the backlog list over from there. Below are the GA nominations from June-September 2023 that are still waiting for a review:
Please feel free to look over any and help get this backlog down! -- Grnrchst ( talk) 19:27, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
I am considering to improve some articles about Dutch given names. I've recently nominated Femke as good article. It is not very long, but I don't think such articles have to be, although the GA review could prove me wrong. Are there more people here interested in improving articles about women's given names? – Editør ( talk) 13:48, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Hatshepsut is in our hot 100 and is one of the the few level-3 vital articles on women that haven't yet been brought to GA or FA (along with Frida Kahlo, Catherine the Great and Florence Nightingale). In January 2023, Gingermead posted a request for input on our talk page and opened a peer review regarding the work they had done on Hatshepsut, with the intention of nominating it for GA. However, Gingermead was blocked not long after opening the peer review, as the account was found to have been a sock-puppet of a user that had been banned a year before for abusing multiple accounts.
This leaves us with a problem, as the article's main contributor (with 31.9% of authorship) can't take it any further and none of the other contributors have authored more than 10% of the article, which is the threshold for one to not be considered a drive-by nomination. Given how far this article has already come and how important it is to our project, would anyone here be interested in adopting it for further work and a possible future GA nom? It would be really good if we could get this one over the line. -- Grnrchst ( talk) 20:43, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
Article on a Canadian First Nations woman which has now turned green and is submitted for DYK nom ( Template:Did you know nominations/Matooskie). If anyone has any improvements they wish to make to the article, comments, or input at the DYK nom please let me know! Thank you GnocchiFan ( talk) 15:45, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi everyone! We're approaching the end of 2023, so I'm just starting a thread here to discuss WiG goals from this year and for next year. We've powered our way through 2023 Goals #1, #2, #3 and #4 (big thank you to our newest project members for their contributions). This year we also introduced Goal #5 to boost group peer reviews of Peer Review requests and Featured Article Candidates, and I think we've just reached our goal of reviews for 15 articles -- most received feedback from at least two WiG participants (and all from at least one). If you have a chance, please take a look at the Peer Review request for Pamela Stephenson, which has been open for three months but only has comments from one WiG reviewer.
Planning for 2024:
That's it for now -- I hope you all are safe and well and looking forward to the holiday season. Best, Alanna the Brave ( talk) 02:45, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
I've nominated Lashauwn Beyond for GA status, if any project members are interested in reviewing or otherwise improving. Thanks! --- Another Believer ( Talk) 18:50, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
I have nominated Emmy Noether for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 ( talk) 20:32, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
at User:Ezlev/Women in the Hawaii Territorial Legislature. Lots of work to be done if anyone is interested! — ezlev ( user/ tlk/ ctrbs) 21:38, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi all, I've put up an offer on the Reward Board which may be of interest. Basically, I'll give the {{ Systemic bias barnstar}} to anyone who gets an article listed in Women in the Australian House of Representatives or Women in the Australian Senate to GA status. Ping me if you complete one :) GraziePrego ( talk) 04:28, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
There's still work to do on the summer backlog! But as the seasons continue to change, I thought I'd compile our backlog for the autumn season of 2023 as well. This includes leftovers from
our last edit-a-thon. I have provisionally commented out December, as the list would be too long to deal with otherwise.
Please do help review these articles if and when you can. The quicker we can cut down on the backlog, the more incentive people have to submit their articles on women and women's works! Grnrchst ( talk) 16:38, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello all! I just found out about this WikiProject and came over here to see about contributing. I already submitted an article I wrote about a woman for GA review this month (and also submitted it for DYK) so I guess I was already kinda contributing without realizing, LOL. But anyway, I'm here because I spent a pretty good chunk of time last night improving the article for photographer Sarah Bahbah. (It came up as a suggestion for editing on my homepage, I worked on it until I felt the flag templates on it didn't apply anymore and removed them.) I don't think the article is really at GA level yet, and in particular I think a lot more could be added to the Career section, but I had already stayed up way later than I meant to working on it and I needed to go to bed hahaha. But yeah, just bringing it to the attention of the folks here in case anyone wants to pick up where I left off and expand the article more. Not a priority since she's not on the Hot 100. :) KRKwrites ( talk) 17:42, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
Are any articles about women that become GA within the scope of the project? Are candidates for GA within the scope? Governor Sheng ( talk) 19:32, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
There's an upcoming month-long drive to review GA nominations and reduce the backlog, and I've spotted a few Women in Green members who have signed up so far -- this would be a good opportunity to tackle some of the leftover 2023 GA nominations about women that Grnrchst has been tracking (see summer and autumn lists!). If anyone is thinking about giving reviewing a try for the first time but isn't sure where to start, you can check out the official reviewing instructions or ask for advice right here at WiG. Alanna the Brave ( talk) 01:35, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
The core contest is back and ... since the 2021 reboot we've not improved a single biography of a woman during the contest and I was hoping somebody here would be willing to break the streak.
The Core Contest—Wikipedia's most exciting contest—runs from April 15 to May 31. The goal: to improve vital or other core articles, with a focus on those in the worst state of disrepair. There is £300 of prize money divided among editors who provide the "best additive encyclopedic value". Signups are open now. Cheers from the judges, Femke, Casliber, Aza24. —Femke 🐦 ( talk) 18:51, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
Hey all, hope everyone's had a good start to their new year. I've been thinking lately about getting started with the coordination for our next edit-a-thon. Per our discussions some time last year, I figured it would be a good idea to do a "Back in time" theme this year, focusing on women throughout history in order to address our tendency towards recentism. Like the Around the World edit-a-thon, when we had a map showing pins in each country where we nominated or reviewed articles about women and women's works, I was thinking we could have a timeline template set up that shows our progress on articles throughout history.
Provisionally setting the date for June 2024, would anyone else here be interested in joining in and/or helping out with this? I'm more than happy to take the lead on this one, in order to give @ Alanna the Brave a bit of a break, but I just wanted to gauge interest before setting up the page. -- Grnrchst ( talk) 15:34, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi everyone, hope you've all been doing well these past few months. It's almost May, so I've had a look at our backlog of GA nominations of articles on women and women's works. Here's what we've got to work on:
If you're interested in taking one of these on for review, please do! Remember we also have articles to review from last year, so check out the above lists as well. I hope you find something interesting to read about in these articles, and hope to see the backlog cut down a bit as well! -- Grnrchst ( talk) 09:06, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
We have a mediocre article on pioneering archaeologist Katherine Routledge on enwiki, but fr:Katherine Routledge is GA- if not FA-level. If there is anyone who is interested in expanding it by translating from French, it could be an easy win for WiG. See also Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Archaeology#Katherine Routledge in the french version. – Joe ( talk) 09:08, 6 July 2024 (UTC)