User:Ipigott/Archive 14

Archive 14: June 2016 to December 2016

Archive 1: January 2007 to January 2010, Archive 2: January 2010 to January 2011, Archive 3: January 2011 to June 2011, Archive 4: June 2011 to November 2011, Archive 5: December 2011 to August 2012, Archive 6: September 2012 to December 2012, Archive 7: December 2012 to May 2013, Archive 8: June 2013 to November 2013, Archive 9: November 2013 to August 2014, Archive 10:September 2014 to February 2015, Archive 11:March 2015 to August 2015, Archive 12: March 2015 to August 2015, September 2015 to May 2016

Charlotte Hanmann
Thanks for making the corrections. I based the two articles entirely on google translation tool, hence the errors. Shall I post them as a double article DYK? I am not sure of the img.-- Nvvchar . 01:47, 1 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Google translate is improving all the time but can still be misleading. You need to be particularly careful of the translations of names, e.g. Landesbank translated as Farmers Bank. If you go for DYK, I wouldn't include the image. It's not very good and may be a copyright violation. You've been doing some excellent work recently on all those biographies for WiR in addition to interesting articles on women and their crafts in India. Now you will have an opportunity to turn to Entertainers.--Ipigott (talk) 06:30, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, . Can you please give a suggestion for a hook combining both articles? Nvvchar . 06:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)


 * ...that the enamelist Inger Hanmann and her daughter Charlotte, an artistic photographer, have both contributed significantly to Denmark's cultural heritage?--Ipigott (talk) 07:29, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I have enjoyed working on this project. I have contributed 100 articles so far under Women in Red project starting from the Red/Meetup/ 1 to 12 and most of them have been DYKs Nvvchar . 07:39, 1 June 2016 (UTC).
 * I'm glad you have been submitting so much to DYK. It helps to promote the cause and also encourages more people to contribute. Unfortunately I find the process too complex and time consuming but am always happy to assist.--Ipigott (talk) 07:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks again. Posted on DYK here Template:Did you know nominations/Inger Hanmann, Charlotte Hanmann. Nvvchar . 08:47, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
 * There is a hat tag on Charlotte Hanmann for adding secondary sources. I cannot find any more sources. You may please like to help with sources from the Danish media sources or books to resolve the issue. Thanks Nvvchar . 16:07, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't think the tag is justified. The sources quoted (Weilbach and Kvinfo in particular) are not "primary". But I'll look at it again tomorrow.--Ipigott (talk) 20:54, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Can you kindly suggest the replies to be provided in the talk page of the artcilex to to get the issue resolved abd tag removed. Nvvchar . 13:03, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I have been up to my neck preparing data for Rosie today and yesterday. I think I'll have time for Charlotte tomorrow. I have not forgotten. I'll try to provide further refs from the newspapers but IMO it is already OK as it is.--Ipigott (talk) 13:07, 5 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I think it's OK now.--Ipigott (talk) 07:41, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Nvvchar . 07:47, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
 * In the DYK review it has been suggested that the articles may split into two. I am not conversant with the procedure. Can you help, pl? Thanks. Nvvchar . 06:16, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I know nothing about DYK procedures but suppose it has simply been suggested that each article could be submitted to DYK separately. Maybe you can go forward on that basis or maybe it would be simpler to forget the whole thing. As is the one suggesting two nominations, maybe she can expl from ain exactly how you should go about it or better still handle it herself (if that is allowed). It's  because of these complicated procedural problems that I avoid spending valuable time on DYK.--Ipigott (talk) 08:14, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I understand. Can some user from Sweden help finding sources to add here Template:Did you know nominations/Gerd Neggo? I am not able find any additional sources to add text for Gerd Neggo's 30 years of stay in Sweden. Nvvchar . 08:28, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 * take cour time and keep simple, - just next time make it two noms, - I will be off (pleasantly) until Tuesday, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:45, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey
The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.
 * Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Where do the Barnstars come from?

 * Thanks, Roger, for expressing your appreciation. I simply look for suitable barnstars on Commons -- so there's no magic in it at all. As I'm no good at combining images myself, that's the only course open to me. This time, I have only sent out thank-yous and barnstars to those who contributed to Women in Photography based on this but I was hoping someone would help out with the MEDA artists in which most of the same editors were involved. In particular, Big iron and Fouetté should receive barnstars for their efforts there. Maybe this one would do but it is not very "MEDA". I'll try to put something together unless you feel like taking it on yourself?--Ipigott (talk) 13:56, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I can do that Ian, I think I have given all of these a "thx" on the resp. article talk pages, but lets give um a b'star too.... however I would like to be "PA to Exec (asst) for Barnstar Delivery" with my own plastic looking label for my computer desk (when I get one). Victuallers (talk) 16:59, 2 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks, that will give me more time to look into the other editathons for Rosie.--Ipigott (talk) 20:57, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for your strong focus
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)


 * As you can see from my reply to Roger above, I have not sent out thank-yous to those who contributed to the MEDA artists. Both there and on photography, most of the contributions came from WiR's most active participants.--Ipigott (talk) 14:01, 2 June 2016 (UTC)


 * First, thank you for distributing them. Let's see how Roger responds. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:12, 2 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I've also updated my overall listing of editathon participation. According to my calculations (which are pretty rough as it is difficult to identify those who have improved old articles rather than creating new ones), we have now had 250 participants in our main editathons. (I have not had time to include WiR/9, WiR/11 and WiR/13.) Over 40 have participated in more than one editathon and 17 have participated in at least four.--Ipigott (talk) 15:19, 2 June 2016 (UTC)


 * These are important statistics; thank you for compiling. Will there be time for you to update these stats to include WiR/9, WiR/11 and WiR/13 in the next 2 weeks; and would it be ok with you if I use the statistics in my Wikimania presentation on 25 June; and are you ok with me giving you attribution for the stats? --Rosiestep (talk) 19:31, 2 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes to all of these although WiR/9 on Women Scientists will require a considerable amount of work. Since you first created the editathon page in February, there have been many, many biographies on scientists (which I've noticed but not recorded). I'll now try to pick them up from the AlexBot archives. I know they're important and so I'll start working on it tomorrow but it will probably mean I won't be able to contribute much to Entertainment. Spies and MEDA are much easier. Let's see how it all goes.-- Ipigott (talk) 21:08, 2 June 2016 (UTC)


 * You should get a barnstar for being Mr. Wonderful. If collecting the scientist data gets to be too much, no worries. --Rosiestep (talk) 01:48, 3 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I've covered the Women Scientist articles from 6 February to the end of May. I have a total of 272: 44 in February, 71 in March, 78 in April and 76 in May. There may in fact be quite a few more as I see that many of those posted since the beginning of April were not picked up by AlexBot. Tomorrow I'll put together a list of participants. may be interested in this too.--Ipigott (talk) 11:31, 3 June 2016 (UTC)


 * This is good. I'm working on the presentation over the weekend and will be working in the stats. Sage Ross with WikiEdu is trying to automate May's overall metrics for us so if he can make that work, it'll be good as those metrics take hours to compile. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:11, 3 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I think you should be careful about how you present the "metrics" for each month in you paper. As I have pointed out on several occasions, a large proportion of the new articles on women each month consists of biographies of women in sport with little or nothing to do with the focus of our editathons. For example, the figure listed for April is 1,649 but there were only 489 as a result of our editathons (393 for Writers, 18 for Spies and 78 for Scientists). The total for March is listed as 2,342 but only 841 articles came out of the Art+Feminism editathon and some of these were improvements to existing articles. Similarly for February, the total listed is 2,320 but only 39 came from Black Women's History. It may well be true that more articles are being created on women as a result of WiR but I think it is misleading to pretend that they are all related to the project. Maybe you could include the editathon results side-by-side with the monthly totals. I think that would be a much more objective way of going about it.--Ipigott (talk) 15:21, 3 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, that is my plan. The overall metrics + the editathon metrics. --Rosiestep (talk) 01:14, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for helping us to fix the gender gap
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)


 * Thanks. I actually also contributed to a considerable number of the new articles; some of them needed quite a lot of attention. Have you created a list of participants for the MENA artists or should I try to put one together myself?--Ipigott (talk) 07:20, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Women in wine
Hi don't know if you have a list somewhere to add these to, perhaps a Women in Wine in the USA section of Business or something.

♦ Dr. Blofeld  05:24, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Dr. Linda Bisson
 * Milla Handley
 * Karen Cakebread
 * Lulu Peyraud (France)
 * Joy Sterling
 * Cristina Mantilla (Spain)
 * Gina Gallo
 * Sandrine Garbay (France)
 * Alison Crowe
 * Kris Curran
 * Ashley Hepworth
 * Joy Andersen (Washington)
 * Patricia Green (wine) (Oregon)
 * Lynn Penner Ash (Oregon)
 * Susana Balbo (Argentina)
 * Cecilia Torres (Chile)


 * We have Women in Leadership. They should be added under the appropriate country, preferably with a useful source. At present we have Category:Winemakers but it would be useful to introduce Category:Women winemakers, possibly with subcategories for some countries. We could then put together a List of women winemakers. I've suggested an editathon in November on Women in food and drink.--Ipigott (talk) 07:14, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I'll add them to Women in Food and drink. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:23, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Mistaken tag?
Hi. I just noticed that you had tagged this article as having been "submitted as part of the Women in Music virtual edit-a-thon hosted by WikiProject Women in Red, 10-31 January 2016." Was this a mistake? If I am not wrong this seems to have been created independently of the event by a COI editor. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 10:47, 9 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I've now tagged it as WiR Entertainment. It's often difficult to know whether articles have been created under our editathons or not but Music was certainly a mistake.--Ipigott (talk) 10:52, 9 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Hmm, considering that the article was created in Jan 2016 with no substantial edits after that, I get a feeling this was not part of WiR Entertainment either or any WiR editathons for that matter. But if the author is indeed part of the editathon, please let me know. One suggestion I have is that in cases where it is not known if the article was created as part of the event, it is best not to tag it as such. To be clear, my intent here is not to deny credit or something, but just to clarify if the article is indeed part of the editathon. I was looking into a case of WP:FINANCIALCOI involved in this article (Joanna Dong), but the editathon tag suggested that it was created by one of the participants (and I don't want to mistakenly accuse an innocent good faith participant of COI). I went through the participant lists and was unable to find the author, hence my request above for clarification. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 12:34, 9 June 2016 (UTC)


 * On further examination, it looks to me as if the tagging was correct as I see that I edited the article in January when we were indeed running the music editathon. The tag reads "new or improved article". As I improved it, the tag was valid. I probably also assumed that the article had been created by a new editor attracted by the editathon. We have many newbies each time. When the article was tagged AfD I assumed it was new and has completely forgotten I had worked on it in January. As we deal with literally hundreds of new articles for WiR each month, it is impossible to remember everything. You may be right that this could be a case of COI but on the other had we might be dealing with a genuine new editor. In general, I try to assist newbies unless there is real evidence of misconduct.--Ipigott (talk) 13:01, 9 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see. I thought the tag was solely about the article being created. No worries then. Yes, I agree with you about new editors, which I why I wanted to clarify before proceeding to ask the editor about COI. Thank you for your help! --Lemongirl942 (talk) 14:23, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Women in Red
So, here it is, three fascinating topics to choose from, and what image do I restore? Emmeline Pankhurst. I'm not always good at sticking to a topic. Still counting it as a WIR FP if it passes, though. =P Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:25, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Right! Bessie Smith (Bisexual entertainer) done. I'll do a quick detour to do Ivor Novello - Don't want to neglect LGBTQ men completely during pride month, but will be prioritising women - then a Joan of Arc movie poster, then we'll see.  Ethel Waters? Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:56, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Really not good at keeping on-topic... still! She deserves the exposure. Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:02, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Hannah Chaplin
— Maile (talk) 13:54, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Hall of Fame!
--Rosiestep (talk) 09:01, 23 June 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage (To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)

Charlotte Hanmann again
Charlotte Hanmann, "mostly capturing the urban environment with processed photographs", can you please tell me were "urban environment" appears in Danish, where "processed photographs", and how that "mostly" is sourced. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:24, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Update: fixed for DYK by Montanabw, - just teach me a bit Danish if you have the time, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:13, 26 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Google translate, LOL!  Montanabw (talk)  19:30, 26 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I did not get back to you sooner. My internet connection here is Denmark has been down for two days and has just been fixed. Glad to see everything has finally worked out. Vive Google translate!--Ipigott (talk) 09:29, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Inger Hanmann
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:50, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Charlotte Hanmann
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:50, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Swiss women red links
You didn't start the page in your sub directory, but in article space. I've moved it to Draft:Swiss women red links. Bgwhite (talk) 05:41, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you with a barnstar
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)

DYK for Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight
The DYK project (nominate) 12:35, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Sibelius
Please read User_talk:Tim_riley. You can reply here or in my discussion (let's not bother Tim again ;) ). Triplecaña (talk) 14:10, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

commons:User:Adam Cuerden/10wikicommonsdays
Little project I got into, inspired by Vassia's 100wikidays. A bit shorter, but I don't think I could have gone much longer, honestly. There'll be another. All of them are WIR-appropriate. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:53, 14 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the info but I think I'll stick to content editing. When I was younger (back in the late 50s and early 60s) I was a keen photographer, doing my own darkroom processing of both black and white and colour and managing to do quite well in a number of competitions. Unfortunately, I have not been able to keep up with the digital revolution but am pleased to see we have a bunch of experts like you who are able to maintain momentum on Wikipedia and Commons.--Ipigott (talk) 14:35, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Help with French source
I found it, but cannot read it except for the few bits of French I can pick up from Latin. I think it says name of Pooja Dhingra's Swiss School was Cesar Ritz Colleges and also that she published a book. [www.culinaryartsswitzerland.com/media/swiss_education_group/document/0/cesar-ritz-alumni-international-recruitment-forum.pdf] Can you help? SusunW (talk) 16:17, 17 July 2016 (UTC)


 * I suppose you are referring to this. There's quite a bit of detailed info I can work into the article but I'm pretty tied up with visitors at the moment. I'll do what I can as time permits. I didn't realize you were a Latin scholar. I also learnt Latin at school. In those days it was considered a basic requirement for entrance to Oxford and Cambridge, even for science students. It has served me well as a basis for the modern Romance languages.--Ipigott (talk) 13:38, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I was a chemistry student, thus science. It helped a lot that the girl who became my matron of honor was great at it. She became a Latin teacher. I think I was not so much a Latin scholar, as to have learned only enough to be dangerous. ;) There is no rush in putting the info in Dhingra's article. We saved her already, but she could clearly benefit from your attention. SusunW (talk) 14:45, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Images
Could you let me know if you find anything likely while working on articles? I have a list, but I always welcome more suggestions.

Besides the current topics, I suspect Polar Women will be hard for me to contribute to, since the collections that have pictures of them aren't likely to be any of my standard ones; any hints towards image sources you have for me on those I'd especially appreciate. Mind you, I thought Halls of Fame was one I'd not be able to get into at all; you've probably noticed I was very wrong there. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:47, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia and United Nations Women Project
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) Delivered by Rosiestep (talk) via MassMessage 04:27, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Indigenous women & Polar women editathons
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 21:08, 24 July 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage

Digital Anthropology research
Hello Ipigott, My name is Stephanie Barker and I am a student at the University of Colorado Boulder. I am currently enrolled in a Digital Anthropology class, which attempts to answer how the digital world affects culture and how culture affects the digital world. For my final project I am doing an ethnography on women Wikipedia users and as a member of the WikiProject Women page I was hoping I could ask you some questions about your experiences editing Wikipedia pages. 1. Have you ever been locked into an intense editing war? If yes, please explain the situation to me. 2. How did you become interested in editing Wikipedia pages and did you have any initial fears/hesitations when you started editing pages? 3. Have you ever been a victim of a mass deletion or other vandalism on Wikipedia? If yes, please explain the situation to me. 4. How would you describe your gender? 5. Is there anything else you would like to share with me about your experiences as a Wikipedia editor? I would like you to know that I am only sharing my research with my professor and the other students in my class. If you would like me to send you a copy of my final project, I would be more than happy to! Sincerely, Stelba90 (talk) 01:10, 2 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi Stephanie. Thanks for contacting me in connection with your interesting research. I must first tell you that I'm male, full name Ian Pigott, as are several of the more active editors working towards the improvement of the coverage of women on Wikipedia. I see you have contacted a significant number of women editors who should be able to answer your questions more directly. If it's of any interest to you, I have been trying to support the involvement of women in Wikipedia for a number of years. I spend a fair amount of time helping new editors, especially those whose early articles are listed for deletion or who run into trouble by not following Wikipedia procedures in their early days. It is my impression that articles about women, many of which are created by women editors, are more often subject to deletion than those about men. Women's biographies translated or adapted from versions of Wikipedia in other languages are often targeted as English-language editors are unable to find (or understand) valid sources in other languages. As for conflicts, I have never experienced any serious upsets myself although I have followed many in which women editors have been involved. Generally speaking though, women editors seem to be far more skilled at avoiding conflicts. Indeed, many seem to join WikiProjects such as Women, Women in Red, Women Scientists, Women Writers and Women Artists simply because of their highly cooperative editing environment. I hope this helps and I hope you will share your findings with us. As you are a new Wikipedia editor yourself, you might like to join one of these projects in order to gain practical experience of the editing environment. May I suggest you look at Women in Red and perhaps join one of our editathons.--Ipigott (talk) 08:09, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Deleted articles
Haven't been following WIR recently. Did you create a list for deleted articles afterwards? An increasingly amount of content seems to be deleted without properly checking to see if they're actually notable or not.♦ Dr. Blofeld  10:08, 2 August 2016 (UTC)


 * This is 's hobby horse. S/he seems to be relying on the lists of alerts on WP Women. If anyone can improve on this, it would help us along.--Ipigott (talk) 13:11, 2 August 2016 (UTC)


 * I would suggest that a page is set up to list AFDs and articles which were deleted in whch people can look at. A sort of noticeboard.♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:41, 2 August 2016 (UTC)


 * One can start here: WikiProject_Women/Article_alerts.  Some of the AfDs are truly cruft (a lot of state beauty pageant winners in the Aug 1 batch) but I've also seen some quite notable people get tagged.  The problem is that I am not sure if this also pulls in the "child" projects (WP Women writers, WP women scientists, etc...)  Montanabw (talk)  18:08, 2 August 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't think it does. Maybe himself can suggest how these lists can be merged. If this proves to be too difficult, we could just provide links to the various lists on WP Women. Or perhaps other members of WiR such as  could help to pick out the ones which really deserve attention and compile a list of deleted article red links, possibly for WiR?--Ipigott (talk) 08:17, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

The West Country Challenge
This is just a reminder that WikiProject England/The West Country Challenge kicks off today, with the first subject being Bristol. Please remember to post entries under your name at WikiProject England/The West Country Challenge/Bristol. You are receiving this message because you are listed as a participant in the challenge.

Happy editing! --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:46, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

The first leg is Bristol. Names are to be added at the bottom of the Bristol page and articles listed. Please also make sure that you add entries you improve/start to the main list on the main page. There will be £10 to win each day for the most points accumulated and then the winner of the county crowned after three days. The overall winner will be decided from the points accumulated from each county round. If you're not interested in winning anything and want to contribute anything you want from the West Country this is fine too though. Best of luck!♦ Dr. Blofeld  10:06, 8 August 2016 (UTC)


 * I'll try to chip in from time to time but certainly not every day.--Ipigott (talk) 13:06, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

offer
Ian, #wikiwomeninred twitter page gets a new banner every day. I could add it to project pages and it should also change to a different women (usually one born on that day) every. Refusal will not offend but I thought I Id make the offer. One niggle is that when I look at the project pages I cannot tell if Ive got the right one till I scroll down. Can I unreserved thank you on behalf of the project for the co-ordination you do. Roger
 * That's a great offer, Roger. Anything you can do to liven up our pages would be greatly appreciated. In regard to the project pages, maybe it would be good to have a clear heading right at the top of each editathon page. Why not try it out? Btw, have you noticed any improvement in page views on the articles you tweet? I'm afraid I'm not very involved in the social networks myself but they seem to be increasingly popular. For many users, Facebook seems to have become the first port of call. If you have any other suggestions for improvements to our pages, please just go ahead with them - unless you think they should first be discussed on the WiR talk page.--Ipigott (talk) 05:17, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Upcoming editathons: Women in Nursing & Women Labor Activists
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 16:44, 27 August 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage

A barnstar for you!

 * Many thanks. But it takes a team to keep things moving. I just try to keep the works well oiled.--Ipigott (talk) 06:02, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

The 10,000 Challenge
Hi there. I've started a new initiative, the The 10,000 Challenge. It's a long term goal to bring about 10,000 article improvements to the UK and Ireland. Through two contests involving just six or seven weeks of editing so far we've produced over 1500 improvements. Long term if we have more people chipping it and adding articles they've edited independently as well from all areas of the UK then reaching that target is all possible. I think it would be an amazing achievement to see 10,000 article improvements by editors chipping in. If you support this and think you might want to contribute towards this long term please sign up in the Contributors section. No obligations, just post work on anything you feel like whenever you want, though try to avoid basic stubs if possible as we're trying to reduce the overall stub count and improve general comprehension and quality. Thanks.♦ Dr. Blofeld  12:39, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Master of Fogdö for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Master of Fogdö is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Master of Fogdö until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Wikidata entries?
I am completely confused how I create a Wikidata entry for 1917 Bath Riots and mark it as a women's event. Can you help? SusunW (talk) 23:51, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I am also confused why labor activists category now defaults to trade unionists. These women weren't trade unionists, but they were protesting a policy that effected their ability to work. That isn't unionized labor IMO. Do you have a better category idea. SusunW (talk) 23:54, 12 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi Susun. I think the problem with labor activists vs. trade unionists comes from Wikipedia itself, see here. It's usually quite difficult to make changes to established categories but and  may be able to offer some advice. Missvain may also be able to help with the Wikidata end of these issues.--Ipigott (talk) 13:23, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia16
Bonsoir Ian. J'avoue ne pas avoir tout à fait compris le problème avec James (Blofeld) et ne pas trop savoir quoi faire en ce moment. Ce qui est certain est que cela fait plusieurs années (je pèse mes mots) qu'un wikipédien ne m'avait pas autant gonflé. Quand à Shola, il a décidé de l'ignorer. Et je ne peux guère lui reprocher à la vue de l'historique des conversations publiques et privées des deux dernières semaines. Bon enfin bref. Et quand je pense que je suis surtout sensée m'occuper de la partie francophone :) La partie Côte d'Ivoire et Cameroun est faite en français. Voici la page d'accueil en français: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projet:Wiki_Loves_Women. Les équipes de ces deux pays parlent franchement un anglais médiocre et les équipes anglophones du Ghana et du Nigéria ne parlent pas du tout français donc il est difficile d'avoir beaucoup d'interactions. C'est dommage. Du côte français, on a un projet naissant inspiré de WiR, les Sans Pages. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projet:Les_sans_pagEs. L'approche est, je crois, beaucoup plus féministe que sur la version anglophone. De mon côté, actuellement je m'occupe surtout de faire du nettoyage de catégories sur la thématique "Afrique/Femmes". Par exemple, j'ai remis d'aplomb et essayé de compléter la catégorie https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catégorie:Condition_féminine_par_pays cette semaine. C'est pas mal le bazar et disons qu'il y a beaucoup d'éléments manquants. Je ne suis pas très bonne rédactrice, mais j'aime bien que les choses soient bien rangées, bien ordonnées :) Nous avons aussi quelques participants des 100wikidays, qui consacrent régulièrement des articles aux femmes africaines dans le cadre de WLW. En fait, j'aimerais beaucoup qu'il y ait un "push" de traduction d'articles EN vers FR ou FR vers EN, ou tout autre language. Mais qui concentrerait l'effort vers la traduction d'articles de fond ou de bio de qualité (alors qu'en général, les traductions se font souvent sur de petits articles) et qui viserait à traduire un article donné dans le plus grand nombre de langue possible. Par exemple, (un peu pris au hasard...), regarde l'article Malicounda Bambara. Ou These Girls Are Missing. Ce ne sont pas de très bons articles, mais peut-être peuvent ils être améliorés ? Ensuite, par exemple pour le premier, il n'existe qu'un seul article dans une autre langue (français) mais nettement plus médiocre. Et il n'existe dans aucune autre langue. Et si... on identifiait collectivement cet automne... disons 16 articles vraiment intéressants et relativement bien traités (mais n'existant pas dans d'autres langues, ou stubs). On les peaufine pendant quelques temps. Et puis... par exemple pour célébrer Wikipedia16 (mi janvier prochain), on lance un petit concours, proposant de traduire ces 16 articles dans le plus grand nombre de langues possibles. Concours symbolique dont les gagnants sont des articles ! Bon, à titre personnel, j'aimerais bien que ces 16 articles soient en rapport avec les femmes et l'Afrique. Mais l'idée est là. Si ça t'intéresse... n'hésite pas ! Anthere (talk) 17:05, 14 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Bonjour Florence et un grand merci. Je n'étais pas du tout au courant de tous ces développements sur le wiki fr. Je suis ravi de voir que vous avez adopté l'approche WiR pour votre projet "Les sans pagEs". (Pourquoi cet E majuscule?) La démarche commence vraiment à porter ses fruits. D'ici une semaine ou deux, j'essairai d'y consacrer quelques heures pour mieux en examaner le détail. Je crois bien que les anglophones et les francophones (pour ne pas exclure les germanophones) pourraient tous profiter d'une collaboration plus étroite. Pour ce qui concerne les déroulements au Nigéria, après mes échanges avec Shola je crois que nous sommes maintenant sur la bonne voie. J'ai l'impression que J. voulait vraiment vous donner un coup de main. (C'est grâce à lui que j'ai découvert les préparations du concours - même avant l'annonce officielle.) Mais il a beaucoup de tempérament et réagit souvent sans trop y penser. Quoi qu'il en soit, il a énormément contribué à Wikipédia. A bientôt.--Ipigott (talk) 11:46, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Oui, beaucoup de contributions et d'excellente qualité apparemment.
 * Pourquoi le E.... et bien je n'étais pas là lors de la décision sur le nom. Il est une conséquence des discussions pendant Wikimania mais fait suite à une série d'actions en Suisse en 2015-2016 (fr:Projet:Suisse/Biographies des femmes en Suisse). Le projet est en particulier porté par NattesAChat. Le sujet a été beaucoup évoqué pendant la m:WikiConvention francophone/2016/fr d'août. Donc oui, les choses bougent pas mal...
 * Je pense que le E est un clin d'oeil à l'écriture épicène. L'usage du E, comme dans motivéEs est pas mal utilisé par les utilisateurs du language non sexiste. Bon... moi j'avoue ne pas me classer dans la catégorie féministe... et j'écris motivées.... mais j'admet que le clint d'oeil est sympa et donne un joli nom de projet au final. Anthere (talk)

Wiki Loves Women- Monthly Contest
Olaniyan Olushola (talk) 17:36, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for this. With some minor edits, I'll post it on the WiR main page.--Ipigott (talk) 07:43, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Ellen Broe
If you are interested and have time, could you look over Ellen Johanne Broe to make sure I didn't make too many mistakes with the Danish? I am also quite puzzled that I cannot find a VIAF or ISNI number for her? She has a worldcat presence, is listed in Sudoc and has a Library of Congress number  but authority control won't take any of that? I hate technical stuff that doesn't work. Hope all is well. SusunW (talk) 22:13, 15 September 2016 (UTC)


 * It's a good article. As usual, you have correctly interpreted the Danish sources. I've made one or two very minor edits and added her two books under publications. She is generally known as Ellen Broe and I think I'll move the article to that name. It might also help with authority control. Overall I think authority control works very efficiently and reveals lots of useful background. But you cannot expect all these tools to work 100%.--Ipigott (talk) 09:36, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks Ian. Appreciate the help. SusunW (talk) 13:20, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Editor of the Week [17 September 2016]
User:SusunW submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:
 * I nominate to be Editor of the Week for his tireless efforts to improve WP. Ian speaks multiple languages (English Danish, French, German, Spanish, as well as having a working knowledge of Dutch, other Scandinavian and romance languages) and is an amazing resource for other editors in helping with translations and sourcing. He has been extremely active [3] in creating articles focused on Scandinavia, Luxembourg, music, art, architecture, literature and women. Truly a Renaissance man, his expertise in many areas is staggering and his contributions to GA have included over 20 entries, not the least of which were creation of Malouma, the improvement of Jean Sibelius for his 150th anniversary and improvement of Carl Nielsen which he later promoted to FA. Besides creating over 6,000 pages and bringing over 200 articles to DYK, he is a tireless behind the scenes editor, sending invitations and thank yous for editathons, helping source newly created articles, creating lists to eliminate orphaned articles, adding categories, and in general encouraging and supporting other editors. Ipigott is reliable, authentic, bright, and articulate. If he says he's going to do something, he does it. A polyglot, his translation assistance is invaluable. A champion of the Women in Red project.

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week: Thanks again for your efforts! Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) 17:57, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I just want to quickly note, outside of the award template, that this nomination was "seconded" by, , , , and – more than any other I can remember. Congratulations, you've definitely earned this one!! Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) 17:57, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Which means that I can be the first to congratulate you. Every project has an engine, and we've got a muscle car. Victuallers (talk) 18:15, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
 * And I can be the second... congratulations! --Rosiestep (talk) 20:18, 17 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you and everyone else involved for expressing appreciation of my work. The award actually comes at just the right time, at the end of a rather difficult week. I must nevertheless point out that without the excellent spirit of collaboration you all have shown, my interest in Wikipedia would have long since dwindled. But I now look forward to even more productive times ahead.--Ipigott (talk) 07:41, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I am glad that it finally arrived. You are so deserving and I appreciate both your help and collaboration more than I could ever say. SusunW (talk) 13:51, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Congratulations. Your efforts have left behind something useful for the future. Buster Seven   Talk  11:59, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Invite on white
I have to say, I rather like the WiR invitations on white background. Plain, simple, and the photos stand out. Shall we stick with that for awhile or do you prefer alternating with colors? --Rosiestep (talk) 17:58, 18 September 2016 (UTC)


 * White is fine with me, so let's stick to white. What about the clickable buttons? I have a feeling we started with a variety of colours but now they all seem to be red.--Ipigott (talk) 06:54, 19 September 2016 (UTC)


 * I was thinking about switching to all white buttons. Thoughts? --Rosiestep (talk) 05:32, 20 September 2016 (UTC)


 * I prefer them coloured. They stand out better.--Ipigott (talk) 06:33, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

The 1000 Challenge (Nordic)
Hi. I was wondering if you would be interested in contributing articles to The 1000 Challenge (Nordic)? It needs contributors to increase diversity of content from different countries and bring about large scale improvements. The idea at some point will be to host a National Contest related to your country of interest. Thanks. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:15, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/24 & 25/Invitation
Hi Ian; per the non-free content criteria, you cannot use non-free images outside of the mainspace. I'm sure you already knew this and this one just slipped through the cracks, but I thought I'd mention it anyway. Josh Milburn (talk) 15:33, 24 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks - I'll check this out and make any necessary changes. Good thing you alerted me so quickly, it's about to go out by mass messaging. I think I've fixed everything now. I simply didn't realize the image was not on commons.--Ipigott (talk) 15:58, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Public art template and Women's Exhibition of 1895
I have made a draft for a Public art in Copenhagen template in this sandbox with inspiration from Template:Public art in London. I am, however, a little puzzled by the London templat's destinction between 'statues' and 'other works' since many of the entries under 'other works' to me does seem in fact to be statues. 'Statues' seems to be reserved for statues of historic people. So do you think the current structure of my draft works or do you have any proposals for improvements?

On women: With all your work on pioneering Women and women history in general, you are probably already aware of it but otherwise the Women's Exhibition of 1895 may interest you.Here is an article from Illustreret Tidende. There is an article on Danish wikiepdia here: Kvindernes Udstilling. Ramblersen (talk) 19:08, 24 September 2016 (UTC) @User:Ipigott: Did you perhaps overlook this question due to the high activity on your talk page?Ramblersen (talk) 15:51, 27 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Glad you alerted me on this again. I had indeed overlooked your first message. The template looks fine to me. The only possible suggestion I have is that it might be useful to pick out some of the more important memorials from the lists on the various districts, but I do not have any specific suggestions. I've been very impressed with all your articles and lists on public art in Copenhagen. You've been doing some wonderful work. Impressed too by all those new articles you've listed on the Nordic contest. The background on the 1895 expo is very interesting. I see there are a number of names which deserve biographies. Thanks for all the info.--Ipigott (talk) 07:33, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to 	 Women in Architecture & Women in Archaeology editathons
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 20:05, 24 September 2016 (UTC) via MassMessaging

User:Ipigott/Architects snafu
Your User:Ipigott/Architects page is currently showing archaeologists. (Excellent use of wikidata, btw; kudos.) --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:45, 24 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much for pointing this out. I've corrected it now and it looks OK. I was trying to finish off too many things yesterday evening before making the evening meal. More haste, less speed. Yes, isn't it great how we can use Wikidata draw up wonderful lists of redlinks based on articles in other wiki languages. I try to put them together for as many WiR activities as possible. I was interested to see you have had contacts with the European Commission's DG XII. I actually worked at the Commission myself (1973 to 2007), mainly in DG XIII (also in the research area) on multilingual and cultural heritage developments. Interesting too to see your first major work was on Alnwick. (Not many of today's editors have been around since early 2004.) I come from Newcastle so I know it well. Any chance of getting you to contribute to Women in Red? I'm sure we would benefit from your participation. In any case, I see you are still creating interesting biographies on women.--Ipigott (talk) 10:33, 25 September 2016 (UTC)


 * My DG-XIII days were ending as you arrived, more or less. I vaguely remember the RTD Framework 4, and have fond memories of very many trips to Brussels, and all sorts of other places European. I fear there'll be less of that now, for the next generations :(. And yes, the North East. It's still here. Somewhat cold and rainy all of a sudden. I'll do what I can w.r.t. WiR: here's what I could find this evening on Bertha Porter (who should probably be made the patron saint of wikipedia - clearly a hard-core gnome). --Tagishsimon (talk)


 * The 4th Framework began in 1994. I joined the Commission in 1973 and moved to DG XIII in 1976 so I don't think you could have been there all that long before me. Haven't been in the north east for years as I no longer have family there. I now live in Luxembourg and spend quite a bit of time in Denmark as my wife is Danish. I sometimes follow what's happening in the north-east on the TV news. Thanks for Bertha Porter. Looks as if there are plenty more red-linked ladies on the DNB list. It might be interesting to sift through the No WP list for women but I see the vast majority of missing articles are on men. I see Bertha wrote about Hannah Wooley who could be usefully included (or at least some of the works she lists) in November's priority on women in food and drink. We also have the novelist Jessie Forthergill for Women Writers, also in November. I've included you on the WiR mailing list -- so you'll hear about our priorities in due course. Let me know if you ever need any specific help with anything.--Ipigott (talk) 22:41, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah. 1997 then. I slipped a decade. WP WP:DNB has been attending to women DNB entries ... consensus is that they are now all included. WikiProject Dictionary of National Biography/Women in Red is ODNB women.


 * Specific help: The WikiProject Dictionary of National Biography/Women in Red page could use one of your wikidata tables ... I've had a play at User:Tagishsimon/test, but my Country of Citizenship column has oddish values, and the final column could do with being a link to ODNB, which would take the form http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/2153 ... grateful if you'd either have a look at mine or adapt one of your own; ODNB has to be low hanging fruit since there's always a well-written biog to consult. --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:36, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Inès de Bourgoing
All that talk of fish and French led me to this jewel. Can you please look it over and make sure that there are no blatant errors with the French translation. As you know, it is probably my very worst language to work with. I am quite puzzled as to why her name is given as de Bourgoing. Perhaps because she was nobility? Had not all the authority control docs and her French article been in that name, I would have done it under her married name, as she was clearly known more as the Marschallin Lyautey. I did redirects under both Fortoul and Lyautey, as there are sources under both of her married names, but I was loath to change the surname given the library and data reference links. SusunW (talk) 21:02, 24 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Interesting article. Looking at it now but finding the use of Fortoul for both de Bourgoing and her husband rather confusing. Trying to sort it out.--Ipigott (talk) 10:52, 25 September 2016 (UTC)


 * I think I've straightened out the article as it stands. The chronology in the various sources you have used is sometimes rather confusing. Maybe you could expand the lead a bit. If you have time, you could also add something on the assessment of her work and her contribution to nursing in Morocco, etc. You might like to look at this. I think you've drawn on the same text elsewhere but there are some interesting illustrations. Would you like to work the article up to GA?--Ipigott (talk) 13:09, 25 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Here's the Euology--Ipigott (talk) 13:18, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I think she would make a lovely subject for a GA, but I think we do not have an in-depth enough profile based on what I found so far. Looks like the Blog you found is by the same guy, Colonel Pierre Geoffroy, who wrote the "Reflections" article at the University of Lorraine. I could only find a summary of her works in Morocco. Would that we had access to that biography of her, but I have no way to access it and even if I did I could not read it, as it is in French. I cannot read the Eulogy either, as it won't translate in any of the programs I use. I guess it's formatted as a photo, not text. But, if we can find more sources, I think she is definitely worthy of a more in-depth article. I'll look in Hathitrust. Given her time frame, surely there is something??? SusunW (talk) 15:59, 25 September 2016 (UTC)


 * I actually found quite a few more sources, including many meaty snippets from Google books. There's also material about her in works about her husband. I expect we could also find accounts in Arabic from Morocco, especially in connection with the institutions she created. But maybe it's more important to move on to other women. I've already spend most of the day on her!--Ipigott (talk) 16:28, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I found very few books I could access, which is why I always think it is important to have a wider participation in making a good article. So many sources are location specific. If you think there are sufficient sources, we can try to take her to GA. It's been a while since we worked on one and I always enjoy our collaborations. I also noted that there are photographs in the 2nd piece from Colonel Georffroy you found of the hospitals she established and worked at. Can we use those photos? I found a piece by Edith Wharton on her at Hathitrust. Will have to review it to see if there is usable material. SusunW (talk) 17:38, 25 September 2016 (UTC)


 * I see you've been working on it a bit. I'll see what I can do with it myself. As you've become the world's expert on sfn/harvard references, as I go along I'll just add sources in the normal way and you can upgrade them. I sympathize with what you say about all those fax files. I just read them like any other sources.--Ipigott (talk) 12:46, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I can do that. I expanded the lede as you asked. Please look it over. I just found some sourcing on Goutte de Lait de Casablanca, which I will try to add. I was kind of confused if this was a program or a building. Apparently it was both--and I'll add the info I found. SusunW (talk) 17:30, 26 September 2016 (UTC)


 * I still have a number of other sources I would like to use. There have been lots of other distractions today, as always, and I've also been working on my pioneering Danish nurses. Hope to finish tomorrow though. There's so much more to do and so many other people have been asking for help. We get busier and busier day by day. Great to be working with you again, though, Susun.--Ipigott (talk) 18:01, 26 September 2016 (UTC)


 * P.S. The lead (sorry, that's the way I spell it!) looks much better. I don't think there's much more to be done but we still need to sort out how she first came to Oran and met Lyautey. There are several conflicting accounts. I'll look at it tomorrow.--Ipigott (talk) 18:10, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm with you on that. Was it in 1903 or in 1907? Kind of a big difference. SusunW (talk) 18:14, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I see that you decided it was 1907. I did a stub, because I know diddly squat about military terms, war, etc. in general and because I am really bad at French, on Drude. That leaves us with only 1 redlink, which I think is acceptable. Let me know when you think it is ready for nomination. Looks good to me. SusunW (talk) 19:51, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, almost sure it was 1907. That date also ties up with other accounts on the general. There are a number of things I would still like to work on but I'm rather short of time at the moment. Let's keep it open for a few more days. I'll let you know when I think it's ready for GA. Just found more illustrations here.--Ipigott (talk) 07:11, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Take as much time as you need. We don't have a deadline. ;) Let me know when you are ready. I saw the later pics on the Lyautey Foundation site, just don't know how we could use them unless they are copyright free. P.S. I have started on a new woman. Utterly fascinating and turned out to be more French sources than Dutch User:SusunW/Maria de Villegas de Saint-Pierre. SusunW (talk) 14:29, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Most of the photos are too old to be copyright. I've also been covering some fascinating Danish nurses, a few of them also "labor activists". I may have time to look at Maria later but my first observation is that Mohiville is in the Belgian province of Namur, not Luxembourg.--Ipigott (talk) 15:37, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Again, no rush. I am not pushing myself these days as in the past. If it takes several days to write a more in-depth article. I do. And yes, I noticed about your Danes. I have been tweeting them ;) SusunW (talk) 15:43, 28 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Unless you want to do more work on it yourself, I think the article's more or less ready for GA. In any case, a GA review will no doubt bring additional suggestions for improvement. I was wondering whether it would be useful to include a short background section on nursing in France at the beginning of the 20th century but decided against it as it would require quite a bit of research, perhaps even an article. I'm also kept busy with all the background work on our editathons, etc. Several other editors have asked me to help with their work or interests and I would also like to look more closely at your de Villegas which seems to be coming along very nicely.--Ipigott (talk) 16:29, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I've been checking in pretty much daily and converting the refs to harv. Love the photo of their home! I'll give it a once over and then submit it, because as you say, I am sure the reviewer will ask for clarifications we've missed. I think we are okay without adding the history of nursing. I toyed with improving the French Red Cross article, but I just don't think I have the language ability with French. I will welcome your help on de Villegas, Dr. Loodts article translates mostly to gobbledeegoop no matter what translation program I use. The story of the soldiers in the forest sounds promising, but I cannot make heads nor tails of it. SusunW (talk) 16:37, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Made a few very minor tweaks and nominated it. Will check back to see how it progresses. Thanks again for your help with her. I truly enjoy our collaborations. SusunW (talk) 17:35, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Just ping me if anything comes up I can help with. I'm glad you discovered Inès. Looks as if she was always very much in the shadow of Lyautey -- so it's just as well she's now gaining a modicum of prominence on Wikipedia.--Ipigott (talk) 09:10, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Good Article
I nominated her for DYK if you want to add anything Template:Did you know nominations/Inès de Bourgoing. Now that we are done with that one, what about the countess, Maria de Villegas de Saint-Pierre? I don't know if you have time, but she is really interesting. I also have an English Baroness (what is up with all this royalty for a poor titless American?) that I'm looking for someone to help with. If you're too busy, no worries. SusunW (talk) 20:07, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

WIR-A 2016 template
I noticed that the template for WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/24 was missing so I made one based on the WIR-N 2016 template. If I have stepped on anyone's toes, then please tell me and I will know better next time. Thanks. --Big_iron (talk) 12:59, 1 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much . I simply forgot to create it. Thanks for sorting it out.--Ipigott (talk) 13:27, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

not exactly a favour but a favour all the same
I noticed you were able to pull the details for redlinks for women from China. There are none listed for Ireland. I have some on my to do pages but I was wondering if there were more for Ireland that you could pull out? It would make it so much easier for me if I could find some more redlinks. There is limited detail on the people I know are missing and it would give me more people to work on... If this isn't a simple task for you then leave it - I was just hoping you have a program written which would do this?  &#9749;  Antiqueight  haver 12:35, 4 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Here's the list for Ireland. I was surprised to see so many names on the list but it looks as if there have been articles about Irish women in languages other than English.--Ipigott (talk) 12:47, 4 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Oh Thank you! I will get working on those - that's excellent. Again, thanks.  &#9749;  Antiqueight  haver 12:53, 4 October 2016 (UTC)


 * I've just been looking at all those articles you've been creating, including many biographies of Irish women writers, etc. Great stuff! The list I sent you only includes women from the Irish Republic. There may be names from Northern Ireland which are not included. Let me know if you need any further help with anything.--Ipigott (talk) 13:08, 4 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Only help is to let me know if I'm making any egregious mistakes - and when I run out of names I feel capable of working on I'll ask if anyone has more. My focus is Irish and Women...preferably Irish Women...I will take NI but I'm focusing on ROI - Or pre1923 any Irish... Thank you for the compliment. I'm off to see what I can do now.   &#9749;  Antiqueight  haver 14:01, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Please stop spamming me
As seen here (added back in May), you should not be sending me messages from the Women in Red project. Please stop spamming me. ··· 日本穣 ·  投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 15:34, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * And also notice that I an not on this list. ··· 日本穣 ·  投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 15:35, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * That's why I didn't invite to WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge because I was afraid of that reaction! You're still very welcome though Joe, as one of the best editors on Japan topics..♦  Dr. Blofeld  15:51, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't mind being invited to things, but I specifically asked to not receive WIR invites. I just don't have the time to participate in them right now (because they are so active it's overwhelming). ··· 日本穣 ·  投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 17:52, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * My apologies,, but in fact you were not being mailed automatically from the Women in Red list but by me personally as I saw that your user page emphasizes your strong interest in Japanese food. I thought that as an English-speaker with a good knowledge of Japan, you would be in an excellent position to contribute to articles about Japanese women in the field of food and drink. As a key player in WP:Japan, you may at the very least be able to pass the message on to other editors with experience or a potential interest in the field. But I'll try to remember not to contact you again in connection with Women in Red. (P.S. I enjoyed reading your recent article on Nancy Fulda.)--Ipigott (talk) 16:09, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Aha. You're welcome to post a note about it on the project talk page if you wish, That's the best way to alert interested editors in the project. As I noted above, I don't have time to participate in the WIR project right now. Your message looked very much like their normal messages, so that's why I reacted that way. If you took it as rude, I apologize, as that wasn't my intention. And thanks for the compliment on the Nancy Fulda article. ··· 日本穣  ·  投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 17:52, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

, well you're warmly welcome at WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge. In fact sometime I might do a national contest/.editathon for Japan if yo're interested. My sister met her husband in Japan!♦ Dr. Blofeld  18:22, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * That would be awesome, though if you can wait a year or so to do it, that would be better for me. I have bits and pieces of time right now, but not usually enough to participate as much as I would like to in such events. ··· 日本穣 ·  投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 18:41, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Haha, I'd run one just for the films of Kurosawa, Miyazaki, Ozu and Mizoguchi, the grandmasters of film. They made some of the best films ever made!♦ Dr. Blofeld  18:46, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * It would be awesome to bump up the quality on some of them. ··· 日本穣 ·  投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 19:06, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Top/high/mid importance African women
Hi, can you, or  create a list of African women bios which are ranked Top, High and Mid importance by the African projects currently? I'm adding a triple GA score for anybody who gets one of them to Good Article status, so one woman bio promoted will be worth 3 normal articles. Don't want to pester Tagish again though if I can help it, sorry ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:12, 17 October 2016 (UTC)


 * I've had a go, results below, using petscan to look at the intersections on talk pages the triplets of categories below. THere are probably more, but this'll get you started. --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:38, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Mid-importance Africa articles
 * WikiProject Biography articles
 * WikiProject Women's History articles
 * and
 * Mid-importance Africa articles
 * WikiProject Biography articles
 * WikiProject Women articles

Top
 * Alexandrine Tinné
 * Ama Ata Aidoo
 * Angélique Kidjo
 * Bessie Head
 * Buchi Emecheta
 * Cleopatra
 * Dihya
 * Doris Lessing
 * Graça Machel
 * Helen Suzman
 * Helen Suzman
 * Jane Goodall
 * Kimpa Vita
 * Mariama Bâ
 * Mary Kingsley
 * Mary Leakey
 * Miriam Makeba
 * Nadine Gordimer
 * Nefertiti
 * Nzinga of Ndongo and Matamba
 * Oumou Sangaré
 * Ranavalona I
 * Ranavalona II
 * Ranavalona III
 * Rasoherina
 * Ruth Perry
 * Sade (singer)
 * Safi Faye
 * Sylvie Kinigi
 * Wangari Maathai
 * Winnie Madikizela-Mandela
 * Yaa Asantewaa
 * Zola Budd

High
 * Adame Ba Konaré
 * Alice Lenshina
 * Barbara Kanam
 * Cesária Évora
 * Cissé Mariam Kaïdama Sidibé
 * Elsie Nwanwuri Thompson
 * Genevieve Nnaji
 * Georgina Theodora Wood
 * Josephine Bakhita
 * Leymah Gbowee
 * Lingeer Fatim Beye
 * Loum N. Neloumsei Elise
 * Malouma
 * Monique Ohsan Bellepeau
 * Nana Osei Bonsu II
 * Olive Schreiner
 * Omotola Jalade Ekeinde
 * Salimata Sawadogo
 * Siti binti Saad
 * The Trimates

Mid
 * Aïcha Fofana
 * Alexia Amesbury
 * Aline Sitoe Diatta
 * Alison Des Forges
 * Amanikhatashan
 * Amanishakheto
 * Aminata Mbengue Ndiaye
 * Angie Brooks
 * Arame Ndoye
 * Asli Hassan Abade
 * Bela Duarte
 * Betty Mould-Iddrisu
 * Camila Estico
 * Caroline Abel
 * Caroline Faye Diop
 * Catherine Samba-Panza
 * Célestine Ouezzin Coulibaly
 * Christine Razanamahasoa
 * Claudine André
 * Damilola Adegbite
 * Deolinda Rodríguez de Almeida
 * Deolinda Rodríguez de Almeida
 * Dian Fossey
 * Diana Nkesiga
 * Edith Nawakwi
 * Ella Koblo Gulama
 * Ellen Johnson Sirleaf
 * Ellen Johnson Sirleaf
 * Ellinah Wamukoya
 * Esther Afua Ocloo
 * Esther Madudu
 * Funmilayo Ransome-Kuti
 * Gertrude Mongella
 * Grace Ogot
 * Gudit
 * Hawa Essuman
 * Hilda Stevenson-Delhomme
 * Isabel dos Santos
 * Isabel dos Santos
 * Jeanne-Marie Ruth-Rolland
 * Jeannette Kagame
 * Jestina Mukoko
 * Judy Mbugua
 * Karen Blixen
 * Karin Mensah
 * Luísa Diogo
 * Lura (singer)
 * Maria do Carmo Silveira
 * Maria do Nascimento da Graça Amorim
 * María Nsué Angüe
 * Marie-Noëlle Koyara
 * Mathilda Twomey
 * Maureen Ayité
 * Mercy Obiero
 * Muhumusa
 * Nana Asma’u
 * Natalie Grainger
 * Nonkululeko Nyembezi-Heita
 * Novuyo Tshuma
 * Pontso Sekatle
 * Princess Lalla Aicha of Morocco
 * Princess Senate Seeiso
 * Queen 'Masenate Mohato Seeiso
 * Raquel Ilonbé
 * Rose Francine Rogombé
 * Rose Kabuye
 * Rosine Sori-Coulibaly
 * Ruth First
 * Sheebah Karungi
 * Sheila Tlou
 * Shirley Itumeleng Tiny Segokgo
 * Simone Gbagbo
 * Sophonisba
 * Specioza Kazibwe
 * Suzan Kerunen
 * Sylvia Blyden
 * Tatiana Rusesabagina
 * Teresa Heinz
 * Thishiwe Ziqubu
 * Verónica I of Matamba
 * Zipporah Nawa


 * Amazingly quick and effective work. Now I won't have to bother about doing them myself.--Ipigott (talk) 13:50, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

I greatly appreciate it and I promise you that'll be the last one! You've been enormously helpful to me!♦ Dr. Blofeld  15:51, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Wow! That was fast,, . :D Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:49, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

I see Karen Blixen is on the list. Now a GA on her would well be worth it Susun and MLG.♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:51, 17 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, my dear friend, I had suggested in the spring that Karen Blixen was a candidate for GA/FA but at the time no one seemed interested. I even read two of her best biographies and studied a fair amount of Danish literature on her contributions to the Danish literary scene. There's far more to cover than just Den Afrikanske Farm or Out of Africa. I now have her life story in my head but my Danish library books for sourcing are back in Denmark. I would actually love to work on her biography but would appreciate some support. There's quite a bit of literature on her in English, including an excellent biography. Any offers? I reckon it's a two or three month project. Unfortunately, even the Danish wiki article is very weak.--Ipigott (talk) 18:21, 17 October 2016 (UTC)


 * I must have been on my trip, as I don't recall ever seeing that note Ian. Don't know if I'll have access to any sources, but I'd be happy to give it a go with you, whenever you are ready. I'm working on a major Finnish architect right now, who I also think might be GA material, but I have 2 others in my wishpile. I agree it is often hard to find collaborators, but I truly enjoy working with you. SusunW (talk) 14:47, 18 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for you interest, Susun. I actually started to do a bit of work on the article in August but then got tied up with other things. I suggest we try to take it on relatively slowly and carefully as there is a huge amount of information to be added. As Denmark's top female (or would that be woman?) author, she certainly deserves a far better write-up.--Ipigott (talk) 16:10, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I would say woman author. I've never tried to rewrite an article that already had so much information in it. But I'm guessing we should first see if the stuff that is cited is actually cited by the sources given. I'm still working on Märta Blomstedt, but I'll try to look at Blixen more thoroughly in the next few days. SusunW (talk) 23:32, 18 October 2016 (UTC)


 * There's actually not all that much, only about 26 kB. Many of the biographies of women writers run to between 60 and 80 kB or even more. Even the standard on-line Danish biographies at Den Store Danske and Kvinfo are much more detailed. As for the sourcing, much of the text has no in-line references and very little has been taken from the recognized biographies such as Judith Thurman's 500-page Isak Dinesen (which I have read in Danish but may now order in the original English). I'll try to cover some of the important gaps in her life story as time permits.--Ipigott (talk) 06:57, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Adé Liz
Feel free to add it to the WIR list.♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:31, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
 * It'll be added to the metrics list automatically.--Ipigott (talk) 15:05, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

An invitation to November's events
(To subscribe: Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 18:07, 23 October 2016 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Reaching 20%
Any idea roughly how many bios we'll need to reach 20% women bios accounting for the average monthly increase in articles on men?♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:43, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Just looked how many bios and current, I reckon around 50,000 articles, might be a bit more but roughly that I think.♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:05, 24 October 2016 (UTC)


 * We're simply not going to make 20% unless we come up with additional initiatives. Despite all our efforts, the number of biographies on men still greatly outweighs those on women. Even the apparent increase up to 16.53% this year is not objective. It has been engineered by bots which look for women by occupation in the categories. That is why I have been saying for some time that we should see how the Koreans, Japanese, Norwegians and Swedes have reached between 20% and 25% and are still progressing. See also the recent discussions on Rosie's talk page. As for actual numbers of new women's biographies, we would need to have at least 280,000 women's biographies even if there were no new biographies on men at all. (Now we only have 232,000.) But as every month about 80% of the new articles are about men anyway, that would mean that we would need about 600,000 just to draw close. Another way of looking at it would be to say we have gained 1.5% over the last 18 months. Given the fact that men's biographies are also being written, to reach 18% would take at least three more years, 19% probably eight or nine more years and so on down the line. On top of everything else, the number of new women biographies per month is now on the decline.--Ipigott (talk) 14:15, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I have to say, this is truly disconcerting. We work our rears off to add quality biographies and the needle barely moves. It seems as if the only solution is to mass add a bunch of stubs, which of course will be AfDed. It is like watching Sisyphus in action. *sigh* SusunW (talk) 16:42, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Ipigott, "not" isn't a word in my vocabulary. Just tell me how many articles roughly we'd need to get 20%. According to the WIR page we have 1,407,950 bio articles. Even allowing 100,000 or 200,000 extra male bios it would be what, somewhere between 50-70,000 bios needed? Achievable. Believe me. Just try to get me the best estimate based on current expansion trends for male bios and I will start to devise something.♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:07, 24 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Did I say "not"? I've been trying to encourage people to come up with new incentives. In round figures, each month there are about 10,000 new bios, 8,000 on men, 2,000 on women. By this time next year, if there are no new initiative, we will have a total of 1,500,000 bios of which 250,000 will be on women. To reach 20%, we would need 300,000. So between now and then, we would need at least 70,000 new biographies on women. So your estimate of up to 70,000 is pretty good. But that would also mean we would need 6,000 new women's biographies a month, i.e. three times as many as we've been clocking up to now. I'm really glad you think you can come up with something. A specific "challenge" on women with the kind of percentage bar you've been using might help us along.--Ipigott (talk) 19:06, 24 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Don't despair! We've actually been doing a fantastic job, writing in-depth articles on women from most walks of life. Our work has certainly contributed to a significant improvement to the coverage of women on Wikipedia. Nevertheless, it's only fair to point out that the articles written by our main participants (whether on the editathons each month or more generally) represent only a very small proportion of the new women's biographies, most of which are very short stubs on sports. As you must remember from your gnoming, editors such as and  between them can clock up about 2,000 new bios on sportswomen every month. However, although I am not very keen on short stubs, if we really wanted to see the needle move, we could certainly devise a method of taking key data from the redlinked women on our Wikidata lists and creating stubs just as quickly as the ones on sports. But is that what we want to do?--Ipigott (talk) 19:25, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

You said "We're simply not going to make 20% " haha. I am something in mind, and yup, you're right in thinking that it's a challenge and a percentage bar :-) You'd need an average of 95 articles a day to pull it off in two years. But consider that the Africa Destubathon produced 500 articles in one week, so it wouldn't be much more than that... ♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:09, 24 October 2016 (UTC)


 * OK, mea culpa. But somehow we would have to maintain the momentum month after month. If you can arrange monthly prizes, maybe it would work. It's certainly worth a try.--Ipigott (talk) 19:25, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Divide 100,000 or even 70,000 by 195 (number of countries in the world). Reckon the figure is manageable/low? I could devise something which gets people producing lots of bios for every country all at the same time given the chance, even with 100,000 bios, only like what 512 articles on average needed per country to pull it off... Can be done, believe. Though some countries might not have that many bios for women, roughly something could be worked out to evenly create articles for women for every country in the world. ♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:45, 24 October 2016 (UTC)


 * We could also start from scratch and consider measuring monthly progress independently from the existing proportions. If we could hit 30% of new bios per month every month, it would not be too bad either.--Ipigott (talk) 19:58, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

At present WIR interest in challenges and contests is extremely low I think. It would be difficult to convince everybody at the project to contribute to a challenge. At present getting that many articles does seem impossible in maybe two years. To pull it off you'd have to do something big to mobilise hundreds of editors too who might not normally contribute heavily to women or be involved in WIR and start to turn the tide. I think though that once WIR members start to see the results, then that may be enough to convince people to contribute all articles to a big challenge on the quest for 20% women bios. I'm going to start drafting for this if I have time later in the week in my sandbox, as it will need a lot more thought and planning, and don't want to jump the gun. I'll just start to devise a mechanism which could be used to pull off what we'd need to get WIR to 20% and people can start to see that actually it is achievable in two years perhaps rather than eight or nine years or whatever you reckon otherwise..♦ Dr. Blofeld  20:17, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Just a quick note as I don't have much time at the moment. Great discussion :). And yes, things are possible. At the moment I'm creating over 100 Women's articles per day. I created over 1000 pages per month over the last year (also men's articles but about 50%, 50%) I'll try to continue creating 100 Women's articles per day :D. Cheers and we will come there at a sudden day. Sander.v.Ginkel (Talk) 20:45, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Great initiative. Let me know if you need some help. I'm working with Excel, and I can learn it to everybody to create a lot of articles. And they don't all become short stubs, also Sheila Ramos was created within 2 minutes. It's all about having data of the women's. Sander.v.Ginkel (Talk) 21:05, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

I gave you a hard time over the British sports stubs, sorry haha. We welcome meatier stubs for UK and any of the other continent challenges. Asia and Latin America ones could use a boost with good creations. If you can make them a little meatier than Sheila Ramos, perhaps another paragraph that would be fine I think. Feel free to add them to the challenges.♦ Dr. Blofeld  21:18, 24 October 2016 (UTC)


 * While the "challenge" approach is a great idea, I think any new initiative should also include ways and means of attracting more participants, especially women participants who generally are more conscious of the important role women play in virtually everything we do and experience in today's world. Women seem happy enough to participate in the social networks and are also ardent bloggers. We simply need to make Wikipedia more attractive for them and more responsive to their contributions, always ensuring they are protected from unfair treatment. We could also try to put together some short but really striking videos (targeting teenagers, students and more mature women) explaining how important Wikipedia has become and how relatively easy it would be to make it better for women. may be able to bring such ideas to the attention of her Wikimedia friends while  could come up with some suggestions on how this could be achieved.--Ipigott (talk) 06:41, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

A bit of a generalization, there'll be a lot of women who couldn't care less about women bios on wikipedia and writing articles on women. And there's alrady a lot of male editors writing articles about women and think nothing of it, we're all humans/people! :-) I know that when I've written articles about women I think of them in exactly the same way as I would a male bio, they're biographies, the same category. I don't think too much about gender as I write an article, except where I've been doing it specifically for WIR or is about a feminist or women's rights activist. But when you really look into it there's an enormous bias in terms of percentage of biographies, and it's not good enough in 2016. So we need to max out production and aim at getting that percentage up to beyond 20 and improving existing articles at the same time which you can only really do through a well funded contest/a perma contest within a shorter time frame. The prize system would get us the editors, male or female, doesn't matter really in terms of quality, but we could certainly do with far more women editors because of a broader focus. Where we could attract more editors is offering people books they want so there is an incentive there to write. Time permitting I'll start drawing up what I have in mind by Friday.♦ Dr. Blofeld  07:46, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

I've got an idea but I won't draw anything up yet, all in good time.♦ Dr. Blofeld  09:06, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Article for deletion
Greetings - I have an article nominated for deletion. I will admit what I was able to find about the person was thin but she seemed to be the second woman to become a snooker referee which seemed notable to me. But personal articles about her are few and far between. So it's up for deletion. I'm not sure if there is a place I can note it so people can take a look and potentially improve it for saving or tell me that yes - it's too thin to keep and I should not argue it..Patricia Murphy (referee) .. I thought perhaps you or a talk page watcher could comment?  &#9749;  Antiqueight  haver 20:25, 25 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Looks OK to me but it would be useful to include something on her own snooker career.--Ipigott (talk) 07:54, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia Asian Month!
Hi there! Wikipedia Asian Month is about to start. Here is some information about participating in the event: Best Wishes, Addis Wang Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:57, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) Please submit your articles via this tool. Click 'log in' at the top-right and OAuth will take care the rest. You can also change the interface language at the top-right.
 * 2) Once you submit an article, the tool will add a template to the article and mark it as needing review by an organizer. You can check your progress using the tool, which includes how many accepted articles you have.
 * 3) Participants who achieve 4 accepted articles will receive a Wikipedia Asian Month postcard. You will receive another special postcard if you achieve 15 accepted articles. The Wikipedian with the highest number of accepted articles on the English Wikipedia will be honored as a "Wikipedia Asian Ambassador", and will receive a signed certificate and additional postcard.
 * 4) If you have any problems accessing or using the tool, you can submit your articles at this page next to your username.
 * 5) If you have any question, you can take a look at our Q&A or post on the WAM talk page.

Streets named after women
I am not sure wether you may have missed my 'ping' (you probably get a lot of those) so just in case: The list of streets named after women you requested a few days ago on some women in red-page can be found at User:Ramblersen/Sandbox4. I am not sure what the plans for the list are, so just tell me if it needs to ne edited in any specific way (put in a form with further information or so) or yplaod it yourself with the needed changes.Ramblersen (talk) 18:02, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * It looks as if it's coming along very well. I have a proper look tomorrow.--Ipigott (talk) 20:42, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Europe 10,000 Challenge invite
Hi. The WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 09:07, 6 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the reminder. In fact I've been participating in the Nordic challenge since it started and will continue to do so. Unfortunately there's far too much going on at the moment. It's just not possible to make high-quality contributions on the UK, Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin America and the WiR priorities at the same time. All in all, though, the challenges appear to be very effective and have had a major impact on the stats for WiR.--Ipigott (talk) 08:46, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

If you're working on Asian women WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge still welcomes you!♦ Dr. Blofeld  10:36, 7 November 2016 (UTC)


 * It's getting to the point where we need a bot to add new articles to all the valid slots. I suppose you've noticed WiR has had another good week with 711 new biographies, bringing us up to 16.66% from 16.62%.--Ipigott (talk) 11:02, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes, creeping more towards 17% now!♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:09, 7 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I agree that there are a lot of campaigns happening at the moment and so it's hard for a person to keep up let alone do justice to more than 1 or 2. Pity that an Asia Destubathon (vs. Africa) didn't overlap with Wiki Asia Month. But I recognize how hard it is to coordinate between projects, so this is just an observation, not a criticism, as campaigns are wonderfully-motivating! --Rosiestep (talk) 16:51, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, if I'd known earlier I could have staged something to benefit Asia at the same time! The Asia Challenge Rosie though isn't a Destubathon it's an ongoing editathon/challenge, so that is designed to encourage more output for Asia Month and beyond!! Ipigott, do you know what they call Germany, Austria and Switzerland together? There must be a name for that like Benelux for some of the others. I think a sub challenge to cover those three would work best.♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:03, 7 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm so glad to see you have started to contribute actively to Wikipedia again. Over the past two days you have achieved a great deal. Hope to see you around as a budding member of the retirement community - but be careful not to overdo it.--Ipigott (talk) 19:06, 7 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Ian. It felt very nice to get up this morning and not follow my usual routine of getting ready for work! Slowly but surely, I'm acclimating to retired life, bit I know there are many lessons ahead. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:59, 7 November 2016 (UTC)


 * During the years of National Socialism, Germany and Austria were known as Großdeutschland but we obviously cannot use that today. Switzerland has never been so closely associated with Germany and Austria although German and Swiss German are spoken by almost two thirds of the population. If you want to group them, you could simply call them German-speaking countries which would also include Lichtenstein.--Ipigott (talk) 19:06, 7 November 2016 (UTC) But then you should call them "Germany, Austria, Lichtenstein and the German-speaking regions of Switzerland".--Ipigott (talk) 19:17, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Inès de Bourgoing
— Maile (talk) 00:01, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia Asian Month
Hi - I recently volunteered to participate in the Wikipedia Asian Month and I am focussing on Indian Women in Red. The list made on the event page WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Missing_articles_by_nationality/India is managed by a bot and I cannot see if the red links are turning to blue links. As a volunteer, I need to see the progress made when I see the page turned to blue links instead of staying red. Is this something you can help? Thanks in advance and thank you for creating the event page. --Parul Thakur (talk) 09:27, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Namaste! I fully understand your interest in monitoring your progress but I'm afraid the bot-controlled lists based on Wikidata are not the best way to do this as when the red links turn blue, they are automatically eliminated from the lists. As far as I can see, the articles you have recently created are Amiya Kumari Padhi and Vidyagauri Nilkanth. The best place to see what you have been doing is to go to the Wikipedia Asian Month article submission page where you should be able to see them under your name. I see you have registered as a participant but you have apparently not yet submitted your articles. In addition, once the articles have been included in Wikidata, they will normally be listed in the Women in Red metrics list for the month, currently at WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Metrics/November_2016. All biographies with categories related to women's occupations (e.g. Category:Indian women writers) are automatically picked up and included in the list. You had not in fact included such categories for these two articles but I have now added them and I will also ensure they are on Wikidata. In the case of Vidyagauri Nilkanth, I have also listed the article under our November Women Writers editathon as she is a writer. I hope all this does not seem too complicated. There are, by the way, two tools you can use to see a list of the articles you have created: New articles by user (for up to the last 60 days) and Articles created by user (for all the articles you have created). I look forward to seeing further contributions from you and am pleased to see you have contributed many biographies on Indian women over the past three years. Please let me know if I can be of any further help.--Ipigott (talk) 11:21, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for clarifying! I apprecite that you added the relevant categories. I am still learning a lot of things and good to see the help around. I submitted the article on Vidyagauri Nilkanth however the one on Amiya Kumari Padhi is not able to go through the link. Though the rules of submission say 3000 bytes or 300 words, the submission link doesn't accept articles unless both conditions are met. I wasn't able to expand the latter and I am hoping for the community to pitch in. As a contributor who focuses on creating biographies for women, it is harder since there are not enough references and the articles are flagged for deletion.--Parul Thakur (talk) 11:54, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I've added a few bits and pieces to Amiya Kumari Padhi. I think the article will probably qualify now. The tools used for word or byte counts are limited to the text of the article and do not count info in references, boxes, categories, etc.--Ipigott (talk) 14:50, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! It is still short of 70 words. I will try to add more and submit. :) --Parul Thakur (talk) 16:12, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

BBC collab'n
Hi Ian, I see that WMUK have created a page for BBC as we have too. I'm aware that we had that silly mix up with WikimediaNG that didnt help anyone. If you are OK then I intend to create a merged page and then put in a REDIRECT to make it appear to be in two places. I have been talking to WMUK but I think this comes under the "Bold" banner. Are you OK with this? Does it matter where it is for your stuff to work etc? Oh and while I'm here. Have another virtual barnstar for not only doing lots of useful stuff but giving advice (see above) and knocking out new articles. Say, I couldnt tempt you to a BBC editathon in London? I'd buy the beer! Cheers Victuallers (talk) 13:15, 12 November 2016 (UTC)


 * was the one who created WiR/29 although I did a bit of work on it myself. If you are referring to GLAM/BBC's_100_Women, then I think there is a need for further discussion before the pages are merged. WiR is promoting an online editathon for the duration of 100 Women while the WMUK page is concerned primarily with the physical editathons around the world on 8 December. When hosting similar arrangements, we have usually provided background information on our own page with suitable links to the pages drafted by the organizers. Perhaps we should be doing the same here but I think you should first discuss it all with Rosie.--Ipigott (talk) 13:54, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Forgot to thank you, Roger, for the virtual barnstar and the offer of a beer in London which I'll graciously have to turn down. But be my guest in Luxembourg if ever you come here. Strange to say I've never met another Wikipedia editor in person. I sometimes wonder what they really look like.--Ipigott (talk) 17:15, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thats cool I have been chatting with Rosie, but I thought this was one for you. My mistake. Still this your area of expertise and I wondered whether you know whether its important that our edit pages are always at the same place. I take in what you say about an in place editathon and an on-line editathon and I guess that may work but I suspect we should find a better solution as it confuses me at least. We should have one go to place ideally. Oh is there no Luxembourg Wiki chapter? It would be a great location for a multi lingual editathon. My first "jolly" was to go to meet euro civil servants to be given a European funding cheque. Since then I try and route thro the country when heading south for Spain or Italy. Victuallers (talk) 18:03, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Ian and Multiple meetup pages are common and it's actually my preference. E.g. there were several meetup pages for UN HerStory -one for each city, most in foreign languages-, and a jillion meetup pages (again, multiple languages) for  each the Art+Feminism event in each city. And WiR always has its own page.  The benefit of the WiR meetup page is that we document our outcomes, our metrics, our images, our history. For the BBC event, I'm aware of the GLAM/BBC page but that's not the London meetup page, I think.  If there is a London meetup page, can you please provide a link.  I think that each BBC bureau city will have a meetup page, e.g. Cairo, Kathmandu, etc. Plus WiR's.  Regarding the WikimediaNG event, WiR did have a meetup page but NG opposed it, so we converted it into a Redirect which worked against our members participating, IMO.  The same is true of AsiaMonth... as the WiR page is a Redirect to a AsiaMonth page, I think WiR's participation isn't as robust as it could be... this is my personal observation and others may view it differently. --Rosiestep (talk) 00:02, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * On the basis of the above, I suggest you contact the UK team and invite them to add a link from their GLAM page to our WiR/29 page. We could then in turn provide links to their page and any physical meetup pages which emerge in London and elsewhere. I think we should do everything we can to inform editathon participants, especially newbies, that they will find a welcoming environment at WiR and can participate in our activities whenever they want, both in connection with the BBC event and in all our other areas of interest. The BBC have apparently been in touch with "Wikimedia". It would be interesting to know whom they contacted there and whether anything can be done to ensure closer collaboration between the BBC and Wikipedia on improving the coverage of women over the longer term. On WAM, I thought it would be easier for participants to register directly on the WAM page rather than on both WiR and WAM. In most cases we can identify which of the WAM participants are writing articles about women. The only drawback is that it is difficult to view the list of articles created. As far as I can see, they only turn up for a couple of seconds when you click on the names of each participant here. For other WAM languages, the articles created by each participant can easily be viewed, as for example in German here. Perhaps  could resolve the problem for us so that we can see all the new articles, as we can for all our other editathons.--Ipigott (talk) 08:51, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * When we don't have a WiR meetup page, we can't see what we're doing, we don't keep track of our Outcomes, we lose track of who of our members are participating, e.g. WAM event and WikimediaNG event and even Awaken the Dragon. When we keep our own page (and link it to the primary campaign page), our members seem to participate more as they are familiar with us and our setup. Maybe they also feel safer and/or more valued and/or like they're working towards "our" common goal vs. someone else's? --Rosiestep (talk) 12:48, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Isn't that a bit of an exaggeration, Rosie? After all, WAM is not "our" project. I think it was very accommodating of AddisWang and his team to make special provision for women on the project's EN site which has not only encouraged our participants to collaborate but has certainly led other editors to write articles about Asian women too. I do not think it would have been fair either to AddisWang or to our participants to require double listings of both participants and articles. As it is, we maintain records of all the new women's articles each month under Metrics. It's really not too difficult to pick out the Asian names from there. Apart from that, it's not an easy matter to set up all the WiR support for meetups and editathons for events organized by others. I have a feeling we'll run into similar problems with the BBC editathons, particularly if we want to monitor all the meetups around the world. For me, the main thing is that there is increasing interest in providing more support for the coverage of women on Wikipedia. While WiR provides central focus with general support and mentoring, I really don't think there is any requirement for us to monitor each and every development in detail. After all, what is important is the overall improvement of the coverage of women on Wikipedia, not just in English but in all the other languages. And in that connection, any comments on my suggestions for a multilingual Women's History Month?--Ipigott (talk) 13:22, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * We will export the result from the judging tool to the event page at the end. And we will do some statistics job to list all female articles, and put it on Asian Women Month page.--AddisWang (talk) 15:42, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for your rapid response and for your efforts to help us along. I think you've been doing a fantastic job with WAM and am very impressed with the tools you have developed.--Ipigott (talk) 15:56, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Ian, in reply to your enquiry on my talk page. I did open up a conversation with WMUK but I'm finding it difficult to influence as we have little time and there is a lot of momentum. Keeping going with what is already agreed or too tricky to change. Its useful that we are sharing with other projects but this highlights the question with what is actually "ours". I think its a general problem with Wikipedia partnerships that we don't negotiate. If volunteers time was charged out at 1$ an hour then we would see that we are frequently a major partner - but we do not demand a respectable quid pro quo. We should demand creative commons sharing. We ask for it usually - and we can end up disappointed. To be fair we sometimes get a million images given to us but its not certain. (We negotiated with the BBC before they filmed Wikipedia's 10th birthday and they agreed a CC by SA license.) I spoke to WMUK and I'm told that they have asked for images, but after that we travel hopefully. We have something to offer. The 100 women from their programmes four years ago had their Andy Warhol "15 minutes". The BBC programmes are licensed and cannot be on-line forever without a cost to the BBC. Our articles are available today and forever. Its useful to see notable women on the TV, Twitter or Facebook but its ephemeral. I don't feel that we have control of important decisions on this one. Would it be useful to work out what our core values are and what we should require of partners? My best regards Roger Victuallers (talk)
 * The problem is that at the moment the information is spread all over the place. I don't think potential participants or budding new editors will find it easy to sort out. I discovered a list of redlinks here but it is not clear to me who compiled it or when it was prepared. It looks to me as if it might be an old list as the last 100 are dated 2013. The BBC Resources page looks pretty confusing to me. I thought the object of the exercise was to create new articles rather than just adding images but perhaps I'm wrong. I see  has been editing the Events and Workshops but up to now she has only included Brazil. I don't know how can find out whether anyone is providing editathon support for all the other cities listed here. Strange there are no links to Cardiff or Miami where one might have expected support from bilinguals. But perhaps like Wikipedia Asian Month, everything will fall into place magically a day or two before 8 December.--Ipigott (talk) 08:42, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Ian - Actually, the "main event", the object of WikiProject BBC 100 Women isn't to create new articles or to add images. The object is for a Wikipedian at a BBC bureau to talk about content gender gap and demonstrate how to edit Wikipedia. Then attendees, with the help of the volunteer Wikipedian, can improve a woman's bio (article improvement being easier to manage, rather than new article creation). These Dec 8th meetups are geared towards wiki content gender gap discussion and training; they aren't edit-a-thons. and I had a discussion about this, e.g. if he's able to attend an in-person event, he'd be networking with BBC staff, and talking about the Wikipedia content gender gap at the 60,000 foot level.
 * That said, there are communities who have Wikipedians, don't have a bureau, and want to host in-person edit-a-thons (e.g. Rome and Washington DC); and communities who have Wikipedians, don't have a bureau, and want to host virtual edit-a-thons (e.g. Madrid, Barcelona, and, of course, Women in Red). While this isn't the focus of the WikiProject, these efforts are welcome. These efforts would include meetup pages, article creation, etc. But this is not the focus; this is not the "main event". --Rosiestep (talk) 19:09, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for these explanations. But I still find the whole thing rather confusing with all the lists from previous years and new ones beginning to emerge. ( has certainly been doing a good job of putting them all together.) Things will probably become clearer as the days go by and BBC World begins its coverage of "octogenarians sharing life lessons; 'good girl' film-makers discussing expectations; nursing; five high-profile women; and '30 under 30' entrepreneurs". From what you say, their Wikipedia tie-up seems to be more in line with Women in Green than Women in Red (cc.) but that doesn't mean we can't turn lots of those red links into blue ones. Then on 8 December, at the live meetups, participants will be able to make further improvements. --Ipigott (talk) 10:04, 20 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I've just been rechecking the BBC's own introduction where they refer specifically first to "a day-long edit-a-thon... to rediscover forgotten women". This is later clarified as "In London we are hosting a marathon editing session of a major website to rediscover some of the unsung achievements of women and girls." So editathon obviously means different things to different people.--Ipigott (talk) 10:25, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Well we have had some articles created - thanks Ian and Antique8. I see that the BBC main page has pictures of the women and a long list of credits for those images. Wikimedia isn't in the list? Why? 5 years ago we were keen to partner with virtually anyone on any terms. We should not be rolling over to be tickled by big names. The BBC is very like Wikipedia and we are are natural allies but we are the #5 website. We should expect the BBC to understand our values and to choose freely licensed picture where possible. We should be expecting them to provide as many images and text as they could whilst not undermining their own business model. Victuallers (talk) 23:55, 22 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I haven't looked in detail at the new images but I do think it is strange that there is no mention of Wikipedia anywhere on the BBC pages, even though they refer to the editathons. I suggested to some time ago that she should take this up with them but nothing has been changed. On the more positive side, I think they are doing a great job providing background on all these women and including them in their programming on BBC World. I have been listening to some of their broadcasts over the past three days and they do manage to tell some interesting stories, backed up by interviews. I've been looking for valid sources on some of the women and am surprised to see that many would not normally qualify for Wikipedia articles as the only informative sources are the individuals' own websites, blogs or Linkedin pages or postings on Twitter and Facebook. But I expect that once they are included in BBC programmes, the news media will start to pick some of them up too (= picking up more women!!). As for images, if the BBC is not prepared to cooperate, maybe the women themselves would be ready to provide images. You have been very effective in making contacts on images. Perhaps you can help out here too?--Ipigott (talk) 08:07, 23 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I know you've had some communications with WMUK re BBC 100 Women and wondered if you discussed image licensing? Images are not my area of forte so hoping you or someone else can carry the torch on this. I think the London BBC Broadcasting House event can only accommodate 10 attendees, and not sure if you are one of them, but If you are able to attend, it might be a good opportunity to discuss images. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:53, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I spoke to WMUK and they said they had raised licensing. However we know that discussing it is easy. I suspect BBC offered to do their best. I offered to go to London to discuss with them but WMUK wanted to do it themselves. I don't know about this 10. I was offered a place at Reading (town) but this is "place number 37" in the UK. I'm not sure we have their attention. BBC page weeks ago was saying that they were having an editathon - so somebody agreed to sign a blank cheque to cooperate. I'm sure this will work out well. Which is a pity because it could have been really useful. Victuallers (talk) 18:16, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * "Curiouser and curiouser!" cried Alice. I must say I'm amazed at the lack of communication in a country where everyone speaks English. It's almost as if they want to avoid any real collaboration with WiR. But if the total number of people to be admitted to Broadcasting House on 8 December really is only 10, it's just as well that we've included 100 Women among our current editathons. In the meantime, I've listed all the 2016 laureates on 100 Women (BBC). As you can see, there are plenty of red links for people to work on. Let's see how many we can turn to blue before the deadline.--Ipigott (talk) 20:02, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * re 10 spaces for London/BBC Broadcasting House, see here. Not sure if the Reading venue is geographically convenient for you, but if the event is at a bureau, that's still something, as the BBC would be covering it and you could promote WiR. Did they ask you to be the facilitator? --Rosiestep (talk) 22:38, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Rosie, yes they want me to lead, but WMUK have been quiet. I'm hoping to talk to them tomorrow. They seem to think that they need to speak to you, which sends poor messages. Ian, ....'m not saying we could have avoided all of this but I volunteered to go and talk to them 3 weeks ago and it was thought unnecessary. WiR could have made a better contribution - good to see that good stuff is happening anyway. R
 * Now that the December invitation has gone out, there'll probably be more interest. The BBC's naming conventions and transliterations seem to be providing a number of red links which should be blue. I'm trying to sort it out.--Ipigott (talk) 12:50, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted
Hello Ipigott. Your account has been added to the " " user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as mark pages as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk. The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. &mdash; MusikAnimal  talk  19:59, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
 * You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
 * Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
 * Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.


 * For those interested in the above, I should explain that I was surprised to discover yesterday that this right had been withdrawn from me without notification as a result of this. Apparently my reviewing of over 500 articles since the beginning of the year was not considered sufficient for maintaining my rights. Perhaps it is because I invariably try to rescue new articles rather than labelling them for potential deletion. Until now, editors with reviewer rights (Rv) could patrol new articles but a few days ago this was changed. To review new articles you now have the status of a "New pages reviewer" (N). Rv is now restricted to "Pending pages reviewer". Given the doubling-up of the number of unreviewed new articles since July (see here), it seems very strange to me that rights are now being restricted. But then Wikipedia is full of strange surprises.--Ipigott (talk) 09:20, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Sounds odd - if you need a friendly admin then tell me what to do Victuallers (talk) 14:41, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks but it's all been sorted out now and I can review new articles again. I just think that these bot-driven initiatives should be much more carefully prepared and controlled. Of course it might also just be a side-effect of the super moon. I discovered yesterday my membership details had been accidentally deleted from a club in Luxembourg with the result that I was no longer receiving info about their events. I've sorted that out too. Now I'm just waiting for number three!!!--Ipigott (talk) 15:00, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Trilby
Stopping by Women in Red, I got onto your user page and notice that you're interested in women in dance. FYI, I recently started a series of relevant articles. These were a spinoff from Alfred Clark who was himself a spinoff from Ru ware. I'm not sure I'll be doing more on these tangents but you may have some ideas. For a taste of the period, please see Ella Lola, a la Trilby.


 * 1) Trilbyana
 * 2) Leigh Sisters
 * 3) Lola Yberri
 * 4) Ella Lola

Andrew D. (talk) 10:50, 18 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for bringing these to my attention. From time to time, Women in Red has a clear focus on dancers and dance but this is not the case at the moment. I've done a bit of technical tidying up on these but not much more for the time being. Hope you will be able to contribute more on women and women biographies in future.--Ipigott (talk) 15:54, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

December 2016 at Women in Red
(To subscribe: Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 22:43, 23 November 2016 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red/Meetup/29
Some questions.....1- I think the talk page tag is labeled wrongly -says writers not BBC 100 but I'm not at all certain. 2- can a page have more than 1 tag? June Eric-Udorie was written because she was on the BBC 100 but tagged with the writers editathon because she is a writer and that was the editathon that was ongoing.   &#9749;  Antiqueight  haver 00:27, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. My mistake. I've deleted "writers" from the meetup page.--Ipigott (talk) 08:42, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * :-D I would have changed it but I wasn't 100% sure as it was late and I was loopy tired.   &#9749;  Antiqueight  haver 11:26, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

New Page Review - newsletter
Hello ,


 * Breaking the back of the backlog

We now have New Page Reviewers! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog. Now it's time for action. If each reviewer does only 10 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work! Let's get that over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.

Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work. Read about it at the new Monitoring the system section in the tutorial.
 * Second set of eyes

With some tweaks to their look, and some additional features, Page Curation and New Pages Feed could easily be the best tools for patrollers and reviewers. We've listed most of what what we need at the 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey. Voting starts on 28 November - please turn out to make our bid the Foundation's top priority. Please help also by improving or commenting on our Wishlist entry at the Community Wishlist Survey. Many other important user suggestions are listed at at Page Curation. Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:16, 26 November 2016 (UTC) .
 * Getting the tools we need - 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey: Please vote

African destubathon
The real winner is of course for succeeding in reaching and even exceeding the target with a final count of over 102%. Congratulations! A great achievement.--Ipigott (talk) 11:01, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Thankyou! Yes, 2041 articles and 676 women bios is certainly noteworthy!♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:34, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Asian women
Hi, can you and page stalkers add entries done like Rasha Sharbaji to the WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge as well, which is supporting Asian Month?♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:43, 2 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Done. I've also added an African and a Brit. Thought the African challenge was finished but I see it's continuing.--Ipigott (talk) 14:58, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

The Challenges are permanent now. And when we reach 10,000 we'll up it ;-). Contests are only intended to fuel the challenges and make reaching targets easier!♦ Dr. Blofeld  15:26, 2 December 2016 (UTC)


 * So every new article has to be placed in one of the challenges. What with editathons, Asian months, talk pages, Wikidata, inclusion in lists, and now challenges, there's quite a bit to be done with every new article!--Ipigott (talk) 15:35, 2 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Optional. Ideally I want editors to have some passion for contributing to the challenges! I'm thinking about setting up a challenge for women to start on January 1, if we do that then we might want to think about getting a bot to add entries and add them to the regional general ones at the same time.♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:06, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Address Collection
Congratulations! You have more than 4 accepted articles in Wikipedia Asian Month! Please submit your mailing address (not the email) via this google form. This form is only accessed by me and your username will not distribute to the local community to send postcards. All personal data will be destroyed immediately after postcards are sent. Please contact your local organizers if you have any question. Best, Addis Wang, sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:58, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi Ian
Re December 8th. If you want to attend or you know of other volunteers who are shut out then do say. WiR is well aware of your work and the contributions you make. I have raised your justified concerns and I know that WMUK are trying to address them. You can always just change the page! although I know that is not the point. Thx again Victuallers (talk) 09:40, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Thanks. I've forwarded you an email from a potential participant. I do not wish to attend myself. They keep changing their pages and things are getting a bit better. Now I see they have four Meta pages. They've restored a "sign up" space on their main page but it's not clear how this works. I've extended the dates for WiR but have not added anything to their resources. I see  is going to the Washington DC event and that there's a bunch of BBC journalists signed up for Kathmandu. They've put together a good set of lists for the meetup in Rome. Still a couple of days left so let's see how it progresses. Since you asked us to slow down there have not been any new articles which I think is a pity. A number of us had become interested in turning those red links to blue but now our enthusiasm has been dampened. It will be interesting to see how many new articles are created on the 8th.--Ipigott (talk) 11:26, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks Ian, I'm also biting my lip about creating new pages. I think the BBC have odd expectations. I was going to Reading but I'm now going to New Broadcasting House. Victuallers (talk) 11:31, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
 * That's good. You'll be able to give them a hand and report on how everything went. Has Reading been cancelled? Can't find any references.--Ipigott (talk) 16:25, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Don't know why Reading isnt in the list. "Our" person there is who is one of our best editor/trainers. He's a good mate of mine and I'm sure it will run well. WMUK seem to have used there best efforts and I have sent them an email about your very keen volunteer. He needs a barnstar for perseverance!! Victuallers (talk) 20:33, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The Reading/Caversham/BBC Monitoring event seems to have been conceived as a small event with an internal target audience, BBC reporters, etc. so I'm guessing that nobody thought to put it on the list. Our normal practices of laying everything out in detail on-wiki doesn't seem to be what the BBC is used to, so we'll have to forgive them. I'm encouraging the organisers there to do as much as they can for themselves in the hope that they'll absorb some Wiki-ways which will make life easier when we do another joint event. I'll be there all day Thursday to run a "get-the-new-editors-up-to-speed" training event before the main editathon, where I'm hoping I'll just be needed to answer questions as they arise in the course of editing. The main event in England will be the London one at New Broadcasting House and I'm looking forward to good coverage of that. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 21:10, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The Reading/Caversham/BBC Monitoring event seems to have been conceived as a small event with an internal target audience, BBC reporters, etc. so I'm guessing that nobody thought to put it on the list. Our normal practices of laying everything out in detail on-wiki doesn't seem to be what the BBC is used to, so we'll have to forgive them. I'm encouraging the organisers there to do as much as they can for themselves in the hope that they'll absorb some Wiki-ways which will make life easier when we do another joint event. I'll be there all day Thursday to run a "get-the-new-editors-up-to-speed" training event before the main editathon, where I'm hoping I'll just be needed to answer questions as they arise in the course of editing. The main event in England will be the London one at New Broadcasting House and I'm looking forward to good coverage of that. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 21:10, 5 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello . Glad to hear from you and pleased to see that as one of our most experienced editors you will be at one of the sessions. From what you say, it looks as if all the UK events are directed at BBC staff. While it is good to know that the BBC is interested in providing internal support for Wikipedia, I think it was unfortunate that WMUK gave us the impression that the "editathons" were open to the public. I can certainly see why WMUK were so enthusiastic about the possibility of arranging joint editathons with the BBC around the globe. I hope that in due course we will have news of their success. I have also been very impressed by the way the BBC have been using the social media and encouraging people to submit accounts of their favourite women (frequently members of their families) for inclusion in World Service broadcasts. It would be useful if you could obtain a list of these as there appear to be a number of deserving women who are not yet covered on the EN wiki. I hope that WiR participants and any other interested editors will also return to the task of turning as many of the BBC 100 Women red links into blue, once WMUK and the BBC give us a green light to continue. We've extended the WiR event until 15 December which will give everyone time to continue working on the lists and providing support to any of the BBC staff and other new participants who think we can help them along.--Ipigott (talk) 08:14, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected
New Page Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC))

Thank you so much!
I'm sat in the BBC in Glasgow at the editathon, frantically adding categories and headings and wikilinks and all the rest, and seeing the joy on folks' faces as they publish their first article. Thank you so much for all the editing you're doing today, it really is so very much appreciated. Lirazelf (talk) 15:58, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Glad to hear you are helping out in Glasgow. I'm pleased to see how much is coming in. Quite a few talented now editors around as far as I can see. There'll be quite a bit of cleaning up to do over the next couple of days but I'm impressed with all the enthusiasm.--Ipigott (talk) 16:03, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Thanks for reviewing Mary Helen Young, Ipigott.

Unfortunately Ajpolino has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

"Looks great!"

To reply, leave a comment on Ajpolino's talk page.


 * Don't understand your message. Please explain.--Ipigott (talk) 16:36, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Oops! Mistake on my part! I thought I was clicking the "review" button but you must've reviewed it right before I did. I got there from Special:NewPagesFeed so I figured it hadn't been reviewed yet. I'll work from farther in the queue to avoid mixups again. Sorry about that! Happy editing! Ajpolino (talk) 16:41, 8 December 2016 (UTC)


 * All's well that ends well. Strange backup by the bot. Keep up the good work. We're having a busy day today.--Ipigott (talk) 17:47, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

New Page Review - newsletter #2
Hello ,


 * Please help reduce the New Page backlog 

This is our second request. The backlog is still growing. Your help is needed now - just a few minutes each day.


 * Getting the tools we need

Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:54, 11 December 2016 (UTC) .
 * Improve the tools: Vote here.
 * Reduce your review load: Vote here

Contest
Yes, made a decent start on this! Can you give me a list of the different main fields of occupation we're dealing with with women? Is there a way we could narrow it down to 10 primary fields of occupation for women or is that not enough? I was thinking something like $5000 divided by 10 to cover the occupation aspect.♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:22, 12 December 2016 (UTC)


 * (Answering your first question) The top ones are writing (including novelists, journalists, playwrights, non-fiction), all forms of art (painting, photography, sculpture, music, dance, theatre and film), science/engineering and "feminism" (women's rights, trades unions, suffragettes, etc.). Among the "occupations" we have architects, archaeologists, business leaders, educators, philosophers, religion, nurses, diplomats, food and drink, military.


 * If you need more, look up the categories under Category:Women. Great initiative. Let me know if I can help.--Ipigott (talk) 16:38, 12 December 2016 (UTC)


 * (Second question) Yes, I think they could easily be arranged in ten main groupings.--Ipigott (talk) 16:41, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

So far I think


 * 1) Literature
 * Art
 * 1) Science and technology
 * 2) Entertainment
 * 3) Government/politics and Feminism
 * 4) Leadership and Business
 * 5) Religion/philosophy and education
 * 6) Military
 * 7) Food and drink
 * 8) Healthcare

How about the above? ♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:59, 12 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Before the edit conflict I was sending this:
 * Not too keen on history. How about "Feminism, Leadership, Education, Healthcare, Manufacturing, Government". --Ipigott (talk) 17:10, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Manufacturing I don't think is as viable as one for Leadership and business, how about the above now?♦ Dr. Blofeld  18:23, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm convinced feminism (meaning women's rights, fighting for status, pioneering women's activities) deserves a slot of its own. I don't really think food and drink is so important; it falls within the other activities. You might consider a slot for other occupations: military, aviation, exploring, etc. The one we haven't mentioned and in which there is superlative interest is sports. So how about:


 * 1) Literature (including journalism)
 * 2) Art (visual arts, dance, music)
 * 3) Science, engineering, technology
 * 4) Entertainment
 * 5) Feminism (women's rights, pioneering)
 * 6) Leadership (enterprise, business, government)
 * 7) Education (academia, religion, philosophy)
 * 8) Healthcare
 * 9) Challenging occupations (military, aviation, exploring, discovery)
 * 10) Sport

You might be able to find better headings but I think these represent the ten main slots. There will be grey areas between art and entertainment and between science and education. But all this could be explained. I think you're on the right track. We could also use these headings for editathons or whatever. What's missing is geographical/religious origins and ethnicity. Nothing for the Jews, eskimos, or aboriginees -- but these could no doubt be accommodated under the other headings?--Ipigott (talk) 18:56, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, those are good, we can include Food and Drink in Art I think.♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:43, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

No rush, but feel free sometime this week to further outline sub fields which would be included under each here.♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:48, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Food and Drink could also be an aspect of leadership. Maybe there should be an 11th category: "Other", to cater for anything unexpected. Many of the women in the BBC 100 Women would fall into this slot. Also many women who become famous because of news coverage on murders, rape and other crimes, spying, accidents, or because of their notability in travel, gardening, demonstrations, etc. There could be a way of combining participation in Other with that in the 10 main slots. I'll also try to participate in the discussions on the other pages addressing contests on Women.--Ipigott (talk) 08:37, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Unreviewed page
Dear Ipigott, this is in reply to your message on my talk page. There isn't much explanation there; what gives? MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:15, 15 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Sorry about this. The message comes from a bot. When I read the article in question I noticed there were no references which as you know are required for a living person. I was working rather fast and clicked on the tick rather than just adding another tag to the article. This has also happened to me the other way round. I think the safeguards should be reinforced so that it does not keep on happening. None of us want to upset other reviewers.--Ipigott (talk) 08:02, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick response, man. Don't worry, I wasn't upset; you (or the bot message, to be exact) was polite and direct. I do understand your caution, however, because some editors do take things personally. Good explanation; in the future when I create articles, I'll try to include sources in the first edit in case editors on patrol notice and raise an eyebrow. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:25, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Season's greetings!

 * Thanks. And all the best to you too for Christmas and a successful 2017.--Ipigott (talk) 07:49, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
 * You are too kind, and I too undeserving. Thanks very much, and happy editing into the new year! -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 12:50, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

The world is a strange and wondrous place
While searching the early aviation history of Nyasaland, a search turned up info on Lyubov Golanchikova. How, I am not sure, but I thought you might enjoy the snippet. page 30 It is a review of a book by Toivo Kitvel, the Estonian historian you found. :) SusunW (talk) 19:32, 21 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks . Strange coincidence. Nyasaland is full of surprises!--Ipigott (talk) 11:29, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

 * It was really nice of you to remember me. All the best to you and yours too. Hope we can work together again next year.--Ipigott (talk) 21:17, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you :), Lets hope so :), Have a great day. – Davey 2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 21:34, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas to all!

 * Thank you for remembering me and for including a famous Danish painting. All the best to you too for Christmas and the New Year.--Ipigott (talk) 12:21, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Ipigott. The painting was pretty touching and symbolic, and I figured "Why not?"  —  Ssven2  Looking at you, kid 12:24, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

An award for your contributions
(See you at our next event Women in Philosophy online edit-a-thon) Victuallers (talk) 13:55, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings
Merry Christmas from me! Thanks for your company during 2016. We have seen the percentage of articles on women rise from 15% to 16.77%. 20% is within our grasp and that's an increase of a third over what we first found. Victuallers (talk) 13:55, 23 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I've enjoyed working with you too. I'm not too sure about the percentages. You'll see from here that in January 2015, we were in fact at 15.5%. So the increase is rather less than you have calculated. Nevertheless, I think we have done well in bringing a considerable number of deserving women into the encyclopaedia, more often than not with informative articles. I'm looking forward to the Cambridge event in March. Let me know if I can help with anything.--Ipigott (talk) 14:19, 23 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Cheers Ian, (was it 15.5? I'll try and try not to boast ... but very proud) I'm hoping to tempt you to Cambridge or do you know if there is a women's college near you (Feel free to claim the 5th amendment :-) Victuallers (talk) 14:27, 23 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Someone has to keep manning the engine room during these events. I'm sure you'll find lots of expert help in the UK. As you know, I've been trying to encourage the BBC to take an interest too. There'll be plenty of time to try to encourage the participation of women's colleges and universities around the world.--Ipigott (talk) 11:19, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Happy Festivus!

 * Thanks, especially for the meatloaf. I have a friend in Dayton, Ohio, who eats nothing but meatloaf wherever he goes. Part of the American tradition, I suppose.--Ipigott (talk) 08:01, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Blixen
My Christmas gift to you--Blixen. I have now finally reviewed the entirety of what was there, sourced what I could, removed what could not be sourced and added information where I could. I would remove that whole "Quotes" section, were it up to me, but maybe you would like to use one or two of them in a quotebox? I also did not rework the "Works" section, as I thought you said you wanted to do that. The entire lede/lead needs to be rewritten, but I always find that easiest to do after the body is written. Would that we had some more/better photographs. *sigh* At least now, we have totally sourced bones which you can build upon. Please let me know if I can help in any way to move it along to GA. SusunW (talk) 04:56, 25 December 2016 (UTC)


 * What a thoughtful present. Thank you very much. I've had a quick look at what you've been doing and it all looks very useful and well researched. To qualify for GA I think we need to rewrite the works section and also include a separate section on the critical assessment or reception of her works. I did indeed say I would try to put something together myself but unless you're in a hurry, I think I'll leave it until January. I certainly agree with you that the Quotes section should be removed. After looking quickly through the quotes, it seems to me unlikely that any of them can be used to improve the other sections of the article but I'll look more carefully later. I have a feeling more photographs could be found in newspapers and journals but I'm not very good at that type of research. I'm not too sure either whether photographs published in Danish or Kenyan newspapers would qualify for inclusion in Commons. There seem to be special rules for photographs published in the USA but I don't know whether there are similar rules for those published in other countries. Maybe could advise on this or even try to find more photographs. After all that work, Susun, you now deserve a relaxing 25 December, even if you are not celebrating Christmas.--Ipigott (talk) 11:23, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas all! The lede needs work before GA but the expansion work looks very good!♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:47, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Address Collection - 1st reminder
Hi there. At the moment we have not received your response on the address collection. Sorry for the inconvenience if you did submit the form before. If you still wish to receive the postcard from Wikipedia Asian Month, please submit your mailing address (not the email) via this google form. This form is only accessed by me and your username will not distribute to the local community to send postcards. All personal data will be destroyed immediately after postcards are sent. If you have problems of using the google form, you can use Email This User to send your address to my Email.

If you do not wish to share your personal information and do not want to receive the postcard, please let me know at my meta talk page so I will not keep sending reminders to you. Best, Addis Wang, sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:04, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Holiday Greetings! I

 * Thank you. And all the very best to you too.--Ipigott (talk) 09:44, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Didjano
Happy hogmanay!

Such a pity that official celebration of didjanoes can only occur very shortly after their creation. Oh well, others can be recognized in other ways (example at right). -- Hoary (talk) 01:37, 29 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks. And all the best for the New Year to you and yours too.--Ipigott (talk) 07:40, 29 December 2016 (UTC)