![]() | 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 55 | ← | Archive 59 | Archive 60 | Archive 61 | Archive 62 | Archive 63 | → | Archive 65 |
I found Dorothy Meigs Eidlitz hiding in a listing of the National Gallery of Canada's permanent collection. Her Times obit calls her an "amateur photographer", but there she is in the National Gallery of Canada's collection, and in the Brooklyn Museum's collection. I thought I would post here as there are some very good editors who lurk this page. There is much more that could be expanded in this article; in particular I was not exactly sure how to characterize her advocacy for women: feminist, advocate, campaigner? She's really fascinating, and must have had a huge art collection as the web is littered with "gift of the Dorothy Meigs Eidlitz foundation" passing mentions, for serious artworks from her collection that are now in museums across North America. ThatMontrealIP ( talk) 03:27, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Andrew Gray has been kind enough to compile some data about BLPs, using Wikidata, and has written a fascinating blog post about it: Gender and deletion on Wikipedia. He has uploaded the graphs to Commons.
There have been some questions recently about whether existing BLPs about women (BLPs that have not been deleted) were more likely to have been taken to AfD at some point. Andrew thinks that used to be true, but that things have recently levelled off. He wrote: "Female BLPs created 2009-16 appear noticeably more likely than male BLPs of equivalent age to have been through a deletion discussion at some point in their lives (and, presumably, all have been kept). Since 2016, this has changed and the two groups are about even."
Andrew, thank you for putting all this together. SarahSV (talk) 00:30, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
In case anyone is interested, see Talk:Chairman#Requested move 8 May 2019. SarahSV (talk) 23:19, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello, In looking through the 'Women in Red' list (occupation/artists) I have noticed a few names that do not not have an English Wikipedia page but do have either French, Spanish or German Wikipedia pages. How are we to proceed with these names? Are we to create an English page and include info from the existing page (adding if we can) - or - are we to notify the 'Women in Red' project that a page exits for the name in another language? One example is Chantal duPont ( https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chantal_duPont). Thank you! LorriBrown ( talk) 15:40, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Hey everybody! Mix 'n match has a list of American Association for the Advancement of Sciences fellows. Every woman with a fellowship here (ie every woman on the list) meets the notability standards for Wikipedia! If you would like to help, the link is here. When these women are in Wikidata, they get automatically pulled for redlists!
If you set the action on "match mode", it's a super quick (and personally, very fun) way to match and create Wikidata items with some women (lots of men too). But, eventually, it would be awesome to see a graph of women who have been elected fellows over time and by field/division (there is a huge gap in engieering, it seems), so if you'd like, when you add somebody, you can put this information:
This sounds like more than it is, and if anybody knows of faster ways to do it, please let me know! Thank you if you can help. I'm going to put this on WP:Wiki scientists too. Sbbarker19 ( talk) 19:40, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi, just wondering why RonBot11 has not run for the last 3 1/2 weeks? The page was last updated by RonBot11 on 7th of April. I hope it will resume - there are many notable subjects whose draft articles can be improved and resubmitted/moved to mainspace, it would be a great pity to lose access to the rejected drafts. (I posted this on the WikiProject Women in Red/Drafts Talk page, but perhaps that is not viewed often - or perhaps no one knows why RonBot11 isn't running ...) RebeccaGreen ( talk) 12:08, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Combining two niche areas in one go, women's cricket and individuals from Pacific islands, I've created the following biographies following the conclusion of the 2019 ICC Women's Qualifier EAP tournament:
They are the current captains of the Vanuatuan and Samoan women's cricket teams respectively. Every little helps! Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 17:28, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
22 FPs of or related to women have been promoted since the start of the year, out of 156 FPs. Remembering that many FPs do not involve people (besides the photographer) at all (animals, buildings, etc) this makes for a fairly healthy 14% of all FPs for this year. Using a sample of 100 images, about 61% of FPs have no substantial connection to a human with gender (no painter, no composer they're related to, no humans. So buildings, space objects, animals, fruits, etc, but not things like paintings or posters where they could potentially be attached to a gender). Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 6.6% of all FPs 16:07, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
@ Adam Cuerden: Oh, damnation. I really like Davis, but that was the only picture I could find that was even remotely of FP quality. Ah, well - thanks for spotting. Another one: what do you think of File:Woman with Roses in Hair.jpg? There are condition issues, but I think those are present in the original. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa? Lo dicono a Signa. 04:17, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Since I tend to update these occasionally at first, a lot of these were mentioned, but since a lot have closed, here we go!
Nothing since then yet. We can hope. Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 6.6% of all FPs 04:29, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
I have a draft on my user space of an article called fifth-wave feminism to describe a particular wave of feminism that is most prominent in Latin America. It has over 70 sources, most of them in Spanish. The problem is, right now Fifth-wave feminism redirects to How_to_Be_a_Woman#Fifth-wave_feminism. In 2017, before a lot of the material now found in the article I drafted existed, fifth-wave feminism was nominated for deletion and then redirected. I feel that the situation has changed enough that this warrants revisiting but unsure how to do it... and for the most part, I could probably name the article Fifth-wave feminism in Ibero-America without losing much (except for mild references to Poland, small bits on the USA, the UK, Turkey, Sweden and Ukraine which are kind of marginal to begin with.). Does anyone have advice on how I should go forward with main spacing? Or does it seem too marginal altogether that it shouldn't be main spaced? -- LauraHale ( talk) 21:17, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Ipigott, that source isn't an RS for this. Laura, this is the English-language Wikipedia, so you need to use English-language sources or supply English quotations in footnotes from your sources to show that they support the text. See WP:NOENG:
Citations to non-English reliable sources are allowed on the English Wikipedia. However, because this project is in English, English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones when available and of equal quality and relevance. As with sources in English, if a dispute arises involving a citation to a non-English source, editors may request that a quotation of relevant portions of the original source be provided, either in text, in a footnote, or on the article talk page.
Individuals may be mentioning a fifth wave here and there, but Wikipedia has to wait until there's a greater mass of sources. The danger is that everyone wants to be the new Rebecca Walker ("I am not a post-feminism feminist. I am the Third Wave.")
Writing about feminism in Ibero-America is not a problem, but if that's what you want to do, call the article Feminism in Ibero-America. Italy, Poland and the UK aren't in Ibero-America. You wrote about the UK:
For British feminists, a potential fourth or fifth-wave assumes that most of the inequalities faced by women in domestic and private spheres have disappeared or will shortly disappear; most of the goals of feminists have been accomplished. [1] [2] [3] The new wave for British feminists will instead turn to a critique of feminine behavior in a post-patriarchal world. [1]
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |dead-url=
(
help)
What do those sources say to support the text or anything about a fifth wave? Notice the age of the citations: 2003, 2007 and 2014.
Notwithstanding everything you wrote above, would it not be better to use English-language sources when writing about British feminism? SarahSV (talk) 19:16, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Looking at the sources to support the UK paragraph, the first is just a book review of Moran's How to be a Woman. Source two is pp. 84–103. Source three is pp. 151–172. Laura, can you supply page numbers? SarahSV (talk) 19:36, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Heads up for WiR - https://twitter.com/jesswade/status/1123494971435290624 - "since this whole thing, every page i’ve made has been tagged for deletion and queries made about people’s notability." You all might want to keep an eye on Jess's recent contributions. Currently just two pink-listed articles in her last 500 edits, one an AfD heading for snowball keep, and the other a deletion review heading for "don't be so stupid". Clarice Phelps seems to have been the immediate trigger, on which question there is a DailyDot article and, if we cannot have an article for the subject (her page has been salted by admins), we are surely at a point where we can have an article on Clarice Phelps Wikipedia controversy. Also smh. Also ❤️ Jess Wade. -- Tagishsimon ( talk) 12:36, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
I am disappointed by the language used by those seeking deletion of the articles on Clarice and Ana Achúcarro and their accusations of the statements against the AfDs. I follow WIR and Jess on Twitter and do my bit with links, etc to help incorporate new articles into WP. I am unwilling myself to weigh into the debates, but please keep up the strong defence of both these articles and the Women in Red project. I hope the situation settles down and we can get on with our work creating new articles. Oronsay ( talk) 19:49, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
During her early career...) look defensible. XOR'easter ( talk) 21:12, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
And now there's this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Tuttle. I was honestly thinking that was more of a "draftify per WP:TOOSOON" situation, but then I started looking for sources, and now I'm wondering if anyone bothered to do that before complaining. XOR'easter ( talk) 17:03, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
Did you not notice that that's untrue before reposting it here? "since this whole thing, every page i’ve made has been tagged for deletion and queries made about people’s notability" Do you actually believe that? It's very simple to prove it wrong. Click on any one of the 500+ articles that have not been tagged for deletion, and you'll see that this is an invented claim. Natureium ( talk) 18:55, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
I'm concerned there's an elephant in the room here. Jess's contributions are being scrutinised in some cases for sexist and misogynistic reasons, of that I have no doubt, and I'm well aware of the often toxic atmosphere which exists for anything other than white male geeks editing Wikipedia, but Jess really hasn't helped herself by saving articles which have serious sourcing deficiencies. The Clarice Phelps draft when first saved says "She graduated from the University of Tennessee with a PhD in chemistry in 2014." sourced to
[3]. This source makes no mention of Phelps having a PhD, she isn't introduced as Dr Clarice Phelps, and on further analysis, it doesn't even confirm Phelps is a University of Tennessee graduate. The hot topic at the moment, Sarah Tuttle has a smaller but similar issue. The first line says "Sarah Tuttle is a Professor of Astrophysics and Science Communicator" but when looking at sources, we only have
[4] discussing Tuttle's current title (assistant professor) and we have a second source
[5] linking through to Tuttle's page at the University of Washington
[6] where their title of assistant professor is confirmed, unfortunately this source wasn't used in the initial revision of the article as saved by Jess.
I know it's frustrating sometimes to have an article running away through your fingers because it's missing a couple of sources to confirm what you know or think you know, but the combination of
original research and
synthesis we see in some of Jess's articles is a large part of why so much of her work is being heavily scrutinised. -
Nick (
talk)
19:47, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
there were issue taking the form of fact and mis-statement. - Sitush ( talk) 02:55, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello WiR! I am currently working on expanding coverage of women's soccer (football for those abroad) in celebration of the upcoming FIFA Women's World Cup, which runs from June 7 to July 7. It would be great if we could wrangle together a full set of eight DYK hooks to run on the final, and I have already taken the liberty of starting us off with Template:Did you know nominations/Im Eun-ju. Feel free to message me if you spot candidates for a potential DYK that need polish or further research; to start, there's plenty of red links and stubs at 1999 FIFA Women's World Cup (namely referees and a few managers listed here) that could yield a few DYKs. Sounder Bruce 23:13, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
Could someone have a look at Duchess Harris? The article has been edited by accounts whose usernames sound as if there is a CoI. There are some formatting and editing issues. I don't have notability concerns but think the CoI and formatting issues put the article in danger of being nominated for deletion. I'm hesitant to edit it myself as it's not a subject I know much about. Thanks. Tacyarg ( talk) 22:52, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
(Moved discussion) I have started a page on Woman's Exchange Movement. Writing a better article is beyond my abilities. Is there a place (aside from here) where I can let interested parties know this is a subject they might want to get involved with? It is a very interesting combination of feminism, altruism, and history. For example the movement had a surge after the Civil War (genteel war widows) and then again after economic disruption later in the century. Social class is a facet of this movement as well, and I have no idea how to side-step POV. I am pinging Megalibrarygirl, Victuallers, SusunW, Ser Amantio di Nicolao and Rosiestep (I'm going straight to the top) for advice on finding historians who would like to tackle this. Oh and any suggestions on tags for the talk page too. Thank you!. WomenArtistUpdates ( talk) 00:53, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
After an argument about women & their works I explained that only women writers seem to show up on Wikidata correctly (as in: not conflated with their works). For youtubers, there should be separate items for the person (with birthdate) and the youtube channel (with inception date), even though Wikipedia has these together. My question here is, should English Wikipedia care at all about this or not? So, e.g. should English Wikipedia always link such articles to the person Wikidata item or not? Jane ( talk) 13:32, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi Folks! I'm a new wikipedian working on Women in Red articles since March with a focus on Women in STEM. I'm hoping for some of your thoughts on something I have been encountering with greater frequency lately on wikipedia. Specifically, I have come across a series of start or stub articles which I'd like to improve where the notability or personal life/family sections of a female scientist is more overdeveloped than career + scientific discoveries. Once I improve these science sections I am wondering appropriate steps forward on addressing the personal life or family/spouse sections. Should the personal life section generally remain as-is? Also should the spouse be included in the infobox if he's a notable scientist (as I've seen in some instances)? I do not want to detract from the length of any existing article or the completeness of any biography however, in some instances, this extra information doesn't seem pertinent to notability. many thanks! alie Nanobright ( talk) 06:29, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi everyone @ SusunW:,@ Nonmodernist:,@ Penny Richards:, @ Johnbod:, @ David Eppstein:, thank you so much for getting back to me, this is helpful context. My game-plan will to keep as-is in cases where the information is already present as long as it is well sourced and also link in the infobox in instances where the spouse is notable. Since I mainly have been working on BLP, my preference is to not research or make any further efforts to add this type of information in consideration of privacy and also because it seems hard to keep such information current. With that said, I do agree there are cases where including personal details are important to explain career moves etc. But there are also several articles where the added info has felt like a red-flag in terms of detracting from article quality...A particular example is an article in my to-improve queue Lily Jan. In this instance I would like to develop and expand the fact that her lab and research is joint with her spouse and to elaborate on joint publications. However, the section at the bottom currently exists discussing details of her marriage ceremony and names of her children does not seem relevant and again to the above points seems to be invasion of privacy since the info is not well sourced. For the example I addressed above I think it is particularly interesting to compare the language and personal life content on her article to that of her spouse Yuh Nung Jan. Both address their marriage but in different contexts re: scientific career. Irrespective of how my efforts shake out for improving these two articles, it does sounds like explaining and addressing things on the talk page on each article is a good path forward + to assist editors down the line. thanks again! Nanobright ( talk) 18:52, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Greetings, please note that Linda Craddock has a page now. Do please let me know of the best way to notify the project of new pages created. Best, LorriBrown ( talk) 15:26, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
{{
WIR-108}}
to the talk page. That will allow it to be picked up by the project pages.
Megalibrarygirl should know the correct template if it's not that one.
Ritchie333
(talk)
(cont)
15:29, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello! I am working on a draft article on the journalist Sarah Jones. The draft is here: Draft:Sarah_Jones_(journalist). I would greatly appreciate any feedback on the draft, particularly whether you think Sarah is notable, whether the draft has the proper tone, and whether the structure works. Thanks! DanDavidCook ( talk) 16:09, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Can anybody help here? I came across Draft:Barbie The Welder which was tagged as a soon to expire draft, and added one independent source. The juxtaposition of the topics in the name appeals to my sense of humour, and I'm sure I can spin a DYK like "... that this Barbie likes playing with arc welders?" out of it. I don't think she's notable, but I know some of you like a challenge, so if any of you can improve this to mainspace standards, great. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:24, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Well! All the ones from the last FP report have closed ( Mary Jackson passed, if anyone didn't see), so let's review the current crop:
I'm quite hopeful for this set of FPCs. Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 01:13, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
I just posted an article on Mabel Harrison, a golfer. As it turns out, there's a stub for Mary Harrison (golfer), and now I'm pretty sure it's the same person (that one only has two references from US papers, and a picture from the Library of Congress; her name was never Mary, but that doesn't mean a reporter or two couldn't get it wrong). So they should probably be merged, right? Can someone help? Penny Richards ( talk) 19:38, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
I was about to write an article on Aguerri, when I realized that across wikis her name is a typographical error and logged as Aguirre. There are NO sources under the name Aguirre, nor are any of the affiliated authority control identifiers. So, I moved the English and Wiki.sv versions to the correct spelling (though my explanations are in English) and I corrected the Wikidata page. On Wiki.es, I do not see any way to move the page from the wrong spelling to the correct spelling. Can someone help? Thanks! SusunW ( talk) 20:29, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
The handwriting is gorgeous, and I'd like to preserve it, but since it's wide, it would make her image smaller at thumbnail, so maybe it's best to crop? Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 21:48, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
![]()
|
-- Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 17:41, 22 May 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hello! On behalf of Sophia Wisniewska, I've submitted a draft article about her as part of my work at Beutler Ink. Given my conflict of interest, I do not edit the main space and ask independent editors to review for accuracy, neutrality, and verifiability. Moments after submitting, the draft was rejected, so I was hoping for some feedback about what improvements are necessary at this time. Any feedback would be helpful, thanks, Inkian Jason ( talk) 21:46, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you all for the helpful feedback. I've shared a reply at Draft talk:Sophia Wisniewska to keep discussion tied to the proposed content. Inkian Jason ( talk) 18:04, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
I've added 5 sources to the draft to expand the "Early life and education" and "Career" sections, and add a brief "Personal life" section, as requested. Are any project members able to take another look, please? Thank you. Inkian Jason ( talk) 20:31, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
To what extent should account be taken of the new Japanese preferences for writing names with the family name first? See Foreign Minister Taro Kono to ask media to switch order of Japanese names.-- Ipigott ( talk) 07:54, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Women Airforce Service Pilots. WW II pilot. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 11:47, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
![]() | 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 55 | ← | Archive 59 | Archive 60 | Archive 61 | Archive 62 | Archive 63 | → | Archive 65 |
I found Dorothy Meigs Eidlitz hiding in a listing of the National Gallery of Canada's permanent collection. Her Times obit calls her an "amateur photographer", but there she is in the National Gallery of Canada's collection, and in the Brooklyn Museum's collection. I thought I would post here as there are some very good editors who lurk this page. There is much more that could be expanded in this article; in particular I was not exactly sure how to characterize her advocacy for women: feminist, advocate, campaigner? She's really fascinating, and must have had a huge art collection as the web is littered with "gift of the Dorothy Meigs Eidlitz foundation" passing mentions, for serious artworks from her collection that are now in museums across North America. ThatMontrealIP ( talk) 03:27, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Andrew Gray has been kind enough to compile some data about BLPs, using Wikidata, and has written a fascinating blog post about it: Gender and deletion on Wikipedia. He has uploaded the graphs to Commons.
There have been some questions recently about whether existing BLPs about women (BLPs that have not been deleted) were more likely to have been taken to AfD at some point. Andrew thinks that used to be true, but that things have recently levelled off. He wrote: "Female BLPs created 2009-16 appear noticeably more likely than male BLPs of equivalent age to have been through a deletion discussion at some point in their lives (and, presumably, all have been kept). Since 2016, this has changed and the two groups are about even."
Andrew, thank you for putting all this together. SarahSV (talk) 00:30, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
In case anyone is interested, see Talk:Chairman#Requested move 8 May 2019. SarahSV (talk) 23:19, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello, In looking through the 'Women in Red' list (occupation/artists) I have noticed a few names that do not not have an English Wikipedia page but do have either French, Spanish or German Wikipedia pages. How are we to proceed with these names? Are we to create an English page and include info from the existing page (adding if we can) - or - are we to notify the 'Women in Red' project that a page exits for the name in another language? One example is Chantal duPont ( https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chantal_duPont). Thank you! LorriBrown ( talk) 15:40, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Hey everybody! Mix 'n match has a list of American Association for the Advancement of Sciences fellows. Every woman with a fellowship here (ie every woman on the list) meets the notability standards for Wikipedia! If you would like to help, the link is here. When these women are in Wikidata, they get automatically pulled for redlists!
If you set the action on "match mode", it's a super quick (and personally, very fun) way to match and create Wikidata items with some women (lots of men too). But, eventually, it would be awesome to see a graph of women who have been elected fellows over time and by field/division (there is a huge gap in engieering, it seems), so if you'd like, when you add somebody, you can put this information:
This sounds like more than it is, and if anybody knows of faster ways to do it, please let me know! Thank you if you can help. I'm going to put this on WP:Wiki scientists too. Sbbarker19 ( talk) 19:40, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi, just wondering why RonBot11 has not run for the last 3 1/2 weeks? The page was last updated by RonBot11 on 7th of April. I hope it will resume - there are many notable subjects whose draft articles can be improved and resubmitted/moved to mainspace, it would be a great pity to lose access to the rejected drafts. (I posted this on the WikiProject Women in Red/Drafts Talk page, but perhaps that is not viewed often - or perhaps no one knows why RonBot11 isn't running ...) RebeccaGreen ( talk) 12:08, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Combining two niche areas in one go, women's cricket and individuals from Pacific islands, I've created the following biographies following the conclusion of the 2019 ICC Women's Qualifier EAP tournament:
They are the current captains of the Vanuatuan and Samoan women's cricket teams respectively. Every little helps! Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 17:28, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
22 FPs of or related to women have been promoted since the start of the year, out of 156 FPs. Remembering that many FPs do not involve people (besides the photographer) at all (animals, buildings, etc) this makes for a fairly healthy 14% of all FPs for this year. Using a sample of 100 images, about 61% of FPs have no substantial connection to a human with gender (no painter, no composer they're related to, no humans. So buildings, space objects, animals, fruits, etc, but not things like paintings or posters where they could potentially be attached to a gender). Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 6.6% of all FPs 16:07, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
@ Adam Cuerden: Oh, damnation. I really like Davis, but that was the only picture I could find that was even remotely of FP quality. Ah, well - thanks for spotting. Another one: what do you think of File:Woman with Roses in Hair.jpg? There are condition issues, but I think those are present in the original. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa? Lo dicono a Signa. 04:17, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Since I tend to update these occasionally at first, a lot of these were mentioned, but since a lot have closed, here we go!
Nothing since then yet. We can hope. Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 6.6% of all FPs 04:29, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
I have a draft on my user space of an article called fifth-wave feminism to describe a particular wave of feminism that is most prominent in Latin America. It has over 70 sources, most of them in Spanish. The problem is, right now Fifth-wave feminism redirects to How_to_Be_a_Woman#Fifth-wave_feminism. In 2017, before a lot of the material now found in the article I drafted existed, fifth-wave feminism was nominated for deletion and then redirected. I feel that the situation has changed enough that this warrants revisiting but unsure how to do it... and for the most part, I could probably name the article Fifth-wave feminism in Ibero-America without losing much (except for mild references to Poland, small bits on the USA, the UK, Turkey, Sweden and Ukraine which are kind of marginal to begin with.). Does anyone have advice on how I should go forward with main spacing? Or does it seem too marginal altogether that it shouldn't be main spaced? -- LauraHale ( talk) 21:17, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Ipigott, that source isn't an RS for this. Laura, this is the English-language Wikipedia, so you need to use English-language sources or supply English quotations in footnotes from your sources to show that they support the text. See WP:NOENG:
Citations to non-English reliable sources are allowed on the English Wikipedia. However, because this project is in English, English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones when available and of equal quality and relevance. As with sources in English, if a dispute arises involving a citation to a non-English source, editors may request that a quotation of relevant portions of the original source be provided, either in text, in a footnote, or on the article talk page.
Individuals may be mentioning a fifth wave here and there, but Wikipedia has to wait until there's a greater mass of sources. The danger is that everyone wants to be the new Rebecca Walker ("I am not a post-feminism feminist. I am the Third Wave.")
Writing about feminism in Ibero-America is not a problem, but if that's what you want to do, call the article Feminism in Ibero-America. Italy, Poland and the UK aren't in Ibero-America. You wrote about the UK:
For British feminists, a potential fourth or fifth-wave assumes that most of the inequalities faced by women in domestic and private spheres have disappeared or will shortly disappear; most of the goals of feminists have been accomplished. [1] [2] [3] The new wave for British feminists will instead turn to a critique of feminine behavior in a post-patriarchal world. [1]
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |dead-url=
(
help)
What do those sources say to support the text or anything about a fifth wave? Notice the age of the citations: 2003, 2007 and 2014.
Notwithstanding everything you wrote above, would it not be better to use English-language sources when writing about British feminism? SarahSV (talk) 19:16, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Looking at the sources to support the UK paragraph, the first is just a book review of Moran's How to be a Woman. Source two is pp. 84–103. Source three is pp. 151–172. Laura, can you supply page numbers? SarahSV (talk) 19:36, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Heads up for WiR - https://twitter.com/jesswade/status/1123494971435290624 - "since this whole thing, every page i’ve made has been tagged for deletion and queries made about people’s notability." You all might want to keep an eye on Jess's recent contributions. Currently just two pink-listed articles in her last 500 edits, one an AfD heading for snowball keep, and the other a deletion review heading for "don't be so stupid". Clarice Phelps seems to have been the immediate trigger, on which question there is a DailyDot article and, if we cannot have an article for the subject (her page has been salted by admins), we are surely at a point where we can have an article on Clarice Phelps Wikipedia controversy. Also smh. Also ❤️ Jess Wade. -- Tagishsimon ( talk) 12:36, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
I am disappointed by the language used by those seeking deletion of the articles on Clarice and Ana Achúcarro and their accusations of the statements against the AfDs. I follow WIR and Jess on Twitter and do my bit with links, etc to help incorporate new articles into WP. I am unwilling myself to weigh into the debates, but please keep up the strong defence of both these articles and the Women in Red project. I hope the situation settles down and we can get on with our work creating new articles. Oronsay ( talk) 19:49, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
During her early career...) look defensible. XOR'easter ( talk) 21:12, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
And now there's this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Tuttle. I was honestly thinking that was more of a "draftify per WP:TOOSOON" situation, but then I started looking for sources, and now I'm wondering if anyone bothered to do that before complaining. XOR'easter ( talk) 17:03, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
Did you not notice that that's untrue before reposting it here? "since this whole thing, every page i’ve made has been tagged for deletion and queries made about people’s notability" Do you actually believe that? It's very simple to prove it wrong. Click on any one of the 500+ articles that have not been tagged for deletion, and you'll see that this is an invented claim. Natureium ( talk) 18:55, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
I'm concerned there's an elephant in the room here. Jess's contributions are being scrutinised in some cases for sexist and misogynistic reasons, of that I have no doubt, and I'm well aware of the often toxic atmosphere which exists for anything other than white male geeks editing Wikipedia, but Jess really hasn't helped herself by saving articles which have serious sourcing deficiencies. The Clarice Phelps draft when first saved says "She graduated from the University of Tennessee with a PhD in chemistry in 2014." sourced to
[3]. This source makes no mention of Phelps having a PhD, she isn't introduced as Dr Clarice Phelps, and on further analysis, it doesn't even confirm Phelps is a University of Tennessee graduate. The hot topic at the moment, Sarah Tuttle has a smaller but similar issue. The first line says "Sarah Tuttle is a Professor of Astrophysics and Science Communicator" but when looking at sources, we only have
[4] discussing Tuttle's current title (assistant professor) and we have a second source
[5] linking through to Tuttle's page at the University of Washington
[6] where their title of assistant professor is confirmed, unfortunately this source wasn't used in the initial revision of the article as saved by Jess.
I know it's frustrating sometimes to have an article running away through your fingers because it's missing a couple of sources to confirm what you know or think you know, but the combination of
original research and
synthesis we see in some of Jess's articles is a large part of why so much of her work is being heavily scrutinised. -
Nick (
talk)
19:47, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
there were issue taking the form of fact and mis-statement. - Sitush ( talk) 02:55, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello WiR! I am currently working on expanding coverage of women's soccer (football for those abroad) in celebration of the upcoming FIFA Women's World Cup, which runs from June 7 to July 7. It would be great if we could wrangle together a full set of eight DYK hooks to run on the final, and I have already taken the liberty of starting us off with Template:Did you know nominations/Im Eun-ju. Feel free to message me if you spot candidates for a potential DYK that need polish or further research; to start, there's plenty of red links and stubs at 1999 FIFA Women's World Cup (namely referees and a few managers listed here) that could yield a few DYKs. Sounder Bruce 23:13, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
Could someone have a look at Duchess Harris? The article has been edited by accounts whose usernames sound as if there is a CoI. There are some formatting and editing issues. I don't have notability concerns but think the CoI and formatting issues put the article in danger of being nominated for deletion. I'm hesitant to edit it myself as it's not a subject I know much about. Thanks. Tacyarg ( talk) 22:52, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
(Moved discussion) I have started a page on Woman's Exchange Movement. Writing a better article is beyond my abilities. Is there a place (aside from here) where I can let interested parties know this is a subject they might want to get involved with? It is a very interesting combination of feminism, altruism, and history. For example the movement had a surge after the Civil War (genteel war widows) and then again after economic disruption later in the century. Social class is a facet of this movement as well, and I have no idea how to side-step POV. I am pinging Megalibrarygirl, Victuallers, SusunW, Ser Amantio di Nicolao and Rosiestep (I'm going straight to the top) for advice on finding historians who would like to tackle this. Oh and any suggestions on tags for the talk page too. Thank you!. WomenArtistUpdates ( talk) 00:53, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
After an argument about women & their works I explained that only women writers seem to show up on Wikidata correctly (as in: not conflated with their works). For youtubers, there should be separate items for the person (with birthdate) and the youtube channel (with inception date), even though Wikipedia has these together. My question here is, should English Wikipedia care at all about this or not? So, e.g. should English Wikipedia always link such articles to the person Wikidata item or not? Jane ( talk) 13:32, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi Folks! I'm a new wikipedian working on Women in Red articles since March with a focus on Women in STEM. I'm hoping for some of your thoughts on something I have been encountering with greater frequency lately on wikipedia. Specifically, I have come across a series of start or stub articles which I'd like to improve where the notability or personal life/family sections of a female scientist is more overdeveloped than career + scientific discoveries. Once I improve these science sections I am wondering appropriate steps forward on addressing the personal life or family/spouse sections. Should the personal life section generally remain as-is? Also should the spouse be included in the infobox if he's a notable scientist (as I've seen in some instances)? I do not want to detract from the length of any existing article or the completeness of any biography however, in some instances, this extra information doesn't seem pertinent to notability. many thanks! alie Nanobright ( talk) 06:29, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi everyone @ SusunW:,@ Nonmodernist:,@ Penny Richards:, @ Johnbod:, @ David Eppstein:, thank you so much for getting back to me, this is helpful context. My game-plan will to keep as-is in cases where the information is already present as long as it is well sourced and also link in the infobox in instances where the spouse is notable. Since I mainly have been working on BLP, my preference is to not research or make any further efforts to add this type of information in consideration of privacy and also because it seems hard to keep such information current. With that said, I do agree there are cases where including personal details are important to explain career moves etc. But there are also several articles where the added info has felt like a red-flag in terms of detracting from article quality...A particular example is an article in my to-improve queue Lily Jan. In this instance I would like to develop and expand the fact that her lab and research is joint with her spouse and to elaborate on joint publications. However, the section at the bottom currently exists discussing details of her marriage ceremony and names of her children does not seem relevant and again to the above points seems to be invasion of privacy since the info is not well sourced. For the example I addressed above I think it is particularly interesting to compare the language and personal life content on her article to that of her spouse Yuh Nung Jan. Both address their marriage but in different contexts re: scientific career. Irrespective of how my efforts shake out for improving these two articles, it does sounds like explaining and addressing things on the talk page on each article is a good path forward + to assist editors down the line. thanks again! Nanobright ( talk) 18:52, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Greetings, please note that Linda Craddock has a page now. Do please let me know of the best way to notify the project of new pages created. Best, LorriBrown ( talk) 15:26, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
{{
WIR-108}}
to the talk page. That will allow it to be picked up by the project pages.
Megalibrarygirl should know the correct template if it's not that one.
Ritchie333
(talk)
(cont)
15:29, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello! I am working on a draft article on the journalist Sarah Jones. The draft is here: Draft:Sarah_Jones_(journalist). I would greatly appreciate any feedback on the draft, particularly whether you think Sarah is notable, whether the draft has the proper tone, and whether the structure works. Thanks! DanDavidCook ( talk) 16:09, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Can anybody help here? I came across Draft:Barbie The Welder which was tagged as a soon to expire draft, and added one independent source. The juxtaposition of the topics in the name appeals to my sense of humour, and I'm sure I can spin a DYK like "... that this Barbie likes playing with arc welders?" out of it. I don't think she's notable, but I know some of you like a challenge, so if any of you can improve this to mainspace standards, great. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:24, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Well! All the ones from the last FP report have closed ( Mary Jackson passed, if anyone didn't see), so let's review the current crop:
I'm quite hopeful for this set of FPCs. Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 01:13, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
I just posted an article on Mabel Harrison, a golfer. As it turns out, there's a stub for Mary Harrison (golfer), and now I'm pretty sure it's the same person (that one only has two references from US papers, and a picture from the Library of Congress; her name was never Mary, but that doesn't mean a reporter or two couldn't get it wrong). So they should probably be merged, right? Can someone help? Penny Richards ( talk) 19:38, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
I was about to write an article on Aguerri, when I realized that across wikis her name is a typographical error and logged as Aguirre. There are NO sources under the name Aguirre, nor are any of the affiliated authority control identifiers. So, I moved the English and Wiki.sv versions to the correct spelling (though my explanations are in English) and I corrected the Wikidata page. On Wiki.es, I do not see any way to move the page from the wrong spelling to the correct spelling. Can someone help? Thanks! SusunW ( talk) 20:29, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
The handwriting is gorgeous, and I'd like to preserve it, but since it's wide, it would make her image smaller at thumbnail, so maybe it's best to crop? Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 21:48, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
![]()
|
-- Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 17:41, 22 May 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hello! On behalf of Sophia Wisniewska, I've submitted a draft article about her as part of my work at Beutler Ink. Given my conflict of interest, I do not edit the main space and ask independent editors to review for accuracy, neutrality, and verifiability. Moments after submitting, the draft was rejected, so I was hoping for some feedback about what improvements are necessary at this time. Any feedback would be helpful, thanks, Inkian Jason ( talk) 21:46, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you all for the helpful feedback. I've shared a reply at Draft talk:Sophia Wisniewska to keep discussion tied to the proposed content. Inkian Jason ( talk) 18:04, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
I've added 5 sources to the draft to expand the "Early life and education" and "Career" sections, and add a brief "Personal life" section, as requested. Are any project members able to take another look, please? Thank you. Inkian Jason ( talk) 20:31, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
To what extent should account be taken of the new Japanese preferences for writing names with the family name first? See Foreign Minister Taro Kono to ask media to switch order of Japanese names.-- Ipigott ( talk) 07:54, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Women Airforce Service Pilots. WW II pilot. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 11:47, 23 May 2019 (UTC)