Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red/Architecture

Multi-column redlists with source information

I've experimented here, at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women/Women in Red/Women in architecture#Argentina, to see how to possibly format a multi-column list, with each item having the room for extensive source information (of any arbitrary length). Right now this is using {{Collapse}}, which is a bit ugly, but there is probably a cleverer way to set this up.--Pharos (talk) 20:27, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Pharos: Thanks for experimenting with this. I think for this list it's best to keep things simple. Simplicity also encourages additions. Thanks also for all your recent additions. I am surprised that nearly all the additions have been to women in non English-speaking countries. Perhaps we need more notable names for the US and the UK?--Ipigott (talk) 20:50, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ipigott: Yeah, I agree the formatting experiment is probably a step too far for now; another possible innovation would be a specialized WP:AFC queue for newbies participating in the next campaign. The names I've added recently from the French and Spanish Wikipedias were inspired by @Roman Spinner:'s search of Eastern European Wikipedias, and all these could be useful for those translating into the English Wikipedia. What I'd like to do for American and British architects now, though, is to partially re-merge with the highlights from the original Wikipedia:Meetup/Women in Red/3/list, particularly the 75 names at Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Women in Red/3/list#Priority list of US architects.--Pharos (talk) 01:25, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Pharos: Yes, it's certainly a good idea to incorporate these lists although I had hoped we would be able to provide a bit more background and at least one external link on each name to encourage people to embark on new biographies. I'll see what I can do if I have time. I've also been through the whole list deleting the blue links, some of which went back ten years or so. Now that we have a full list of red links we should be able to see how many are covered during the virtual editathon (in addition to those completed over the past couple of weeks - now listed in the Outcomes). Thanks for all your assistance and encouragement on this. As for translations, we have to be very careful to add valid sources when picking names from the wikis in other languages. Many of them are unsourced or rely on sources which are now dead links. I have been trying to do everything possible to avoid article deletions which have upset so many new editors in recent months. One of my main concerns in establishing these lists was to make sure the people cited were notable enough to stand up to the criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia. That's the main reason I tried to give external links or, in cases where there were articles in the other languages, to make sure valid sources were included there.

What has happened to your master list? Maybe you felt it was too daunting for this exercise?--Ipigott (talk) 08:56, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've sorted out your American additions (many misspellings, redirects) and have placed them with links in the main list. Hope this also helps with your "physical" editathons. The unsorted list will have to wait until tomorrow.--Ipigott (talk) 12:47, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you don't mind, I've re-added 75 names from the 'Juried Collection' from Beverly Willis Architecture Foundation for today. They are a major partner for the physical events, and we want to give their list some recognition, even if a number of them are blue. Please let me know if there are any remaining spelling errors.--Pharos (talk) 15:23, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also, let's not remove from the list immediately the new articles that are created today, so we can track them first.--Pharos (talk) 15:40, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ipigott: Sorry for the mistakes with misspellings and redirects, these were a symptom of haste. We would, though, like to keep the Beverly Willis Architecture Foundation list as representing the partnership, even if many of these are bluelinks now.--Pharos (talk) 18:38, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Pharos: I think you have been doing a wonderful job coordinating our work on the virtual editathon with your physical events. As far as I can see, all the "notable" ladies on the Beverly Willis list now have articles. I don't know whether you have personal contacts with the new contributors from the physical events. I have written to several of them offering help and encouragement but as far as I can see only two have replied. Do you think it would be useful to draw up a list of newbies from this exercise for further contacts or have most of them have simply given up? You may be interested to hear we appreciate your support for Women in religion which I think (thanks to Rosiestep) we will be implementing in the form of an open virtual editathon in December.--Ipigott (talk) 19:09, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ipigott: a slight correction: while Pharos and I are coordinating another event, it's November's Women in Science, sponsored by the New York Academy of Sciences (rather than December's Women in Religion). We're hopeful to have information solidified about the November event by November 1st. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:28, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merged from Wikipedia:Meetup/Women in Red/3/list

I've merged as much as I could from Wikipedia:Meetup/Women in Red/3/list, and adjusted the format of this page so that it can be transcluded more easily on the various in-person event pages today. This is a somewhat drastic change, but I'd ask that we try to leave it in a transclusion-friendly format for at least the duration of October 15.--Pharos (talk) 05:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Editatona Mujeres en la Arquitectura 2016

es:Wikipedia:Encuentros/Editatona Mujeres en la Arquitectura 2016 --Jalu (talk) 22:08, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]