Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red/Archive 141

Archive 135

←

Archive 139

Archive 140

Archive 141

Archive 142

Gabriela Zych - translation from Polish

Dear Friends.

I have translated my first article as a part of this project. It was in the list of Wikipedia articles in need of translation from Polish (the general list, not something specific to Women in Red) so I think it will be notable.

The link to the article is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kaworu1992/sandbox

If somebody could check my grammar and other stuff and edit the sandbox for me, I would be grateful ;-) After I will get a pass from a Native English speaker, then I will post it in the main Wikipedia, okay? ;-)

Best wishes -- Kaworu1992 (talk) 20:21, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

- Oh, one more thing! You have kinda different copyright than in Poland, right? Does that mean I could upload a photo of this lady to the English Wikipedia? Because that's one thing that is totally lacking in this article, I believe. --Kaworu1992 (talk) 21:18, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Kaworu1992: I worked carefully through your translation and was in the process of moving the draft to mainspace when I discovered there was already a stub on Gabriela Zych. I have therefore merged the translation into that article. Unless you can edit machine translations from Polish up to acceptable standards for the English Wikipedia, I don't think you should create any more articles in this way. And before you start work on your next biography, please make sure the article doesn't already exist in English. On the brighter side, we now have a much more detailed biography of Gabriela Zych.--Ipigott (talk) 16:15, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Dear Friend.

Yes, I am aware that there was an article about Gabriela Zych. However, the Polish version was more detailed, so I wanted to bring that to the English Wikipedia. Also, it was not a machine translation - I'm a native Polish speaker and I translated the article in the best way I could into English language. I am sorry if something was wrong with grammar or maybe vocabulary, but this is why I worked in sandbox and wanted an input of a native English speaker.

I am sorry, I am not sure if I understand all of your points.

Best wishes

-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 22:49, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Zofia Marchewka

Dear Friends.

I extended and improved the article about Zofia Marchewka. Since when I am asking about native English proofread of articles in my sandboxes (English is my second language), I only get "this article already exist" and nobody does the proofreading, I hope now somebody will work on the article's grammar and wording and nobody will misunderstand my intents.

Best wishes --Kaworu1992 (talk) 23:20, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

help with birth/death dates

Hello friends, Would someone be able to give me hand with some birth/death dates? I'm working on a stub for Draft:Della Aleksander (born Derick Alexander) who was a trans rights activist. This blog post has dates but I can't see where to confirm them? Would someone be able to help? [Warning Aleksander was also far right activist.] Many thanks Lajmmoore (talk) 17:27, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

• Lajmmoore not really finding much, but in family search (you'll need to register, but it's free) there is a Della Joan S Aleksander born 1 April 1923 died 2001. It is the only listing of that name spelled like that. Ancestry available through the WP library hits on the same person and says the death was registered in January 2001 in Lewisham, Greater London. I find nothing in the British Newspaper archive, newspapers.com, or newspaperarchive.com records for December 2000-January 2001 to confirm if this is your person, but maybe you have access to other sites on your side of the pond? SusunW (talk) 18:27, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

  Thank you so much @SusunW - this is great. I had no further luck than you though! Lajmmoore (talk) 17:13, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

  Lajmmoore Glad to help. SusunW (talk) 17:24, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Draft for review & suggestions Elizabeth Kathleen Turner

Hello, I have written an article draft for Elizabeth Kathleen Turner. I followed the guidelines in the primer... I think. I hope I did it correctly. I wrote my first articles last weekend and did not follow any guidelines (sorry I was a bit quick to jump in due to excitement about this project!), so I am hoping I have improved my processes this time.

I would love to have someone review it, and give me any suggestions on how to improve it, and/or help me get it published.

I have included a section at the bottom called 'The Elizabeth Turner Medal' which was named in her honour posthumously. I am thinking this whole section with the list of recipients might be be better placed on the Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne page, and then linked to from Turner's page. But I would love to know what people think about that?

Thank you,

AdaWoolf (talk) 06:28, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

@AdaWoolf My feeling is that the full list of medal awardees is probably undue detail, as it's an internal award within one hospital. The fact that the medal exists and is named for her is of course worth mentioning in her article and also in the hospital's article - and the reference could usefully be annotated with "includes full list of recipients", in both places. A redirect from Elizabeth Turner Medal could lead to the content about the award on her page, or perhaps better to a section on the award added to the article on the hospital, with a link to her, which would raise her prominence and de-orphan her article.

A tiny little general point: section headings don't use capitals except for the first letter and proper nouns, so it's "Early life" not "Early Life".

You've linked to a couple of disambiguation pages: Australian and Presbyterian Ladies' College. There is an easy way to avoid linking to disambiguation pages: if you go to "Preferences", "Gadgets", and look under "Appearance" you'll see "Display links to disambiguation pages in orange" towards the bottom of the section. Select that tickbox, and whenever you Preview a page you'll be able to see whether you've accidentally linked to a disambiguation page. It's a great little gadget! Whether or not you're using it, be sure to check that all your links go to the page you intended: it's all too easy to link a name, find it goes blue, and not realise that it's linked to a singer or tennis player instead of the nurse or politician you were looking for, as well as disambiguation pages. PamD 08:43, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @PamD, Thank you for your feedback.

I think you are right about the medal section. I will put a summary on the hospital website, maybe with a sentence about notable recipients and the two blue-linked people from the list. And then link it back to the page. I haven't made any redirect pages for the articles I have written yet. I will read up about about how to do it and make one for the medal. and fix my other articles.

Section headings capitalisation - good to know! I will fix.

And the disambiguation links - I absolutely missed them. Thanks for the gadget tip, that will help a lot. And yes, I should check all the links anyways!

I will make a few edits tomorrow to fix these things up. Thanks again for your assistance!

AdaWoolf (talk) 09:59, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Welcome @AdaWoolf - it's wonderful that you're editing! Warmest wishes Lajmmoore (talk) 11:08, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I tend to forget to be welcoming as well as nitpicking/informative! Yes, @AdaWoolf, thanks for this article, and I hope you enjoy your editing. Beware, it can be quite a time sink: I sit down to do one little thing, and suddenly it's beyond lunchtime and I've rescued an abandoned draft about a museum in Brussels. {That was yesteday's little diversion). PamD 12:24, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you @Lajmmoore it is lovely to be here!

And no worries @PamD, you got straight to the point and I love some good critical feedback :)

I have noticed the time sink. I think I have become a bit too obsessed. How can anyone go about living their normal lives when there are important articles that need editing?? AdaWoolf (talk) 20:17, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @AdaWoolf, I found a pretty decent interview of Dr. Turner in "The world of sick children", The Age July 14 1945, page 6 (here for those with WPL access) that could be used to fill in some more descriptions of her work. JoelleJay (talk) 16:37, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Oh cool, thank you @JoelleJay. I have looked it up in the trove archives, I will have a read now and add in some more detail.

Also, I didn't know WPL was a thing. I am looking forward to getting access to that!!

AdaWoolf (talk) 20:22, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello again! I have made some edits based on this helpful feedback. I have now moved it to the main space.

Elizabeth Kathleen Turner

I followed all the instructions in the primer, but I would love it if someone wanted to have a look and let me know if it all looks okay. I am still a tiny bit confused by how talk pages work, and what tag thingos I should add. And the content assessment thing is still a bit of a mystery to me. I am not meant to assess my own article or anything right? That is for the magical amazing administrator people to do?

Thanks again, AdaWoolf (talk) 06:30, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with the edits @PamD. I can't believe I missed another link! I could have sworn I checked Croydon.

AdaWoolf (talk) 07:52, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Help to reach DYK eligibility

Hello! I've just created Alda Milner-Barry, after coming across her in a biography I read on Emily Anderson. I think there's a good DYK hook for it along the lines of "Did you know Alda Milner-Barry, the older sister of WW2 Enigma codebreaker Stuart Milner-Barry, worked for British Military Intelligence during World War One?"

But I'm 200 characters short! Her brother named his daughter Alda after her, and this second Alda Milner-Barry was one of the first two women appointed as a clerk in the House of Commons but I don't know if that really fits. Any suggestions and advice very welcome! EEHalli (talk) 16:50, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

@EEHalli: I've added a little bit of wording - not 200 characters' worth, but it's a start. I have to leave shortly, but I'll try and take another look before I go and see if I can think of anything else to add. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 18:45, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

@EEHalli: I've added some too, and an infobox. We might be there now. Penny Richards (talk) 19:06, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

@EEHalli:, agree with what others are saying; I think it's okay now: Prose size (text only): 1607 B (261 words). --Rosiestep (talk) 20:24, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

I have added a Times death notice, which has further detail if needed. TSventon (talk) 20:41, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you all! I’ll submit a DYK in the morning. EEHalli (talk) 21:16, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

I've gone in and added two articles Milner-Barry published - it seems like her literary analysis in these articles is cited in quite a few other works, if more is needed for the article. ForsythiaJo (talk) 21:14, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! EEHalli (talk) 12:06, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you everyone who has contributed. I've just made my first DYK submission! EEHalli (talk) 12:06, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

@EEHalli: Congratulations! I have to say, I'm reminded a bit of that meme that occasionally makes the rounds, about writing for school versus writing otherwise. Where normally one would say, "I'm sorry, but I can't"...but when writing a paper with a minimum length, turning it into, "I apologize, but at this time I am unable to can".

Which is to say, there's always a way to add a few characters here or there if you're shameless enough... :-) --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 15:49, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

I've been trained over 20 years to write as concisely as possible so I find expanding text hard. On the other hand, I hope it means I write a sharp opening para! EEHalli (talk) 16:01, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

@EEHalli: Oh, I get it. I suppose I still preserve some of the habits of my wayward youth. Whether or not those habits are good I leave to others to decide... --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 16:07, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Mujeres Referentes

Hi! I'm not sure if this is the place to comment it, but some time ago I created the list Wikipedia:WikiProject Venezuela/Mujeres Referentes. It is a compendium of over three hundred Veezuelan women from different fields collected by media outlets El Pitazo, Runrunes and Tal Cual. I supposed it could be a nice supplement to Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by nationality/Venezuela, and a briefing of their biographies can be consulted in their main page: https://mujeresreferentes.com. Best wishes! NoonIcarus (talk) 20:19, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Women of Russia bloc redlist

Hi all. I've created a new redlist for the Women of Russia electoral bloc (Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Women of Russia bloc), which elected 24 women to the State Duma in the 1993 elections. The corresponding articles in Russian Wikipedia may serve as a good baseline. Curbon7 (talk) 01:46, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Is Katarzyna Kasia (polish journalist and philosopher) encyclopedic?

Dear Friends.

Katarzyna Kasia, Polish journalist and PHD of philosophy, just got an award for her journalism activity. I wonder is she is encyclopedic from point of view of English speaking people? Because she has a page on Polish WIkipedia [LINK: pl:Katarzyna Kasia] and I could translate it into English, but also I would like to not get the article later deleted, so I wanted to ask you first.

Best wishes -- Kaworu1992 (talk) 22:59, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

From looking over sources both on that other language article and from a Google search, I think there's enough coverage of her to meet notability standards here. I would say put the translated article together in a sandbox first and we can take a look at it then. We might need to beef it up with some more sources. If you could make the sources you use from the other article better formatted so it's easier to tell if they're from reliable news and television sources, that would help. Silverseren^C 23:53, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Dear Friend.

It seems to me that I do not completely understand. There is some kind of problems with sources, right? Can you explain to me what exactly is wrong and how I could fix it? ;-)

Best wishes

-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 02:20, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

It's just not entirely clear, especially with me not being familiar with Polish sources, on which sources are to actual news sites and which are just to random websites. The latter of which would be more unreliable. Also, some may be primary rather than secondary sources. What I like to do when I fill out references is wikilink them to the article on the news or organization site, if we have one. You can also cross-wiki link them to the Polish Wikipedia article instead, if one exists there. Such as for Press.pl, which then shows that it is an industry magazine and, thus, reliable. Silverseren^C 02:26, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Dear Friend.

I translated the article into English. I hope now it is more clear - I will try to fix the issues you have with it.

Please, read my version of the article here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kaworu1992/sandbox3

Actually, I have two problems/issues:

1 - do you wanna English translations of titles of her Polish books?

2 - some references are in red, could somebody help me with them?

If you have some input, please, say so :-)

Best wishes

-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 03:07, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

If you look at Template:Cite News, you can see there's a |trans-title= parameter, where you can add the English title in addition to having the Polish title in the regular title parameter. I'll see what I can do about the errors. Silverseren^C 03:10, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

I see you fixed the references for me - a thousand thanks :-)

Also: in which categories should we put this lady? I suppose you have different categories than Polish Wikipedia has, so I cannot just to a literal translation, right?

Best wishes

-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 03:19, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Right. Some might be similar, but not all. I'd suggest finding a similar English article to her's, another Polish woman philosopher, and just copy whatever categories at the bottom also apply. Silverseren^C 03:22, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Okay, I did some categories and I published the article in "main" Wikipedia. I hope everything is alright? ;-)

-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 03:47, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Ah, one issue. You should have used the Move button from your sandbox to move it to mainspace, since the way you did it, with just copying the text, disconnects it from the edit history of your sandbox. No worries though, I'll request a history merge. Silverseren^C 03:56, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Cross-posting regarding specific and actionable lack of coverage of women in sports

Hello, I didn't see any traction over ~3 days at the other WikiProject, so thought I'd mention that here. Thanks. Biosthmors (talk) 19:32, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Three WiR GAs today

For the first time I can remember, three articles created in connection with Women in Red have today been promoted to Good Article class. They are Marcela Pérez de Cuéllar about a UN first lady created by SusunW, Ninfa Huarachi, a Bolivian politician, created by Krisgabwoosh, and Abigail Larson, an American illustrator, created by KRKwrites. Congratulations to these three and to the other editors who have contributed to improving the articles.--Ipigott (talk) 12:32, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Wow that's cool. Congrats Krisgabwoosh and KRKwrites. Really cool that KRKwrites started this as a school assignment and the hive of WIR came together to offer help and advice. Really impressive to get Larson to GA status. SusunW (talk) 15:54, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you all again for your help! I really do appreciate it, and made sure to give the community a lot of credit in my assignment write-up! And congratulations to you @SusunW on your GA as well (and you too, @Krisgabwoosh).

I have a new name to add to the WiR redlist, but it should be blue soon as I'm hard at work on an article already (Draft:Chris Bearchell). Apparently I'm hooked on editing, which I don't think would've been the case if I hadn't been welcomed so enthusiastically by this community. Thanks everyone :) KRKwrites (talk) 17:04, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Glad to see it! -- asilvering (talk) 17:05, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Right on! It's so cool to see the contributions of both veteran and new editors come together like this. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 19:25, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

• I've done a bit to make all these three great contributions more findable, as in our current month's editathon - details in the "outcomes" section. Adding women to surname pages makes it easier for the reader who gets a passing reference to "[Surname]'s work", and also reminds the world that women exist and are notable, by raising the proportion in those surname lists. PamD 20:46, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Good articles/GAN Backlog Drives/March 2024

While we're talking about GAs, I'd just like to plug the backlog drive, since there are still hundreds of articles waiting for review, including many that have been in the queue for 180+ days! Come help some other WiR writers get their articles to GA too! -- asilvering (talk) 17:07, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Is being a female winemaker "defining"?

Comments please (and ideally sources) at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_March_18#Category:American_female_winemakers. Johnbod (talk) 01:34, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

New article Lorna Verdun Sisely - and a question

Hi All, I have created a page for Lorna Verdun Sisely. I would love to know if anyone has any suggestions? And it would be great if anyone wants to do a quick edit and check I have done all the things I need to do.

A question - I don't understand how small I need to make the non-free images. I read the page about sizing, but it was confusing, and the tool it linked to was written in Chinese. I thought maybe I should add the 'reduce size' tag, but I don't know where to put it. On the talk page? In the summary, or the licensing section? Or is this something the magic bots just automatically do anyway?

Thank you, AdaWoolf (talk) 01:37, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

AdaWoolf, the article looks good, I have tweaked a couple of details. I have added Template:Non-free reduce to the top of the image page and it should be resized automatically shortly. I doubt the exact location is crucial. TSventon (talk) 02:50, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Great, thank you @TSventon I appreaciate your help.

AdaWoolf (talk) 04:51, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

There is a bot (JJMC89 bot) that automatically tags non-free images that are too large with {{Non-free reduce}}, another bot (DatBot) that does the actual resizing, and then a third bot (DeltaQuadBot) which then rev-dels the overwritten original upload. The entire process takes about a day (besides the revision deletion, which takes the customary week) and happens automatically. You can see an example here. Curbon7 (talk) 05:37, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Ah, okay cool. So I can let the bots do their thing. Thank you for explaining!

AdaWoolf (talk) 06:43, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Check before you write

I've just had a look at both Ten Simple Rules and Primer, and neither of them starts with the first step along the lines of:

"Check carefully that there isn't an existing article in English Wikipedia on your subject. Check variant spellings or transliterations of her name, check married and birth surname if she used both, check any name you find in any source (eg stage name, pseudonym, code name), check her surname/family name on its own, etc. If you find a foreign-language wikipedia article, check on the "Other languages" link in case there's an English version you haven't found. There may be an article which uses a short form of her given name (Liz/Elizabeth), or a different number of given names, or a married surname... Even names appearing in our lists of red links can occasionally be found under another name. It can be disappointing to put effort into an article and find that it's an accidental duplication which can't be used."

It doesn't often happen, but it does occasionally, and it must be very disappointing for newbie editors to find that they've put a lot of effort into an unwanted duplicate article.

Should we include something on those lines, as a first step perhaps before even considering notability? PamD 21:39, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

I think so, yes! I caught one of these in NPP recently. It's a bummer. -- asilvering (talk) 21:59, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

I agree! Great addition. Thank you for spotting that omission PamD. SusunW (talk) 22:11, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

We had that as the "Tip of the month" for March, and agree the warning should be put into the steps and primers. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 23:12, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. Johnbod (talk) 00:30, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

• I've adapted the Ten Simple Rules.--Ipigott (talk) 09:30, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Can someone help me with Mirna El Helbawi?

Hi all

I've started an article for the journalist Mirna El Helbawi who has been coordinating providing esims to reconnect people in Gaza to the internet, my main concern is notability. I also created an article for her organisation Connecting Humanity.

Thanks very much

John Cummings (talk) 07:10, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

John Cummings: Looks to me you've done a pretty good job on these two.--Ipigott (talk) 17:13, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

New article: Helen Parsons Smith

One more red link down. Article is fairly robust, but any additions or input would be appreciated. Skyerise (talk) 14:23, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

I found the article quite interesting, Skyerise; thank you for creating it. I added WP:WPWW to its talkpage. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:13, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! She was a very interesting character. Skyerise (talk) 19:20, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

New article Peggy Crewe-Milnes

I just added this stub. I'm not sure if the title should be her formal name or the one she was commonly known as. Theroadislong (talk) 20:32, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Just wanted to add that I also found sources that refer to her (after her marriage) as Margaret or Peggy Primrose, so I've added those as redirects to the page. ForsythiaJo (talk) 21:25, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks for all your improvements. Theroadislong (talk) 21:26, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

It's VERY difficult to find red links that have sufficient sources, I've just checked about 20 (awards and actresses) and could find virtually no sources for any of them. I will have another look later. Theroadislong (talk) 21:55, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

It might be worth starting a separate topic and linking the lists you have been having problems with. Probably some lists are more user friendly than others. TSventon (talk) 01:11, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Created a new article: Chimalxochitl II

This is the second article I write for the project. Please let me know if you find any major issues with it. Also, I try to follow the guidelines when writing about women in history. TepeyacPilgrim (talk) 01:10, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi TepeyacPilgrim, that is an interesting article, my main concern is that the biographical content seems to be based on ancient codices, which Wikipedia would regard as primary sources, rather than the secondary sources which Wikipedia prefers, see WP:RSPRIMARY. I will ping SusunW, who is more experienced in writing biographies and has an interest in indigenous Americans. TSventon (talk) 19:54, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks TSventon, missed the note here. I am definitely not an expert on Aztec history, but a brief search shows that there are definitely mainstream sources available, most of which I cannot access. TepeyacPilgrim I note that your link to the Chimalpopoca Codex is a translation and interpretation prepared by Primo Feliciano Velázquez, so in fact, you are not interpreting the codex. You should add him as |translator-last=Velázqez |translator-first=Primo Feliciano |translator-link=Primo Feliciano Velázquez so that it does not give the appearance that you are relying on your own interpretation. The same should be done with any of the links that have authors or translators. I notice that your article does not specifically give information of her death. Alternate versions of her life occur here and here, giving the source as the Codex Vaticanus 3738. Don't know if you would be able to find that, but it might be worth exploring. I added a redirect for her name Shield Flower. SusunW (talk) 21:23, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Ok, but can I change it even though I already introduced the source. Like I said, I'm still learning about WIkipedia. TepeyacPilgrim (talk) 01:33, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Well, me personally I'm experienced in Mesoamerican history, even when I may not be so in Wikipedia. So what I can tell you about ancient codices and such and you can tell me about Wikipedia. First is I understand your concern with using primary sources, although what I did was to paraphrase when using primary sources in order to avoid original research. Second -- and this is a major problem not only in Wikipedia but also in Academia -- is that Ancient Mexican history hasn't truly being studied or has been scantily discussed... For instance, there are some horribly written Wikipedia articles without sources and factually (completely) wrong. This was the case with the Wikipedia article of Atotoztli I. This amongst other things was what prompted me to sign up as a Wikipedian. In fact if you name any Mesoamerican Wiki-article I can pin-point inaccuracies, unsourced factoids, and blatant confusions. That is why I had to rely in certain sentences on primary sources because there was no other way. Any obscure British princess is far more quoted or studied in secondary sources than entire empires from Ancient Mexico. As far fetched as that may sound, we wouldn't be discussing this if this wasn't the case. @SusunW mentions correctly that the written codex is translated, although I also read it in Classical Nahuatl to make sure certain things were right... would this eliminate this effort or help? These are honest questions. Would peeking to the Nahuatl version count against Wikipedia policy? Lol. Anyway, I appreciate your comment, but bear in mind the points I brought. Other than that, you're welcome to erase whatever you seem fit from our history, lol, you get the point. TepeyacPilgrim (talk) 01:32, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

TepeyacPilgrim welcome to my world. I always want to see the original for myself too. It's not exactly a lack of trust of the academic, but a recognition that historians have biases that might slip into their interpretations or might have made errors. Primary sources like the codices, especially in the period for this subject, are pretty much the only historic records we have, until after contact when we have narratives by explorers, priests, and conquerors. Almost all academic work on ancient societies in the Americas stems from interpreting those and yes, like women, Indigenous societies have not received adequate attention. I appreciate that you are trying to address inaccuracies and gaps in our knowledge. In answer to your question, establishing notability for en-WP requires secondary curated sources, meaning that there is an editor, translator, editorial board, or publisher, who has reviewed the work. Once notability is established, details can be filled in by primary sources. So it's a balancing act. In this case, you need both primary and secondary sources. As to your question about citing it, were it me, I'd do it like this: {{cite book |translator-last=Velázqez |translator-first=Primo Feliciano |translator-link=Primo Feliciano Velázquez |title=Códice Chimalpopoca: Anales de Cuauhtitlán y Leyenda de los Soles |url=https://historicas.unam.mx/publicaciones/publicadigital/libros/000/codice_chimalpopoca.html |edition=3rd, 1st electronic |publisher=[[Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México]] |location=Mexico City |language=es |trans-title=Chimalpopoca Codex: Annals of Cuauhtitlan and Legend of the Suns |chapter= |chapter-url= |isbn=968-36-2747-1}} And then insert the chapter name and specific chapter-url when it changes in your citation. I hope that helps. SusunW (talk) 14:42, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

• TepeyacPilgrim: Thank you for your useful information about the inaccuracies you have found in Wikipedia's coverage of Ancient Mexican history and related Mesoamerican articles. In this connection, I see you have already made substantial improvements to Atotoztli I. In line with the approach suggested by SusunW, it would certainly help Wikipedia along if you could correct any other major errors you find, drawing on primary sources when necessary. (If you don't have time to work on the articles themselves, it would be useful to mention the problems you encounter on the corresponding talk pages.) While Wikipedia's policy is to justify notability by requiring articles to be based on secondary sources, once notability has been established, it is perfectly permissible to use reliable historical accounts. You will find this approach is widely used elsewhere, for example in connection with ancient Greece and Rome. If you run into any problems, you are of course welcome to post them here. In the short time you have been contributing to Wikipedia, you have certainly been producing impressive work.--Ipigott (talk) 10:06, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Danish West Indies flag?

Dora Richards Miller was born in the Danish West Indies. When I added her to 299, I included the Danish flag icon. Should I have used a different one? --Rosiestep (talk) 22:29, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

I think that is the most appropriate. The Danish West Indies were part of Denmark when Miller was born in 1842. They didn't become part of the United States until 1917. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:36, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Question for the hive-mind - UK edition

WiR Art & Feminism 2024

Hi Londoners, Do any of you know if the sculpture The Man Who Blows the Clouds by Marisa Rueda is still standing in Shepherd's Bush Green? Brief newspaper report makes it seem like it was removed during renovation.

• https://www.mylondon.news/news/local-news/save-man-shepherds-bush-green-6017125
• https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-statue-in-a-childens-playground-on-shepherds-bush-green-west-london-25722241.html?imageid=C58F6FFC-8269-42B2-82C9-D29601A7B104&p=1130&pn=1&searchId=08f3b0af0152c961d86833b500ee2c82&searchtype=0

Also, it would be great if there was a copyright free image. I am not finding it in the commons. Thanks WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:41, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Women's Forum

Theroadislong has just written Susan Wood (photographer) following a helpdesk request. They have asked about this source, which says that Wood was a founding member of the Women’s Forum. My guess is it was the International Women's Forum, founded in 1974 as the Women's Forum of New York, would anyone here know where to look for more information? TSventon (talk) 16:35, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I have found an archived New York Times article from 1974, which says that the organisation had 59 members and 18 on its steering committee, so Wood's role may not have been particularly prominent. TSventon (talk) 18:50, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Re: compiling a redlist

Hi everyone! Some of the articles I have worked on recently have been on women featured in the Diccionari Biogràfic de Dones (Catalan Biographical Dictionary of Women (Q61591046)). I was wondering how I could go about creating a redlist for it, along the lines of the ones already in our index. I'm not overly familiar with how Wikidata works, as I'm very new to editing it and almost completely unaware of how to integrate it with Wikipedia red lists, so if anyone in the know could help that'd be fantastic. The Catalan Wikipedia article already includes a loooong list of articles from it, if that's at all helpful. --Grnrchst (talk) 16:45, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

• @Grnrchst: I think Gamaliel or Pigsonthewing might be able to help with this. It's in Wikidata as Catalan Biographical Dictionary of Women (Q61591046).--Ipigott (talk) 10:46, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
  • @Grnrchst: @Ipigott: Since there's a Wikidata property already this is very easy. I've made the list here, just waiting for Listeriabot to populate it. Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by dictionary/Catalan Biographical Dictionary of Women Gamaliel (talk) 15:33, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

    @Gamaliel: Wow, that's amazing! Thank you so much :D --Grnrchst (talk) 15:37, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

• Looks good. Now added to our Redlink index.--Ipigott (talk) 14:19, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Mary and Margaret Gibb

Today I discovered that there was not a page for Margaret and Mary Gibb, and I think they would be notable (I only found out about them today but I think they sound notable and the article would meet GNG). I found the following sources online: [1], [2], [3], [4] and [5]. This one too [6]. What does everyone think? DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 15:00, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Adding to this, these two also are referenced in several books ([7], [8], [9], among others). ForsythiaJo (talk) 16:27, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Amelia Elizabeth White and Martha Root White

Just started a new article on Amelia Elizabeth White and Martha Root White, sibling philanthropists and champions for the arts of the Indigenous Puebloan people of New Mexico, their culture and land-rights. Benefactors of the School for Advanced Research, the Corcoran Gallery and several museums of Indigenous arts in New Mexico. It's just a start, but it can be improved and expanded. Please have a look, and improve or expand if you have the time. Netherzone (talk) 01:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Is Aleksandra Janusz encyclopedic?

Dear Friends.

I wonder whether a Polish article about Aleksandra Janusz, a Polish writer and neurobiologist, would be considered encyclopedic, thus, do you want a translation into English?

Best wishes --Kaworu1992 (talk) 23:40, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

New articles: defunct Australian girls' industrial schools

For our "Education" campaign, I created 2 articles about defunct Australian girls' industrial schools -- Newcastle Industrial School for Girls and Biloela Industrial School for Girls -- and would appreciate a glance at them from our Australian editors. My big concern is getting the nuance right as the follow-on institution for both of these was Parramatta Girls Home, which has a "See also" section that includes Stolen Generations. Should that be included in the Newcastle and Biloela school articles? Thanks. -- Rosiestep (talk) 20:14, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for creating these two articles of importance in New South Wales history. The article on Stolen Generations states 1905 as the commencement date. As both the Newcastle and Biloela schools closed in 1887, they pre-date the period covered by Stolen Generations. Parramatta Girls Home, in taking over from them in 1887 and continued through to 1974, warrants the link to SG. Oronsay (talk) 03:32, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, Oronsay. Happy that you could sort this out. --Rosiestep (talk) 04:14, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Winifred West

Hi. While I was writing a separate article, I noticed that Winifred West, an Australian educator, had an Australian Dictionary of Biography entry. Her Wikipedia article had been redirected on notability grounds 8 years ago, but I noted that an entry in the ADB equals a passage of WP:ANYBIO#3 and reverted this ancient redirect. However, the article is in pretty dismal shape, with the ADB entry being the only citation provided. I am unable to work on it as I am busy with another project so I figured I'd toss it here to see if anyone is interested. Curbon7 (talk) 07:45, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

I've sourced her CBE and added the ref, with the text of the citation. Also made a redirect from Winifred Mary West, and added her to West (surname). PamD 09:49, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you @Curbon7 for creating her bio from the redirect and @PamD for your contributions. I have print materials that I will look out later today and should be able to add some details and more references. Oronsay (talk) 18:19, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Willa Beatrice Player

Former Women-in-Red project. I managed to get a featured pictre for her, but her article's rather undercited. Anyone want to help fix it up? Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 17:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Have added a few citations. Balance person (talk) 12:10, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Added three refs, now it's at 10 in the reflist, but some of the items in the further reading list after references should probably be worked in as refs too. Penny Richards (talk)

Links to events

@Oronsay: I am here to discuss the bold edit of mine to Template:Women in Red navigation which you reverted. There is a complete list of WiR events listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Events going back to 2015. I also included a link to this page from the navigation template. I think the navigation template would be more useful if it only contains the most important links, and I believe it is excessive to include a link to every meetup in this template. If editors want to see the complete list, they would be better served by clicking the link to Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Events to see the full list. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:04, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

I don't see any reason to change this important WIR template. It is only the current year's events that are displayed in full in the template and just a single click to show the earlier years. I don't seek why it is better to click away from the template. The list on the the Events page is very long and not easy to see at a glance, unlike in the template where the info is condensed. Oronsay (talk) 18:36, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

I just think it's excessive for the template, and we could make a much more useful and accessible list of past events on the /Events page — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:20, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

I tend to agree with Oronsay. Yes, it's a lot of events, but the purpose of the navbox is to help people navigate, and I would rather find my way through a long list in this template than be sent somewhere else to look through it. This is more convenient to me as a user. DrThneed (talk) 04:07, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Well perhaps you can tell me how you think they should be displayed? This is what happens when they are all listed in one box, and it looks pretty terrible.

And this is what it looks like when separated out into years. I think you'll agree that this takes up too much space.

Generally I don't think this template is useful for someone who is genuinely trying to look for a past event. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:57, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I've used the template to find past events, especially if I can't remember which biographies I might have written for a theme, so think it's useful and a good go to place. Is it really neccessary to change it? Lajmmoore (talk) 17:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Which of the above do you prefer or can you suggest any improvements? I was thinking that something like the below would be more useful on its own page — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:52, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

There are two reasons I prefer the original template. I can make a single click and see all the previous events, 2015–2023. Your amendment means I have to make 9. More importantly, the January 2024 events don't appear at all and when the calendar turns to April, neither will the February ones. Please ensure that this year's events will all appear in the template. Oronsay (talk) 19:33, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Ha, well spotted! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:00, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I'm in this boat as well; I frequently use the template to find past events and like that I can see all events in one place. I can see your point @MSGJ about it looking unwieldy though and it's likely to get to a point where it is too much for one template at some point.

Maybe instead of 2015-2023, we could do 2015-2019 and 2020-2024? Two clicks to see all previous events instead of 9? Chocmilk03 (talk) 21:29, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Compromise suggestion: show all events from the past 4 years in the template, and include a link to the list of all events elsewhere. I seriously doubt anyone is using this template to look for an event from 2016. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:22, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

I frequently do, and from their previous comments it appears that @Oronsay, @Lajmmoore and @DrThneed may also do so. Chocmilk03 (talk) 20:21, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

True. Please also read below, @Rosiestep's comments on these recent template changes. Oronsay (talk) 20:32, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Meetup	Name	Date
150	#1day1woman	2020
151	Sports	Jan–Aug 2020
152	Explorers	Feb 2020
153	Geofocus: Central America	Jan 2020
154	Black women	Feb 2020
155	Women in Horror	Feb 2020
156	Art+Activists & Folklore	Mar 2020
157	Aviation	Mar 2020
158	Geofocus: Great Britain and Ireland	Mar 2020
159	Visible Wiki Women	Mar 2020
160	Gender studies	Apr 2020
161	Dance	Apr 2020
162	Geofocus: Caucasus	Apr 2020
163	Healthcare	May 2020
164	Women and their animals	May 2020
165	Geofocus: Central and Eastern Europe	May 2020
166	Mary Mary month of May	May 2020
167	LGBTQ women & Wiki Loves Pride	Jun 2020
168	United Nations & UN Agencies	Jun 2020
169	Geofocus: Reducing gender imbalance	Jun 2020
170	July Julies	Jul 2020

I am confused. I was looking at the green template for the "temperance women" event we did in January 2024, as I'm about to write another article about a temperance woman, and I don't see our January 2024 events on the green template. I guess I missed a conversation where this was decided? (pause) Okay, I searched by number, starting at 293, and found "temperance women" at 296. Looking at #296, though, I don't see the other January 294 events like I used to. Why aren't they showing up here? If they don't show up, it's wiping out our history. --Rosiestep (talk) 23:59, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

It's an oversight, just pointed out by Oronsay above. I'll fix it shortly — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:20, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Reply above was in response to your question about the "green template" - this should now be resolved. Your second point relates to something different I think? Are you referring to the navigation buttons at the top of the meetup page? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:08, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

MSGJ, (1) Regarding the "green template", I don't like the change made where the months associated with the year's events are no longer shown. It has worked well for us to be able to see what events we did in, for example, in January, of each year. If you are the one who made the change, would you please revert it? Thank you. (2) Regarding the second point, yes, it was that the links at the top of an event page used to include all the events for the month, e.g., if the particular event page was for a January 2024 event, there would be links at the top for all the other January 2024 happenings. If you are the one who made the change, would you please revert it? Thank you. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:10, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Regarding (1), I will look into it. Regarding (2), would you also want to see link to the current events and upcoming events, or just that particular month? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:59, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

@Rosiestep; does this work for you? (You may not realise but these lists are being created on the fly from the list of events, so when we get it how everyone likes it they will update automatically each month with no more manual updating needed.) — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:09, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

MSGJ, it's hard for me to respond to ... "does this work for you?" as what we had worked for all of the working members of Women in Red... not just for me. With the latest depiction of the "green template" that you are sharing, each event has a month next to it vs noting the month once and then all the events associated with it trailing. Let me also note that I have to click each year separately to open it, vs. in the past, with one click, I could view all events for all years. This is really helpful when our members are trying to decide what worked in Foo month in our first five years vs. our last five years. I get that you are trying to be helpful with automation, but WiR has always operated from the stance that we gain consensus first, and then we take action, vs. what you're doing, which is the opposite. Frankly, it flummoxes me that you persist in this way, and I wonder if it's because no one is being forceful enough in saying, 'please stop'. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:22, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Agree fully! As noted above, I regularly use the template to refer to all past events and can't do so on the current version. I understand this may seem like an odd way of using the template, @MSGJ, but given that there are a few people here in the same boat, could we please discuss and reach consensus before changes are made? Thanks, Chocmilk03 (talk) 20:46, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Hear hear. Consensus first. It's most frustrating to find big changes made to commonly used templates without even a discussion started first (I'm used to missing discussions that have happened, but that's on me). DrThneed (talk) 20:56, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

• I've restored an earlier version. See "WiR template" below.--Ipigott (talk) 11:33, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

• Thank you, Ipigott. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:19, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

• @Ipigott and MSGJ: Something's gone wrong: the March (ie current) events are not showing up on either Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red#Events or Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Events! PamD 19:02, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

PamD: Past my bedtime. I'll look into this tomorrow if MSGJ has not already taken care of it.--Ipigott (talk) 21:33, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

I've added the current events but we now have two sections on "Ongoing initiatives". If MSGJ cannot sort this out, we should perhaps return to our earlier method of presenting events. Any reactions?--Ipigott (talk) 06:53, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

I'll look into this later today — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:25, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Fixed. Silly mistake of mine. Thanks for reporting — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:29, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Women in Red April 2024

Women in Red | April 2024, Volume 10, Issue 4, Numbers 293, 294, 302, 303, 304 Online events: New: Alphabet run S & T | Gender studies | Health Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) Announcements The second round of "One biography a week" begins in April as part of #1day1woman. Tip of the month: If you run into technical problems, you might find help on our Tools and technical support page Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk 19:41, 30 March 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Draft:Angela Fisher

Is draft:Angela Fisher notable? FloridaArmy (talk) 20:22, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

At a glance I would say yes. Theroadislong (talk) 07:25, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

It would help to find at least one more good independent source.--Ipigott (talk) 15:44, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Agree with both. Johnbod (talk) 16:26, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

User:Africanceremonies should disclose their paid editing status first though. Theroadislong (talk) 16:51, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Agree with everyone. Curious to see one of my (mediocre) snapshots getting used in an article about a proper photographer. Edwardx (talk) 16:59, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

• I'm very confused on the lack of sources in this article. There are so, so many available, dozens spanning years. Look, here's a just a few massive articles:

• Two Women With Vision Take On a Continent by Rick Vanderknyff (Page 2) (Page 3)
• African Ceremonies by Katherine Roth (Page 2)
• Explorers of everyday life ... in Africa by Mary Daniels (Page 2)
• Capturing a vanishing world of African ritual by Laurence Chollet (Page 2)

And those are, like, just the first four results on Newspapers.com when you search both their names together. And there's over 500 results. Some will be duplicates, sure, but still. Silverseren^C 17:13, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Also, this may be an example of where a dual article of Angela Fisher and Carol Beckwith (or vice-versa) is called for, since they'd be so similar to each other if kept as separate articles. Silverseren^C 17:15, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Stephanie Mitchem

I came across this wntry on a scholar and author and it seemed like something that should be in mainspace. FloridaArmy (talk) 20:10, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

It was created using Generative AI though. Theroadislong (talk) 20:14, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

User:Theroadislong interesting. Is that allowed? Should a "fresh" alternative version by created by hominids? I am unfamiliar with how AI works or if it's allowed here. FloridaArmy (talk) 00:11, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Jaireeodell: You can use AI or any other method to create a biography but this is almost entirely the result of an analysis of one source. If you can back this up with two other reliable sources which cover Stephanie Mitchem in some detail and add pertinent wikilinks, the article will no doubt be acceptable for mainspace. Please let me know when you think it is ready.--Ipigott (talk) 15:37, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi. I have been working on this in stages. The draft started with only what the AI engine produced. I have been revising it based on a single source (as you note). I intend to complete another round of revisions with additional sources that were not discovered or used by the AI tool prior to moving it to mainspace. This article is the subject of a presentation at WikiConference North America ... about benefits and risks of using RAG AI. Sorry that it's taking me so long to finish it. -- Jaireeodell (talk) 19:56, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Any proper journal or newspaper reviews of her various books, Jaireeodell? I found this, which is a start. We'll need a good couple more to properly reference things though and show notability. Silverseren^C 20:01, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

There are plenty of published reviews, enough to give a clear pass of WP:AUTHOR, many probably available through The Wikipedia Library:

• Reviews of African American Folk Healing: C. Renate Barber, The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, JSTOR 40541727; Yvonne Chireau, Church History, JSTOR 20618536; Nancie Erhard, Studies in Religion, doi:10.1177/000842980903800122; Deirdre Cooper Owens, The Journal of African American History, JSTOR 25610057; Frederick Ware, Pneuma, doi:10.1163/157007408X346717
• Reviews of Race, Religion, and Politics: Toward Human Rights in the United States: Dara Coleby Delgado, Pneuma, doi:10.1163/15700747-04301006; S.A. Johnson, Choice, [10]; Robin Fretwell Wilson, Journal of Church & State, doi:10.1093/jcs/csz105
• Reviews of Name It and Claim It? Prosperity Preaching in the Black Church: Lewis Brogdon, Pneuma, doi:10.1163/157007408X346492; Kathleen Hladky, Religious Studies Review, doi:10.1111/j.1748-0922.2008.00308_10.x; Carol Troupe, Black Theology, doi:10.1558/blth.v7i1.125
• Review of Introducing Womanist Theology: Eileen Flanagan, Horizons, doi:10.1017/S0360966900000311

As for using generative AI: every single claim in the text must be carefully checked against the sources by a human. AI is known for misrepresentations or in extreme cases making things up from nothing. We cannot allow that in a biography of a living person. There is nothing preventing you from using AI-generated text, but go through it with a fine-toothed comb to make double sure that everything is an accurate summary of its source. The other issue with generative AI is that often it will be a close paraphrase of material elsewhere and it won't tell you where it got the text it is paraphrasing. As well as checking for accuracy, make sure that nothing is too closely copied, neither from the source used nor from any other sources. With all of this necessary checking, it may be easier just to write things by hand yourself; then you know you're not making things up and not copying. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:16, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Another aspect of the article is that the single independent source used so far is a chapter of a book (link here) informed specifically by the struggles of Wikipedia editors for the 1000 Women in Religion Wikipedia Project. The chapter itself is largely sourced to oral history interviews with the subject. According to the preface With her passion and biases exposed, her [Hinton's] biography about Stephanie Y. Mitchem functions as a challenge to perspectives that insist a universal, neutral, disinterested point of view creates superior scholarship. TSventon (talk) 01:53, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

So it explicitly disclaims its own reliability as a source? That's unhelpful. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:19, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps it challenges Wikipedia's idea of neutrality. There are 23 pages of the preface, Creating Inclusive Biographical Narratives A Disruptive Use of Sources and Writing Conventions and I have only extracted one and a bit sentences. TSventon (talk) 02:46, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

New article: TikTok-A-Thon for Trans Healthcare

Hi all

I've just finished writing TikTok-A-Thon for Trans Healthcare, if anyone could take a look and make some improvements I'd really appreciate it :)

Thanks

John Cummings (talk) 19:25, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Archive it!

A cautionary tale. A theatre group whose article I have worked on quite a bit decided to revamp their website with a trendy new design. So the content was moved around from page to page, and quite a lot of it has just disappeared - details about previous year's shows etc. I've managed to track down archived copies of most, but not all, of the refs, on the Internet Archive, but some of the links are just going to be dead. Very sad.

So: if you are linking to any website which isn't just a copy of a print medium, my advice is to include an archive link in your reference. Look it up at https://web.archive.org/ and see if there's a recent copy already archived which has the text you need. If not, or if in any doubt, request that the page be archived right now. It takes a couple of minutes, but is worth it.

I think there's a bot or gadget which can do this for you so that having created an article with current links you can ask the bot to archive them and upgrade the references, but I haven't got a note of it in my "useful stuff" list. Can anyone advise?

But in the meantime, if your source might possibly disappear, or rearrange its website on a whim (OK, on the advice of a PR team and design gurus!), then archive your refs as you go along, to future-proof the encyclopedia.

I suspect that a frightening number of the refs in the encyclopedia are probably dead links, including a lot of "Official website"s for people who have retired or died, or organisations or companies which no longer exist but are still notable.

Perhaps this is an idea for "Tip of the month":

To future-proof your website sources, find or create an archived copy at https://web.archive.org/ or elsewhere, and add "|archive-url= xxxx | archive-date= xxxx" to your reference. Then your references will survive even if the source website is rearranged or disappears.

PamD 09:16, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Aaaaamazing. Thank you, I was confused about why/how people were finding archive links. This makes a lot more sense now. AdaWoolf (talk) 10:17, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

The important part is to make sure it is archived by going to archive.org, looking for the url there, and if it doesn't have an archived copy then following the instructions to make one. Retaining a copy of the link here is secondary. As long as it actually is archived, it can be found again from the old url. But many of our sources aren't, and then when they go stale it becomes much more difficult or impossible to replace them. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:17, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

It's the policy of WikiProject Figure Skating to archive all sources. I know the project isn't connected with WIR, except for the fact that most figure skaters are women, but we've chosen to automatically archive any and all sources because all of the sources we use tend to be web sources. Depending on the article or list, some archived sources are listed in the citation, while others are not and a template stating that all sources are archived is added to their talk pages. I agree and highly recommend that the sources used in articles about women should always be archived. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:25, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Figureskatingfan that sounds like something that WiR should consider copying, is WikiProject Figure Skating's policy or process for archiving written down somewhere? TSventon (talk) 18:51, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

@David Eppstein Good point. But having checked that there's an archive, one might as well add it to the reference. I've just been reminded that User:InternetArchiveBot is the bot I was thinking of. You need to tick the box saying "Add archives to all non-dead references (Optional)" if that's what you want to do. @Figureskatingfan, is that what the Figure Skating project uses? PamD 19:18, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Adding the archive link to the article itself sometimes faces pushback, because then the visible archive link distracts from or even supplants the live link (depending on how it is linked), effectively freezing the reference in time when you might prefer readers to always see the current version of the reference (at least, unless it ever becomes dead). —David Eppstein (talk) 19:39, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Ah, I've now found Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Figure_skating#Sources with its recommendation to check that everything is archived and then add a notice to the talk page to confirm that as at YYMM all refs were archived.

This seems such a general point that I'm surprised that (as far as I know) there is no general guidance in WP:MOS or elsewhere about archiving sources. I've looked at a couple of recent Featured Articles, but their sources tend to be mostly books, where this doesn't arise - though the couple of website refs in today's FA Order of Brothelyngham, the sources "MED2023", don't show archive links (but were archived in 2023). Maybe it's not good style to clutter an article's reflist with archive links, as long as one has checked the existence of the links.

Is anyone aware of any general discussion, or existing guidance, on this (apart from at the one WikiProject which Figureskatingfan helpfully pointed out)? It's only going to become more and more of a problem, as websites disappear or get revamped over the years. PamD 19:40, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Edit conflict above, hadn't read David's when posting. Yes, sometimes a page is archived and detracts from the value of the link.

The contrary situation, of course, is when you need to archive a page because you know it will change and you want to source the current version. An example being https://bloodyscotland.com/bloody-scotland-scottish-debut-of-the-year/ which today is announcing the 2023 winner but in a year's time will presumably be talking about the 2024 winner - I archived as I added the link to Bloody Scotland recently.

There ought to be some central guidance on this! PamD 19:46, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

There's an active discussion about this at Wikipedia talk:Citing sources § Talk:Donald Trump and using WP:LOCALCON to disallow citation archives, specifically about the editors of one article developing a local consensus not to include the archive links on the article itself. (I think this should not be interpreted as disallowing archiving itself.) —David Eppstein (talk) 20:17, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

@David Eppstein Thanks, that's a fascinating, if mind-boggling, discussion. Too late at night to digest it, I'll have another go tomorrow.

I've also now read up about the "url-status=" parameter, which I now see makes a lot of difference: I didn't understand it before. All good learning. PamD 23:02, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I think it's a good idea for WIR to adapt. @PamD, I'm glad you found the FS Style sheet, since I now realize I should have linked it as a possible model. Here's an example of a FS list that archives within the in-line citations: List of highest scores in figure skating; and here's one that denotes that it's been done on its talk page: Demise and revival of compulsory figures. (Yes, I've significantly contributed to both.) Sorry, I don't know of any other project that's following the same procedure. WP FS is doing it because we've learned that the nature of the articles and lists we work on often require it, for many of the reasons brought up in this discussion. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:38, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

I think I take back that suggestion as a "tip of the month", pending further thought, discussion, and investigation as to whether there are any centralised recommendations!

Perhaps something more on the lines of: "If you are citing a website, remember that sites can change or disappear, and check that there is a recent archived copy at the Internet Archive or similar, archiving it now if it isn't already there." But not until further discussion! PamD 19:49, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

I would also add that if you have the Wayback Machine's Google Chrome extension installed, you can set it to automatically archive any webpages you visit that haven't been archived in x time (with blacklist options, of course). Curbon7 (talk) 19:53, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

If you're comfortable telling a third party your entire browsing history, that could be quite useful. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:19, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

I am late to the discussion. Yes great idea! Sometime in the last few years the Smithsonian rewrote the interface to its database for Smithsonian American Art Museum. All old links go to the main search page, but not the artist's page. Seems like biographical databases often change the front end. I think Alexander Street changed its front end recently too.

Has anyone found the widget that will easily make the archive links? I strongly believe there is some sort of automated way to do this as I have had editors "archive" the references to some of the pages I have created. I'll be looking through my watchlist to see if I can find an example. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:43, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

• Have I misunderstood something or is it the case that sources needing to be archived are handled automatically by Archivebot? If so, in most cases we will not need to take any further action. It might nevertheless be useful to prepare a WiR page on archiving for those who are not technically minded, clearly explaining when it is necessary to undertake any additional archiving steps and how these can be implemented. Perhaps David Eppstein could prepare a draft.--Ipigott (talk) 08:54, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

I think that bot looks for dead links to revive, not live links that should be archived. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 16:10, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't know much about how Archivebot works. I only know how to access archive.org manually on a one-link-at-a-time basis. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:11, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Women's studies and gender studies focus

April marks our annual event dedicated to the academics and activists who pushed for women to be included in the historical record. Without their dedication, none of our work would be possible, and to my mind it is one of the most important editathons we host. I am suspending work on my chain for April because I think it is such an important focus. Because women's and gender studies are interdisciplinary, they often incorporate academics from across a wide spectrum. Some of the first courses created were by art historians interested in investigating women whose images appeared in Renaissance paintings. While obviously the majority of academics who created these programs were anthropologists, sociologists, and historians, some of them came from completely different fields, like genetics and even Sinology. If you aren't comfortable writing articles about academics, you can contribute to the event by adding names to the red list of the founders of the women's or gender studies programs at the university you attended or the university nearest you. You can sign-up or add names here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/303. Happy editing! SusunW (talk) 19:30, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

SusunW: I always try to create one or two biographies of women from the Nordic countries who have become notable for their work in gender studies. But unlike some of the other sectors we cover, I am never sure how they should be listed. For those who are still living, I am not too happy about adding them to the list of feminists which up to now has not included anyone born after 1940. Most of them can of course be added to the lists of women writers but would it not be more helpful for those interested in the subject to have a separate list of those known for their work in gender and women's studies? If so, what should we call it? Perhaps "List of women in gender studies" or "List of (women?) gender studies academics". Perhaps you can to suggest something better. We should be able to find most of them from Category:Gender studies academics, Category:Women's studies academics and those involved in Category:Gender studies organizations.--Ipigott (talk) 15:19, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Ipigott Personal preference, but I don't like tables. I find them somewhat harder to navigate and add info. In the List of feminists the subheadings "Mid to late 20th-century feminists" and "Notable 20th and 21st-century feminists" seems a likely place for them. Another alternative would be List of women's and gender studies academics. If we go to a separate list, I think you have to have both because the history is that women's studies came first and then morphed into gender studies, which more broadly includes all genders, evaluating the socio-politico-economic and health/sexuality factors which impact gender throughout history. SusunW (talk) 15:39, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

SusunW: I don't like list tables either. They are too difficult to edit, discouraging expansion. All those I have created have been simple lists of names, DOB/DOD, nationality and main achievements, which anyone can edit without difficulty. I'll think about putting together a List of women's and gender studies academics before the end of the month. Thanks for the suggestion.--Ipigott (talk) 15:47, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Cool. Thank you Ipigott! SusunW (talk) 15:50, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

The Core Contest

The core contest is back and ... since the 2012 contest, we've not improved a single biography of a woman. I was hoping somebody here would be willing to correct that record.

The Core Contest—Wikipedia's most fun contest—runs from April 15 to May 31. The goal: to improve vital or other core articles, with a focus on those in the worst state of disrepair. There is £300 of prize money divided among editors who provide the "best additive encyclopedic value". Signups are open now. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:42, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jane Brunson Marks

Members way wish to comment at this discussion. All opinions welcome. Any help with finding sources to improve the article would be appreciated as well. Thanks.4meter4 (talk) 19:13, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Redlist not updating

I was looking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Number of links, and several of the listed items now have enwiki articles associated with them. Is there a reason why the list hasn't been updated since May 2023? Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:28, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

ListeriaBot tends to struggle with managing large redlists, though this is an odd case as that one is not insanely large. Curbon7 (talk) 23:12, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

ListeriaBot especially struggles with list cells that themselves link to other complicated or heavily linked wikidata items. In this case, that would be the occupation and citizenship columns. Removing them from the table might help it proceed. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:05, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Jadwiga Szubartowicz

Dear Friends.

Seems I had a productive night. I translated an article about Jadwiga Szubartowicz into English from Polish (it was on one of the redlists). Please, check my grammar and other stuff, okay? ;-)

Best wishes -- Kaworu1992 (talk) 07:08, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

@Kaworu1992:: I should first point out that our redlists are not intended to indicate suitability for inclusion. This biography may meet the requirements of the Polish wiki but I'm not at all sure she is notable enough for the English version. Unless they were notable for other reasons, many articles about centenarians and supercentenarians have been deleted. In future, whether you are translating or creating biographies yourself, I recommend you make sure articles meet the notability requirements listed in our Ten Simple Rules.--Ipigott (talk) 10:20, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Dear Friend.

I wasn't aware. I thought since the lady is "in red" and has a Polish Wikipedia article, an English translation should follow. I'm sorry if I did something wrong. I will remember to ask in the future for other's opinion on whether a given lady is or is not encyclopedic.

Again, very sorry.

Best wishes

--Kaworu1992 (talk) 06:36, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Katarzyna Paprocka

Dear Friends.

I expanded the article about Katarzyna Paprocka, based upon the Polish Wikipedia article. However, my English and understanding of Wikipedia is not perfect - if a native English speaker could look at the current version of the article, I would be grateful.

Best wishes -- Kaworu1992 (talk) 01:26, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

@Kaworu1992 Please remember that in English wikipedia we do not link dates or years. Thanks. PamD 18:25, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

And when including references with non-English titles it's helpful to use the "trans-title=" field in the citation, to show readers the title translated into English. Thanks. PamD 18:28, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Dear Friend.

I am not very good with Wikipedia "code", so to speak. Could you please say something more in this topic?

Best wishes

--Kaworu1992 (talk) 06:37, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

I've added the translated titles (using Google translate) to three of the four books in the Bibliography section of Katarzyna Paprocka, so you can see there how this works. I didn't add the translated title of the Tarnowska book, because Google turns it into "Spell-mary ending at the stake in Fordon": with your knowledge of both Polish and English I'm sure you can produce a better translated title (and please change the other three if they are not right: they all looked plausible, but I don't read Polish!). It's just kinder to the readers of English Wikipedia if we show them what the titles of the sources are, translated into the language they know. I hope that explains it OK for you. Thanks. PamD 13:49, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Polish female (ex)leaders of Campaign Against Homofobia

Dear Friends.

I see that English Wikipedia has no articles on two ladies that were leaders of Campaing Against Homophobia (KPH). However, the Polish WIkipedia has such articles. Do you wish for me to translate them? I suppose they are encyclopedic, right?

Best wishes --Kaworu1992 (talk) 06:39, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Each Wikipedia has it's own inclusion criteria, so just because Polish Wikipedia has an article it doesn't necessarily follow that we can have one here, best to use the WP:AFC process when in doubt. Theroadislong (talk) 16:30, 5 April 2024 (UTC)