Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Ideas/Archive 3

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red‎ | Ideas

January 2017

Women in Philosophy

How about Women in Philosophy, based on Kevin Gorman's lists as well as on a country by country analysis with the help of Wikidata?--Ipigott (talk) 07:56, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

I am in support of this. Could we add educators? They seem to go hand in hand. SusunW (talk) 15:22, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
I agree with SusunW. There's most likely a lot of overlap since (I'm assuming here) that most philosophers are working in academia. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:27, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
Support Educators for January.--Ipigott (talk) 11:17, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
  • Only a couple of weeks to go. Are we just going for philosophers and educators (closely related) or does anyone want to go for more? After all the turmoil of December, I think we need to take things a bit more slowly.--Ipigott (talk) 16:46, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
I am all for easy. The clean up from the BBC editathon has been a lot of work. In addition, the holidays are upon us and those who celebrate them will be quite busy I am sure. SusunW (talk) 02:05, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
OK. So let's go for Women Philosophers and Women in Education which will be WiR/33 and WiR/34. I'll prepare the editathon pages soon. Dr. Blofeld is also preparing a major Challenge for Women beginning in January, so there'll be more than enough to do. No response yet from Rosiestep but I imagine she'll agree.--Ipigott (talk) 11:15, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Done. I'll leave the invitations for a while unless something else crops up.--Ipigott (talk) 16:20, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Women In Education

There has been a discussion on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Women/Women_in_Red about having an editathon on Women in Music (possibly 10 to 31 January as there is plenty of work to be done). My preference would be for composers and instrumentalists. My reasoning is that music is an extremely important area with major contributions by women while many of our biographies in other fields also include education anyway. Maybe we could reschedule a special event on education later - April or May perhaps?--Ipigott (talk) 13:14, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
No problem with a reschedule, though not May, that's photography. Has a list on Music/musicians been started? SusunW (talk) 13:26, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Women in Technology

  • Redlists:

Women's presence in technological capacities are often overshadowed by their male counterparts. How about an editathon for Women in Tech?MBlairMartin (talk) 04:40, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

@MBlairMartin: Do you know some notable women's in technology? I only know Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Technology. Cheers Sander.v.Ginkel (Talk) 15:22, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Got home late last night, and one of my new emails was from Cisco re having me facilitate a Women in Technology editathon at their office on January 19th!! I am honored to do so, and have a lot to do to prepare for it (bio, abstract, slidedeck, WiR meetup page, etc.). Re event duration, would you prefer that it be a one day, in-person event; or have it be part of our scheduling (perhaps, 19th-31st?)? I see that Women Philosophers and Women in Edu has been lined up, and don't want to over-tax folks as December has taken an enormous amount of effort. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:23, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
LOL @Ipigott: "in case something else crops up"...Rosiestep he has your numberĀ ;) I see no reason we cannot add a link for technology. Days is up for discussion, IMO, last half of the month makes more sense, i.e. 15-31st, but that is just me. In any event, we already have lists prepared on technology, so at least some of the prep is done. SusunW (talk) 18:48, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
I would suggest a fairly low profile on this for two reasons: the first is that if we advertise the event widely, other large companies are bound to come along for similar editathons with only a few weeks warning, upsetting our forward planning; the second is that our red link lists on technology per se are not well developed. I tried to establish a technology-based list from Wikidata but discovered that "technologist" and "technician" were seldom used for occupations. I think we'll have to rely on scientists, computer scientists, entrepreneurs and leadership. The crowd-sourced list is also rather weak and hardly coincides with the type of technology covered by Cisco. So unless we want to spend a lot of time and effort preparing the way for Cisco, I think it would be better simply to list the one-day editathon under announcements on our main page. I therefore think we should limit the invitation to Philosophy and Education although as always we will all be able to assist any new editors who continue to edit. (I this connection, I think it is a pity hardly any of the new editors from BBC 100 Women appear to have continued editing since the event. Can anyone point to new enthusiasts from all those who signed up on 8 December?) Preparing editathon pages is not too difficult but the follow-up can be extremely time consuming. That's my own opinion and I will of course fall in line if others think we should give Cisco the full treatment. --Ipigott (talk) 08:04, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
@Rosiestep: On Cisco, is this intended to be an in-house editathon for their own staff or are they planning to open it up to outsiders? If it's for outsiders too I suppose they will be making an announcement? In order to avoid the kind of confusion we experienced with the BBC, we should be very careful about how we announce the event. As for the invitations for January, I was thinking it might be best to send them out on the 27th or 28th when people have recovered from the Christmas festivities.--Ipigott (talk) 08:46, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
@Ipigott: - This is an in-house company event, plus some women at some other tech companies will be invited. It is not open to the general public. I want to use a WiR meetup page; no other WiR involvement/promotion re Cisco.
Agree re invites on 27th or 28th. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:30, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
I know Rosie that you are always keen to use a WiR meetup page but this time I cannot really support it if the event is not open to all. This is an in-house meeting outside the general involvement of WiR. I would suggest we keep it as an announcement on our main page based on Cisco's own announcement (if there is one) and that you provide an account of the meeting for Signpost or on our own pages. Unless we keep to stricter rules, anyone showing interest in WiR or in your personal involvement will be able to lay claim to a WiR page. We could announce it along the same lines as the Guggenheim event on 3 December.--Ipigott (talk) 17:52, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Ipigott Thank you. While I appreciate that you would even suggest it, I am not asking for your support or assistance in any way, or anyone else's, as I know that many of us have been very busy of late, and the holidays are upon us, and March events are around the corner. I will clarify that I was invited to Cisco because of my work with Women in Red, and that Cisco wants to learn more about creating women's content on Wikipedia, especially women in technology, so I am delighted to bring WiR to Cisco! I'm going to create a meetup page for that and a slidedeck, which I'll upload to Commons. WiR can continue the women in technology theme as a virtual edit-a-thon later in January or not but we don't need to advertise it, e.g. we don't have to promote all of our events in the same way. I don't know about WMNYC's Guggenheim event, so I'm sorry I can't comment on it. I don't know that I want to write a Signpost article about the Cisco event, but thank you for suggesting it.
Perhaps you'll expand on your stricter rules point another time, but personally, I am very uncomfortable with "stricter rules" regarding WiR's events. IMO, we should be going in the opposite direction!! We should be encouraging people who show interest in WiR's scope to develop, facilitate, implement new ideas re events, podcasts, blogposts, posters, contests, presentations, meetings, conferences, etc. in any language, at any time, anywhere in the world. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:59, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks Rosie for your more detailed explanations. I now understand more clearly what you have in mind and, like you, I welcome the widening interest in WiR from companies and institutions who wish to follow our lead. I think the discussion on the meetup page is probably a result of my (mis)understanding that such pages were intended as a means of attracting widespread online participation. If in this case the page makes it clear that it is intended first and foremost as a guide to a physical, in-house event, then I have no objection. I'm glad to hear you are putting together yet another set of slides. Perhaps you can include or adapt some of those recently created by Jane023 which provide a vivid overview of the gender gap and how things are evolving. In early November, I included an announcement of the Guggenheim December event on our main page after Pharos informed us that it was being hosted in connection with Wikipedia Asian Month. But with everything else going on at the time, it was probably just as well we did not become more involved on this occasion although our past collaborations with Pharos have been exemplary. This is hardly the place to mention it but AddisWang had promised he would compile a list of all the articles on women created during our Wikipedia Asian Month editathon. I have searched for it but have not been able to find it. Can you help?--Ipigott (talk) 10:00, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
It should be easy to create slides from Whigi/Wigi or whatever if you don't want to run Sparql queries, but I think judging from the work I did on occupations that it would be good to share redlink lists per occupation - especially those occupations lacking women, such as anything in technology or having to do with technical subjects. Here is another slide I made of the top women's occupations for the languages en/nl/ja/sv that can be used as a qualifer on that other occupations slide. I finally "found" those Japanese women! The take-away here is that occupations for women are definitely culturally different, but also there is bias in all prfessions - e.g. I find it interesting that for a "female occupation" like modelling the percentage for men is higher than for the percentage of women in most "male occupations". Jane (talk) 14:09, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Let's consider women in technology for another month as we're almost half-way through January; and Feb and March, are shaping up to be extremely busy months. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:44, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

February 2017

Anthropologists

It has been suggested that we focus on Women Anthropologists in February.--Ipigott (talk) 18:41, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

I'm good with that. Cultural studies are a wonderfully broad field. SusunW (talk) 22:56, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
I love women anthropologists(!), but I'm wondering if they'd get more attention during another month as I think "Black women" will be a huge undertaking because of all the redlists we've created. I'm ok with keeping or moving; just putting the question out there for thought. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:45, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
I'll do it My Way, tnx for the idea. But it's just a one-man-challenge in German Wikipedia. Regards, --Emeritus (talk) 17:48, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Black History Month

Brain just engaged that February is also Black History Month. Could we do both? SusunW (talk) 23:49, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Fine by me. Should we call it "Black women in history" as we did last year or simply "Black women", which I would prefer? We already have quite a good crowd-sourced list on Black history (thanks in part to MopTop's recent additions). I tried to create a Wikidata list but it was not worthwhile. I see there are physical meetups in Omaha (on the 20th) and Seattle (on the 23rd). Perhaps we should encourage them to give special attention to women. I'm going to be pretty tied up with other business from the 18th to the 27th but I'll try to set up the editathon pages, etc., beforehand. Rosiestep: Are you OK with this or do you foresee any other priorities for February?--Ipigott (talk) 11:49, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Ipigott! Black women is perfectly fine with me. And yes, it is difficult. We have some black women pilots that could also be added to our black women list. Not sure if Megalibrarygirl has already transcluded the names from our timeline we created last month to the various country/ethnicity lists. SusunW (talk) 16:53, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Regarding "Black women", I know of these redlists. Is there a better way of organizing them? Are there other lists? --Rosiestep (talk) 17:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Rosiestep OK, I'll do the editathon pages tomorrow. Any interest in the other two meetups I mentioned? If not, I'll just keep them posted and suggest they might like to draw on our red links.--Ipigott (talk) 17:06, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks to you both. There are also Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Caribbean, Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by nationality/Trinidad and Tobago, Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by nationality/Jamaica, Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by nationality/Dominican Republic, Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by nationality/Bahamas, Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by nationality/Bermuda, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by nationality/Cuba though I am not positive that all the women on the list are black. However, given the nature of development in the Caribbean, the majority will most likely be. SusunW (talk) 17:37, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Ipigott: Regarding Seattle and Omaha... After we get the WiR black women redlists added to the campaign page (Wikipedia:Black WikiHistory Month), we could let Seattle and Omaha know they are there. Do you think this would be a good approach?
SusunW - awesome!!
Reminder to self: once created, we should add the WiR meetup page to the campaign meetup page, and to the campaign NavBox {{tl|BlackWikiHistoryMonth}}. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:40, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
@Rosiestep, SusunW, and Ipigott: I'll take a look at the redlists above. Sorry I didn't get a ping on this earlier! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:40, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
@Rosiestep, SusunW, and Ipigott: Question: did you want all of the black history-related information to occur on one list? I can do that if that's what we want.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:47, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Megalibrarygirl I don't see that it is important that they all be on one list, gives people choices, but maybe others disagree. I do think that if you haven't already added the women from the brewing article and pilot's timelines we should comb through those and add any appropriate ones to the lists. I'll be glad to help, just didn't know if you've already done it. SusunW (talk) 18:54, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
SusunW OK, I'll glean from some of the other articles. I don't know how many I've added from the Women in Brewing. Probably a few, certainly not all!Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:58, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Megalibrarygirl I'm sure you will be expanding the main list in your usual expert way but perhaps you can draw on some of the others. Some of the other lists could be mentioned specifically on the editathon page but another solution might be to include the most important ones under "See also" on the main list. As for all the lists on African, South American and Caribbean countries, it might simply be best to suggest that these can be accessed from the main WiR page under Red links. Participants will have to use their common sense in determining whether individuals are black or not.--Ipigott (talk) 13:50, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Ipigott, I like that idea. I'll add to the main Black history list and we can include the other lists as is.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:40, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

March 2017

Women Wikipedia Design

WikiD will host the third annual event for women in architecture on March 30th at the center for architecture in New York. Would be great if people from women in red could participate because the online participation already helped a lot in former WikiD events. --EarlyspatzTalk 12:06, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

UN

  • The UN will be doing an international editathon, maybe focusing on activists, and I recommend we support it. Plus Art+Feminism if it reoccurs. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:01, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
I'm in. Love activists. SusunW (talk) 14:59, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
I have heard that the UN will focus on artists, not activists. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:47, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
For now at least, this is a dead end. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:29, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Art+Feminism

A+F will be back in March! --Rosiestep (talk) 14:51, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Note: I have tentatively moved the discussion of the book artists & artists' books editathon to April, for the reasons discussed there.Alafarge (talk) 22:28, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
  • There has been a discussion here on our main talk page about embarking on a multilingual approach to Women in Red in March. The general idea is that we should follow in the footsteps of Wikipedia:Wikipedia Asian Month by encouraging other language versions of Wikipedia to participate in our editathon. It has been suggested that we could start with some of the European languages with Latin alphabets which have proved successful in WAM but we could also think of including other important language versions such as Arabic, Chinese, Korean, Japanese and Russian. For each language version we will need at least one coordinator to translate the invitations and support pages and to provide assistance to participants. We welcome any ideas on how we should proceed as well as any offers of support for other languages. The topics of Activists and Feminists appear suitable for all the languages but it might be useful to extend our scope to attract users interested in creating articles on women active in other areas.--Ipigott (talk) 11:14, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
@Dr. Blofeld, Ipigott, Megalibrarygirl, SusunW, and Victuallers: - an update...
I received an email today regarding scheduling a Google Hangout with the Art+Feminism team (Sian, Michael, Jackie) on Nov 25th; time has not been determined yet. If any of you are available/interested, it would be nice to have you participate. A+F is now a User Group. This means access to people on the Affiliates mailing list (Chapters, UGs, and ThOrgs) and a grant (~US$90,000).
The UN will be facilitating international in-person edit-a-thons re women activists on March 18th. I don't have a call scheduled with the UN yet, but once that's in the mix, I'll circle back.
Let's discuss, either here, or via Skype/Google Hangout.Ā :) --Rosiestep (talk) 22:20, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Sorry Rosiestep I will be out of the country and will more than likely not have any phone/internet service for a week. I have about 30 minutes left to finish my article before we head to the jungle. SusunW (talk) 22:25, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
SusunW - have fun and be safe! --Rosiestep (talk) 22:30, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Rosiestep, I'm available the 25th all day. We're off work. Have fun, SusunW! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:32, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks Sue and Rosie. I am sure it will be a blast. Cannot wait to see our Belizean friends. SusunW (talk) 22:38, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
This is excellent news Rosie. I certainly have a lot of ideas for maxing output on how to bring in women articles for every country and somethign which could potentially bring us thousands of articles on women in art and feminism. A larger grant like that would be needed if we are to achieve big things on here. I'll see how things go over the next few days but time permitting with the Destubathon I'll begin drawing up some ideas. I'm up for a chat.ā™¦ Dr. Blofeld 22:33, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Glad to hear this is picking up steam. Looking forward to further details as they emerge.--Ipigott (talk) 08:16, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Book artists & artists' books
  • I'm moving the proposed book artists & artists' books to April, tentatively, with a suggestion that it occupy the first two weeks. It is proposed as a collaboration with librarians at the University of California, Irvine (where I teach) as partners, but it turns out that March (as first proposed) is not a good month to do this because of issues involving this year's academic schedule. At Irvine we will run at least one live session, and I'll work with the librarians on figuring out a good date for the live session in early April. Is WiR ok with this new placement? Alafarge (talk) 22:28, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
Works for me. SusunW (talk) 22:58, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
  • possible sponsor: UC Irvine

Librarians at the University of California, Irvine (where I teach) would be interested in sponsoring an editathon on book artists and artists' books. UCI's Langson Library has a fine collection of 20th century artists' books, and one of their librarians who has worked with me on some meetups has noticed how poor the representation of even major book artists is on Wikipedia. I'm interested in this too, partly because it's an area of art that is often associated with both women and crafts and so doesn't always get appropriate visibility. The best time for such an editathon would be in the academic year, which for UCI runs, practically speaking, October-May. Any interest?Alafarge (talk) 21:01, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Alafarge I think this would sync up well with March 2017 if we do Art+Feminism again. Would that work? If you are agreeable, can you move this to the March 2017 header? --Rosiestep (talk)
I don't see why not. I'll move it now. Alafarge (talk) 17:48, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Role Models

Anyone and @Jane023, Alafarge, Dr. Blofeld, Rosiestep, Ipigott, Megalibrarygirl, and SusunW: I was at the BBC 100 Women event in Dec in London - (best editathon ever IMO) and pleased to see it from the centre. Whilst I was there I met leaders of Newnham College (one of first (and last?) Womens colleges). I suggested that we might copy the BBC event for Womens Day/Month in March. At a minimum we intend to invite Cambridge students/academics to "fill the gap". 1000 articles maybe. They will supply venue, publicity etc. Sadly March 8th is on a Wednesday so it could be then or maybe the weekend before? (as WiR would run the thing for a month anyway). Are you up for this? If possible Im hoping to see if Edinburgh, Cardiff, Barcelona, Amsterdam, Smith College? or Rome might join us with their prime location too. I'm suggesting the theme is "Role Models" which would include a broad group of notables. Thoughts? Running this in parallel? Locations? Victuallers (talk) 15:44, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Great title. Why not leave the choice of date to the college? It may well be easier for them to organize the editathon during the week and it would certainly help if it were to be on the 8th. But if not, no problem to have it on the following Saturday. I have already suggested that we should do everything possible to involve as many women's universities and colleges as we can, wherever they happen to be. If we really can encourage the creation of 1000 articles, it will certainly contribute to our ambitions.--Ipigott (talk) 16:01, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
What I fabulous idea. Good luck. SusunW (talk) 16:28, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Spot on with the "Role Models" idea, Victuallers. Pharos, do you think Barnard College would be interested in running a parallel event? Please ping me if you have a contact as I'd be glad to reach out; my mom and Margaret Mead were alums, and they were my role models so this cuts close to home for me. It would also be wonderful to get the other 6 of the Seven Sisters involved; @LiAnna and Jami, do you have connections? --Rosiestep (talk) 17:32, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
I also love the idea! We have some contacts at these colleges, but not sure if they will necessarily run these events. Depends on the support they might get. If y'all start planning for the event and have some info I can share, I'd be happy to. I can think of one instructor, in particular, who is at Spelman College. Anyway, will definitely get the word out and can help rally people. Perhaps in my volunteer roleĀ :), which I'm happy to do! Jami (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:26, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

If we could get them all working on American women for the US contest planned in March that would be even better!ā™¦ Dr. Blofeld 17:42, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

I like the Role Models idea. As far as I know, the Netherlands never had a women's university. Traditional women's schooling was meant to educate women to raise children and run a household. I will ask in the gendergap workgroup. Jane (talk) 17:56, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
I'm not sure that it matters Jane023 if there were not women's colleges per se. I am wondering how we could involve say the gender program at for example the University of the West Indies. Lots of traditional universities have women's study programs which could be contacted. If we were able to make contact with UWI, for example, we might be able to generate articles on a sorely missed region. The big question would be training, IMO. Having never participated in a "live" editathon, I am not sure how one could coordinate a live event, without someone being physically on-site who knew the ins and outs of editing on WP. But surely there are already groups editing in major European cities like Amsterdam or Leiden who could facilitate an on-site editing session with a women's study department of any university?? SusunW (talk) 19:00, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks to all! This looks like a go-er the college have rooms booked and I think they would contact "sister" colleges to bridge the gap at their level if we have keen Wikipedians who want to do something near them. Suggestion to Pharos of Barnard College. Smith College and University of the West Indies sounds particularly interesting. I think that is we can find 3 or 4 within the next few weeks then we will have many more wanting to join. The BBC event got international coverage and sadly this problem effects every Wikipedia (as the Welsh success highlights). I mentioned Smith College as well but I suspect you know more about your areas than me. Although I noticed that many women doctors went to Zurich to train when they found there way blocked in 19C in their own countries (maybe a few Dutch? Jane023) Victuallers (talk) 16:34, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
"If you build it they will come" .... getting some good feedback. I was given this link which explains that universities need to collaborate with Wikipedia and make their stuff open access. Useful argument. I'm intending to create a table that shows contacts we are making with universities and the press. Email/comments here or on #wikiwomen are red can then be collated. Victuallers (talk) 21:56, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
SusunW - I missed your point, earlier. Live editathons work where you have enough trainers. 2 or 3 will do for a small event but the BBC event had maybe a dozen in London but they trained hundreds in batches by giving them a presentation and then teaching them to edit using the visual editor. Victuallers (talk) 23:48, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
@Victuallers and SusunW: They may indeed have been able to "train" hundreds in batches but as far as I can see very few of them have continued editing. One or two persisted for a day or two but then disappeared. The BBC's 90-minute video introduction to Wikipedia editing caused lots of trouble and probably disappointed most of those who tried it out when they saw their work had been deleted. Rather than go for mass production, I think it might be worthwhile spending a bit more time on trying to identify participants who are genuinely interested in contributing. They can then be given more extensive guidelines in order to create draft articles at the editathon which they can then improve with the help of the Wikipedians present or thanks to subsequent virtual mentoring or assistance.--Ipigott (talk) 14:22, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
I'm not sure you can spot these people so easily. I came here to add refs to my own work and then realised that there were higher objectives, I spent a year mostly editting talk pages with the thought I'd get in trouble eventually. My primary objective here is to to find "role models" and we will get them loaded into wikidata (How much data was deleted from wikidata after the event). Each person we train may not become the next mega-editor but they do understand how wiki works. They are all supporters I hope and when they design their web site then I hope they will pause before copyrighting everything. I have tried to recruit thousands of people .... and I've found only a few mega editors (who have created thousands of pages.) If there is a way of identifying these people who are interested then thats great, but I suspect they have to identify themselves. The mega editors I have found have told me years later that I gave them the wiki habit. Still I'm open to suggestions. I think that we are deleting new articles and new editors at the same time - we need to find them some protection which is not just closing them off in a corral where they can do no damage/benefit. Are you sure that training less people will create more assistance? Victuallers (talk) 14:50, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

The Women You Have Never Met

I'd like to support the campaign because it's being organized by Wikimujeres, but because March is a busy month for us, I would recommend some changes in the way that Women in Red would participate. Thoughts? --Rosiestep (talk) 18:11, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

  • WiR contributions to correspond with our bot-generated metrics dates of March 1-31.
  • The WiR meetup page for this event would be a copy of the March metrics list, e.g. no one would have to monitor it or add anything to it. We'll copy over the March articles from the Metrics page on March 31st.
  • Judging/prizes: I think the judging corresponds with: How to edit including the gender perspective in Wikipedia. I don't want to be a judge for Women in Red articles; does anyone else want to be a judge? If no one volunteers, we could tell the campaign organizers that we'll forego the "prizes". Maybe just WiR could get recognized for participating. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:29, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • For the record, we've added it to our March 1-31 calendar... we'll support the campaign but won't participate in the "contest". If we are required (this is not clear at the moment) to select a winning article, Megalibrarygirl and I will convene the "jury" and will pick one. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:22, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
I see this more as an opportunity for our participants to give support to articles on women in other languages. It seems to me that our own articles are hardly relevant. We therefore do not need to judge or give prizes.--Ipigott (talk) 16:37, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Where do we stand on March?

Rosiestep, Victuallers: As you can see from the various threads above, there are now quite a number of proposals around for March, including your own suggestions and the The Women You Have Never Met multilingual expansion. I think it may be confusing for our participants if we try to offer them too many options at the same time. I know you, Rosie, have been hesitant to undertake any specific preparations on a multilingual approach too soon but I think we will have to start considering what we want to do and how we will do it fairly soon.--Ipigott (talk) 14:05, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Good point Ipigott - I'm not shooting from the hip but thinking about it Victuallers (talk) 14:44, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Ipigott: I think multi-lingual is a good idea as well as limiting the March offerings. I've thought of one option: WiR to coordinate the A+F virtual, multilingual nodes. Last year, we only coordinated the en-wiki one, so we'd have to develop a plan for how to reach out to other languages. The benefit of the A+F theme is that it is all set for March: on-wiki, off-wiki (Slack channel), Meta presence, WMF grant; their processes have undergone a formal diversity review; they are entrenched within the Affiliates movement; they have weekly planning calls, etc. We could build off of that. Note, when I say A+F, I really mean Art+Feminism+Plus (because in 2016, WiR added activists and reformers, and I think we might consider added focuses for 2017, too). --Rosiestep (talk) 20:29, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
@Rosiestep and Victuallers: I suppose we can take it for granted that one of the "added focuses" should target the "role models" from the university education community.--Ipigott (talk) 09:03, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
On the multilingual front, I see there's a French editathon focusing on women in science on 8 March in Grenoble.--Ipigott (talk) 09:25, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
@Rosiestep and Ipigott: et al! Been thinking about it for 24 hours. My thoughts are that the Wikimajures project is definitely not anglocentric and it has an nicely female but ambiguous title. The A+F title is not a great fit for women with a whole range of academic and political interests.... which is why I went for "rolemodels". I have to rush off for real world needs.I'll add more later today (UK time). gotto go Victuallers (talk) 10:12, 15 January 2017 (UTC) - Update - plan is to use wikidata to hold the new info and we should see the release of images from one of the top universities. (Although I note that Harvard has done a lot already) We have the trainers booked and I think it should be a great day. I'm hoping that Women in Red will support this during the month of March. Victuallers (talk) 16:13, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
@Victuallers, Ipigott, SusunW, and Megalibrarygirl:: AFRM 2017! (I'm pronouncing it "affirm"; Art+Feminism+Role Models; affirm in Spanish = afirmar; in French = affirmer; in Italian = affermare). Create a unique logo. One meetup page or 3? If one: an outcomes area for artists/feminists; an outcomes area for Role Models; an outcomes area for improved articles (with a bullet point that it supports "The Women You Have Never Met"). Am I trying to kill too many birds with one stone or do you think this might actually work?
Plus: create a Navbox linking all the March WHM events, not just for 2017, but for previous years, too. (cc: Pharos as we've been discussing WHM Navboxes via social media). --Rosiestep (talk) 17:08, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
I like AFRM Rosiestep and I also like one list. It's March for goodness sake. The month celebrates all women, thus our list should too. SusunW (talk) 17:45, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
AFRM sounds good = A Firm Redlink Mandate. I think it would be best to group everything under one meetup page with one invitation. Role Models can simply be part of it and announced for 8 March. (If Victuallers wants to develop a separate programme for the day, that would fit in too. Perhaps also a separate tag for the talk pages of articles created.) I think we should go for just one "outcomes area", i.e. list of new or improved articles. If necessary we can develop/expand specific redlink lists for the various components: Art, Feminism, Academics (Role Models), and any others we would like to offer. Perhaps also specific attention to images. It remains to be seen how we encourage multilingual participation.--Ipigott (talk) 08:57, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
AFRM it is - I'm impressed by you guys and proud to be a member. Trying to arrange a key meeting in Cambridge, hopefully on Friday. Well done particularly to SusunW - Thanks Victuallers (talk) 07:28, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

April 2017

Geo focus: Wikimedia CEE Spring 2017

Although their campaign last about 2.5 months, we could jump in for part of it, e.g. our geo focus for May to be the CEE countries: m:Wikimedia CEE Spring 2017. Hoping that the more we support other communities' campaigns, the more support we'll get back. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:16, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Update: Wikimedia CEE Spring 2017 campaign started yesterday (21 March) and run through May 31. We could support it in April. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:45, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Book artists

The University of California, Irvine is sponsoring a 2-week editathon for the first half of April. It's something of an extension of the spirit of March's Women's History month since many book artists are women, and it looks like we will place it under the Art + Feminism banner as well. There will be a real-space meetup at UCI the afternoon of Friday, March 7 (more info on this to come). As previously discussed on this page, we'd like to make it one of the WiR April editathons. Hopefully this still works for everyone as an idea.-- Alafarge (talk) 19:58, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Alafarge We could extend our focus on book artists over the whole of April. We could also include illustrators and cartoonists for which we have Wikidata lists. Do you have an index or list of red links on women book artists? The only UCI editathon I have found is the one on April 7 but it does not specify book artists. Can you provide the link.--Ipigott (talk) 10:21, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
The focus at UCI is on the April 7 meetup for which you found the link-- the publicity materials just came together in the last couple of days. The image announcement for the editathon does say "Book Arts edition" on it, though the text doesn't reiterate that focus. I'd love an all-month virtual editathon on all kinds of book artists, as you suggest; we could include graphic novel artists as well. I have only a short list of women book artists, but my cosponsor for the April 7 meetup is putting a longer one together, based in part on the UCI special collection of artist's books, which spans about a half century. Alafarge (talk) 16:55, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
Do we have a contact at the National Museum of Women in the Arts? They used to do an exhibition of book art every year...not sure if they still do. Might be an interesting place to talk to as well for this. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 05:30, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Alafarge: Glad to see you are happy to go along with my suggestions and that a list of red links is being prepared. I'll put together a draft editathon page today for you to review. Will also include graphic novel artists.--Ipigott (talk) 13:50, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Alafarge: Here's the draft editathon page. Please let me know if you want to make any changes.--Ipigott (talk) 15:57, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Ipigott: Thanks so much for setting this up. So exciting. I am sending the link to the librarian who is my main cosponsor at UCI for her input as well, and I'm guessing she will want to add herself on as a facilitator and participant -- I don't offhand know her Wikipedia username or I'd mention it now. Also, thanks to Ser Amantio di Nicolao for the prompt about the NMWA-- I'll ask around for their book arts contact. Alafarge (talk) 00:46, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
@Alafarge: Thanks. Feel free to add your librarian's user name to the editathon page and let me know if I need to include any other information.--Ipigott (talk) 07:34, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: By a strange coincidence, I've just received the latest newsletter from Europeana which mentions last year's NMWA event and has an interesting follow-up. The site is good for finding artwork with appropriate Creative Commons licences.--Ipigott (talk) 07:34, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
@Ipigott:I've add my UC Irvine co-facilitator, Weaselcity, to the editathon page with their permission. I've also drafted a redlist based on a list Weaselcity and I drew up offline, currently stashed at: User:Alafarge/book arts. Does it need to be transferred elsewhere before being linked from the editathon page?Alafarge (talk) 17:56, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi, @Alafarge:. If possible, could you please add a reference to each of the redlinks in order to establish notability before we copy them over to the meetup page? It might also be helpful to start a crowd-sourced redlist, but pinging our Librarian in Residence, Megalibrarygirl, for her thoughts first as it would mean pulling some entries out of Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Art. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:30, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
Alafarge: Thanks for starting a redlink list together with Weaselcity. I've added a few sources and a few more names. Those without any refs do not seem to be obvious candidates unless you can provide convincing secondary sources. Perhaps Megalibrarygirl can also contribute. We could move the list to WiR to attract additional crowd sourcing.--Ipigott (talk) 11:12, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
@Alafarge, Ipigott, and Rosiestep: a lot of authors sometimes only pop up on databases. I'll see what I can turn up hopefully today.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:28, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
@Rosiestep:I've added sources for all the redlinks that were missing them, plus some notes, and took out a couple names that didn't look likely to me. Could someone who knows how move it to WiR so it can be further crowd-sourced? And @Ipigott: thanks for your ref hunting! Alafarge (talk) 18:18, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
@Alafarge: Moved and listed! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:19, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Women in Psychology

In collaboration with Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Psychology. (cc Celizas, Brooks patty)--Ipigott (talk) 10:57, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

May 2017

Geo focus - Asia

As we have no update on the WMDC US Women contest, I've moved the US focus from May to June, which leaves a hole for May geo focus. Some options come to mind: Southeast Asia and "Island women" (islands being broadly construed). Other ideas?

Women's orgs and conferences

Women's organisations and conferences: has it been "done" before? I'd like to suggest it as a topic for an editathon. Both historical and contemporary organisations could be covered, large/international and smaller/grassroots. MurielMary (talk) 11:27, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

I second this; I've done a bunch of these just as spillover from other pages I've worked on, so I'd guess it's a pretty rich territory. Alafarge (talk) 20:47, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm in. Organizations and conferences always lead to discovery of multitudes of notable women who have vanished from the historical narrative. SusunW (talk) 22:32, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm being bold and putting this on the calendar. It is IMO a great way to generate more tie ins to existing articles on notable women, tying them more fully into the encyclopedia, as well as finding new ones. SusunW (talk) 22:52, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Me, too, I'm in! I love working on women's organizations and conferences. --Rosiestep (talk) 23:09, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Women in Sports

I was about to propose an online editathon on women in sport, because some of our male contributors complain the lack of article about. I do as ambassador from them to tell you that the voice of Fiorentina Women's Football Club missing in the English versionĀ :-D. So, when are we able to do a virtual editathon about this? Athletes, footballers... I was thinking in april, but I see is full. --Camelia (talk) 19:59, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Works for May! --Rosiestep (talk) 13:48, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

June 2017

Pre-1900 Historical Women by nationality

I am new here, so I hope I place my idea in the right place! I my information are correct, English language Wikipedia has more women biographies from English speaking nations than from the rest of the world. This seem to be especially true when it comes to historical women before 1900. Why not have one edit-a-ton for each (non English speaking) region of the world, to make the biographies of historical women more balanced? For example: one week, we could have an edit-a-ton named "Women of the Balkans before 1900", the next "Women of the Middle East before 1900" and the next "Women of India before 1900", and continuing around the world, starting from, for example, the Scandinavian countries, and continuing through Europe, the Middle East, Africa, the Far East, South East Asia, The Pacific, South America, and Latin America, with one week for each region? "before 1900" would be a woman active before this year in whatever area she is known for. Would this be a good idea? I have myself participated in a similar project on Swedish language Wp: the focus was subjects from different regions around the world, and I used it to create women's biographies from all over the world, which was both fun, educational, and made the content of women's biographies more balanced. I myself do not have the technical skill or the energy to create the pages for the projects (I suffer from depression), but I do believe in the idea, and I think it would help the imbalance of historical women biographies on Wikipedia more balanced. Does this sound good? --Aciram (talk) 10:08, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

I'd be supportive of a "pre-1900 women" editathon, but I would not recommend any other limitations, e.g. by geography or occupation. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:09, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
How about instead of a "Geo Focus" we did Pre-20c women (from anywhere)? --Rosiestep (talk) 23:48, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Place in time. I'd be totally happy with this. Much prefer working on dead women, as sources are usually easier to find and you have less worries about issues.Ā :) SusunW (talk) 13:12, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Met Artworks Challenge

This should be an interesting focus, artwork being new to us: Met Artworks Challenge. More info available from Pharos as details get sorted out. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:07, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

  • @Rosiestep, Victuallers, Megalibrarygirl, SusunW, and Montanabw: and all other editathon enthusiasts: Once again we are nearing the end of the month and need to establish our final plans for May. I fully support "Organizations and conferences", and also the geo focus, but I wonder if we should be supporting art for the third month in a row. Maybe there are other topics of interest such as Montanabw's cowgirls or Camelia.boban's "Women in sport"?--Ipigott (talk) 14:29, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
I'll probably focus on orgs and conferences, no matter what the other topics may be. If I find an org for a territory, so much the better. SusunW (talk) 14:59, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
That's true. We've covered art in March and April. I don't know if the Met event is actually taking place in May, though. Pharos - any updates? --Rosiestep (talk) 15:48, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
If we could do women in sport, for us would be great. We have funds remaining from the The women you have never met, so we think to use them (asking a new grant) just for 3-4 prizes. Some wikipedian will thanks usĀ :-D, because they often ask for help for their project (including female footballers). Orgs and conferences could be add too, is a interesting topic for us. --Camelia (talk) 16:22, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
@Rosiestep, Victuallers, Ipigott, SusunW, and Montanabw: I'd love to do orgs. I'm frankly terrible and clueless about sports, but if everyone wants to do sports, I'm game. As for Geo location, we could do Asia and Pacific Islanders because I think May is the month for celebrating that heritage group (at least in the US.) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:41, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
@Rosiestep, Victuallers, Megalibrarygirl, Ipigott, SusunW, and Montanabw: The novel thing about this project is the focus will not be on artists (i.e. biographies), but on artworks by women - specific paintings, sculptures, textiles, etc. You can see a preview of some new museum template magic here, click a redlink there to see how it works. The Met event is actually taking place in the later part of May and maybe into part of the next month, and we'll try to announce soon.--Pharos (talk) 02:00, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Interesting. Perhaps we should leave Pharos' event until June when everything will be firmed up. But then we should agree on final priorities for May within the next 48 hours.--Ipigott (talk) 14:59, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
I had the same thought Ipigott as we have multiple events this month and only one for June, the works event might fit there nicely. SusunW (talk) 15:06, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
June sounds good to me, too.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:35, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Unfortunately I can't really move it much from the museum side, but I think we can do second part of May and first part of June.--Pharos (talk) 18:22, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
I am not sure I understand what the issue is? If your event runs from the "latter part of May" into June and ours starts virtually in June, they will still overlap. WiR can support the event from afar and you can host your on-site event whenever your facility wants. WP ends up, either way, with articles on works by women. What am I not understanding? SusunW (talk) 19:50, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride

I love that you are planning so far ahead. I definitely think another event is in order and fully support it. SusunW (talk) 14:26, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
Fully support. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:01, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
Yes, greatĀ ;-) --Camelia (talk) 17:03, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Yes!!!! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:41, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
@Another Believer, Megalibrarygirl, and Camelia.boban: - In addition to the crowd-sourced redlist we have on the meetup page, do you think it would be possible to add a Wikidata-generated list in order to provide more article creation options? --Rosiestep (talk) 00:13, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
I like this idea, but I know very little about Wikidata, let alone submitting a query to help with this task. ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:35, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
I just put in a request for it on the WiR talkpage for wider attention. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:41, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Need to firm up for June

With only a week to go, we need to decide on our priorities for June. Another Believer: Are we ready to go ahead with LGBT women, more or less on the same basis as last year or are there any special requirements? Maybe you can also assist in expanding the editathon page if I first provide a basic draft? Rosiestep: Has there been any progress on the WMDC contest or should we just go ahead with the American islands anyway? We have recently had three priorities each months but maybe we should just stick to two unless anyone has a strong suggestion for one more.--Ipigott (talk) 09:32, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

@Ipigott: We have Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/46. We're ready to go as far as I know, but please let me know otherwise. ---Another Believer (Talk) 13:47, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
I've been adding names to the LBT link list all month. Have found quite a few really interesting women both in other sources and other WPs. Most of the ones I added are historic people. SusunW (talk) 13:57, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
@Another Believer: My apologies. I did not realize you, Rosiestep and Megalibrarygirl had put the editathon page together as well as WiR 45 on art from the Met. At first sight they both look fine. I'll include links to them as appropriate. Let me know if there's anything more I ca help with.--Ipigott (talk) 14:04, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
No need to apologize!Ā :) ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:05, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
I see we still need banner templates and an invitation. Perhaps one of you can take care of them too. I must say I'm rather confused by the new banner templates with longer and longer texts -- so I'd rather not become too involved.--Ipigott (talk) 14:23, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
I did the WIR-45 and 46 talk page templates, Ipigott. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:19, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Sue for all you have been doing to help us along. So now all we need is confirmation of the geo focus, unless it has already been decided elsewhere. In any case, it would be great if Rosie could get back on this and confirm everything is OK.--Ipigott (talk) 09:58, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
No worries, Ipigott! I'm always glad to help. Sometimes I just need to be reminded when things need getting done.Ā ;) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:12, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
@Ipigott, Megalibrarygirl, SusunW, and Victuallers: - Great job! We will offer 3 events again for June. I'll get to work on the Invite.
  1. pre-20c women.
  2. our annual focus on Wiki Loves Pride. Another Believer, can we assist with any additional promotion besides our standard Invite to our outreach list?
  3. women's works at the Met. Pharos, can we assist with any additional promotion besides our standard Invite to our outreach list?
@Ipigott, Megalibrarygirl, SusunW, and Victuallers: - can someone please create: Editathon banner: {{WIR-47}}. Thank you! --Rosiestep (talk) 19:31, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
@Ipigott, Rosiestep, SusunW, and Victuallers: Done! I'll make sure the pre-20th century women is also on our front page, etc. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:22, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, Megalibrarygirl, thanks! I didn't remember that at all! --Rosiestep (talk) 00:14, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

July 2017

Geo focus

I moved the U.S. Women Contest out of this section as it hasn't gained momentum. I like the below suggestion of India! --Rosiestep (talk) 17:58, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Women in Music

Suggesting this in support of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women# WP Women Musicians. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:09, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Taking the initiative to be BOLD am putting this on the calendar. I am wondering if we could broaden it by including Women in dance, which I don't think we have done before. SusunW (talk) 17:19, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

  • Dance is a good idea as women seem to be especially interested in forms like ballet. I don't quite get it myself but have started articles in the past like Dance and Dancers, Jann Parry and the Leigh Sisters and so have the impression that there's lots more to find in that field. Andrew D. (talk) 15:05, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
I like the idea of Women in Dance. I'll start a redlist.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:03, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Yay Sue! Dancers kind of goes along with choreographers, even if all dancers are not choreographers, and there is apparently a Wikidata list of them. Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Choreographers I can help you add to a dancer list, i.e. Harriet "Quicksand" Browne (1932-1997) [1], [2]; Barbara Duffy (born 1959) [3], [4], [5], [6], [7] SusunW (talk) 20:09, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
@SusunW: thanks for adding to it! I also started a women in Theater list since I ran into a few of those names recently, too. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:25, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
  • RosiestepVictuallersMegalibrarygirlSusunW: Over the next few days, we need to decide exactly what we want to focus on in July. Music seems fine but there still seem to be problems with the DC editathon. Perhaps we could have a geographical focus on India. How about Women in government? Any other ideas?--Ipigott (talk) 06:23, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
I'd really like dance included, but India would be fine. SusunW (talk) 14:36, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Should we therefore focus on Dance rather than Music?--Ipigott (talk) 16:07, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
I kind of thought dance and music worked well together. SusunW (talk) 16:26, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Dance and music seem like a great fit. I like India, too, especially since there are a lot of English language sources for the country. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:46, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
What about all 3 events: dance + music + India? I have some friendly contacts for India and I can reach out to them asap if we are in agreement with including it for July. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:58, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Yes, that sounds great to me. SusunW (talk) 18:58, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
So we can agree on Dance (48), Music (49) and India (50). I think separate editathons on dance and music will help us along. On music, it might be good to emphasize musicians (i.e. instrumentalists), composers, conductors, and opera and concert singers, in addition to the ever popular contemporary singers and song writers. Megalibrarygirl: Will you have time to prepare the editathon pages or would you like me to help? You'll probably be able to draw on Meetup #6.--Ipigott (talk) 08:44, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
Once the invitation is ready, I can send it out via MassMessage; just let me know. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:45, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
RosiestepVictuallersIpigottSusunW: I can put together the Meetup pages today if we're all in agreement.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:35, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Perfect! Thanks, Megalibrarygirl! --Rosiestep (talk) 16:43, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Rosiestep: With Megalibrarygirl's help, we've now have editathon pages, talk page templates and an invitation for July. So you can now send out the MassMessage invitations whenever you wish. I can follow up with copies to those specifically interested in dance and music and will try to promote interest in India through appropriate mailings to wikis in the various Indian languages, etc. Let's hope the summer break will revive interest in WiR. Overall participation over the past few weeks has been substantially down on the same period last year despite a considerable number of well researched articles in the topics we have been promoting. In that respect, we have been increasingly moving from quantity to quality, in accordance with the interests of key participants.--Ipigott (talk) 11:16, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

August 2017

Geo focus: Canada

I suggest we focus on Canada as Wikimania will be in Canada and we might be able to attract a new group of editors. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:14, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

I like that Rosie and I also think it works in tandem with indigenous women. SusunW (talk) 15:39, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Indigenous women

I'd like to propose that we do indigenous women again, as the International Day of the World's Indigenous Peoples is 9 August. SusunW (talk) 18:05, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Women for Peace

See discussion here Women for Peace in conjunction with Wikimedia Austria's camp. SusunW (talk) 18:24, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

@SusunW: Here is the list: Women in Peace. Thank you!!! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:35, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
@SusunW and Megalibrarygirl: I've created a Wikidata list on Peace activists although for the time being it only lists six names. When I have time, I'll see if I can expand expand it by adding similar occupations, e.g. anti-war activists, pacifists... --Ipigott (talk) 08:25, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Adding "pacifist" did not help. For Wikidata, "pacifist" is equivalent to "peace activist". The problem is that these terms are seldom used as "occupations". So I don't think there's much more we can do with Wikidata.--Ipigott (talk) 08:58, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Ian. I'll keep working on the list too. SusunW (talk) 14:28, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
@Ipigott and SusunW: thanks for helping out with these. There was a large pacifist movement early in the 20th century, so we should be able to mine some of that time period. There are quite a few Code Pink activists and other modern women in other peace groups who could be considered notable. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:25, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Megalibrarygirl Yes! I have "checked out" a couple of books on WILPF from the Wayback archive I told you about. I will be gleaning info from them and adding them to the list. It's kind of slow going between real life stuff, saving other articles and writing, besides checking out the women to see if there are sources.Ā :) I *wish* they'd figure out the problem with Alexander Street Press, as there are tons of women there who hit on pacifist, but I cannot access them. Just occurs to me, earlier time periods might have Quaker women who would fit the category. SusunW (talk) 17:37, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Good idea about the Quakers, SusunW. Shakers, too, if I remember correctly, were also pacifists.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:40, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Indeed Megalibrarygirl Maybe Ipigott can add Quakers and Shakers to his Wikidata query. Don't know if it will yield results, but both groups were really well known for pacifism. I also note there are categories: Buddhist pacifists, Hindu pacifists, Jewish pacifists, etc. which might yield result as well? SusunW (talk) 18:47, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Firming up August

@SusunW, Rosiestep, and Ipigott: I can start making the meetup pages now if this is all settled in.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:34, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Megalibrarygirl, sounds good to me. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:29, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Megalibrarygirl Good with me. I should be back in the "real world" on Friday. SusunW (talk) 00:10, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Megalibrarygirl: It looks as if you've already made a very good start on these, including the #1day1woman page. Using WIR-00 for this looks like a good idea but maybe we should drop the "meetup" and post it as Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/00 with a separate entry in the WiR navbox. I'll see what I can work out during the day. I was also wondering if a map of Canada (eg File:Canada (orthographic projection).svg) would be more appropriate for inclusion in the invitation. I'll work on it and see what it looks like.--Ipigott (talk) 09:26, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Megalibrarygirl Rosiestep: I've created a new page for 1day1woman at User:Ipigott/Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/1day1woman. I think it should be presented separately as it is more that just an editathon. If you like the approach, you can subsitute it (or any part of it) for the existing page which Sue has been working on.--Ipigott (talk) 11:22, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
I've also created the Template:WIR-00 but now that Headbomb has rationalized our template approach, I have not been able to use Sue's new image or replace "edit-a-thon" by "initiative". Perhaps someone can help.--Ipigott (talk) 11:25, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
@Megalibrarygirl, Ipigott, SusunW, and Rosiestep: I LOVE the way you all set up the #1day1woman initiative page! Good idea! Feel free to change the pic on Canada, Ipigott. I was hoping, though, that maybe she'd get an article, so that's why I picked that woman.Ā :) Maybe I can move it to the sportsing women's page with a redlink, though instead.Ā :) Maybe there is a way to override images on a case by case basis. Maybe Headbomb can help with that? Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:45, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
@Megalibrarygirl: While I'm unsure of what 'that' is at the moment (I haven't read anything in detail here yet, I'm busy with a lot of stuff at the moment), I'm sure I help with it. By when would you need 'that' to be ready? Couple of days before Wikimania? Headbomb {t Ā· c Ā· p Ā· b} 12:11, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
Headbomb I'm sorry I wasn't very specific! It's a cosmetic issue about displaying a different graphic on the WiR template for #1day1woman only. It's not a priority, but it would be cool if we knew how to switch just that one out and still keep the template logic you've helped create for us.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:36, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
Megalibrarygirl: I think there might have been something of a misunderstanding with Rosiestep who sent out the 1day1woman invitation, linking it to your page and apparently had not realized that I had intented it to be sent out together as an additional thread together with the August editathon invitation. As I explained above, I created an alternative presentation on my user space with pink instead of gold shading (to match your image) and more detailed information on our thinking behind the new approach. I also suggested that rather than an "editathon" or "meetup" it should be presented rather differently, ditto the talk page template. As the invitations have been sent out, I thought I would be bold and simply substitute my page for yours. If either of you think I have gone too far, please just revert. I also thought the basic invitation was ready, unless you want to use the photo of Eva Ault on the invitation too. I purposely left it on the editathon page but I thought a map of Canada on the invitation would be more striking and meaningful for the world community. Canada is after all much bigger than most people realize. Please let me know if you agree with these developments as I certainly would not like to override anything without agreement.--Ipigott (talk) 15:05, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
@Rosiestep and Ipigott: I think there was confusion, too. I liked Ipigott's version and thought we were going with his. Maybe we can replace mine with yours, Ipigott, so that there aren't broken links.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:20, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
@Megalibrarygirl and Ipigott:, apologies for misunderstanding on my part; chalk it up on traveling and trying to focus on too many things at one time. Do I need to take any steps to fix the problem? Also, please let me know when there's a final version of the August invitation and I'll MassMessage it. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:20, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Rosiestep: I'll try to be as clear as possible in order to avoid further confusion:
  1. The invitation to the August editathons has been ready for the past couple of days and can be sent out by mass messaging whenever you wish.
  2. I have replaced Sue's 1day1woman page by the one I had prepared in my user space but had suggested it should not be seen as an editathon or a meetup but rather as an ongoing initiative. I therefore suggest it could have its own page without "meetup", for example "Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/1day1women" but any changes along these lines can wait until you have time to look at the matter in more detail.
  3. I created the Template:WIR-00 which currently reads "This article was created or improved during the #1day1woman edit-a-thon hosted by the Women in Red project in 2017. The editor(s) involved may be new, please assume good faith to their contributions before making changes." I would have preferred "This article was created or improved under the #1day1woman initiative hosted by the Women in Red project." and I would have liked to replace the standard WiR image with the new one Sue has created at File:1day1woman.png. In view of all the reorganization of our talk page templates by Headbomb, I did not want to make any new templates without consulting you first. Again, this is a matter which can wait until you have more time.
So for the time being, I think we can go along with things as they are. In any case, it might be a good idea to discuss #1day1woman in more detail on our main WiR talk page. I think it is a great idea but as with all our other developments, our participants might have useful suggestions about how we can get it to fly, not only for the EN wiki but for any others who wish to join.--Ipigott (talk) 07:04, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for clarifying, Ipigott. I've sent out the August invitation, and agree that we should discuss #1day1woman at the WiR talkpage.
Hi Megalibrarygirl. I did MassMessage the invites, but this is a great example of why WiR needs another admin as both Victuallers and I are traveling so it's hard to stay on top of talkpages, etc.Ā :) --Rosiestep (talk) 12:57, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
Rosiestep: I also support Sue as a candidate for admin but in the meantime you could delegate responsibility for mass messaging to her. This is certainly possible if you look into the background.--Ipigott (talk) 13:04, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
@Ipigott, Rosiestep, and Victuallers: if I can help with the mass-messaging w/out going through RfA, I'd be happy to do it. My feedback was good on the OCRA, but some very knowledgable individuals on the page rightly suggested I need more experience in a few different areas. So I've started to work on that and have found it very enjoyable and still, in fact, under the scope of WiR--since women are everywhere. But that's another, longer story. Short story: I'm here to help however I can.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:33, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Alright I gave it a shot. Two things:

  1. Is {{WIR-00}} what you wanted?
  2. As a side-remark, I'm a bit concerned about the choice of name for a that template/meetup. It makes it look like this is event 0, that took place before Event 1. If it's a special event, that doesn't quite fit as a regular meetup, it might be better to have a special event naming convention. Something like WIR-S1, WIR-S2, etc... Otherwise it might be best to place at {{WIR-54}}.

Headbomb {t Ā· c Ā· p Ā· b} 18:44, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

@Megalibrarygirl:Ā ? Headbomb {t Ā· c Ā· p Ā· b} 04:34, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
@Headbomb: That's exactly it! I've been out of town, vacationing with my family, so I'm sorry about the slow reply! Thank you so much! I don't mind changing the naming conventions. If you think it needs to be changed, it's cool. I'll update anything that refers to it. @Ipigott:, too.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:07, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Headbomb: Glad you came in on this. I had raised the same point earlier but received no reactions. I also wondered whether the wording of the template should not be changed to reflect the fact that this is an arrangement which is intended to extend over several months. The URL could perhaps also be adapted to avoid "meet up".--Ipigott (talk) 06:26, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Headbomb: You seem to have missed my ping. I must say I thought Megalibrarygirl had made quite a good choice in creating WIR-00 which I think we all recognize as being outside the normal monthly editathon priorities. But I would not have any objection to WIR-S1 if that seems more logical. I would also like to have your views on the other two points I raised immediately above which I also mentioned during our initial exchanges in this thread. Perhaps Rosiestep also has comments to make here?--Ipigott (talk) 09:48, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Didn't miss it, just it's Wikimania and things are rather hectic. If by the two points above you mean 'avoiding the work meet up' in the url, and reflecting this takes place over several months, this is rather easy to implement. I'll give it some thought once things calm down. Ping me again next week if you don't hear from me. Headbomb {t Ā· c Ā· p Ā· b} 12:05, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
I'm deferring to others on this. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:27, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

September 2017

Geo focus: New Zealand

  • New Zealand

Hispanic and Latina women

  • Wondering if we could do a Latina editathon. National Hispanic Heritage Month begins September 15, 2017. SusunW (talk) 03:52, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
I think both of these OUP dictionaries are open access:
The Oxford Encyclopedia of Latinos and Latinas in the United States
The Oxford Encyclopedia of Latinos and Latinas in Contemporary Politics, Law, and Social Movements SusunW (talk) 23:28, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Another dictionary: Notable Hispanic American Women SusunW (talk) 17:10, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Nice, it could be a good idea to do it in Rome too, so I will try to involve the Spanish Accademy. --Camelia (talk) 19:07, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
Some more dictionaries: SusunW (talk) 15:41, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
  • VicuƱa Mackenna, BenjamĆ­n (1872). MiscelĆ”nea. ColecciĆ³n de articulos, discursos, biografĆ­as, impresiones de viaje, ensayos, estudios sociales, econĆ³micos, etc. 1849-1872 (in Spanish). Santiago, Chile: LibrerĆ­a del Mercurio. OCLCĀ 55270487.
  • CortĆ©s, JosĆ© Domingo (1876). Diccionario biogrĆ”fico americano (in Spanish) (2ndĀ ed.). Paris, France: TipografĆ­a Lahure. OCLCĀ 866715132.
  • SuĆ”rez, JosĆ© Bernardo (1878). Rasgos biogrĆ”ficos de mujeres cĆ©lebres de AmĆ©rica: escritos, traducidos i estractados para el uso de las jovenes (in Spanish) (2ndĀ ed.). Paris, France: LibrerĆ­a del C. Bouret. OCLCĀ 4784506.
@SusunW and Rosiestep: I've started a Latinas redlink page. Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Latina. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:48, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

If we do Latinas, maybe we could also incorporate Hispanic, Latina and Chicana activists. I've recently found a few women involved with migrant farmwork activism and I think there's a lot more. Many of these women have won the "Ohtli Award" from Mexico. I think looking though similiar awards from other countries might help. These types of awards are given to people who live outside of their countries doing activism for migrants and immigrants.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:36, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Woman in the Olympics

Firming up on September

How about this:

  1. Hispanic and Latina women
  2. Woman in the Olympics
  3. Women from New Zealand

I suggest Olympics as we now have the great new Wikidata list from Edgars2007. And I thought New Zealand might be interesting for the Geofocus, with the help no doubt of MurielMary and her friends. In addition to the Wikidata list for New Zealand, we also have the redlist from the Dictionary of New Zealand Biography. We should also include our continuing #1day1woman.

Await reactions from Rosiestep, Victuallers, Megalibrarygirl, SusunW and all others who regularly look at this page.--Ipigott (talk) 08:50, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Oh a focus on NZ would be great! I plug away at our list, and other editors come along and assist and expand after I've started new articles, so there are definitely people who would support articles created in this editathon. MurielMary (talk) 09:31, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
P.S. Very appropriate to be September as Women's Suffrage Day is 19 September! (NZ being the first self governing country to grant women the vote, in 1893) MurielMary (talk) 09:34, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
I like the scope Ipigott. Latinas will be hard for a lot of people so New Zealand will give them an alternative to write about. Olympics will hit an area we haven't focused on before and #1day1woman covers all the rest. SusunW (talk) 12:54, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
I think this is a great line-up! Once we have the meetup pages created, we can crosslink the Olympics one with this upcoming in-person event in Los Angeles. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:07, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
Notifying Schwede66 re NZ. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:18, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Nice one. I could see myself create a few bios for Olympic competitors from NZ. We've got templates for all the Olympics that show the red links, e. g. this one. Schwede66 19:37, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

That would be great, Schwede66. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:51, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
OK. If Megalibrarygirl can make a start on the editathon pages, I'll help with their development, etc., in a day or two.--Ipigott (talk) 09:37, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
@Ipigott: I can start working on the pages today and tomorrow. Also, don't forget I can now help with mass messaging. However, it will be my first time doing it! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:47, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
Lugnuts, you are creating a lot of Olympic competitor bios. Shall we team up and cover New Zealand women during September (or agree to work from opposite ends of the timeline)? Schwede66 05:01, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
I'm not working on one nation, just going through various lists and turning all the reds to blues. There might be some cross-over with NZ Olympians, but I'm happy if you want to focus on the ones that are currently missing biographies. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 09:11, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
Lugnuts, given that I come across new NZ bios from you all the time, I assumed you were a Kiwi. D'oh. Paora, I guess I should also ping you in this matter, given the quality Olympics bios that you produce (e.g. Frank Sharpley). Schwede66 09:25, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Hehe, no worries! I'm British, BTW. Although I have created a ton of articles for NZ Olympians and cricketers. But let me know if there's any real high-profile missing articles that simply need a short stub starting, and I'll help out. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 09:29, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

October 2017

Geo focus

How about Scandinavian women, broadly construed (Denmark, Norway Sweden, plus Finland, Iceland, Faroe Islands, and ƅland Islands)? We'll need more redlists.Ā :) --Rosiestep (talk) 04:56, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Women in health care

What about Women in health care? It is Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Could encompass physicians, scientists and nurses. SusunW (talk) 14:04, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
I like it; let's do it. It would be cool if some folks wanted to also do in-person editathons at Susan G. Komen events, though I don't know how easy it would be for them to coordinate something like that. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:26, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Yay! Pinging Barbara (WVS) because I am thinking she is part of WikiProject Women in Health and might have some ideas or might be able to help generate participants. SusunW (talk) 19:35, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Disability and disability rights

We've never focused on this topic. I've just started a redlist, Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Disability. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 00:37, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

I like this topic Sue! Don't know why I wasn't notified before that you proposed it. SusunW (talk) 19:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
As a contributor to the list, and a former president of the Disability History Association, I too like this topic.Ā :) There's a Wikipedian in Residence working on disability topics at the Longmore Institute, might be good to tap her in. Penny Richards (talk) 23:02, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
@Megalibrarygirl, SusunW, and Penny Richards- As there are no events lined up for October, would you like to move this one up to Oct instead of Nov? Also, great idea to loop in the Wikipedian in Residence (I don't know who they are or I would do so myself.). --Rosiestep (talk) 01:58, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Either month works for me. the Longmore Wikipedian in Residence is Jackie Koerner. - Penny Richards (talk) 13:31, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Totally good with that SusunW (talk) 14:01, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
I'm in however we can get on this. I'm right now working on women disability rights activists. These are ones that are red and/or stub/start status. Glad to collaborate on any articles. Just ping me on the talk pages. Let me know the game plan if we want to organize an event and I'll gladly support it how I can! Jackiekoerner (talk) 14:55, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Also glad to pull articles for anyone in this effort. Feel free to leave a message with what you need on my talk page. Jackiekoerner (talk) 15:01, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Hi and welcome Jackiekoerner; didn't realize you were the Longmore WiR! --Rosiestep (talk) 19:16, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
@SusunW, Penny Richards, Jackiekoerner, and Rosiestep: I'm fine with doing it in October. Dodger67 may be interested in coordinating with WP:Disability. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:58, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Okay, then I am being bold and moving this to October. SusunW (talk) 19:01, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping Megalibrarygirl, I'll be happy to act as coordinator at the WikiProject Disability end, though I see many familiar usernames are already here. Are disabled athletes on-topic for this? If yes, the Paralympics Task Force should also be brought on board. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:35, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Dodger67 We are an inclusive project and would very much appreciate the addition of the Paralympic Task Force, or any other folks who might be interested. SusunW (talk) 20:45, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
SusunW I've dropped a note at WT:WikiProject Olympics/Paralympics#Women in Red event and now I'm off to bed, it's almost midnight at my end. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 21:29, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
@Dodger67:, FYI, I've added names of paralympic athletes to the Women in the Olympics editathon going on next week. And hope you had a good night's rest.Ā ;) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:03, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Keep in mind that only medal winners at Paralympics are presumed notable per WP:NOLYMPICS, so non-medallists will need solid GNG-based notability. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:18, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

We have something like 10 guy active in Sport Project with which we collaborate. So, to not stop them, we left women in the Olympics an open editathon. We can add another section about paraolympics, as you did. --Camelia (talk) 13:49, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Firming up on October

From the above I suggest:

  1. Disability rights activists and educators
  2. Health care
  3. Geofocus: the Nordic countries

I use "Nordic countries" as Scandinavia does not include Finland. I hope the term is sufficiently familiar. Otherwise we can simply say "Geofocus: Scandinavia" and explain on the editathon page that we're also including Finland. (Btw, I've purposely avoided repeating "women" in the headings.)

We'll also be continuing our increasingly successful #1day1woman initiative. And I suggest our invitation should include preliminary news of November's World Women Contest.

I await comments/agreement from Rosiestep, Victuallers, Megalibrarygirl, SusunW, Dr. Blofeld and all others who regularly look at this page. We can then start to put together the editathon pages.--Ipigott (talk) 07:40, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

I think restricting the disability-related editing to only "activists and educators" is too narrow. There are many women with a variety of connections to disability,who get little to no attention, probably because they are not activists or otherwise fit in a neat attractive box. It would be rather ironic if WiR ends up falling for the supercrip model by giving attention to only "glamourous" disabled people. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:20, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Maybe we just call it Women and disability? That way it remains broad and encompasses any woman with a disability or who works in disability rights. Nordic is great, Ipigott. SusunW (talk) 13:43, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
This works for me. If you really don't want to have "Women" in the subject header, maybe Disability Rights, History, Culture would work too.Penny Richards (talk) 14:05, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
I like "Women and disability." That's a broad scope. Let me know when we have it firmed up, Ipigott, I'll make the pages. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:43, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
@Dodger67, Dr. Blofeld, Ipigott, Megalibrarygirl, Penny Richards, SusunW, and Victuallers: Yes, Nordic; not Scandinavia. Is "disability" ok vs. "other-abled"? --Rosiestep (talk) 16:35, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Please do NOT use awkward euphemisms like other-abled, differently-abled, height-impaired, etc. Disability and disabled are not insults and are preferred unless a particular individual asks otherwise. Here's a style guide from WP:Disability -- I'd quibble with this or that detail, but it's a starting place. Penny Richards (talk) 16:42, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
I agree with Penny Richards. Following the KISS principle (no offense meant) it becomes cumbersome and awkward to replace disability, unless a particular biographical subject prefers a specific term be used in reference to them. SusunW (talk) 17:05, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
@Penny Richards and SusunW: Agree. Thank you for affirming. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:23, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
  • On the basis of the above:
  1. Women and disability
  2. Healthcare
  3. Geofocus: the Nordic countries

Plus a word in the invitation on #1day1woman and something on the November contest. Megalibrarygirl: Can you prepare rough drafts of the editathon pages? Then I'll try to give you a hand with the rest.--Ipigott (talk) 17:42, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Will do, Ipigott! I'll try to knock them out today.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:12, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
I'll look at them, too. Also, if you want to walk through MassMessaging, Megalibrarygirl, just let me know.Ā :) --Rosiestep (talk) 22:10, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi Rosiestep! I think I can do it this time, but when should I send them out? Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:33, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi Megalibrarygirl, Commonly, Ipigott and I review the invite after someone creates it here, and we add this or that to it. Then we can comment back on this page that it's good to go.Ā :) --Rosiestep (talk) 23:45, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

I was actually thinking of proposing a Nordic contest sometime in the new year, a general one but which could also benefit women but I don't mind. I think I'd prefer to do "cold" regions in December though rather than October, every year I always do that in December or January LOL.ā™¦ Dr. Blofeld 09:12, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld: I take it you agree to a preliminary announcement about the the World Women Contest in our invitation for October. I thought this would be a good opportunity for our participants to contribute additional red links and generally spread the news so that everyone can start contributing from the very beginning of November. As for focus on Nordic women, we have already seen a pretty good response to your Nordic Challenge where we have now reached over 67% of the objective. Providing focus through Women in Red might bring us close to the 1,000 mark.--Ipigott (talk) 09:46, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

That would be great Ipigott, I'll ask Ser Amantio to send out some invitations at the beginning of next to people who participaye ion the challenges too.ā™¦ Dr. Blofeld 11:11, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Would it be worthwhile to create Wikidata lists for Greenland, Faroe Islands, and ƅland Islands as they are Associated territories of the Nordic countries? --Rosiestep (talk) 11:54, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Megalibrarygirl - If you'd like me to help with creating the Oct invite, just let me know as I have some time tomorrow.Ā :) --Rosiestep (talk) 01:54, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Rosiestep Megalibrarygirl: Thanks, Sue, for making a start on the editathon pages. I've checked them through and added templates, etc. I've also prepared the October invitation. Unless Rosie wants to make any changes, I think you could send it out now by mass messaging. I'll send out copies to any additional WikiProjects and editors. I'll also adapt the recruitment invitation so that we can make a start on Bobo's updated August list.--Ipigott (talk) 11:01, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, Ipigott and Megalibrarygirl for all the prep work on invites and meetup pages. I added clickable buttons. --Rosiestep (talk) 11:40, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Just noticed there's a "Personality rights warning" on one of the images; I will change that out. --Rosiestep (talk) 11:44, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. I noticed that too but it has CC 4.0 on the Wikipedia entry. But if you can change it, that's fine. I've also created a Wikidata list on the Faroe Islands but not on ƅland as they are all Finns. Also updated the Bobo recruitment invitation.--Ipigott (talk) 11:49, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Ipigott, thanks for the additional redlist. I changed the invite img as I'm ultrasensitive about these having been taken to AN/I a year or two ago in this regard. Megalibrarygirl, can you please review the invite, too? Extra set of eyes is always helpful. Otherwise, it seems good to go for MassMessaging. --Rosiestep (talk) 12:08, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
@Ipigott and Rosiestep: thank you for helping with the images and the invite. Everything looks great! I'll go ahead and mass message.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:51, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
How did "Women and Disability" become "Celebrating Women and Disability"? Some of the people we may write about won't be heroines by a long stretch (the history of disability includes some ugly stuff), and the title smacks of inspiration porn, especially next to other editathons without that kind of title. I would have objected if I saw that title proposed ahead of time. Can it still be changed? Penny Richards (talk) 22:29, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
@Penny Richards: Absolutely, yes; anyone can modify the meetup pages. In the meantime, I've removed the word. Thanks for noticing it and speaking up. Also see my explanatory note on the WiR talkpage, including the more hands and the more eyes we can get on meetup pages and the monthly invite, the better. --Rosiestep (talk) 00:51, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, I'm glad it wasn't a problem to change. I've already started inviting folks to join in--maybe I can round up some participants from disability studies and disability history.-Penny Richards (talk) 05:11, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

November 2017

The World Contest

I'm going to put in a grant request soon which will include funding for this contest. I think the women contest will need $10,000 to allow 195 prizes for each country and for a few occupations. I think October would be ideal but possibly could be November and compliment Asian month at the same time. We can see what gets produced in one contest, review what worked and what didn't and then go from there. I think it'll give wikipedia a boost of over a thousand articles on women for every country of the world. As with the Africa Destubathon, the mechanism would work to make people produce more content to win the prize for the given country. ā™¦ Dr. Blofeld 12:53, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

I like this a lot, especially that the funds can be used to improve our sourcing at WikiLibrary. Dr. Blofeld do you have any idea whether prize $ could be used facilitate the premium upgrade for newspapers.com, or for something like the NY Ttimes archives or the AllAfrica archives which has recently become subscription only? SusunW (talk) 15:40, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
@SusunW and Dr. Blofeld: I thought I heard previously that prize $ can't be shifted in this way, but adding @Ocaasi (WMF) and Ocaasi to the convo. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:57, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
Yes it can, because I did it with the Destubathon, the prize fund would be for Amazon vouchers or/and subscriptions. I would be given the grant funds and at the end of the contest people can opt for Amazon vouchers or subscriptions. It would be the responsibility of the contestant to buy their own subscriptions though, I would just send the money by paypal. If somebody won say Ā£150, it would be quite acceptable to give them Ā£80 for a British Library subscription for instance and then the remaining Ā£70 in Amazon vouchers. Either way the prize fund would be used to further invest in content. If some of the WikiLibrary people think a set of subscriptions which are desired by a lot of people is preferrable we could arrange something like that to give out to contestants. But keep in mind the prizes on average will be about $50, so some people might have to win for a few countries to get enough to pay for a subscription.ā™¦ Dr. Blofeld 16:07, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
Another thing, note that the contest design isn't set in stone yet. I want the input of many of the women editors here too and to stage something which is going to produce maximum results and appease the most people and their interests. If there is more support for paid subscriptions, I'm sure we could plan something in coordination with the WikiLibrary. I think my past experience has shown though that you need an incentive to get people working on different countries, so allocated to all 195 countries I think would produce better and more even results. I'm going to need a bot designed too to help check article lengths and sourcing which will have to be arranged as I can't run single handedly at the level I did with the Destubathon!ā™¦ Dr. Blofeld 16:23, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
Dr. Blofeld Just looked at the contest page and while it's still in draft form, it's pretty and I like it.Ā :) Also, I didn't realize the subscriptions could be individual vs. through WikiLibrary, which is why I pinged Jake. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:41, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Miyagawa opted for a British Library subscription instead of all Amazon vouchers as part of the Destubathon. A possibility is that we publicize the contest months in advance and ask people to sign up who are interested in having certain paid subscriptions currently unavailable for free through WL. Or people make suggestions of the kind of subscriptions they want and we work something out. It doesn't necessarily have to be for every country, you could split the funds by region/occupation and give larger prizes than $50. We'll see, I think $10,000 will be ideal though considering the scale. A start might be to draw up a list of paid subscription resources currently unavailable which would benefit women content and the current prices.ā™¦ Dr. Blofeld 17:50, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

The reason I asked if it could be through the WikiLibrary is that as I live in Mexico, I have been unable to obtain library cards in the U.S. I assume the same would hold true for Britain. There seems to be a rule that one must live in the place and couldn't possibly want to access their resources from somewhere else. I find it odd, as it is a paid subscription, so why does where you live have anything to do with it? Copyright, is my only guess. SusunW (talk) 18:28, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
I love this contest. While Wikipedia Library has chosen to not set a precedent of paying for some sources but not others, I see no problem with giving individuals subscription access as a prize. Keep in mind that many providers do not offer individual subscriptions, only per-article purchases or institutional licenses (e.g. ScienceDirect, EBSCO), and others like HighBeam or JSTOR are in the $200 range annually. However Dr. Blofeld's suggestions of NY Times or Newspapers.com are great ones (and yes, we're still trying to increase our access to both!). If editors want sources, give them sources! Cheers, Jake Ocaasi (WMF) (talk) 23:55, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Jake. Yes, we'll have to work out what NYT and Newspapers.com etc ones cost. It's possible we could order a batch of NYT ones. If we bought a load of subscriptions from them they might become less hostileĀ :-) Prizes in the $200 range like Highbeam and JSTOR aren't out of the question if we can get $10,000, perhaps you could have a few prizes like that for doing the most articles of a given occupation, we'll see. If you consider that the African Destubathon produced this at the bottom, this one has the potential to see more produced. The contest could focus purely on new articles, or include both new and destubs.ā™¦ Dr. Blofeld 11:02, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Looks good to meĀ ! Would require a bit of anticipation to "increase" lists of red links for african women. Time to anticipate to identify "special prizes" as wellĀ ;) Anthere (talk)
  • Dr. Blofeld: I have always thought the "contest" approach has great potential. I think a strong basis for acceptance here is the emphasis on covering women in countries around the world, especially those in which they are under-represented on the EN-wiki. Perhaps it would be useful to seek support from relevant chapters and WikiProjects in Africa and Asia. Maybe there could also be targeted efforts at cross-translation between English and languages such as Arabic, French, Hindi, Korean, Mandarin, Urdu and Swahili. I would be happy to assist if this approach is considered useful. We certainly need to support any new initiative which will revive Women in Red at a time when the number of new articles is beginning to lag.--Ipigott (talk) 13:33, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

This is definitely being run in November now!ā™¦ Dr. Blofeld 09:18, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

I don't think anyone has created {{WIR-61}}. @Dr. Blofeld, Megalibrarygirl, SusunW, and Ipigott: Do we want editors to tag the articles created as part of the contest with this talkpage tag? --Rosiestep (talk) 22:39, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
I think that we do. It's consistent with how we track our work. SusunW (talk) 22:45, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
I agree with SusunW on that, @Dr. Blofeld, Rosiestep, and Ipigott:.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:45, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
Ok, I created it. Dr. Blofeld, please mention it on the contest page so people know to include it on talkpages. Thanks. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:46, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Rosiestep: Now that WIR-60 is no longer active, should it not be used for the WiR contest rather than for WAM? Otherwise there will be a gap. I think tagging should be an option for those familiar with WiR but perhaps all participants should be encouraged to use it. I think by listing new articles in the prescribed lists, there will automatically be a contest category. I don't think we should make things too difficult for new participants. The category should be sufficient for identification but Dr. Blofeld can perhaps provide a word of explanation.--Ipigott (talk) 08:46, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Yes, I suppose World Contest should be moved from #61 to #60. I'll take care of it later today. Or Megalibrarygirl, if you'd like a lesson on how to delete pages, we could Google Hangout sometime today. The lesson would take 20 seconds... the steps are that simple. But if you've already figured out how to do deletes, or if you're busy with other things, no worries! --Rosiestep (talk) 15:53, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
@Rosiestep: I'd love to go over it with you. What's a good time? Afternoon works for me if you want to email me an invite to a hangout. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:45, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi @Megalibrarygirl: - I just sent you an Invite for 2:30PM today California time. Please make sure it converted ok to El Paso time.Ā :) --Rosiestep (talk) 19:24, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
@Rosiestep: got it! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:15, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Rosiestep, Megalibrarygirl, Dr. Blofeld: I don't want to cause any unnecessary additional work on the contest page but until now, all our WiR editathon pages have included basic information about WiR, including guidelines on how to draft article talk pages with the WiR template, etc. Maybe it will over-complicate the contest page to include such details but you might at least like to give the matter some consideration. After all, in addition to encouraging the creation of more articles, the contest offers huge recruitment potential for WiR. Alternatively, we could edit the talk pages ourselves and/or alert all participants by email later.--Ipigott (talk) 07:43, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

I don't want to pester participants and pressure them to join WIT or patronize editors on how to edit women bios but I agree that a small section at the top of the contest inviting people to join and contribute long term would be a good idea as I do hope this will be the start of many WIR contests.ā™¦ Dr. Blofeld 08:06, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Rosiestep: Perhaps you could take care of this? I think it should be as short and simple as possible so as not to upset interest in the contest.--Ipigott (talk) 08:13, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
Ipigott: I was rushing to get the Nov Invite and Template pages created, and MassMessage done by yesterday as now, I'm getting ready to leave for Berlin so I won't be able to work on this task with you. Sorry. --Rosiestep (talk) 03:35, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Rosiestep: I'm sorry the invitation and template pages took up so much of your time. I would be happy to take care of them again in the future. Just let me know when the pressure is too great. As I seem to be the only one concerned about promoting WiR on the contest page, let's just leave it as it is. If those familiar with the project want to add the WIR-60 tag their talk pages, they are of course free to do so but there's really no need to complicate things for newcomers. Have fun in Berlin.--Ipigott (talk) 07:06, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Other possibilities for November

Pass on Scientists

Scientists in conjunction with international wiki science photography contest... More details to come, after which we can decide if we want to participate or not. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:42, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

@Alafarge, Megalibrarygirl, MurielMary, SL93, and SusunW: I haven't heard anything more about the "wiki science photography contest" so what do you think if we drop this from our November offerings and concentrate on The World Contest? (cc: Dr. Blofeld) --Rosiestep (talk) 23:43, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
I'm thinking with Asia month and the world contest we will have our hands full so to speak. SusunW (talk) 23:45, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Makes sense to me. Alafarge (talk) 19:05, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Ok. I crossed out my initial suggestion, and I removed the header so it's clear we're taking a pass on scientists and the international wiki science photography contest. --Rosiestep (talk) 00:57, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
Pass on Wiki Asia Month

*Hi @AddisWang and SuperHamster - Do you have any info/links for us regarding WAM2017 to help us with planning? --Rosiestep (talk) 19:19, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

  • Striking out my older post IAW group consensus. One contest at a time is enough and we've been committed to The Women in Red World Contest for months. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:49, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
Continue #1day1woman

@Megalibrarygirl, SusunW, Ipigott, and Dr. Blofeld: I've been thinking about whether it makes sense to continue with #1day1woman in November. I'm thinking it should continue as some people won't want to participate in the World Contest or WAM, or their article might not meet the qualifications but it's still a nice article, etc. If we do continue with #1day1woman, maybe we could "donate" the articles to the World Contest at the end of the month, not towards prizes, but for solidarity? Thoughts? --Rosiestep (talk) 19:28, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

I think it should continue, but am not sure if we donate the articles or not. We've had some people get pretty heated about inclusion, which baffles me, but there it is. SusunW (talk) 19:51, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Ok; that makes sense. We'll continue with #1day1woman. But no article "donation" at the end of the month.
I'm not entirely clear on how 'donation' of pages to the contest would work, but I wonder if we could do it on a volunteer basis? I simply can't write 1 page a day, but I like the idea of any pages that I do manage for WiR (at any time) being part of a WiR-collective one-a-day output. I also understand this might not be practical because falling into the 'one more thing to manage' time sink. Alafarge (talk) 18:06, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
Yes, volunteer basis sounds good. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:40, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Firming up on November

@Alafarge, Dr. Blofeld, Ipigott, Megalibrarygirl, MurielMary, Penny Richards, SL93, SusunW, and Victuallers: Please take a look at these drafts. It's real easy to make mistakes on them, so appreciate any extra hands to improve them. Also, I'd be glad to do the MassMessage task once they are good to go. Thanks! --Rosiestep (talk) 22:40, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

They look fine to me, Rosiestep, but I'm no expert.Ā ;) SusunW (talk) 22:50, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
They look good to me, too, Rosiestep! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:35, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Sorry I coming to this so late. From the above, I understand the priorities for November have now been established. I must say, though, I think it must be confusing for our participants to have to choose between two competitions, especially as all the Asian countries in the World Women Contest are also covered in the Asian Month contest. Would it be useful to comment on this, at least on the editathon pages? There are of course slightly differing criteria for the two contests, including the minimal acceptable length of the articles. I know that it is late in the day, but an alternative might simply have been to arrange for mutual support between the two contests on the Asian countries. I have no idea whether any consideration has been given to this possibility but it certainly looks to me as if collaboration would provide added impetus and could facilitate user participation. Could new articles on Asia not be automatically exchanged between the two? From the editathon pages, it rather looks as if once you submit an article to one of the contests, you might not be able to resubmit it for the other. Is that in fact intended to be the case? Finally, I think WiR needs to send out separate invitations on the World Women Contest alone to all the country-based WikiProjects and to many of the other active WikiProjects which are not included on our mass-mailing list. The Asian Month contest is usually well advertised but we should also decide whether like last year we are also going to publicize it by sending out invitations to those on our international list. (In this connection, I see that Women in Red on the Asian Month page is not correctly linked. I could not find the English wiki anywhere on the list. Perhap WiR is supposed to represent the English Wikipedia but that is not clear.) I think these considerations might be of particular interest to Rosiestep, Dr. Blofeld, AddisWang.--Ipigott (talk) 09:09, 17 October 2017 (UTC) Also, cc to Fantasticfears.--Ipigott (talk) 09:11, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
Looks fine. 1 day entries can also be put on the main list of the contest but if it's PD material or not the right length then it can't be entered into the contest itself to win prizes of course.ā™¦ Dr. Blofeld 11:21, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
Ian, you bring up valid points. I was perplexed about how to handle WAM as the instructions on the WAM page aren't clear to me. My preference would have been that we handle WAM 2017 the same way as WAM 2016, e.g. that there were clickable buttons on the WiR event page which take you directly to WAM and that you enter your articles there vs. on the WiR page. So a thought I have is clickable buttons on the #1day1woman page which take you to (a) WAM's mainpage (instead of the #60 WiR WAM page), and (b) World Contest. What do folks think about this? @Alafarge, Dr. Blofeld, Ipigott, Megalibrarygirl, MurielMary, Penny Richards, SL93, SusunW, and Victuallers: --Rosiestep (talk) 16:13, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
I think the clickable buttons is a good idea.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:51, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
The technology is beyond me, keep it as simple as possible so I can add my articles. If it is too difficult, I won't add them, as the focus for me is on the writing. SusunW (talk) 16:56, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
TBH I am lost on the two competitions and how they differ. And also why there is a big 0% bar on the screen of one of them - what is that going to measure? Could someone please add some more information about that to the page with the bar, thank you. MurielMary (talk) 09:22, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
MurielMary: The 0% bar on the World Women Contest is supposed to move up once articles are created but I don't think anyone yet knows what the target is. I sympathize with you not understanding the difference between the two contests. I think it would make things much more straightforward if we just kept to the WiR World Women Contest and left Asian Month take care of itself. Is that a possibility Rosie?--Ipigott (talk) 20:36, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
@Alafarge, Dr. Blofeld, Ipigott, Megalibrarygirl, MurielMary, Penny Richards, SL93, SusunW, and Victuallers: - I agree; one contest is enough for November. So I removed Women in Red from the Wiki Asia Month (WAM) contest mainpage; and I'll take care of the other details (the WiR page, etc.) shortly. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:44, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
@Alafarge, Dr. Blofeld, Ipigott, Megalibrarygirl, MurielMary, Penny Richards, SL93, SusunW, and Victuallers: I've dropped WAM from the offerings and made all the changes involved with that. Please take another look at this: November invite and November recruitment. Thank you. --Rosiestep (talk) 22:20, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
@Rosiestep: I think it looks good.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:52, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Why can't Asian month agree to be a part of the contest and contribute to the Asian section? Part of the idea was to support their effort. At least all entries submitted for Asia month should register on the main achievement s list with the rest of the articles.ā™¦ Dr. Blofeld 07:15, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

  • Thanks Rosiestep for straightening things out. I think this will make things much easier for our participants. We can always include an announcement on World Asian Month on our main page at the beginning of November but monitoring progress on two contests at once would have been extremely demanding. Together with Dr. Blofeld, we should perhaps put together an even simpler invitation to the WiR World Women Contest to be sent out to WikiProjects and key players in the various countries and regions. An easy way to do it would be to remove the #1day1woman line but it might be useful to add something about prizes and the fact it is open to all. I can send it out once it's ready. I agree it would help if WAM could be persuaded to support our contest.--Ipigott (talk) 07:27, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks very much Rosiestep I think that having the one contest in November is much more focused and will produce better results than spreading contributions across two. When it's decided what that big bar is measuring can we have something written on it! It's confusing still because the page also talks about 17% of WP articles being women and aiming to get that number to 20% so I thought the bar was going to measure progress from 17% to 20% but then I thought that probably isn't possible in real time so yeah clarification please would be great! MurielMary (talk) 10:36, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Dr. Blofeld - Drawing your attention to this conversation. Will the bar show percentage progress towards a target amount of articles (e.g. 10,000) contributed to this contest during the month of November? Hoping you can shed some light here, and also on the contest FAQ page as others are probably wondering the same thing. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:43, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
I'll add it. Yes, like the Destubathon when we had a target and ended up with 102%. We could aim for 3000 but I think it's optimistic, the destubathon was very productive and produce 2041 articles in 6 weeks. I may still make it 1.5 kb for the women contest. I think 2000 and see how it goes.ā™¦ Dr. Blofeld 16:35, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Dr. Blofeld: 2,000 isn't very ambitious. We quite often hit that in an average month without a contest. How about 5,000? We can then go out and strongly encourage participation. If we don't make it during the contest, we can try to continue hors concours for the rest of the year.--Ipigott (talk) 19:59, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Megalibrarygirl and I went over how to delete pages, etc., and new pages were created to keep the numbering in sequence. So one more time... @Alafarge, Dr. Blofeld, Ipigott, MurielMary, Penny Richards, SL93, SusunW, and Victuallers:... please take a look at these drafts.

If you agree that they are good to go, then Megalibrarygirl or I can do the MassMessaging asap. --Rosiestep (talk) 22:17, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Rosiestep template 60 has "World Contest" edit-a-thon as a red link, i.e. it doesn't point to the page of the sign up sheet, I'm guessing. SusunW (talk) 22:22, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
SusunW, Can't sort out which template has the redlink. Help? --Rosiestep (talk) 22:29, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
@Rosiestep: {{WIR-60}} SusunW (talk) 22:39, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
@SusunW:, sorry for the delay in responding, but I didn't get the notification, and clueless why not. I looked at the template and at the link to the contest, and I don't see a redlink. @Megalibrarygirl, Ipigott, and Victuallers:, can you take a look, too? We really do need to get this sorted out and get the MassMessage out soon. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:22, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
@Rosiestep: It's fixed now. No idea why it was red before, but it isn't now. SusunW (talk) 14:32, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
@SusunW: - yay! And btw, I didn't get the notification again but saw that you had replied as this page is watchlisted. Maybe it's the "rto"? I wonder if anyone else has had trouble with that? @Megalibrarygirl: - do you want to MassMessage, or I can as I do have time. I just don't want to step on toes if it's something you enjoy doing. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:42, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
@Rosiestep: I've sent them out!Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:19, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Rosiestep, Megalibrarygirl, SusunW: I've discovered that if you make an error in your pinging address, post the message and then correct the ping later, the person concerned is not informed. You have to send a new message with the correct ping for them to be alerted. This and the main WiR page have become so busy lately that the only reliable way to find out what's going on is to look at the page history. I'm glad to see the invitations are now being sent our by mass messaging. I'll prepare a simpler invitation to the contest for potentially interested WikiProjects and other editors and send it out within the next couple of days.--Ipigott (talk) 15:58, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
@Megalibrarygirl: yay! It looks great! @Dr. Blofeld: I'm guessing a lot of other editors will sign up after seeing this! @Ipigott: that would be very helpful; thanks. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:39, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Dr. Blofeld: I've created an invitation for wider distribution here. Unless you have any comments, I'll start sending it out later today.--Ipigott (talk) 11:54, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
  • It feels ok to me that we share editathon in WAM with you. Though we are quite busy in organizing the event, it's quite hard to follow up in co-organizing.--Fantasticfears (talk) 07:57, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

December 2017

Go Local

How about we do a "Go Local" theme? Since many people go home for the holidays they may have access to local resources at libraries, etc. This might help turn up some interesting and neglected women in history. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:02, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

I like this Megalibrarygirl. Maybe for December? --Rosiestep (talk) 13:48, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Yes, Rosiestep, that's even better since a lot of college kids would be at home as well! :D Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:43, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
I think we're coming up with awesome ideas for our events. No one can say Women in Red is boring.Ā :) Thanks for the idea, Megalibrarygirl. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:44, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
I like this too. We could encourage photos as part of this, i.e. buildings, public sculptures, monuments, stained-glass windows by womenā€” for women architects, especially in the 19th and early 20th centuries, entries are often lacking any such pix. For example, Ida McCain, Edith Northman, Sarah W. Whitman. Alafarge (talk) 16:07, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
I love that idea Alafarge whenever we do architects, I must admit that one of my steps in evaluating whether to write is if I can find samples of their works. Artists too. If I have to use a "fair use" photo, I try to find one that shows them creating a piece of art. Photographs of their works make one see them in a more precise light, IMO. SusunW (talk) 16:47, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
SusunW So true. Alafarge (talk) 18:44, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Seasonal celebrations

The local idea looks good. It will provide an opportunity for me to cover more on my local interests in Denmark and Luxembourg. I was also wondering whether there would be any interest in addressing something along the lines of Women in Christmas Art and Literature. It could cover women authors, screen writers, composers, singers, etc., not forgetting all those children's stories which are often so creatively illustrated by women too. We could also write articles on the works themselves. It should be a bit more relaxing than working on the November contests.--Ipigott (talk) 11:19, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

I've just realized that a fair amount of consensus has been reached on first ladies. I'm prepared to go along with that too but we could always put it off until January. I've noticed that a fair number of articles have been written on first ladies and the wives of political leaders from the developing countries during the November contest. One of the objectives of the first ladies focus could be to try to create new articles on those who are currently included in redirects to their husband's biographies.--Ipigott (talk) 11:29, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Ipigott We usually have 2 topics and one Geofocus. If our Geofocus is local then with first ladies we have 2 instead of 3, so I don't see why we couldn't add another. The only question I have is that there is a large part of the world that does not take part in Christmas festivities, so would it be more encompassing to be called Women of Winter Festivals or something of the sort? SusunW (talk) 15:34, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
@Ipigott and SusunW: How about Winter Festivals Women and their Works, which would add non-Christian element. It would also add music to art and literature, which are already mentioned. For example, there are a lot of albums, hymns, etc. created for this time of year, and WikiProject Music or it's sister/daughter projects might be able to assist. Pinging our librarian, Megalibrarygirl, who may have some thoughts on how we'd develop redlists as that's a bit fuzzy for me. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:06, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
SusunW, Rosiestep: Many, many countries throughout the world celebrate Christmas either for religious or purely commercial reasons. I'm afraid I'm not aware of literature in connection with women of other winter festivals. But we could perhaps extend it to "Christmas and the New Year". That would also cover all the countries with high December temperatures. I had in fact mentioned composers and singer to cover the music. If there are problems with red lists I could try to help out.--Ipigott (talk) 16:12, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
The thing for me is that women have often been excluded. I don't think the message WiR ever gives out is that we exclude any women for any reason. IMO, our topics always should be broad enough to include women from all cultures. Just because we may not know of someone in a category, doesn't mean they don't exist. Judith and Deborah, for example, are highly associated with Hanukkah and I am sure that there are images of them that have been created by women. Surely there are women artists who have recorded music or painted images of Kwanzaa, etc. But I bow to consensus. SusunW (talk) 17:01, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Support. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:17, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
@Ipigott, Rosiestep, and SusunW: I think I can make a Winter Festival Women and their Works list, for sure. The list will probably be heavy on literature, since there's a lot of Christmas books I can think of right now, but I'm sure I can go broader in scope. Let me work on it this weekend.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:10, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
@Ipigott, Rosiestep, and SusunW: I started a list Winter women and their works and so far have included books and ice artists.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:11, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
@Rosiestep, SusunW, and Megalibrarygirl: OK, I see my suggestion was considered to be too narrow and I certainly agree with Susun that WiR should have wide appeal. I suggested Christmas as, like it or not, it has become global. Furthermore, I though it would have a good chance of attracting wide participation as most of us are aware of the cultural appeal of Christmas too. For me, winter festivals is much narrower. "Women in winter festivals" has associations with fashion shows, cabarets and even Las Vegas but certainly not with Christmas. But I probably belong to the wrong generation. Let's just see how it works out. In any case, thanks to Megalibrarygirl's evolving list, I can see I am about to be educated into a range of new ideas and works. On the other hand, many of the topics I had intended to cover have now been excluded as they have nothing to do with winter. But I'll always be able to add them to #1day1woman.--Ipigott (talk) 09:29, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
@Ipigott: The list I made, I started with literature, and there's quite a bit of women's Christmas works that haven't been written about. Do you have any songs/albums you'd like to add? I'm less familiar with musical works.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:59, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Megalibrarygirl: I was actually thinking of religious works which are probably no longer suitable as Christ was not born in winter and strictly speaking the true Christmas is not a winter festival. Most of the musical compositions, hymns, choir performances, etc., are based on Bible stories. But I'll see what I can do when I have time. You've already made a good start.--Ipigott (talk) 09:05, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
Ipigott oh! I understand now.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 14:51, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
I don't understand. Why is that you cannot include Christmas songs and art if you want? Maybe it should be called Women of the Holiday Season, then it doesn't point to the global north? Sorry, I am still tied up with construction, the final push is today, so hopefully that will end soon and I'm trying to write my articles for the Caribbean. SusunW (talk) 15:03, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 

@Rosiestep, SusunW, and Megalibrarygirl: I've been thinking about all this in the light of the above discussion, especially as Rosie suggested covering Christmas music, hymns, etc. How about we call it "Seasonal celebrations"? If we have it in December it should be self-explanatory and would cover a wide range of celebrations which have nothing specifically to do with winter. It would cater not only for our traditional Christmas but also for those more interested in Pancha Ganapati, Lohri, Bodhi Day, Hanukkah, New Year/Hogmanay, Orthodox Christmas and could even extend to Thanksgiving. All this could be explained on the editathon page.--Ipigott (talk) 08:31, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

I like that idea Ian SusunW (talk) 13:16, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Me, too. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:27, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Perfect! @Ipigott, SusunW, and Rosiestep:, should I keep updating the Winter women and their works list? I can rename it to "Seasonal celebrations" and I'll add the other holidays, too. I already have some Hanukkah, Kwanzaa and Solstice works, both children's lit, YA and adult. Anyone can add songs, etc.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:41, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Yep! Just rename it and then anyone can add stuffĀ ;) Thank you Sue, you totally ROCK! SusunW (talk) 17:45, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
@Ipigott, Megalibrarygirl, and SusunW:, For clarification, will it be "Women of Seasonal Celebrations"? --Rosiestep (talk) 18:11, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
@Ipigott, Rosiestep, and SusunW: I renamed it to Seasonal celebrations Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Seasonal celebrations. Please add!Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:46, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Rosiestep: I don't think we need to specify "Women of Seasonal Celebrations", for me "Seasonal celebrations" is enough.--Ipigott (talk) 19:27, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
That's what I changed the subheader above to read so looks like we're all on the same page. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:37, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

First Ladies/Spouses of national leaders

@Rosiestep and Megalibrarygirl: I am wondering if at some point we should do First Ladies. I ran across this list First Lady of Guatemala and seeing a sea of red, I checked a few others ... First Lady of Colombia, First Lady of Ukraine. Bottom line, there are a bunch of them without articles. SusunW (talk) 20:46, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

@Rosiestep and SusunW: I like this idea. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:05, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
I like the idea too but can we brainstorm a different name? "First Lady" is a very American term. In NZ and Australia for example the wife of the head of state isn't called the first lady. Just the Prime Minister's wife. Hmmm. "Wives of heads of state"? Or "partners or spouses of heads of state"?? For example, Cherie Blair is listed in the category "Spouses of the Prime Minister of the UK". MurielMary (talk) 23:05, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
MurielMary I'm not married to the nameĀ ;), it just seems like there are a lot of missing women in this area. In the US it is an actual job title, meaning the official hostess of the nation. In other places, there aren't specific duties for the job, and in those cases we have to be careful because we'll hear "notability is not inherited". I'm game to call it anything we can agree on calling it. It just seems to me that notability ought not to be hard to verify for such prominent figures. SusunW (talk) 23:42, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
Great, will see if anyone else has thoughts on the title, but I agree that it's a worthwhile area of focus. MurielMary (talk) 02:28, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

I like this focus a lot and actually have a personal connection to it as, every year since 2005, I've marched in a parade as FLOTUS Helen Taft. As for what to call our event, how about "spouses of national leaders"? --Rosiestep (talk) 04:30, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Yup, I'd vote for that! MurielMary (talk) 04:34, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
I'm down with that too. We may not even have to make a bunch of red lists if we just check to see what's already out there: First Lady of Iceland, First Lady of South Korea, First Lady of Brazil, First Lady of South Africa, First Lady of Mexico, First Ladies and Gentlemen of India, Spouse of the Prime Minister of Canada, Spouse of the Prime Minister of Australia, Spouse of the Prime Minister of New Zealand, Spouse of the Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia, List of spouses of Prime Ministers of Thailand, List of spouses of Prime Ministers of Japan, etc. My cursory search showed a lot of lists already. Now to when? Would it work with December or January? SusunW (talk) 05:54, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
@Rosiestep, Megalibrarygirl, and MurielMary: oops, I forgot to ping and I never seem to get notices from this page, *sigh* I think we need to reiterate that creators should not put she was the wife of/partner of X in the lede, (specifically on this topic), otherwise we will get a whole bunch of AfD and PROD notices. "She was the First Lady/Spouse of the PM/Primera Dama/etc. of ___ between ___ and ___ should suffice. Anyway, the big question is when do we do it? SusunW (talk) 16:27, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
@Rosiestep, SusunW, and MurielMary: I don't mind putting together a redlist. If nothing else, it helps to show the scope of the issue; in this case how many first ladies aren't represented on Wikipedia. Also, I can check if they're notable, since some of them only have inherited notability. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:03, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Sue, you totally rock! SusunW (talk) 18:10, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
@Rosiestep, SusunW, and MurielMary: Are we going with "Wives of heads of state?" I can call the redlist Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Wives of heads of state or some such.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:29, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Megalibrarygirl Rosie suggested "spouses of national leaders" SusunW (talk) 18:35, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

I'm editing on phone and can't search categories so easily, but I found one last night while on my laptop which seemed to correspond with the event title I suggested, but I'm up for something else, if you'd prefer. As for when, Dec sounds good to me; how about everyone else? Rosiestep (talk) 22:41, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

I'm being bold and putting it on for December. It can always be moved. {({shudders})} Cannot imagine editing on the phone. I hate my telephoneā€”Can't type on it, can't swipe the thing (apparently I am a ghost as electronic things just don't see me). I just want a stupid phone that I can use if ever I need to talk with someone. I type 120 wpm on a keyboard, on a phone, it's like 1 wpm. SusunW (talk) 23:00, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
I've rescued my laptop from grandchildren. *yay* Thanks for moving this one to December, SusunW! BTW, Megalibrarygirl, this is the category I found last night, Category:Spouses of national leaders. Maybe it'll be helpful for laying groundwork for Wikidata redlists? --Rosiestep (talk) 23:29, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
BTW, just for fun, I looked at List of heads of state of Afghanistan, and started clicking on the first few entries, and most have a wife/consort listed but they aren't redlinks/bluelinks. So there are probably similar lists which, if we dig deeper, we'll find more names. I'd be glad to do some of this research once we start a redlist(s) on this topic. --Rosiestep (talk) 23:35, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Yes. I found those Lists of type entries too. I am sure there are many of these. Some will definitely not meet our notability requirements, but I'm betting a bunch will. I don't know if we want to list them all out separately by name or just put the links to the whole lists under the country, but that little Guatemalan woman I did opened a can of wormsĀ ;) SusunW (talk) 23:42, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
@SusunW, Rosiestep, and MurielMary: I've started the list. I'm being pretty conservative adding to it, though. Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Spouses of national leaders. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:34, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Looks great, and I like the disclaimer at the top, very clear. MurielMary (talk) 20:03, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Yes! Totally agree with MurielMary. You nailed the disclaimer. I'll try to help add entries as I can, but am working hard on my goal to 1000 articles by the end of the year. Since I don't do stubs, I'm having to push myself a wee bit to get them finished.Ā ;) SusunW (talk) 21:57, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
@SusunW: just noticed this post... 1000 articles for the year?!?! Beyond amazing. Humbling. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:28, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
No, no Rosiestep, good lord, that would be virtually impossible the way I write them. Not stubs. 1000 articles since I started WP 3 years ago. That's almost 1 per day, which is all that I can muster LOL SusunW (talk) 15:32, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

I found this Las primeras damas de Costa Rica which is supposedly written by the top 3 scholars of the country, but cannot access it. [8] I really, really dislike hoarders of knowledge. Grrrrrrrrr SusunW (talk) 21:23, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Dang... Same problem, SusunW. I can't access it. --Rosiestep (talk) 22:19, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
It didn't even come up when I put in my zip code, so I picked one near SueĀ ;) SusunW (talk) 00:09, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
@Rosiestep, Megalibrarygirl, and MurielMary: Does anyone have an objection to putting an additional instruction in the header that says something like: "If you cannot verify independent notability with sufficient reliable sources, make sure the spouse is in her spouse's biography and write a brief, sourced description on the country list". Or something like that. Do we also think instructions should state to create a redirect? If so for her to the country list or husband? (I lean towards the list, but that is so that she gets the prominence rather than being lost in his bio.) SusunW (talk) 15:15, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
@SusunW, Megalibrarygirl, and MurielMary: yes, instructions are warranted for this event as we don't want these articles to be candidates for AfD. +1 to suggestion regarding redirect to the list rather than to the husband if there isn't enough material to write the article. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:33, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
@SusunW, Rosiestep, and MurielMary: yes I think it would be good to write the women who aren't independently notable into their husband's bios. That would be awesome. Clear instructions are going to be key on this editathon.Ā :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:22, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Ideas/Archive_3&oldid=1077710101"