Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women/Archive 15
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:WikiProject Women. 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 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 |
October 2021 at Women in Red
Special event:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 01:34, 29 September 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Red Apple
Hello. 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. eISSN 1588-2586. ISSN 1216-9803.
- Stein, Sadie (16 March 2009), Like A Virgin: Armenian In-Laws Want To See Blood On The Sheets, Jezebel, retrieved 9 September 2021
- An article on such traditions: Heath, Nicola (January 2018), The Historic Tradition of Wedding Night-Virginity Testing, Sydney, Australia: Special Broadcasting Service, retrieved 9 September 2021 Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 04:34, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- Really? No one wants to offer advice! • Мастер Шторм (talk) 09:01, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women's History § Women's rights by year article(s). {{u|Sdkb}} talk 22:01, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
November 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Innisfree987 (talk) 21:27, 24 October 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!
 Hello, |
"Women in"
Why there is Category:Lists of women in music and no Category:Lists of man in music? Why "women in" is even a thing? We really need articles/lists by gender? Why female sex is excessively promoted in this way? Eurohunter (talk) 09:51, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
- Eurohunter I'm going to assume that you are asking in good faith and do not understand women's history. Women were banned/barred/prohibited from participating in almost all professions until the 20th century world wide, especially if they were married. Thus the default of any profession has historically been male. Without separate lists for women, finding the handful of women (or other persons who have been under and unreported in general history, such as ethnic minorities, LGBT+ persons, etc.) who might have participated in a given field would require sorting through thousands of male entries. Typically the broad categories, like musicians, list persons of any gender and the non-diffusing categories list persons by other characteristics to facilitate finding them. It isn't promotion, it is an educational device to find the needle in the haystack. SusunW (talk) 15:23, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
- I can understand that women were banned in some countries and in some ages but even then female had own role especially I could mentioin here Ancient Egypt. "Without separate lists for women" - if they are not enugh notable they shouldn't be mentioned - they need to be notable without division by sex or sexual orientation. We can't make special list for one gender or for one sexual orientation only because of them and because they are not in mainstrream same as we don't do special articles or lists for underground songs only because they are not in media mainstream so they never will be enough promoted - not even only for educational purposes but Wikipedia role isn't education - it is for give facts with reliable references. Eurohunter (talk) 15:44, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
- Making special lists or categories for woman isn't a solution. Why just don't divide them then? There is a lot of "naturally" notable woman - why not focus on them? Eurohunter (talk) 15:51, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
- I am sorry, but what you are saying does not make sense to me. An encyclopedia exists as an educational tool to combine information on broad topics of knowledge to comprehensively relay that knowledge to readers, it is undeniably educational. We don't have random lists of people who don't have articles, as Wikipedia is not a collection of data. Thus, lists and categories are populated by actual articles, or redlists of people who meet the requirements for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Articles should not be written about non-notable subjects, thus lists shouldn't contain them either. If you want to build consensus for your idea, though it is not entirely evident to me what you are proposing, I suggest you create a clear proposal for broad discussion across en.WP. Engaging with only one project, which does not have the ability to change site-wide policy gives the appearance of non-neutrality on the subject. I am extremely busy, thus will not come back to reply. SusunW (talk) 16:09, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
- @SusunW: In this way we could create same lists for mens only - there is no reason to not to do it. So in this way we would have lists for men and women + their separate lists - the same lists - only divided by genre. In the same way small countries like Sweden will never reach or be greater than countries like the United States so they will be naturally represented less. Swedsh female singers naturally wil be represented less than the United States female singers. Does they need special treatment? So? I think thats the problem. Eurohunter (talk) 19:59, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
- When it comes to lists, the guideline on notability of stand alone lists applies. A subject is considered notable for stand-alone list purposes if reliable sources have discussed the group that it covers. So, for instance, we have List of female violinists, and you will find that it cites various works which discuss female violinists as a group. But we don't have List of male violinists, and I would be surprised if there are reliable sources that discuss "male violinists" as a group. (If there are, and if an editor were interested, they could create such a list).
- As for Category:Lists of men in music, I suspect we simply don't have enough such lists to justify it (cf. WP:SMALLCAT). We do have Category:Male musicians and Category:Women musicians, though there is no rule that there has to be a matching Category:Men in foo for every Category:Women in foo. The guidelines on categorising by gender are at WP:CATGENDER, and if you should be changed the talkpage for that guideline is the place to go. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 21:18, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
- @SusunW: In this way we could create same lists for mens only - there is no reason to not to do it. So in this way we would have lists for men and women + their separate lists - the same lists - only divided by genre. In the same way small countries like Sweden will never reach or be greater than countries like the United States so they will be naturally represented less. Swedsh female singers naturally wil be represented less than the United States female singers. Does they need special treatment? So? I think thats the problem. Eurohunter (talk) 19:59, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
- I am sorry, but what you are saying does not make sense to me. An encyclopedia exists as an educational tool to combine information on broad topics of knowledge to comprehensively relay that knowledge to readers, it is undeniably educational. We don't have random lists of people who don't have articles, as Wikipedia is not a collection of data. Thus, lists and categories are populated by actual articles, or redlists of people who meet the requirements for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Articles should not be written about non-notable subjects, thus lists shouldn't contain them either. If you want to build consensus for your idea, though it is not entirely evident to me what you are proposing, I suggest you create a clear proposal for broad discussion across en.WP. Engaging with only one project, which does not have the ability to change site-wide policy gives the appearance of non-neutrality on the subject. I am extremely busy, thus will not come back to reply. SusunW (talk) 16:09, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
- Making special lists or categories for woman isn't a solution. Why just don't divide them then? There is a lot of "naturally" notable woman - why not focus on them? Eurohunter (talk) 15:51, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
- I can understand that women were banned in some countries and in some ages but even then female had own role especially I could mentioin here Ancient Egypt. "Without separate lists for women" - if they are not enugh notable they shouldn't be mentioned - they need to be notable without division by sex or sexual orientation. We can't make special list for one gender or for one sexual orientation only because of them and because they are not in mainstrream same as we don't do special articles or lists for underground songs only because they are not in media mainstream so they never will be enough promoted - not even only for educational purposes but Wikipedia role isn't education - it is for give facts with reliable references. Eurohunter (talk) 15:44, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
December 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Innisfree987 (talk) 00:10, 27 November 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Category:Women New York City Council members has been nominated for merging.
I got this on my talk page today and felt that it might be of interest to this WikiProject:
Category:Women New York City Council members has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page.
--HugoHelp (talk) 00:34, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
J. K. Rowling has an RFC
J. K. Rowling, 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. Sideswipe9th (talk) 00:12, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
Allegorical Painting of Two Ladies, English School
I just created a draft for the painting Allegorical Painting of Two Ladies, English School which has been in the news due to a UK export ban. It is quite an interesting painting. Any help would be appreciated! Thank you, Thriley (talk) 04:36, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Discussion at Talk:J. K. Rowling § Splitting off list of awards
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:J. K. Rowling § Splitting off list of awards. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 23:07, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
FAR notice re J. K. Rowling
An editor has nominated J. K. Rowling for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:06, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
January 2022 Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:01, 28 December 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red report for 2021
Inspired by the Women in Green report on the Women in Red talk page, I have put together some of the principal WiR results for 2021.
- Overall the percentage of women's biographies increased from 18.67% in January to 19.10% at the end of the year; there were 24,787 new biographies of women although the majority of these were not created specifically under Women in Red. By the end of the year, there were 355,957 biographies of women on the English Wikipedia.
- Our WiR metrics pages record a total of 26,805 articles created in 2021, 3,301 less than the 30,106 created in 2020. This can be explained by our discontinuing manual additions to the lists from February 2021, subsequently relying fully on bot-listed results.
- Membership according to our mailing lists was 1,185 including 114 members who joined in 2021. (These figures may not fully reflect membership as a few members have requested removal from the lists while a number of non-members have added their names.) About half of those listed are no longer active.
- A total of 5,722 articles were listed as new or improved on our meetup pages, of which 2,080 were on #1day1woman, 1,598 from the Continental Contest (Africa, Europe, Latin America and Oceania), 1,584 under other monthly priorities and 460 in connection with our year-long emphasis on Women's rights. The most popular topic was our three-month-long Olympics & Paralympics with 1,185 new or improved articles of which 195 were subsequently deleted.
- The most popular monthly priority was Women writers in September with 225 new or improved articles, the least popular Gender studies in April with only five articles listed.
- According to Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/DYK, over 500 articles tagged with a Women in Red banner were highlighted on the Main Page as DYKs. For example 105 of those under #1day1woman were displayed as DYK. Many articles were also displayed on the Main Page under In the news.
- Articles created under WiR and subsequently ranked FA or GA can be seen at Women in Green.
These results may be useful in discussing priorities for future planning.--Ipigott (talk) 13:37, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
possible new article - murder of Paulina Dembska
Can someone write an article about the Murder of Paulina Dembska? She was a Polish woman who was raped and murdered in Malta on 2 January. This appalling case has been covered by many media sources - for example
https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/paulina-dembska-identified-as-sliema-murder-victim.925273 https://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2022-01-03/local-news/Lead-suspect-in-Sliema-murder-claimed-he-was-taken-over-by-the-devil-6736239504 https://www.guidememalta.com/en/fundraisers-launched-to-erect-paulina-dembska-memorial-statue-and-repatriate-her-remains https://www.corrieredimalta.com/attualita/pioggia-di-donazioni-per-supportare-il-rimpatrio-della-salma-di-paulina-dembska/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.11.98.92 (talk) 12:08, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Cause of bias per intro message
I noticed this in the third paragraph of this Wikiproject's introduction/welcome message (Wikipedia:WikiProject Women/Introduction): To counter Wikipedia's systemic bias against covering women's biographies, women's work and women's perspectives, which occurs because the vast majority of editors are male (see the article on Gender bias in Wikipedia for more details)
. I read the current version of the linked article and it does not make a causal relationship between the proportion of male editors and the bias regarding articles about women. Would it be possible to change the phrasing of this and possibly include other factors noted as influencing the gender bias? I don't know that it's fair or productive to cast blame at male editors in this WikiProject's welcome message. (I have written over 50 women's biographies and can't recall writing any men's biographies.) – Reidgreg (talk) 01:29, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
Women in Green
Hey there! :) I notice this project also works with the Women in Red project, and links to them on the main project page. Do you also work with Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Green, which I just discovered recently? BOZ (talk) 13:30, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
- Women in Green is mentioned as an affiliate of WP:Women in the sidebar on the project's main page. It might also be worth mentioning in the "Welcome to WikiProject Women!" section where it talks about Featured and Good Articles? Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 13:35, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Peng Shuai RfC
Notification of an RfC on Peng Shuai's article. Would appreciate folk's providing input. NickCT (talk) 16:26, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
February with Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:09, 31 January 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Sports notability discussion
There is an interesting discussion at the Village Pump: Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Sports notability (with, currently, 13 subproposals - you might want to get a cup of tea before venturing over there). PamD 19:02, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
Renaming discussion at Gender bias on Wikipedia
There's a requested move at Gender bias on Wikipedia, to move to Sexism on Wikipedia. Please join the discussion. --Xurizuri (talk) 03:42, 26 February 2022 (UTC) (please ping me if you reply)
March editathons
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:36, 27 February 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Requested move at Talk:Janani Iyer#Requested move 17 February 2022
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Janani Iyer#Requested move 17 February 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 21:09, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
April Editathons from Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:44, 22 March 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Requested move at Talk:Riythvika Panneerselvam#Requested move 18 March 2022
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Riythvika Panneerselvam#Requested move 18 March 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 02:14, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
Featured Article Review for H.D.
I have nominated H.D. for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 17:55, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
Natalie Clifford Barney Featured article review
I have nominated Natalie Clifford Barney for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:29, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
Margot Heuman has an RFC
Margot Heuman, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has an RFC for what language should be used to describe Heuman's sexual orientation. 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. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 18:14, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Pia Zebadiah Bernadeth#Requested move 30 March 2022
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Pia Zebadiah Bernadeth#Requested move 30 March 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 21:22, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
Featured Article Save Award for J. K. Rowling
There are three Featured Article Save Award nominations at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/J. K. Rowling/archive1. Please join the discussion to recognize and celebrate editors who helped assure this article would retain its featured status. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:19, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
Sexual violence in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine
Sexual violence in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine currently:
- is proposed for deletion (AfD)
- has at least one dispute about what incidents or patterns of sexual violence in the invasion are Wikipedia-notable.
Participants in this project may be interested in commenting or editing. Boud (talk) 14:29, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Join Community Conversation to discuss Women & WMF Human Rights Policy
Dear Wonderful Wikimedians of WikiProject Women, the Global Advocacy team is inviting members of this group to participate in a series of conversations that will help us implement the Foundation Human Rights Policy.
We want to know how community members' human rights have been negatively impacted and how the Foundation can better support individuals and prevent such situations. Given the disproportionate harassment, violence and harms that Women face related to their Human Rights, we hope members of the community will join our calls and share their experiences.
You can join any of four regionally-focused conversations. Each call will be 60 minutes, on Zoom, with translation support. More information about how to join these calls, what we will do with the information collected, and the history of the human rights policy can be found here.
--FPutz (WMF) (talk) 11:01, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
User script to detect unreliable sources
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like
- John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (
John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)
and turns it into something like
- John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.
The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
May Women in Red events
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:51, 30 April 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
2022 abortion protests in the United States
Project members are invited to help expand the newly created 2022 abortion protests in the United States. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:36, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Formula shortage article: help! And also: wow!
Moved here —swpbT • go beyond • bad idea 16:21, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
We don't have such a category (C:Woman redirects to C:Women). Ok, but almost 70 wikis do have it (see wikidata:Q7473085). To make things more confusing, the Wikidata calls this category "Women by name", which is weird. I think there is a larger problem with how different projects use the relevant categories. On Polish Wiki, c:Women is the 'women by name', pretty much, and is a child to c:woman, which lists 'woman-related topics'. Maybe someone feels like trying to clean this up somehow, fix some interwiki links, and also consider whether English wiki needs a related category? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Inspiring Open Podcasts
I am posting the announcement below, which you may have missed elsewhere, and in the hope that you can share it with your local communities.
Hello all,
I am happy to announce that Wiki In Africa launched its new episode of Inspiring Open, the new podcast series from Wiki Loves Woman.
Inspiring Open is available across multiple platforms under a free licence (CC BY SA). The series is free to access, and free to share, redistribute, reuse, and remix.
If you are interested, please indicate here your User Page to be notified once a new episode is released.
Cheers!
--Afek91 (talk) 14:39, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Molly White
Project members are invited to help improve the newly-created Molly White (writer) entry, thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:40, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
June events from Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 09:19, 31 May 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Gladys Emerson Cook Prize
hi all, have just created an article on Gladys Emerson Cook, a US artist and illustrator (due to buying a kitty book of hers, The Big Book Of Cats, from a charity shop:)). on googling her name i came across quite a few hits of artists who have won the above prize but not about the prize itself, if anyone is able to add info about it to the article would be appreciated. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:24, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- It seems to have come from the National Academy of Design but isn't mentioned on their current website! See here and here (1984). PamD 08:30, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Ahah: Here, under "Exhibition history", we have:
New York. National Academy of Design. "National Academy of Design 159th Annual Exhibition," March 8–April 5, 1984, unnumbered cat. (as "Untitled," lent by the Forum Gallery, New York; winner of the Gladys Emerson Cook Prize for the best animal sketch or painting).
. So, in the 1980s, it was a prize from the NAD for "best animal sketch or painting". Maybe somewhere in works about the NAD there might be more info. PamD 08:35, 1 June 2022 (UTC)- It was still around in 2001. But a 1992 mention is of the "Gladys Emerson Cook Prize in the Area of Prints, Drawings and Pastels,". Hmm. PamD 08:38, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- ah well... thanks for all your digging PamD.Coolabahapple (talk) 12:16, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- It was still around in 2001. But a 1992 mention is of the "Gladys Emerson Cook Prize in the Area of Prints, Drawings and Pastels,". Hmm. PamD 08:38, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Ahah: Here, under "Exhibition history", we have:
FAR for Anna May Wong
I have nominated Anna May Wong for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. (t · c) buidhe 03:54, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Featured Article Save Award for Natalie Clifford Barney
There is a Featured Article Save Award nomination at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/Natalie Clifford Barney/archive1. Please join the discussion to recognize and celebrate editors who helped assure this article would retain its featured status. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:24, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
There's a discussion about listing inductees as redlinks based on the org itself. Your input is welcome. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:07, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
WP:UNDUE and sourcing issues.
I'm notifying the wikiproject of an article in need of help here: Talk:Charlotte Durante § The state of the article. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 09:37, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
FYI, the usage of Women's Championship (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) is under discussion; see talk: FA Women's Championship -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 03:17, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Women in Red in July 2022
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 15:45, 27 June 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Request for assistance at Julie Sweet and related article
Hello, editors! WikiProject Women editors might be interested in reviewing this request to update the article for Julie Sweet, the chair and CEO of Accenture, a Fortune Global 500 company. You'll see my request seeks to add some basic information to her biography, such as the fact that she is now chair, she was ranked number 1 on Fortune's Most Powerful Women list in 2020, and some of her board work.
If anyone is interested in the company she leads, I've also posted another request at Talk:Accenture. I've submitted these requests on behalf of Accenture, as disclosed appropriately on both Talk pages. I appreciate your consideration. Inkian Jason (talk) 16:01, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Request for FA comments
Hello! I'm currently trying to promote Gurl.com into a featured article. If you can, please leave feedback at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Gurl.com/archive1. lullabying (talk) 21:00, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
Article titled Female (gender)
Comments are requested at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Female (gender). Crossroads -talk- 01:07, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
Stephanie Cutter
Hi editors, my name is Christian and I work for Precision Strategies. I have been looking to make a few updates to the Stephanie Cutter article and was hoping someone here might be interested. Stephanie is a consultant and worked in the White House and on President Obama's campaigns. I made similar requests at other WikiProjects but so far I haven't gotten any responses. Please let me know if you are interested! I'm doing my best to follow all of the COI practices and rules and only use top-quality sources, so hopefully these requests are simple. Thanks in advance for your consideration! PrecisionChristian (talk) 13:54, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
Women in Red in August 2022
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 10:57, 29 July 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
AfD: Sara Hauman
---Another Believer (Talk) 16:02, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
Olivia Newton-John
Hi, there are a number of sourcing issues keeping Olivia Newton-John appearing on the main page. Please see the discussion here. Any help with sourcing some of the tours and television sections would be much appreciated by all those wanting to see this posted. Best wishes Polyamorph (talk) 17:44, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
Olivia Newton-John has an RFC
Olivia Newton-John 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. Polyamorph (talk) 10:27, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
RfC on first sentence of Trans woman
Comments would be appreciated at Talk:Trans woman § RfC on first sentence. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:31, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
RfC: A TikToker, ... , other accused constitute 'Public figure' or not?
Some of other related policies for current requested RfC discussion: WP:BLP, WP:SUSPECT, WP:BLPPUBLIC, WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE.
Requesting inputs about WP policies regarding, WP:BLP protocols and naming of the accused in relation to mentions of allegations and counter allegations in the given article, against a female victim of sexual assault, her associates and also other accused.
Requesting well studied, carefully thought inputs @ RfC: A TikToker, associates, other accused constitute 'Public figure' or not?
Thanks and warm regards
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 11:14, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
FAR for Hillary Clinton
User:Buidhe has nominated Hillary Clinton for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:53, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
AfD: Evelyn Garcia (chef)
---Another Believer (Talk) 13:50, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Women in Red in September 2022
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 15:33, 31 August 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Tamara Gustavson article updates
Hello. I have a personal connection to Tamara Gustavson, and have requested a few updates to the article about her on the Talk Page Talk:Tamara Gustavson#Requested Edit Review. I’ve declared my conflict-of-interest and carefully reviewed the policy. Is an editor from this group available to review the requests for me? Thanks.Wiki64gus (talk) 16:45, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
In-body name use when BLP subject marries
What's the best way to update a BLP about a subject who recently married and has decided to use her married name as her professional name? Should all the in-body references (including captions) in Karolina Fortin be updated accordingly or should they remain as is? -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:22, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
- I cannot imagine why you would call someone by a name that they weren't prior to a name change, unless the situation involves a deadname. IMO, calling someone Y when the source said they were X is bordering on OR. In this specific case, her records were in her maiden name and anyone looking to document them would need to know that name to find them. I would definitely not change her name throughout the article. SusunW (talk) 05:00, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for the comment. FWIW, I wasn't trying to offend; I just wasn't sure which is why I decided to ask about it here. I was trying to find an example to follow and took a look at Michelle Wie West. In that article, Wie West is still referred to simply as "Wie" in all article content prior to her getting married; then, it seems to switch to "Wie West" for one mention. However, it then returns to "Wie" in the "Personal life" section even after she had married; so, it was a bit confusing. Anyway, I'm assuming that the thing to do then would be to follow whatever the source being cited says, right? If they use "Fortin", then that's what the article should reflect; if the use the maiden name, then that's what should be used. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:36, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
- Marchjuly I promise I wasn't offended.
Hard to convey tone in text, sorry if it sounded like that. Me, yes, I follow the sourcing. My only exception would be if the person is married to or has family who appear in the article which would make it confusing to the reader who is being talked about. (A personal preference, I never put personal details in a separate section. A life happens in chronology and putting those details like in the example above then makes the reader have to search elsewhere to discover name changes, marriages, etc. But looking at various sport articles, pulling out the personal life seems to be a thing.) Because the career is on-going and presumably there will be future competitive events in the new name, following the sources is most logical, but once she retires, it remains to be seen what will end up being the common name. (BLPs are so confusing.) Good luck with it. SusunW (talk) 13:26, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
- Marchjuly I promise I wasn't offended.
- Thank you for the comment. FWIW, I wasn't trying to offend; I just wasn't sure which is why I decided to ask about it here. I was trying to find an example to follow and took a look at Michelle Wie West. In that article, Wie West is still referred to simply as "Wie" in all article content prior to her getting married; then, it seems to switch to "Wie West" for one mention. However, it then returns to "Wie" in the "Personal life" section even after she had married; so, it was a bit confusing. Anyway, I'm assuming that the thing to do then would be to follow whatever the source being cited says, right? If they use "Fortin", then that's what the article should reflect; if the use the maiden name, then that's what should be used. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:36, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!
Hello, |
Requested move at Talk:Caroline of Hesse-Homburg#Requested move 14 September 2022
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Caroline of Hesse-Homburg#Requested move 14 September 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky (talk) 18:17, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
The Mayyas
Just a poke for the project. I think this article The Mayyas would be an important addition. Cheers, - FlightTime Public (open channel) 20:35, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
Requested move of "Alumnus" to "Alumni"
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Alumnus § Requested move 27 September 2022. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 05:50, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Women in Red October 2022
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 14:58, 29 September 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!
Hello, |
FAR notice
I have nominated Elizabeth II for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. John (talk) 15:03, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Peer review request
I've got a WP:PR open for Natalie Portman at Wikipedia:Peer review/Natalie Portman/archive1. Any comments welcome, thank you. -Kj cheetham (talk) 11:16, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
Featured Article Save Award for H.D.
There is a Featured Article Save Award nomination at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/H.D./archive2. Please join the discussion to recognize and celebrate editors who helped assure this article would retain its featured status. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:35, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
First/second/third/fourth woman...
Any views on this edit at Theresa May, which restored mentions of her being "second female prime minister", "the fourth woman to hold one of the British Great Offices of State", etc.? I removed them, as I've done on other pages without objection, but these have been in place for months and are still there. EddieHugh (talk) 22:10, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
Women in Red November 2022
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 17:32, 26 October 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging