![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 130 | ← | Archive 135 | Archive 136 | Archive 137 | Archive 138 | Archive 139 | Archive 140 |
Hello! We have a class that started drafting some bios mainly of women identifying poc, and ran into some challenges. Many of these bios are in the sandbox space or in draftspace. I've looked at them and several of them are borderline notable or need more sources to establish notability. There are also instances of promotional/essay-like text. If anyone is up for it and would like to give these drafts a chance for mainspace, feel free. Any help improving them is welcomed and very much appreciated.
Brianda (Wiki Ed) ( talk) 18:46, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
..."in need of some help". -- Rosiestep ( talk) 23:22, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
Divya Dwivedi, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Beccaynr ( talk) 00:15, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi everyone. I just came across a new study that has been published by PNAS Nexus, looking into the effects of toxic comments on Wikipedia editors. [1] From an analysis of millions of talk page comments, it found that toxic comments correlate closely with a reduced activity from editors and can even lead to editors leaving the platform altogether. They estimate that this has resulted in 265 cumulative years of productivity loss. Its section on diversity I thought was particularly relevant to our work at WiR and WiG:
Diversity of editors
"Wikipedia is often considered a neutral and unbiased source of knowledge. In fact, this is ingrained in its “Neutral point of view” policy, which is officially one of the five fundamental principles of Wikipedia (36). However, the claim of neutrality should not be accepted uncritically (37). For instance, while Wikipedia mandates that its content is supported by reliable sources, the selection of these sources can significantly deviate from the norms of the expert knowledge community, introducing biases to Wikipedia content (38). Even if the content of articles is neutral, their coverage may be biased. It is well documented, for example, that biographies of women are underrepresented on Wikipedia (39). Wikipedia’s own rules might contribute to such biases. For instance, providing reliable sources as required by Wikipedia for biographies of women might be challenging because fewer sources exist on women due to historic inequalities (40). Another case in point is the Oral Citations project, which aimed to use oral citations for content on countries that are underrepresented in other sources (41). However, this initiative was met with opposition by the English Wikipedia community.
"These content biases are closely connected to the lack of diversity among editors (38, 42). While estimates vary, the vast majority of Wikipedians are men (43). Notably, Wikipedia did not achieve its own goal of having at least 25% women editors by 2015 (44). This shortfall is a significant concern for the project, as diversity can improve the quality of content and reduce its biases (13, 45). While multiple barriers confront women editors on Wikipedia (40, 46, 47), toxicity is likely to be one of key factors contributing to the observed gender imbalance. Specifically, research has shown that while men and women are equally likely to face online harassment and abuse, women experience more severe violations (48). They are also more likely to be affected by such incidents and to self-censor in an attempt to prevent potential harassment (48). This has been confirmed in the Wikipedia context as well, where it has been demonstrated that the psychological experiences of women and men editors differ, leading to higher attrition rates among women (49). Similar results were found in another survey (24), showing that women experiencing toxicity are more likely to stop contributing in the future.
"Overall, there are reasons to believe that toxicity might significantly undermine the diversity of Wikipedia editors, which can, in turn, compromise the quality of Wikipedia articles and introduce biases in its coverage. This underscores the importance of our findings. While most of the existing studies focus on the gender gap, we want to emphasize that the Wikipedia diversity problem goes beyond that, including racial, nonbinary, and other biases as well (50–52). For instance, we observed that many of the toxic comments in our data set include ethnic slurs. Future studies are needed to better understand the experiences of minority groups on Wikipedia and the effects that toxicity has on them."
Interventions
"The Wikipedia community is well aware of the aforementioned problems, and there have been multiple efforts to address them through various interventions. Research into reward systems showed that while they might work effectively for already highly productive editors, they fail to motivate less active editors (53). Another study found no significant effect of positive rewards in online communities (54).
"To address the gender gap in Wikipedia content, numerous events dedicated to creating entries about women were organized (46). An analysis of such interventions, which focused on two popular feminist interventions, confirmed that they succeeded in introducing content about women that would otherwise be missing (55). However, there is still a need to address the gender gap on a more systematic and sustainable level. For instance, one study showed that most of the women activists who attended editing workshops later chose not to continue contributing to Wikipedia, citing safety concerns as their primary reason (46). This issue was echoed in another study which identified safety as a core concern for women editors (56).
"A suggested solution to this problem has been the red-flagging of harassment and harassers (46). However, the opinion that toxic comments are negligible and should be seen as merely over-enthusiastic participation is still present among editors (25). Furthermore, various anti-harassment measures have been declined multiple times by the community, as they were seen to slow the process of content creation (57, 58). Based on our findings, we believe there is a need to reevaluate these policies, and more research attention is required to understand the impact of potential interventions."
— Smirnov, Ivan; Oprea, Camelia; Strohmaier, Markus (December 2023). "Toxic comments are associated with reduced activity of volunteer editors on Wikipedia". PNAS Nexus. 2 (12). doi: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgad385. ISSN 1091-6490.
I've certainly received my (un)fair share of toxic comments, from inappropriate and unnerving comments to seemingly intentional intimidation, so I thought I'd share this here. Given our projects have apparently been highlighted here as successful (if insufficient) interventions to combat systemic bias, I wonder if there's anything we are doing and/or can be doing better to red-flag harassment, as is suggested here? -- Grnrchst ( talk) 16:00, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
As 2023 draws to a close, WiR participants need to select a theme that will run for the whole of next year or, alternatively, two six-month ones if that is preferred. Previous year-long events have been Suffrage (2019), Sports (Jan-Aug 2020) & BLM (Jul-Dec 2020), Women's rights (2021), Climate (2022) and Peace and Diplomacy (2023). -- Oronsay ( talk) 19:41, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
What would you like to nominate as the theme/s for 2024? All ideas welcome.-- Oronsay ( talk) 19:41, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
:::I think Education is a great idea, but I'll throw Science into the mix as well!
Lajmmoore (
talk) 20:38, 27 November 2023 (UTC) just saw the comment above *doh*
Lajmmoore (
talk)
20:40, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
I'm very happy to support education as the 2024 theme, but in the interests of having an additional suggestion to consider at the brainstorming stage, I'd also put forward Literature. We have plenty of redlists in this area and it would cover biographies of women in literature as well as women's literary works, female fictional characters, awards for women's literature, etc. This is of course my personal area of interest, so I'm being very opportunistic in suggesting it. :) Cheers, Chocmilk03 ( talk) 20:43, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
So today's the day. This time last year I thought I wonder if I could write a new women's biog every day for a year. I'd tried before and messed it up at #360. So I started in December last year so I could officially start a full year this January. Well its complete and Wikipedia even records the names and dates here. During the year, I completed my 8 year run of notable ODNB women and ran out of missing ODNB Women in Red. I had to turn to Aussie women on the ADB. All of the 365 articles have fed into one of the WIR editathons. So what should be my prize to myself? I have bought myself a copy of "The Greater Bear". What?... I'll explain ... Imagine a London Underground map where the tube lines are either mathematicians, engineers, computer scientists etc or scientists etc and each station is a notable person. Now where the tube lines cross then you need to find a person who is both say a mathematician and an engineer. Thats one hell of a task, sometimes 3 or 4 lines cross.... is it possible for one person to write wikidata queries that turn out such a picture. My friend Terence Eden (helped by @Tagishsimon) has done just that. You can see the result here. Its not all women but there is an unapologetic bias towards them. (Thanks Terence) I bought myself a copy (and gave it to my spouse as a present). It cost me about £20 and it was mailed to my door and its a fabulous poster. If you like maps and data and notable lives then you'll be fascinated. I'd like to buy you all a copy but I don't have all of your addresses ... or the urge to spam you... or X time £20 to spare.... but treat yourself... and order a copy. Terence did all the work and he is not making a profit and he's done his level best not to infringe any copyrights. How did he do it? Where can you obtain your copy? [Seasons Greetings from Roger] aka Victuallers ( talk) 19:40, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
Over at Wiki Loves Pride, I've listed a group of articles about drag performers (including one about a trans woman requested at Missing biographies of nonbinary, trans and intersex people/transgender female) I've nominated for Good status. Sharing in case any project members are interested in providing feedback or reviewing, as this year's campaign comes to an end. Thanks and Happy New Year! --- Another Believer ( Talk) 23:00, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
Am I right in thinking this article is kinda... half-baked and awful? Didn't even include Duniway's major contribution until I added it. Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 8.7% of all FPs. 20:59, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
As with the counterpart of #1day1woman, is it specifically only women biographies that count or do women's works (such as books) also count? Since I have a fair few of those in addition to biographies on my list to make. I'm currently reading through The Exceptions by Kate Zernike, which is excellent (and infuriating) and plan to make an article on the book when I'm done. Silver seren C 21:39, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
Can anyone find coverage for any of the following Olympians at AFD?:
BeanieFan11 ( talk) 20:09, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
I know members of this project contributed to the discussions around moving men's football team articles to "X men's national football team", and would like to neutrally draw your attention to a similar discussion at a football records/achievement page. I am not suggesting contribution, but anyone interested could read the arguments there in case there are future discussions on the topic. See: Talk:List_of_footballers_who_achieved_hat-trick_records#Women. Kingsif ( talk) 00:32, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
I created a draft for Patricia Schultz. Her book is found on many a book shelf- a popular Christmas gift in the 2000s. Thriley ( talk) 03:39, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
I've just come across an interesting research paper on "Gender and the invisibility of care on Wikipedia" which reveals irregularities in Wikipedia's coverage of women in the Australian Honours System. "...we demonstrate that women are more likely to be awarded a Wikipedia page after the award announcements or not at all if their contribution is for labour relating to the caring professions than if their service is for sports, arts and films, politics or the judiciary." This should be of special interest to Victuallers and Oronsay.-- Ipigott ( talk) 13:21, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
I think this is an interesting and important subject missing. Anyone want to start it? FloridaArmy ( talk) 20:21, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
Came across this draft, which is too CV-like, but the subject seems notable Lajmmoore ( talk) 22:23, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
I'm looking for sources to see if an article on Rosalind Goodfellow (1927-2008) is feasible. She was the first woman Moderator of the General Assembly of the United Reformed Church, and the first lay moderator. There was an obituary in the Independent, and there is coverage both in newspapers of the time (the Daily Mirror, "The dark-haired, plucked-eyebrowed Mrs Rosalind Goodfellow, JP the Moderator of the United Reformed Church, spoke like Dame Edith Evans") and in history books of her participation in the service in St Paul's Cathedral after the Falklands war. [1] [2] [3] There is coverage in local papers which backs up what the obituary says about her activity as a magistrate and in voluntary organisations. There is also a reference in passing to her as one of the judges of Preacher of the Year in 1996. But I think with what I have an article would be vulnerable to AfD on the grounds of not enough coverage under WP:ANYBIO, and potentially WP:BLP1E for the reading at the Falklands service. I have looked at the Wikipedia Library and only found one passing reference. Does anyone have other ideas about where there might be significant coverage of her? I'm thinking there might be something in biographies or memoirs of people active in the URC at the same time as her. Or do I give up on her for the moment? Thanks. Tacyarg ( talk) 20:28, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
hello folks, I just sent the MassMessage for January, but for this list Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/A-F I forgot to put my signature at the end. Is there a way I can go back and mass-add-a-signature? If not, really sorry for the mistake! Lajmmoore ( talk) 20:24, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
User:PMCH2, who had a great interest in this project, and wrote several articles under its domain, has passed away. She leaves in her userspace three early-stage drafts on notable women:
If possible, please finish these and move them to mainspace. Cheers! BD2412 T 15:27, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
I think I may add a few more names over the next few days. Thriley ( talk) 20:43, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
Two more. Thriley ( talk) 05:55, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
Here's a link for "Bridging Digital Skills Gap Amongst Women through Wikipedia_Wiki Women in Red with UPSA" by Women For Sustainability Africa, via Youtube. -- Rosiestep ( talk) 15:37, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
I was thinking of creating an article for 2023 Deaths for Andrea Majstorovičová. There appear to be a lot of sources out there, but all in websites that are .cz and .sk , and I am struggling to read them. A good project for someone else? Kingsif ( talk) 02:17, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
So my holidays are complete - as a package arrived from Accra for me complete with Tee shirts. I'm offering to mail one and a real Women in Red barnstar to the first person to add 24 new biographies to our Education editathon which starts tomorrow. Thanks to Women for Sustainability Africa!. Feel free to cross post.
The new articles need to have 1,500 characters of original text, three refs at least, (preferably a picture), not "an orphan" and not be about anyone known to be from the UK or US. What do the prizes look like? See the pic. Happy New Year. Victuallers ( talk) 15:47, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
People you may not know about, but probably should.
The first entry I looked at covers Louise Cook (humanitarian) and Mary Burchell, but I wonder how many of the entries don't have articles? Would be worth digging into the group's archives and having a look. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:16, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
There are many women temperance activists/workers affiliated with International Organisation of Good Templars and Woman's Christian Temperance Union who have Wikimedia Commons photos (see c:Category:The International Good Templar and c:Category:Woman's Christian Temperance Union people), but don't have Wikidata items. If someone feels inclined to add them to Wikidata, then they'll show up on this redlist, which would be helpful for #296, which is happening this month. -- Rosiestep ( talk) 19:09, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
I uploaded a bunch of images from events in NZ last month, and have just been working through the extracted headshots. About 70-odd are women - I was planning to add them to last year's #1woman1day page, and I see there's a hidden category on Commons for media supported by WiR, so I'm guessing I should I add that? Is there anything else I need to do with respect to WiR (I already linked to Wikidata items using SDC)?
Apologies that this is probably covered somewhere but I've failed to find it! DrThneed ( talk) 06:57, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
I've started work on my first article draft for the #1Week1Woman initiative and I'm kinda amazed (in both a good and bad way) how simply doing the research keeps leading to more women to cover, but thus more women we were already missing. I've already added two more well known scientists to my list of future women's biographies to make. I wonder how many more will turn up in the process of making those articles. Either way, at least it means we will finally be covering them properly. Silver seren C 04:09, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
I have proposed a light copy-edit of our invite template here. I would be grateful if anyone has a moment to make sure the suggested changes wouldn’t be objectionable, since it speaks on behalf of the project. Thanks all. Innisfree987 ( talk) 21:22, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
It's encouraging to see how well this new feature of #1day1women is coming along. Anyone who thinks they could create one acceptable women's biography a week is welcome to contribute. The first of a series of virtual awards is for adding a minimum of 13 articles over the first three months. There are no special requirements in regard to size or presentation but the biographies should of course meet basic Wikipedia standards of acceptance. Why not start today and see how long you are able to participate? Your contributions will help us to increase the percentage of women's biographies in the English Wikipedia which now stands at 19.72%. Let's see how soon we can reach 20%.-- Ipigott ( talk) 07:39, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello!
I'd like to set up a DAB for 'Margaret Costa'. There are currently two:
Someone has set up a redirect on Margaret Costa to go to the former. I'd like to create a DAB for the two women, then have the redirect go to the DAB. However, my problem is finding a simple guide to creating a DAB! Every time I look at the MOS:DAB, I find it impossible to follow. Is there the equivalent of a Dummies Guide I can follow? EEHalli ( talk) 12:45, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
@ TSventon@ EEHalli It's simpler than that: if neither is the primary topic just overwrite the Margaret Costa redirect with a dab page (ie edit the redirect to turn it into a dab page). Margaret Costa (disambiguation) is not needed, unless you need for some reason go link to the dab page from elsewhere.
Simple way to create the first line of a dab page is {{subst:refer}}. Then make a bulleted list, link plus brief annotation(including dates, when known, for biographies). Then {{ dab}} or, if it's people's names, {{ hndis}}. Pam D 17:50, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
On this redlist, Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Temperance worker, does anyone know why the redlink is for Henrietta Brown (Q115787698) instead of just her name? This redlist also contains Margaret Parker (Q18762034) with a redirect to Margaret Eleanor Parker. I've noticed this issue on at least 1 other redlist, though I can't remembered which one. Maybe others have encountered it, too? Hoping someone knows how to fix this. I'd be happy to do so, but I don't know how. Happy New Year! -- Rosiestep ( talk) 18:57, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
@ Rosiestep It's because Henrietta Brown exists for another woman ( as a redirect in this case). You could turn the RD into a dab page if neither HB looks like the Primary Topic. With Margaret Parker I was all set to create her article till I found via Wikidata that there was already an article at her full name, so I created that redirect as a way to save anyone else wasting time. I think I also did what was needed to merge the two separate Wikidata records: I tried, at least, if I remember rightly. It all gets complicated, doesn't it! Pam D 21:28, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
Does anyone have any suggestions for when you write about a school that is basically synonymous with its school founder/teacher?
I added a biography section for Mary Balch to Mary Balch's School, since a separate biography article would probably 1.) be short, and 2.) have a lot of overlap with the article on the school. Mainly, the schools' notability is because of Mary, and Mary's notability is because of the school. However, I do think there's enough info on Mary Balch to create a separate article, and I'm wondering if the "Biography" section seems weird to have in the article about the school?
My instinct is to have Mary Balch as a redirect to the school, but any improvements or suggestions would be appreciated :) - Whisperjanes ( talk) 18:26, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
I have begun a stub on the above, who is part of this month's Temperance Women editathon. I have requested resources at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Resource_Exchange/Resource_Request#offline_book:_Emilie_Solomon:_1859-1939, but if anyone has access to this or other information on Emilie Solomon's life I would greatly appreciate the help in the article. Thank you. GnocchiFan ( talk) 19:59, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
I just created Draft:Amalija Knavs. The New York Times wrote her an obituary, which I generally find a signifier of notability for a standalone article. Thriley ( talk) 06:16, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello WikiProject Women In Red editors, Wikimedia Deutschland has a new project team investigating the different ways Wikidata is being used in the other Wikimedia projects. As your project exists on different Wiki's and uses integrated data from Wikidata, you may have valuable insights that could help us or you might like to share. If you would be interested in such a discussion, we encourage you to register for an interview with us at the following link: Sign Up Here
Please note that we probably won’t be able to have sessions with everyone who is interested. Our UX researcher will try to create a good balance of wiki contributors, e.g. in terms of wiki experience, tech experience, editing preferences, gender, disability and more. If you’re a fit, she will reach out to you to schedule an appointment. We hope to hear from you, -- Danny Benjafield (WMDE) ( talk) 13:04, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
This article was PRODed as an unreferenced BLP. I added a reference work and removed the PROD. If others care to expand and improve further, please do. 4meter4 ( talk) 04:45, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
Liz Magill and Claudine Gay have had recent edits that feel disproportionate + feed into media bias targeting women that I'd like to think we can avoid (or be patient enough not to take part in).
An example of the last is the repeated inclusion on Gay's article of a controversy involving two other men, which did not involve her, presented so as to suggest it did.
As people who started campaigns against them have said they mean to " carry out a long-overdue cleansing" of academia, I assume we'll see more. A little extra attention on these articles (and Sally Kornbluth, Minouche Shafik, and the category) would be welcome. I realize this is minor compared to many biases, but given the volume of media attention on these women, singled out in the first place for their prominence, the least we can do is not contribute to an echo chamber. – SJ + 20:08, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
I spotted this initiative Wiki Loves Muslim Academia this morning, and I imagine there might be some nice crossover with our own Education year-long theme! Lajmmoore ( talk) 13:37, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
While writing a new article on computer scientist Catholijn Jonker, I ran across some references to her mother Ineke Jonker [9] (1934–2011), a Dutch author of multiple books on sexual violence. Maybe she is also notable? I found two reviews for her book Christianity and Incest but I think we would need more sourcing than that. — David Eppstein ( talk) 21:45, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
Discussion on if something she wrote on Instagram should be mentioned in the article. It's Gaza-war related, your opinion is welcome at Talk:Mika_Tosca#She_no_longer_works_at_SAIC. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 10:30, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Looking for a new topic? British pioneer DJ Annie Nightingale has just died, she'd be a good 'Recent deaths' candidate, but the article needs referencing and a thorough copy edit. Lajmmoore ( talk) 13:13, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Mezzo-soprano. I just heard a recording of her and she’s mentioned but not in red. Just posting in case anyone has some knowledge and wants to do it. Pbackstrom ( talk) 05:09, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
I just published Susan Berget and, unlike most of the biographies I work on, she's still a living person. Meaning the usual non-free allowance rules I work with for photos doesn't apply. Does anyone know of any usable photos for her that would meet our copyright requirements? Silver seren C 00:28, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
Can anyone find coverage for the following Olympians who have either been AFDed or PRODed?
BeanieFan11 ( talk) 18:56, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
This category was recently under discussion at CFD at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 January 1. It was closed without much participation with the result of deleting many women related cats. I only became aware of it after cats were being removed on mass on my watch list. There appears to be a number of gender related cat deletion nominations currently at CFD. Project members may wish to keep an eye on project related categories for discussion, and notify the group about discussions for comment. All opinions on any of these discussions are welcome. 4meter4 ( talk) 18:18, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
This recent article about a 20th-century American photographer currently only has two secondary sources. Based on her obituary from the New York Times, she seems likely to be notable, but I'm struggling to find information about her online. Bringing this up here in case anyone else is interested in finding sources to expand/support the article. ForsythiaJo ( talk) 03:31, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Wedding of Grand Duke George Mikhailovich of Russia and Rebecca Virginia Bettarini#Requested move 16 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 08:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Amelia Hazard at AFD sourcing issues. — Maile ( talk) 15:35, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
In The Skeptics Dictionary, Robert Todd Carroll wrote that Cannon was "the poster child" for the New Age movement but was undecided as to "whether Dolores Cannon was a charlatan, a fraud, or a sincere delusional person...."
Or so says our article. Given the hyperbolic claims of her opponents, I suspect this person is notable, but the AfD right now is a mess. It could use the help of one of WiR's newspaper-search wizards to get a solid claim for notability. Or, alternatively, if some previously uninvolved editor could put this to bed with a really clear source evaluation table that proves all of this is junk, that would be very helpful. So far the arguments run the full gamut from impassioned keep votes to "delete and salt". --
asilvering (
talk)
02:33, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
![]() ![]()
Announcement
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 130 | ← | Archive 135 | Archive 136 | Archive 137 | Archive 138 | Archive 139 | Archive 140 |
Hello! We have a class that started drafting some bios mainly of women identifying poc, and ran into some challenges. Many of these bios are in the sandbox space or in draftspace. I've looked at them and several of them are borderline notable or need more sources to establish notability. There are also instances of promotional/essay-like text. If anyone is up for it and would like to give these drafts a chance for mainspace, feel free. Any help improving them is welcomed and very much appreciated.
Brianda (Wiki Ed) ( talk) 18:46, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
..."in need of some help". -- Rosiestep ( talk) 23:22, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
Divya Dwivedi, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Beccaynr ( talk) 00:15, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi everyone. I just came across a new study that has been published by PNAS Nexus, looking into the effects of toxic comments on Wikipedia editors. [1] From an analysis of millions of talk page comments, it found that toxic comments correlate closely with a reduced activity from editors and can even lead to editors leaving the platform altogether. They estimate that this has resulted in 265 cumulative years of productivity loss. Its section on diversity I thought was particularly relevant to our work at WiR and WiG:
Diversity of editors
"Wikipedia is often considered a neutral and unbiased source of knowledge. In fact, this is ingrained in its “Neutral point of view” policy, which is officially one of the five fundamental principles of Wikipedia (36). However, the claim of neutrality should not be accepted uncritically (37). For instance, while Wikipedia mandates that its content is supported by reliable sources, the selection of these sources can significantly deviate from the norms of the expert knowledge community, introducing biases to Wikipedia content (38). Even if the content of articles is neutral, their coverage may be biased. It is well documented, for example, that biographies of women are underrepresented on Wikipedia (39). Wikipedia’s own rules might contribute to such biases. For instance, providing reliable sources as required by Wikipedia for biographies of women might be challenging because fewer sources exist on women due to historic inequalities (40). Another case in point is the Oral Citations project, which aimed to use oral citations for content on countries that are underrepresented in other sources (41). However, this initiative was met with opposition by the English Wikipedia community.
"These content biases are closely connected to the lack of diversity among editors (38, 42). While estimates vary, the vast majority of Wikipedians are men (43). Notably, Wikipedia did not achieve its own goal of having at least 25% women editors by 2015 (44). This shortfall is a significant concern for the project, as diversity can improve the quality of content and reduce its biases (13, 45). While multiple barriers confront women editors on Wikipedia (40, 46, 47), toxicity is likely to be one of key factors contributing to the observed gender imbalance. Specifically, research has shown that while men and women are equally likely to face online harassment and abuse, women experience more severe violations (48). They are also more likely to be affected by such incidents and to self-censor in an attempt to prevent potential harassment (48). This has been confirmed in the Wikipedia context as well, where it has been demonstrated that the psychological experiences of women and men editors differ, leading to higher attrition rates among women (49). Similar results were found in another survey (24), showing that women experiencing toxicity are more likely to stop contributing in the future.
"Overall, there are reasons to believe that toxicity might significantly undermine the diversity of Wikipedia editors, which can, in turn, compromise the quality of Wikipedia articles and introduce biases in its coverage. This underscores the importance of our findings. While most of the existing studies focus on the gender gap, we want to emphasize that the Wikipedia diversity problem goes beyond that, including racial, nonbinary, and other biases as well (50–52). For instance, we observed that many of the toxic comments in our data set include ethnic slurs. Future studies are needed to better understand the experiences of minority groups on Wikipedia and the effects that toxicity has on them."
Interventions
"The Wikipedia community is well aware of the aforementioned problems, and there have been multiple efforts to address them through various interventions. Research into reward systems showed that while they might work effectively for already highly productive editors, they fail to motivate less active editors (53). Another study found no significant effect of positive rewards in online communities (54).
"To address the gender gap in Wikipedia content, numerous events dedicated to creating entries about women were organized (46). An analysis of such interventions, which focused on two popular feminist interventions, confirmed that they succeeded in introducing content about women that would otherwise be missing (55). However, there is still a need to address the gender gap on a more systematic and sustainable level. For instance, one study showed that most of the women activists who attended editing workshops later chose not to continue contributing to Wikipedia, citing safety concerns as their primary reason (46). This issue was echoed in another study which identified safety as a core concern for women editors (56).
"A suggested solution to this problem has been the red-flagging of harassment and harassers (46). However, the opinion that toxic comments are negligible and should be seen as merely over-enthusiastic participation is still present among editors (25). Furthermore, various anti-harassment measures have been declined multiple times by the community, as they were seen to slow the process of content creation (57, 58). Based on our findings, we believe there is a need to reevaluate these policies, and more research attention is required to understand the impact of potential interventions."
— Smirnov, Ivan; Oprea, Camelia; Strohmaier, Markus (December 2023). "Toxic comments are associated with reduced activity of volunteer editors on Wikipedia". PNAS Nexus. 2 (12). doi: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgad385. ISSN 1091-6490.
I've certainly received my (un)fair share of toxic comments, from inappropriate and unnerving comments to seemingly intentional intimidation, so I thought I'd share this here. Given our projects have apparently been highlighted here as successful (if insufficient) interventions to combat systemic bias, I wonder if there's anything we are doing and/or can be doing better to red-flag harassment, as is suggested here? -- Grnrchst ( talk) 16:00, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
As 2023 draws to a close, WiR participants need to select a theme that will run for the whole of next year or, alternatively, two six-month ones if that is preferred. Previous year-long events have been Suffrage (2019), Sports (Jan-Aug 2020) & BLM (Jul-Dec 2020), Women's rights (2021), Climate (2022) and Peace and Diplomacy (2023). -- Oronsay ( talk) 19:41, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
What would you like to nominate as the theme/s for 2024? All ideas welcome.-- Oronsay ( talk) 19:41, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
:::I think Education is a great idea, but I'll throw Science into the mix as well!
Lajmmoore (
talk) 20:38, 27 November 2023 (UTC) just saw the comment above *doh*
Lajmmoore (
talk)
20:40, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
I'm very happy to support education as the 2024 theme, but in the interests of having an additional suggestion to consider at the brainstorming stage, I'd also put forward Literature. We have plenty of redlists in this area and it would cover biographies of women in literature as well as women's literary works, female fictional characters, awards for women's literature, etc. This is of course my personal area of interest, so I'm being very opportunistic in suggesting it. :) Cheers, Chocmilk03 ( talk) 20:43, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
So today's the day. This time last year I thought I wonder if I could write a new women's biog every day for a year. I'd tried before and messed it up at #360. So I started in December last year so I could officially start a full year this January. Well its complete and Wikipedia even records the names and dates here. During the year, I completed my 8 year run of notable ODNB women and ran out of missing ODNB Women in Red. I had to turn to Aussie women on the ADB. All of the 365 articles have fed into one of the WIR editathons. So what should be my prize to myself? I have bought myself a copy of "The Greater Bear". What?... I'll explain ... Imagine a London Underground map where the tube lines are either mathematicians, engineers, computer scientists etc or scientists etc and each station is a notable person. Now where the tube lines cross then you need to find a person who is both say a mathematician and an engineer. Thats one hell of a task, sometimes 3 or 4 lines cross.... is it possible for one person to write wikidata queries that turn out such a picture. My friend Terence Eden (helped by @Tagishsimon) has done just that. You can see the result here. Its not all women but there is an unapologetic bias towards them. (Thanks Terence) I bought myself a copy (and gave it to my spouse as a present). It cost me about £20 and it was mailed to my door and its a fabulous poster. If you like maps and data and notable lives then you'll be fascinated. I'd like to buy you all a copy but I don't have all of your addresses ... or the urge to spam you... or X time £20 to spare.... but treat yourself... and order a copy. Terence did all the work and he is not making a profit and he's done his level best not to infringe any copyrights. How did he do it? Where can you obtain your copy? [Seasons Greetings from Roger] aka Victuallers ( talk) 19:40, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
Over at Wiki Loves Pride, I've listed a group of articles about drag performers (including one about a trans woman requested at Missing biographies of nonbinary, trans and intersex people/transgender female) I've nominated for Good status. Sharing in case any project members are interested in providing feedback or reviewing, as this year's campaign comes to an end. Thanks and Happy New Year! --- Another Believer ( Talk) 23:00, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
Am I right in thinking this article is kinda... half-baked and awful? Didn't even include Duniway's major contribution until I added it. Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 8.7% of all FPs. 20:59, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
As with the counterpart of #1day1woman, is it specifically only women biographies that count or do women's works (such as books) also count? Since I have a fair few of those in addition to biographies on my list to make. I'm currently reading through The Exceptions by Kate Zernike, which is excellent (and infuriating) and plan to make an article on the book when I'm done. Silver seren C 21:39, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
Can anyone find coverage for any of the following Olympians at AFD?:
BeanieFan11 ( talk) 20:09, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
I know members of this project contributed to the discussions around moving men's football team articles to "X men's national football team", and would like to neutrally draw your attention to a similar discussion at a football records/achievement page. I am not suggesting contribution, but anyone interested could read the arguments there in case there are future discussions on the topic. See: Talk:List_of_footballers_who_achieved_hat-trick_records#Women. Kingsif ( talk) 00:32, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
I created a draft for Patricia Schultz. Her book is found on many a book shelf- a popular Christmas gift in the 2000s. Thriley ( talk) 03:39, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
I've just come across an interesting research paper on "Gender and the invisibility of care on Wikipedia" which reveals irregularities in Wikipedia's coverage of women in the Australian Honours System. "...we demonstrate that women are more likely to be awarded a Wikipedia page after the award announcements or not at all if their contribution is for labour relating to the caring professions than if their service is for sports, arts and films, politics or the judiciary." This should be of special interest to Victuallers and Oronsay.-- Ipigott ( talk) 13:21, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
I think this is an interesting and important subject missing. Anyone want to start it? FloridaArmy ( talk) 20:21, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
Came across this draft, which is too CV-like, but the subject seems notable Lajmmoore ( talk) 22:23, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
I'm looking for sources to see if an article on Rosalind Goodfellow (1927-2008) is feasible. She was the first woman Moderator of the General Assembly of the United Reformed Church, and the first lay moderator. There was an obituary in the Independent, and there is coverage both in newspapers of the time (the Daily Mirror, "The dark-haired, plucked-eyebrowed Mrs Rosalind Goodfellow, JP the Moderator of the United Reformed Church, spoke like Dame Edith Evans") and in history books of her participation in the service in St Paul's Cathedral after the Falklands war. [1] [2] [3] There is coverage in local papers which backs up what the obituary says about her activity as a magistrate and in voluntary organisations. There is also a reference in passing to her as one of the judges of Preacher of the Year in 1996. But I think with what I have an article would be vulnerable to AfD on the grounds of not enough coverage under WP:ANYBIO, and potentially WP:BLP1E for the reading at the Falklands service. I have looked at the Wikipedia Library and only found one passing reference. Does anyone have other ideas about where there might be significant coverage of her? I'm thinking there might be something in biographies or memoirs of people active in the URC at the same time as her. Or do I give up on her for the moment? Thanks. Tacyarg ( talk) 20:28, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
hello folks, I just sent the MassMessage for January, but for this list Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/A-F I forgot to put my signature at the end. Is there a way I can go back and mass-add-a-signature? If not, really sorry for the mistake! Lajmmoore ( talk) 20:24, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
User:PMCH2, who had a great interest in this project, and wrote several articles under its domain, has passed away. She leaves in her userspace three early-stage drafts on notable women:
If possible, please finish these and move them to mainspace. Cheers! BD2412 T 15:27, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
I think I may add a few more names over the next few days. Thriley ( talk) 20:43, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
Two more. Thriley ( talk) 05:55, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
Here's a link for "Bridging Digital Skills Gap Amongst Women through Wikipedia_Wiki Women in Red with UPSA" by Women For Sustainability Africa, via Youtube. -- Rosiestep ( talk) 15:37, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
I was thinking of creating an article for 2023 Deaths for Andrea Majstorovičová. There appear to be a lot of sources out there, but all in websites that are .cz and .sk , and I am struggling to read them. A good project for someone else? Kingsif ( talk) 02:17, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
So my holidays are complete - as a package arrived from Accra for me complete with Tee shirts. I'm offering to mail one and a real Women in Red barnstar to the first person to add 24 new biographies to our Education editathon which starts tomorrow. Thanks to Women for Sustainability Africa!. Feel free to cross post.
The new articles need to have 1,500 characters of original text, three refs at least, (preferably a picture), not "an orphan" and not be about anyone known to be from the UK or US. What do the prizes look like? See the pic. Happy New Year. Victuallers ( talk) 15:47, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
People you may not know about, but probably should.
The first entry I looked at covers Louise Cook (humanitarian) and Mary Burchell, but I wonder how many of the entries don't have articles? Would be worth digging into the group's archives and having a look. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:16, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
There are many women temperance activists/workers affiliated with International Organisation of Good Templars and Woman's Christian Temperance Union who have Wikimedia Commons photos (see c:Category:The International Good Templar and c:Category:Woman's Christian Temperance Union people), but don't have Wikidata items. If someone feels inclined to add them to Wikidata, then they'll show up on this redlist, which would be helpful for #296, which is happening this month. -- Rosiestep ( talk) 19:09, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
I uploaded a bunch of images from events in NZ last month, and have just been working through the extracted headshots. About 70-odd are women - I was planning to add them to last year's #1woman1day page, and I see there's a hidden category on Commons for media supported by WiR, so I'm guessing I should I add that? Is there anything else I need to do with respect to WiR (I already linked to Wikidata items using SDC)?
Apologies that this is probably covered somewhere but I've failed to find it! DrThneed ( talk) 06:57, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
I've started work on my first article draft for the #1Week1Woman initiative and I'm kinda amazed (in both a good and bad way) how simply doing the research keeps leading to more women to cover, but thus more women we were already missing. I've already added two more well known scientists to my list of future women's biographies to make. I wonder how many more will turn up in the process of making those articles. Either way, at least it means we will finally be covering them properly. Silver seren C 04:09, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
I have proposed a light copy-edit of our invite template here. I would be grateful if anyone has a moment to make sure the suggested changes wouldn’t be objectionable, since it speaks on behalf of the project. Thanks all. Innisfree987 ( talk) 21:22, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
It's encouraging to see how well this new feature of #1day1women is coming along. Anyone who thinks they could create one acceptable women's biography a week is welcome to contribute. The first of a series of virtual awards is for adding a minimum of 13 articles over the first three months. There are no special requirements in regard to size or presentation but the biographies should of course meet basic Wikipedia standards of acceptance. Why not start today and see how long you are able to participate? Your contributions will help us to increase the percentage of women's biographies in the English Wikipedia which now stands at 19.72%. Let's see how soon we can reach 20%.-- Ipigott ( talk) 07:39, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello!
I'd like to set up a DAB for 'Margaret Costa'. There are currently two:
Someone has set up a redirect on Margaret Costa to go to the former. I'd like to create a DAB for the two women, then have the redirect go to the DAB. However, my problem is finding a simple guide to creating a DAB! Every time I look at the MOS:DAB, I find it impossible to follow. Is there the equivalent of a Dummies Guide I can follow? EEHalli ( talk) 12:45, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
@ TSventon@ EEHalli It's simpler than that: if neither is the primary topic just overwrite the Margaret Costa redirect with a dab page (ie edit the redirect to turn it into a dab page). Margaret Costa (disambiguation) is not needed, unless you need for some reason go link to the dab page from elsewhere.
Simple way to create the first line of a dab page is {{subst:refer}}. Then make a bulleted list, link plus brief annotation(including dates, when known, for biographies). Then {{ dab}} or, if it's people's names, {{ hndis}}. Pam D 17:50, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
On this redlist, Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Temperance worker, does anyone know why the redlink is for Henrietta Brown (Q115787698) instead of just her name? This redlist also contains Margaret Parker (Q18762034) with a redirect to Margaret Eleanor Parker. I've noticed this issue on at least 1 other redlist, though I can't remembered which one. Maybe others have encountered it, too? Hoping someone knows how to fix this. I'd be happy to do so, but I don't know how. Happy New Year! -- Rosiestep ( talk) 18:57, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
@ Rosiestep It's because Henrietta Brown exists for another woman ( as a redirect in this case). You could turn the RD into a dab page if neither HB looks like the Primary Topic. With Margaret Parker I was all set to create her article till I found via Wikidata that there was already an article at her full name, so I created that redirect as a way to save anyone else wasting time. I think I also did what was needed to merge the two separate Wikidata records: I tried, at least, if I remember rightly. It all gets complicated, doesn't it! Pam D 21:28, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
Does anyone have any suggestions for when you write about a school that is basically synonymous with its school founder/teacher?
I added a biography section for Mary Balch to Mary Balch's School, since a separate biography article would probably 1.) be short, and 2.) have a lot of overlap with the article on the school. Mainly, the schools' notability is because of Mary, and Mary's notability is because of the school. However, I do think there's enough info on Mary Balch to create a separate article, and I'm wondering if the "Biography" section seems weird to have in the article about the school?
My instinct is to have Mary Balch as a redirect to the school, but any improvements or suggestions would be appreciated :) - Whisperjanes ( talk) 18:26, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
I have begun a stub on the above, who is part of this month's Temperance Women editathon. I have requested resources at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Resource_Exchange/Resource_Request#offline_book:_Emilie_Solomon:_1859-1939, but if anyone has access to this or other information on Emilie Solomon's life I would greatly appreciate the help in the article. Thank you. GnocchiFan ( talk) 19:59, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
I just created Draft:Amalija Knavs. The New York Times wrote her an obituary, which I generally find a signifier of notability for a standalone article. Thriley ( talk) 06:16, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello WikiProject Women In Red editors, Wikimedia Deutschland has a new project team investigating the different ways Wikidata is being used in the other Wikimedia projects. As your project exists on different Wiki's and uses integrated data from Wikidata, you may have valuable insights that could help us or you might like to share. If you would be interested in such a discussion, we encourage you to register for an interview with us at the following link: Sign Up Here
Please note that we probably won’t be able to have sessions with everyone who is interested. Our UX researcher will try to create a good balance of wiki contributors, e.g. in terms of wiki experience, tech experience, editing preferences, gender, disability and more. If you’re a fit, she will reach out to you to schedule an appointment. We hope to hear from you, -- Danny Benjafield (WMDE) ( talk) 13:04, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
This article was PRODed as an unreferenced BLP. I added a reference work and removed the PROD. If others care to expand and improve further, please do. 4meter4 ( talk) 04:45, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
Liz Magill and Claudine Gay have had recent edits that feel disproportionate + feed into media bias targeting women that I'd like to think we can avoid (or be patient enough not to take part in).
An example of the last is the repeated inclusion on Gay's article of a controversy involving two other men, which did not involve her, presented so as to suggest it did.
As people who started campaigns against them have said they mean to " carry out a long-overdue cleansing" of academia, I assume we'll see more. A little extra attention on these articles (and Sally Kornbluth, Minouche Shafik, and the category) would be welcome. I realize this is minor compared to many biases, but given the volume of media attention on these women, singled out in the first place for their prominence, the least we can do is not contribute to an echo chamber. – SJ + 20:08, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
I spotted this initiative Wiki Loves Muslim Academia this morning, and I imagine there might be some nice crossover with our own Education year-long theme! Lajmmoore ( talk) 13:37, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
While writing a new article on computer scientist Catholijn Jonker, I ran across some references to her mother Ineke Jonker [9] (1934–2011), a Dutch author of multiple books on sexual violence. Maybe she is also notable? I found two reviews for her book Christianity and Incest but I think we would need more sourcing than that. — David Eppstein ( talk) 21:45, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
Discussion on if something she wrote on Instagram should be mentioned in the article. It's Gaza-war related, your opinion is welcome at Talk:Mika_Tosca#She_no_longer_works_at_SAIC. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 10:30, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Looking for a new topic? British pioneer DJ Annie Nightingale has just died, she'd be a good 'Recent deaths' candidate, but the article needs referencing and a thorough copy edit. Lajmmoore ( talk) 13:13, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Mezzo-soprano. I just heard a recording of her and she’s mentioned but not in red. Just posting in case anyone has some knowledge and wants to do it. Pbackstrom ( talk) 05:09, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
I just published Susan Berget and, unlike most of the biographies I work on, she's still a living person. Meaning the usual non-free allowance rules I work with for photos doesn't apply. Does anyone know of any usable photos for her that would meet our copyright requirements? Silver seren C 00:28, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
Can anyone find coverage for the following Olympians who have either been AFDed or PRODed?
BeanieFan11 ( talk) 18:56, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
This category was recently under discussion at CFD at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 January 1. It was closed without much participation with the result of deleting many women related cats. I only became aware of it after cats were being removed on mass on my watch list. There appears to be a number of gender related cat deletion nominations currently at CFD. Project members may wish to keep an eye on project related categories for discussion, and notify the group about discussions for comment. All opinions on any of these discussions are welcome. 4meter4 ( talk) 18:18, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
This recent article about a 20th-century American photographer currently only has two secondary sources. Based on her obituary from the New York Times, she seems likely to be notable, but I'm struggling to find information about her online. Bringing this up here in case anyone else is interested in finding sources to expand/support the article. ForsythiaJo ( talk) 03:31, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Wedding of Grand Duke George Mikhailovich of Russia and Rebecca Virginia Bettarini#Requested move 16 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 08:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Amelia Hazard at AFD sourcing issues. — Maile ( talk) 15:35, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
In The Skeptics Dictionary, Robert Todd Carroll wrote that Cannon was "the poster child" for the New Age movement but was undecided as to "whether Dolores Cannon was a charlatan, a fraud, or a sincere delusional person...."
Or so says our article. Given the hyperbolic claims of her opponents, I suspect this person is notable, but the AfD right now is a mess. It could use the help of one of WiR's newspaper-search wizards to get a solid claim for notability. Or, alternatively, if some previously uninvolved editor could put this to bed with a really clear source evaluation table that proves all of this is junk, that would be very helpful. So far the arguments run the full gamut from impassioned keep votes to "delete and salt". --
asilvering (
talk)
02:33, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
![]() ![]()
Announcement
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|