Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women/Archive 14
 | 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 10 | ← | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 |
Aroused peer review
I've put the good article on the documentary film Aroused (film) for peer review at Wikipedia:Peer review/Aroused (film)/archive1. Feedback to help improve its quality further would be appreciated, thank you, Right cite (talk) 14:21, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
New film article - Women of the White Buffalo
I created a new article about the documentary film, Women of the White Buffalo. Let me know if you want to help with further research, Right cite (talk) 22:02, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
Wendy Luhabe
RfC on mentioning access to abortion services in Poland
There's a discussion taking place at Talk:Poland#RfC: Abortion rights and legal history in Poland#Law on whether to mention Poland's restrictive abortion laws in the main article. I've realized while writing this comment that I should probably post a link here, so here. Cheers! François Robere (talk) 17:54, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
December with Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:42, 26 November 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Request for input at Talk:Onna-bugeisha
There is a proposal to change the title (and subsequently the content to reflect the new title) of this article on warrior women in pre-modern Japan. Please see
Discussion regarding "What is a fully professional league" + football / soccer inclusion criteria
A discussion regarding "What is a fully professional league" based on
Input and ideas are welcome.Hmlarson (talk) 21:00, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
A New Year With Women in Red!
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 03:01, 29 December 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Main wp:Women page
What has happened to the display? There are thick black frames everywhere. Can anyone fix them?--Ipigott (talk) 10:42, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
- It happened in this edit and similar ones. I am not familiar enough with the topic, - best talk to the bot (driver). I had a similar problem today about a different deleted template, and got a good answer and fix. Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:08, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
- Looks like the bot fixed the broken CSS. Before the edit, the box-shadow wasn't showing and the border was disabled. I have fixed the display here and will look for others. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:19, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
RFC
Lana Del Rey 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.--Bettydaisies (talk) 01:06, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Timelines of women's history deleted -- need help with rewrites
Please see discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red#Timelines of women's history deleted -- need help with rewrites. Whizz40 (talk) 09:42, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
February 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 14:58, 27 January 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Filsan Abdullahi
One newly blue woman with the extremely challenging role of trying to stop
For the interested
Helen Caldicott was brought to my attention here: Wikipedia:Editor_assistance/Requests#How_to_deal_with_Wikipedia:Autobiography_violation?. The article could use some checking. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:14, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
AfC for review: Krish O'Mara Vignarajah, CEO of Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service
Hello all. I would kindly like to request a review of the draft submission for
Immigrant Issues (talk) 16:59, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
AfC: Draft:Dolaana Khovalyg
Hello! As my draft was denied in the AfC review, I am looking for advice how to make the article on Dolaana Khovalyg better, in order to get it through the review. Many thanks for helping with that! Kind regards, Quaenuncabibis (talk) 15:06, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi all. I just created a small article on this
Maria do Carmo Medina
Hi everyone. I just came across Maria do Carmo Medina and think the article needs some attention. She is stated as having been:
- The first female judge of Luanda Court of Appeal in Angola
- Vice President of the Supreme Court of Angola
- Chairman of the General Assembly of the Association of Angolan Lawyers
- Chairman of the General Assembly of the Angolan Association of Women Lawyers
There is also mention of her being a judge of the Supreme Court of Angola; in the cited website article – translated by google – she is described as Judge Counselor, Magistrate of the Supreme Court, and First Vice President of the Supreme Court. She was a professor of family law and an all-around cool person – at least according to what I've read so far.
The majority of references are in Portuguese and I am not sure of their quality as sources, but I think there is far more to be said about her, in greater detail. I hope her article can be expanded and her story accurately portrayed. (I'm not entirely sure if this is the correct place to put this but here we are.)
Cheers, ritenerektalk :) 10:50, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
March 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 18:47, 26 February 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Haruka Kudō
There is a discussion taking place at Talk:Haruka Kudō (singer)#Requested move 3 March 2021 over renaming the article. Your input is appreciated. lullabying (talk) 19:35, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
national geographic article
Just thought I'd highlight this national geographic article as it seems likely to have a bunch of content for a number of articles that seem to be in scope of this wikiproject. Hope it is some use also this entire issue looks to be relevantEdwardLane (talk) 16:23, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Femicide
Hi all, in light of recent events concerning the disappearance of
April editathons from Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:15, 22 March 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
A discussion about whether or not there should be separate categories for villains by gender, in case anyone has an opinion. Liz Read! Talk! 20:19, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Ying Ma
Hi all, I have added sufficient details and relevant references to save Ying Ma (writer). However, my added contents and references have been deleted. I do believe article needs your help. Please review the history and add your comments. [my latest revision] Thanks, SWP13 (talk) 16:13, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
- The content you added was near-exclusively sourced to self-authored bios and to other self-sourced work (such as op-eds). If you weren't a regular editor, I would have strongly suspected your edit of being talk) 16:22, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Help regarding recent articles listed at WP:AFD created under #1day1woman initiative
Hi members,
) 15:37, 16 April 2021 (UTC)Seeking Germany-based editors with a subscription to WAZ to assist with clarification in AfD discussion regarding Laura Hoffmann Hmlarson (talk) 18:39, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
May 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 21:35, 28 April 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Merger proposal of Candice Brown
I started the merger proposal of
Draft:Modern Métis Woman
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Modern_M%C3%A9tis_Woman
Looking for feedback and help in article publishing. This is a great young woman, who founded a registered non profit charity, with her own money while still in University that gives scholarships to Indigenous women.
Many news paper articles have been dedicated to her efforts.
Any criticism of the draft article is accepted as help. Any thoughts/help for review to help make it an official page is sought.
Thank you all volunteers,
Noapplause (talk) 13:30, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Noapplause: The above link doesn't seem to work, so here it is: Draft:Modern Métis Woman. I've done a bit of copy-editing: it seemed important to get Métis with a link into the first sentence. And section headings don't use capitals except for the first word or proper nouns, and there's no need for a heading at the start of the article. PamD 14:01, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
Super thank you!! Noapplause (talk) 14:53, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
@PamD Thank you again, for your edits to the draft:Modern Metis Woman. Is there any way to get the draft article re-reviewed and approved? I'm new (15 days new contributing to Wikipedia) and really appreciate your knowledge, Wikipedia wisdom, and guidance. Currently the draft is in limbo waiting to be re-reviewed, but I feel complete, and within the "tone" and guidelines for article approval. Thank you so much for your volunteering, it's appreciated, and I hope I can make your day positive with my comments.
Noapplause (talk) 13:26, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Noapplause: The ways of the AfC process are a bit of a mystery to those not involved, so I think I'd better leave it for one of th AfC reviewers to get back to it, sorry. PamD 15:14, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
Satronia Smith Hunt up for deletion
June 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 18:48, 28 May 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Gendered associations of pink and blue
Newly released stub article Gendered associations of pink and blue needs your help in expanding it. Can you lend a hand? Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 20:03, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Przemysław Czarnek
Some attention to recent edits at Przemysław Czarnek may be needed - there are fewer than 30 watchers:
- Potugin 10 June: "this comment was not about "women's rights" but just about modern women. don't create SYNTH!"
- revert by me 11 June
- restoral by Potugin 11 June: "sdtop posting your own iunterpretations. keep it neutral. it was not about "women's rights" but conservative/liberal attitudes (also: he was biologically correct)"
- revert by Cran32 12 June
Boud (talk) 11:29, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
- Please engage at talk. Please try to remain constructive and don't use dramatic language.Potugin (talk) 15:44, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
- The quote
'tragic consequences'
is indeed dramatic, but those are the words of the subject of the article;baby-machines
seems to me a compact and common way to summarise the issue and GAFAM says it's a common expression. Agreed that Talk:Przemysław Czarnek#Women's rights is the place to discuss that particular article by people who are familiar with the well-established encyclopedic topic women's rights. Boud (talk) 01:36, 13 June 2021 (UTC)- ) 03:18, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
- There is no dispute that Czarnek stated the words
pl: ,,tragicznych konsekwencji"
, i.e. "tragic consequences" in relation to women prioritising their careers over producing babies. Boud (talk) 17:31, 13 June 2021 (UTC)- Boud, I.D.C. stop using it to canvass. Elizium23 (talk) 17:35, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
- It appears that there's a misunderstanding, sorry! So I'll explain more clearly. There is no dispute that Czarnek stated the words "tragic consequences" in relation to women prioritising their careers rather than prioritising baby production, which is why the title that I gave is descriptive, it is not canvassing. Your edit of the title of this section obscures the topic, since the dispute is not especially about the particular person, it's about one aspect of his publicly stated opinions. However, I propose that we end this meta-discussion, since it's getting more and more abstract: you seem to suggest that any more discussion here, about whether or not discussion here is canvassing, is itself canvassing. (I won't try to decode "I.D.C.".) We could continue on to whether discussion about discussion about canvassing is canvassing, ad infinitum. I'm not convinced that this will help with obtaining consensus at the talk page itself, and I fail to see how this discussion will bias others to either side of the editing debate. Boud (talk) 18:15, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
- Boud, I.D.C. stop using it to canvass. Elizium23 (talk) 17:35, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
- There is no dispute that Czarnek stated the words
- ) 03:18, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
- The quote
Your feedback would be welcome at the James Barry Rfc
There is currently an Rfc going on at
One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!
 Hello, |
July 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 16:04, 22 June 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Tekedra Mawakana
Hello! On behalf of
I've worked to draft an overview of her early life and education, career, board service, and recognition using Wikipedia-appropriate sources and neutral language. Are any project members willing to review the draft and implement in the main space appropriately? I'm willing to address questions or concerns here or on the draft's talk page, where I've disclosed my conflict of interest in compliance with the site's Terms of Use. Thank you! Inkian Jason (talk) 13:27, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Red apple
Which are the articles where content regarding the "Red apple tradition" may be added? Few sources regarding this tradition are:
- Poghosyan, Alina (December 2011). "Red Apple Tradition: Contemporary Interpretations and Observance". Acta Ethnographica Hungarica. 56 (2). Budapest, Hungary: Akadémiai Kiadó: 377–384. ISSN 1216-9803.
- Heath, Nicola (January 2018), The Historic Tradition of Wedding Night-Virginity Testing, Sydney, Australia: Special Broadcasting Service, retrieved 11 July 2021 Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 14:11, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
- Pinging some project members: Alanna the Brave, Blossom Ozurumba, Gerda Arendt, Headbomb, KatyaVictoria, LovelyLillith, Missvain, Netherzone, Sakura emad. Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 07:40, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
Here is one more detailed article on this tradition (though unlike Alina Poghosyan's article, this third source may not be a WP:RS):
- Stein, Sadie (16 March 2009), Like A Virgin: Armenian In-Laws Want To See Blood On The Sheets, Jezebel, retrieved 16 July 2021 Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 08:12, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
August Editathons at Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:23, 23 July 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Overview of projects supporting women
At Women in Red we have been compiling a historical overview of projects and related initiatives in support of women's coverage on Wikipedia. As the wikiprojects on Women in English and many other languages have played an important role in trying to reduce the gender gap, I thought it would be useful to let you know about this development. Please make any necessary changes or additions to the overview itself or simply make suggestions for improvement on the talk page. You might like to include links to the overview where appropriate on your project pages.--Ipigott (talk) 12:43, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
Section blanking on UAE rights abuses left in place for over two years.
In late 2017, an IP removed the entire sections on flogging, stoning, forced disappearance, torture, sexual assault, and judicial rape report retaliation from Women in the United Arab Emirates.
The removed material appears to have been well-cited.
The user that removed it also did so repeatedly after multiple restorations, and was thus clearly engaged in edit warring.
This in fact appears to be a pattern on that article.
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red appears to be far more active than here.
Is there some organizational or community mechanism to prevent vandalism to existing pages?
Intralexical (talk) 14:45, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
Feedback needed: best sources for improving articles on women's issues
Hello. I'd like to get your feedback on what databases or searches you generally use or find the best for finding reliable sources on topics about women or concerning women's issues?
I have a specific reason in mind for this question. Lately, I've been involved in expanding the functionality of the {{find sources}} template to additional, specific search domains. The {{find sources}} template generates those links you're probably used to seeing in the "Talk header" that sits at the top of a lot of article Talk pages. For example, the one at Talk:Simone de Beauvoir (look for the "find sources" links just above the "Search archives" input box). Here's a copy of it:
 | Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Is that set of links good enough, or would something more tailored to the project be better?
Recently, we've created {{find medical sources}}, and {{find biographical sources}}, which each provide a different set of links that are more targeted for their search domain. We could do the same thing for this WikiProject, if it would be helpful. If the standard links from {{find sources}} (i.e., the ones you see now at Beauvoir) are good enough, then there's no reason to change. But, if there are other sources that are better than the ones in the general "find sources" set, then we can create a new template targeted especially for the project.
I'd appreciate your feedback on this question. What are your favorite search engines or databases to use when researching topics for this project? (please 
mention me on reply; thanks!) Mathglot (talk) 00:25, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- Mathglot I rarely write about living people, thus most sources for the women I target are not easily found with a google search. Most used source would be newspapers. Hathitrust and archive.org are also good search engines to discover sources for women. Academic work on women did not begin until the 1970s so there is real difficulty in finding journal articles in the 1970-1990 era, meaning that I rarely find anything in google scholar, but Jstor and Muse are good. SusunW (talk) 04:32, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- @SusunW:, thanks for your comments. I hadn't thought of archive.org this time, but that's a good idea; I find myself using it more and more, and they have a lot more than just web page captures, which not everyone is aware of. Ditto HT.
- I figured that there would be considerable overlap between the sources for women, and sources for biographies in general, and it's possible there's no reason for a separate set of links. Here's what the new {{find biographical sources}} template look like, formatted for appearance at Talk:Simone de Beauvoir:
| Find biographical sources: Britannica · British Library · EoWB · books · Guardian · Infoplease · JSTOR · Library of Congress · MUSE · NYT · TWL |
- and as you can see, it has a different set of links than the standard one I posted earlier, including a couple of that you mentioned. If this one is good enough (or close, perhaps with addition of archive and Hathi), we can just leave it at that. I was motivated to poll people here, though, to see if there were some sources that I'm missing; that are specialized in women's biographical sources, or might have content that the usual suspects don't. I'd especially like hearing about those, if there are some that are worthwhile for adding to the new template. Any thoughts? Mathglot (talk) 04:54, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- I mocked up the one above with the two links you mentioned; that would make it look this way:
- and as you can see, it has a different set of links than the standard one I posted earlier, including a couple of that you mentioned. If this one is good enough (or close, perhaps with addition of archive and Hathi), we can just leave it at that. I was motivated to poll people here, though, to see if there were some sources that I'm missing; that are specialized in women's biographical sources, or might have content that the usual suspects don't. I'd especially like hearing about those, if there are some that are worthwhile for adding to the new template. Any thoughts? Mathglot (talk) 04:54, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
| Find biographical sources: Britannica · InfoPlease · EoWB · LoC · British Library · JSTOR · MUSE · Hathi · archive.org · Google books · NYT · Guardian · WP Library |
- Mathglot (talk) 06:09, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- Mathglot Sorry, it was the middle of the night when I responded to you and I crashed right after I wrote that. The most useful ones I use, other than those I gave are paywalled: Newspapers.com; Newspaperarchive.com; Women in Social Movements; and Orlando Project of Women Writers (All available via subscription at the WP Library. The third is through Alexander Street Press and is international. The fourth is through Cambridge University Press and mainly covers British women writers.) You might also be interested in this discussion. SusunW (talk) 13:28, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- @SusunW: thanks; Alexander St looks particularly useful, and complements the others well. These sources look equally good for men and women, so I'm starting to get the impression we don't need a specific "find sources" for women, and that the general, "find biographical sources" one would serve equally well for both, especially if augmented to add Hathi, archive.org, and Alexander Street:
- Mathglot Sorry, it was the middle of the night when I responded to you and I crashed right after I wrote that. The most useful ones I use, other than those I gave are paywalled: Newspapers.com; Newspaperarchive.com; Women in Social Movements; and Orlando Project of Women Writers (All available via subscription at the WP Library. The third is through Alexander Street Press and is international. The fourth is through Cambridge University Press and mainly covers British women writers.) You might also be interested in this discussion. SusunW (talk) 13:28, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- Mathglot (talk) 06:09, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
| Find biographical sources: Britannica · InfoPlease · EoWB · LoC · British Library · JSTOR · MUSE · Hathi · Alexander St · archive.org · Google books · NYT · Guardian · WP Library |
- Unless there are specific databases unique to or specializing in women or women's issues that I'm missing. What do you think? Mathglot (talk) 21:52, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Mathglot, my opinion, which counts for nothing is that there just aren't a lot of sources that focus solely on women, comparatively speaking. You have to be good at looking through general sources and finding those flakes of gold. I'm not saying there aren't women's journals, but typically they are hard to find and pretty specialized. I use ASP a lot, but use only the "Women in Social Movements" database, so have no clue if there are articles about men included in the main searches, though my logic tells me there are. I would think anybio template is good. Anything that keeps people from using uncurated web pages written by an anonymous writer who may or may not be worth reading will be helpful. ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SusunW (talk • contribs) 22:06, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Unless there are specific databases unique to or specializing in women or women's issues that I'm missing. What do you think? Mathglot (talk) 21:52, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
Just tried the links at the Talk page of a not well known figure, Virginia Tola, and all of the database links pretty much came up with nothing (you can view it in rev. 1039033753), while the Google links did turn up a few results. So probably the biographical links will work better with someone who has at least some footprint in public awareness. Mathglot (talk) 09:55, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, Mathglot, for triggering discussions on how wikiproject templates could be improved. On the template for women's biographies, my immediate reaction is to be careful not to overwhelm inexperienced contributors with too many options for searching. Instead we could develop a page on how to search for sources in connection with women and their works. This could contain the various suggestions from SusunW and could perhaps be expanded by others in connection with biographies of living women or even women in different occupations, etc. As WP Women in Red has developed several essays, research pages and redlink facilities in connection with articles about women, it might be easier to develop the page there rather than on WP Women. I've suggested this on the WiR talk page. Once the page has been adequately developed, it might be useful to a link from your template rather than adding more search options. On Virginia Tola, I created the article on the basis of various sources I had found in connection with Argentine opera. Many of the articles I create fail to turn up sources in the usual places.--Ipigott (talk) 10:38, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- Ipigott you said so well what I was trying to say. "Most" articles I create fail to turn up sources in the usual places. You have to know how to search. With women that is using a variety of names, quotes (like "Jane Doe", "writer"; "Jane Doe", "Joe Roe"; "Jane Doe", "Timbuktu"), and narrowing searches by time period. But I love, love, love that you have put in a link to the WP Library, Mathglot. I am not even going to tell you the steps involved in how I have accessed it heretofore. Wikitechnology is baffling to me, but I am really good at research. ;) SusunW (talk) 14:02, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Resources page, or possibly an entire Help subpage, about how you go about your research, so we could profit from your experience and to give new editors interested in contributing a place to start. If you can write up your "how-to", I'd be happy to assist with any tech issues that come up, just ping me.
- @Ipigott:, there are definitely too many links, it's a mock-up that was geared to stimulate discussion, so this is good. I really like the idea of having a link from the template to a research page (and in fact, I think that idea should be extended to all the "find <subject> sources" templates; but I'm getting a bit off topic...). Maybe we can add one of those circled question mark icons to the end of the list of links, which could then be linked to the resources page:
(this one is clickable). Thoughts? Mathglot (talk) 21:01, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- Mathglot, you mean like this?: Primer SusunW (talk) 21:36, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- @#Sources for women section partly address the question I was asking since they list "which links" to use. (I'll have to do more digging in this project; I can see there are levels and sublevels that I'm not aware of.) What I was thinking of, was a monograph that might consist perhaps of an intro section where you describe any tips you've discovered in how to go about the search process, when faced with a given topic. For example, is it as simple as starting at the top of the #Sources list, search it for the topic, and then go on to the next link, rinse and repeat till you get to the end? I'm guessing there's more to it than that. Maybe even that #Sources list expanded into its own essay or project page, along with the procedure how-to as the intro. What do you think? Mathglot (talk) 22:03, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, pretty much rinse, repeat. I start with newspapers and the last name they used, which typically gives a birth name, and sometimes a former spouse. If that doesn't work, I add quotes, then quotes with spouse, partner, employer, etc. etc. etc. Once I've gleaned what I can from newspapers, I go to Archive.org and repeat, then Hathitrust and repeat, then whatever else I can think of. And I completely ignore the information of the guidelines that says don't analyze the source material. If you don't do due diligence to make sure that Mary Doe is the Mary Doe you are interested in, you will get lots of false positives. Like in this discussion. SusunW (talk) 22:29, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- SusunW Mathglot: I like the idea of linking to the Primer, especially its search section. Nevertheless, if we are to prepare a research page to be linked from the template, it might be useful to simplify things a bit, adding some guidance on how to use the sources mentioned. I realize Wikipedia is mainly American but for those of us who do not often write about Americans, the inclusion of all the American university sites might be superfluous. I also think it might be useful to distinguish between sources for living people and those for people who are no longer with us who can often be found in obituaries, etc. This might also be useful for the primer itself. I know Wikipedia frowns on links to blogs but I must say I often find them an extremely useful source of information. A word about how they can be used might also help.--Ipigott (talk) 07:03, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- I agree about blogs Ipigott, they can lead you to find other sources. But they also can be incredibly wrong. That whole problem with Edna Alexander linked above, started in a blog post wherein it was assumed that Edna who married Maceo Pinkard was the same Edna as two other women. If this is to be used by newbies, it is really doubtful that they will have enough skill to weigh whether the material is reliable, the author is indeed an expert who has been published elsewhere, or the organization which controls the blog (like the women mathematicians) actually does curate the articles. IMO, better to steer them away from blogs until they develop some skill in analyzing sourcing. SusunW (talk) 13:33, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, on reflection I think you're right about steering newbies away from blogs.--Ipigott (talk) 14:32, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- SusunW Mathglot: I like the idea of linking to the Primer, especially its search section. Nevertheless, if we are to prepare a research page to be linked from the template, it might be useful to simplify things a bit, adding some guidance on how to use the sources mentioned. I realize Wikipedia is mainly American but for those of us who do not often write about Americans, the inclusion of all the American university sites might be superfluous. I also think it might be useful to distinguish between sources for living people and those for people who are no longer with us who can often be found in obituaries, etc. This might also be useful for the primer itself. I know Wikipedia frowns on links to blogs but I must say I often find them an extremely useful source of information. A word about how they can be used might also help.--Ipigott (talk) 07:03, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, pretty much rinse, repeat. I start with newspapers and the last name they used, which typically gives a birth name, and sometimes a former spouse. If that doesn't work, I add quotes, then quotes with spouse, partner, employer, etc. etc. etc. Once I've gleaned what I can from newspapers, I go to Archive.org and repeat, then Hathitrust and repeat, then whatever else I can think of. And I completely ignore the information of the guidelines that says don't analyze the source material. If you don't do due diligence to make sure that Mary Doe is the Mary Doe you are interested in, you will get lots of false positives. Like in this discussion. SusunW (talk) 22:29, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- @
- Mathglot, you mean like this?: Primer SusunW (talk) 21:36, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- @
What articles are within the scope of your WikiProject?
Hello there. I was just wondering what articles are within the scope of your WikiProject. Should all biographies of women be tagged? Or do you use a more specific criteria? Thanks. –Novem Linguae (talk) 11:24, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
- Bump. Any thoughts on this? –Novem Linguae (talk) 17:14, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Jaime King
Jaime King, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Aircorn (talk) 19:31, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Przemysław Czarnek
The question of whether or not the following statement is related to women's rights seems to be a recurring issue at Przemysław Czarnek: "Career first, maybe later a child, leads to tragic consequences. If the first child is not born [when the mother is aged] 20–25 years, only at the age of 30, how many children can [the mother] bear? Those are the consequences of telling a woman that she doesn't have to do what she was destined to do by the Lord God."
People interested in the topic of women's rights might wish to keep an eye on the article. Boud (talk) 19:20, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
September 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 22:28, 26 August 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!
Hello, |
Feedback requested at WT:Biography
Your feedback would be appreciated at this discussion at WikiProject Biography:
Amanda Rousseau (malware unicorn)
Does she meet notability guidelines?
- https://www.wired.com/video/watch/tech-support-hacker-answers-hacking-questions-from-twitter
- https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-himi-amanda-rousseau-20180803-story.html
- https://boingboing.net/2017/03/30/just-enough-to-get-in-trouble.html
- https://www.cyberscoop.com/top-women-in-cybersecurity-amanda-rousseau/
- https://www.teenvogue.com/story/what-being-a-female-hacker-is-really-like
- https://malwareunicorn.org/#/about
- https://threatpost.com/latest-teslacrypt-targets-new-file-extensions-invests-heavily-in-evasion/117541/
- https://threatpost.com/master-decryption-key-released-for-teslacrypt-ransomware/118179/
- https://defcon.org/html/defcon-27/dc-27-cfp-review-board.html#malware
I'd be happy to fabricate a stub. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 20:37, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- Hmm, if those are the best sources for claiming notability, I'd say she's borderline notable at best. Some of them are pretty clearly not the "significant coverage in independent reliable sources" that count towards the general notability guideline – I would say that the Wired video, BoingBoing article, Teen Vogue article, defcon listing, and malwareunicorn.org are not independent of the subject; and the two threatpost articles aren't significant coverage of Rousseau. That leaves two sources: the LA Times article, which is clearly primarily based off an interview with her, and the CyberScoop interview. Whether an interview with someone counts towards their notability is at-best divisive: there was a big discussion back in 2018, with one side arguing that they're clearly not independent of the subject by virtue of being an interview, while the other side argued that though the information contained within an interview is not independent when we're assessing the reliability of the factual claims within them, the fact that an independent reliable source chose to interview that person is still an indication of notability. Unless there's been a more recent discussion that I've missed, on the basis of that discussion I personally wouldn't create an article on someone where the best claims to notability are interviews with that person. I wouldn't want to bet on the article surviving at AfD. (Though I haven't done any of my own research except from the sources you linked; if there are better sources out there, the case for notability may be stronger.) Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 21:17, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- (And, just for completeness' sake - I don't see that there's a claim that she meets WP:ANYBIO to be made, and I don't think there's another more specific notability guideline that she might qualify for) Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 21:19, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- Caeciliusinhorto, thanks, I was afraid that might be the answer. Glad I didn't jump ahead to creating an article. My personal opinion is that interviews from independent sources should count towards notability, but not everyone shares that view. It's possible there are more sources out there ("Amanda Rousseau" is a surprisingly common name so I included her handle when searching which may have excluded some sources) and perhaps she'll be reported on some more in the future. Guess I'll shelve this for now. Btw, boingboing was posted by Cory Doctorow, it seems independent of the subject to me, what did I miss? — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 21:33, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- Alexis Jazz: The reason I wouldn't want to use the BoingBoing article to establish notability is because, though it is posted by Doctorow (who is clearly a well-regarded source on the topic!) he isn't really discussing Rousseau in depth - the opening paragraphs are about her course, and the bulk of the text is just copied from her own site. Maybe you could argue that the first paragraph is an independent reliable source on Rousseau, but then I think you'd struggle to justify it as significant coverage.
- I've done a little googling and I can't find anything that's super clearly establishing her notability, but it feels like she's the kind of person who might get more coverage in future - one to watch, perhaps! Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 09:19, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
- (And, just for completeness' sake - I don't see that there's a claim that she meets
Help with improving artist's Wikipedia page
Hello Wikipedia editors. I work with Monique Péan and have presented some improvements to the Wikipedia page about her, on her behalf. The page as it is written is missing a lot about Péan's work as an artist, as well as relying on a lot of sources that don't look ideal. An editor has already reviewed and said that my proposal looks good, so I am looking for additional feedback and help to complete the edits. Can anyone help?
As I have a conflict of interest, I am mindful of following the guidelines and not making changes to the page myself, so I have put everything together in a draft version and made a request on the Talk page. Very appreciative of your help! KM for Monique Péan (talk) 16:39, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Death of Gabby Petito#Requested move 21 September 2021
Disappearance of Lauren Cho
I have created an article for the
Request for input
I would appreciate some un-involved editor input at Talk:Mariama Bawumia#Merge proposal; as the pre-ceding AFD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mariama Bawumia) closed as no consensus. All opinions welcome.4meter4 (talk) 20:38, 25 September 2021 (UTC)