User:Ipigott/Archive 22

small> 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, Archive 13: September 2015 to May 2016, Archive 14: June 2016 to December 2016, Archive 15: January 2017 to August 2017, Archive 16: September 2017 to March 2018, Archive 17: April 2018 to September 2018, Archive 18: October 2018 to August 2019, Archive 19: September 2019 to January 2020, Archive 20: February 2020 to June 2020, Archive 21: July 2020 to February 2021

Alma Vessells John
Can you give this one a once-over before I nominate it? Thanks! If you are too busy, no worries. SusunW (talk) 18:30, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Virtually nothing to do on this one but please continue to send me your latest articles. They always make interesting reading.--Ipigott (talk) 08:24, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much. I honestly appreciate your going over them, as many of them develop so piecemeal that I want to insure they are cohesive. I loved writing her. She was truly a fascinating subject and required a lot of detective work. I cannot believe a formal biography of her doesn't exist somewhere. SusunW (talk) 13:09, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Your advice on Terje G. Simonsen article
Ian, hi. Please take a look at Draft:Terje G. Simonsen. It is a properly stated WP:COI contribution about a Norwegian non-fiction author. I would like to know how it could/should be developed in order to improve the chances of passing an AfC review. Thanks! Peter. --Bbarmadillo (talk) 18:36, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
 * As it seems to have been submitted for review, I don't think I should intervene at this stage. Let's see how it goes.--Ipigott (talk) 19:04, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Mary Dees
If you get a chance can you look this one over? Thanks! SusunW (talk) 20:34, 3 October 2020 (UTC)


 * You obviously meant Mary Dee. Well researched article with good illustrations. Ready for GA, I think.--Ipigott (talk) 09:18, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh how silly of me. I had just finished writing to Rosie to have her check the hat note, as I am still not comfortable creating disamb pages and wasn't sure if I'd done it right. Glad you figured it out. Thanks for your help. I do appreciate you. SusunW (talk) 13:43, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

October 2020
Hello. Your recent edit to List of Indian writers appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person, organization or product added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. Alexf(talk) 09:45, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Well spotted, : for the time being it is Priya Kumar (writer). Should be moved shortly.--Ipigott (talk) 09:57, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

AfD's
You both are far more knowledgeable than I am in regards to AfD's because you have been here longer. So, I have a question. How common is it to see a closer delete an article when only a third of the votes are to delete?Tsistunagiska (talk) 13:49, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * AfD is not a vote, so it does and it doesn't matter how may ayes and neighs there are per se. What matters is how many of those votes directly and specifically relate to policy. So technically you could have 10 votes for keep which cite no policy and one vote for delete which was strongly rooted in policy and it could close with a decision to delete. It is supposed to be a discussion of whether based on our guidelines and policies an article can be justified. I typically avoid the platform, as it is a drama board. I figure if an article is deleted and there are adequate sources, it can be recreated. If I do weigh in, it is usually because the article easily meets GNG and by listing various sources I can prove that. SusunW (talk) 14:05, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * There has been a mass of AfD's specifically targeting articles on Indigenous people. If all 16 votes cast cite policy with five stating their subjective opinion is no, nine saying their subjective opinion is yes and two stating their subjective opinion leans keep but will agree to a redirect, how can the consensus be to delete? That is not a consensus. By definition, a consensus is a majority opinion. If the closer wants to base their decision on their own subjective opinion then so be it but don't say the consensus was to delete. That is disingenuous and leads others to doubt the integrity of the closer or even that of the encyclopedia and processes in general.Tsistunagiska (talk) 14:13, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately,, this happens more often than you might think in cases when the closing administrator believes the "Keep" comments do not comply with rules established for the sector under consideration. One of the most common occurrences is in women's sports, especially for footballers, or if the sources are not considered to be sufficient. Is there any particular case we should be looking at? Sometimes decisions can be overruled, especially if articles can be expanded.--Ipigott (talk) 14:19, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * This AfD This individual IS Wounded Knee. There would have been no Wounded Knee without this person being present and the actions they took. And the "one event" argument doesn't hold any water with me when I found hundreds of articles about persons whose only "claim to fame" was one event. There is too much cherry picking here for my liking and quite frankly I'm tired of biased opinion overruling common sense. That's what Wikipedia is turning into. A bunch of biased opinions with no root in common sense. Either this is an encyclopedia that is inclusive of historical/current facts based in sourced references applied with some relative amount of common sense or a loosely tied bunch of OP-ED's favoring certain races, ethnicity and genders while furthering the discrimination against those who have historically faced it. As I have stated before, I acknowledge that Wikipedia is not here to right the wrongs of the past but to be an active and willing participant in furthering it is disgusting and discouraging, to say the least.Tsistunagiska (talk) 14:34, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I would take it to the review board if you feel strongly about keeping it and start gathering sources. I don't know where that is, but I am sure if you go to the how to page for AfD's you can find it. I cannot see the previous article, so cannot help you evaluate it. One-event, is nonsense (Lawnchair Larry), as is the argument that anyone has to have done anything significant, i.e. Paris Hilton/Kim Kardashian, and your best defense is to write strong articles well founded in references. The problem for women and many minorities is references are difficult to find, they weren't studied by academics until the 1970s so there is little reference material except newspapers, which published for the most part mainstream news and ignored women, American Indians, Latinos, Asians, blacks, etc. etc. etc. In my early days on here I used to try to work at AfD, but I realized it is a time sink and has regular editors who have zero understanding that the history they were spoonfed was biased and selective. I'd rather spend my time creating and expanding articles with good referencing than try to argue about whether they have merit. SusunW (talk) 14:58, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

{od} We convinced Scotty to draftify the article to allow us to research and add sources as we find them. He graciously obliged. here is the draft.
 * Ugh, clearly in need of some attention. First off, why in the world would you use a clearly biased source from 1891 for anything? Perhaps as a footnote, certainly not in the body. "The relative accuracy of the sources must also be considered, for it is apparent that some of them are more credible than others", is a direct quote from this source about the events. I'd start with sources here and try to use only scholarly sources and delete anything that is web based unless you are sure of its authority. SusunW (talk) 21:16, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * See the above suggestions by . Susun, Thank you so much for taking time from researching your items to look for me. Let's see if any of the information contained helps our cause.Tsistunagiska (talk) 13:00, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello and ~!  SunsunW is correct, that it is an !vote not a vote, meaning the consensus is based on the qualitative not quantitative value of the arguments & justification for keep and delete based on policy and guidelines. It's a debate. I left you a message on your talk page a few days ago (Heading: September/October 2020, don't know if you saw it) regarding some essays that are very helpful in deletion discussions, they are: Arguments to make in deletion discussions, Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, List of policies and guidelines to cite in deletion debates. In general, concise statements grounded in policy/guidelines rather than walls of lengthy text can be very effective. Netherzone (talk) 13:55, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Daisy Yen Wu
The most detailed sources about her are all in Chinese, but I think I've done okay. I did only put her publications in English in the selected works. Not sure about that decision. Your thoughts? If you have time to look it over, that'd be great. SusunW (talk) 20:45, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I think you've done a good job of combing the Chinese and English accounts. It might be worthwhile citing 营养概论 (Introduction to Nutrition, 1929) among the selected works.--Ipigott (talk) 09:17, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks Ian. The original was published only in his name. He updated it in 1934?, I can find no record of the Taiwanese version. Should I list it as her editing it and him being the author? or just list the 1974 version (I do have a source for the publishing house) and list them as co-authors? SusunW (talk) 14:13, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
 * You could perhaps include a note with the above explanations, citing the original publication and the later version from 1974. It's really up to you.--Ipigott (talk) 14:33, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Danièle Aron-Rosa
1) I cannot believe no article has been written on her in French or English, but 2) I'm probably going to need some help, as you know I struggle with French. For instance, this says get it somewhere else? Also this (Italian) I believe says her heritage is Tunisian/Jewish? and does this say she married in May 1958? I wish I could find an article that says that, or frankly anything on her early life or career trajectory. Putting dates to places she worked would certainly help, as to my reading it is more promotional without concrete dates. Please feel free to jump in on it if you'd like. SusunW (talk) 19:25, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, it certainly seems to indicate there is a photograph of her wedding in May 1958. I'm a bit tied up with visitors today. I'll see how it goes. If not, tomorrow.--Ipigott (talk) 08:45, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * No worries Ian, whenever is fine. SusunW (talk) 13:47, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Can't see there's anything about Danièle in the Italian piece. You can find more details here, showing she was born on 15 October 1934 in Tunis, married Jean-Jacques Aron in 1958, etc.--Ipigott (talk) 16:21, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Yay! Thanks for the book reference. On the Italian piece, its on page 7 last column on the right. SusunW (talk) 16:31, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * With your lovely source, I was able to take it live. I didn't list publications, nor go into a lot of detail about her research, but there is enough there for someone to know who she is and hopefully someone who gets the medical part will be able to assist. Thank you so very much! SusunW (talk) 19:02, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Women's Football / Soccer Update > October 2020
Subscribe or Unsubscribe here. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:28, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Archive
Can you archive your talk page, my iPad is super slow here, thanks. Looking about some of the famous polyglots typically take at least 2 years to become properly fluent (C1-2 level) in a language, longer for languages like Japanese and Hungarian. Most of the claims online about hours needed to attain it are grossly underestimated. 500 hours is nothing! A solid core can typically be achieved in a year. There's a big difference between deciphering text and being highly fluent at writing and speaking.† Encyclopædius  09:28, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for alerting me. I'll take care of it. The page seems to expand more and more quickly each time. But even with an iPad you should be able to jump to the bottom by using the TOC.
 * Around two years to become really fluent seems reasonable to me. The younger you are, the quicker it goes. I once coordinated an experiment teaching English to five-year-olds in France. It was amazing how well they could communicate after three or four months with sessions of just 30 minutes a day. Despite our success, there was no follow-up as there were so few primary school teachers in France who could speak English fluently (rather than just write and translate).
 * Moving from one language to a similar one (e.g. Spanish to Italian) is obviously much easier than trying to acquire a completely different language. I think Danish must be one of the easiest languages for English speakers to learn: lots of similar words, only two genders, far fewer verb forms than most other languages, quite a bit of flexibility in sentence structure, etc. I think most people find it difficult because of the pronunciation — they simply cannot understand what is said. And once you learn Danish, you can get by pretty well in Norwegian and even Swedish.--Ipigott (talk) 10:00, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes young children under 10 have an astounding capacity for learning which far exceeds adults, you'll find most of the world class classical musicians started very young, some as young as 3! As I've progressed I'm finding that forming sentences in speech and writing together is the only way I can really remember a lot of vocabulary long term, particularly in languages like German which have a huge amount of similarly spelled words. Short sentences comprising two or three words ot learn work best I think in the early stages to build vocabulary. Reading is a great way to build passive vocabulary and understanding but the real nitty gritty in my opinion is being able to recall and reproduce the words in the right contexts. Which takes a lot of time and means I have less time to spend on other languages. I will continue spending small amounts of time each week in reading and listening to the six languages I'm focusing on but I'm focusing on building my French up to an intermediate level at the moment and speaking a lot! Spanish I've reached a stage where I can understand a large amount of what is being said without subtitles, though varies on the speed and topic of discussion!† Encyclopædius  10:59, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Sentences like Je veux manger un morceau de poisson pour le déjeuner. Je suis très content de mes progrès! Je entendu une forte détonation! † Encyclopædius  11:13, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Request for an AfC declines rescue rewrite
Hello, I used the Women in Red tool to find articles that were not accepted for creation. I didn't write the original but there were tons of reliable sources so I gave it a try to rewrite it. I have not myself ever successfully gotten an article through AfC and I would love to get some feedback on what I've got. Would you mind having a look and/or pointing me in the direction for more feedback in my Talk before I submit it? It's in my sandbox: [] Thank you for your time and efforts. TheMusicExperimental (talk) 17:32, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Confessions of a Talk Page Stalker - I found the article you wrote enlightening, especially when looking at the sources and doing a search myself. I avoid the AfC process. if possible. A lot of reviewers think an article should be ready to nominate for "GA" status in order for it to be accepted. That's just my opinion, of course. The article has an uphill climb to make, unfortunately, in today's Wikipedia universe. I'd fight for it though. How many skaters have an exhibit in the Smithsonian? That's so cool. There is a "war" in this encyclopedia between deletionist/purist and inclusionist/realist that is constant. I would write as well an article as I could. Cite as many independent sources with a splash of primary sources {if found). You did good asking for help. No one better than those in WIR project. --Tsistunagiska (talk) 17:47, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * thank you for taking the time to read it! I'm on the fence re: AfC as well. I feel like if I can get it through the AfC then it will be less likely to get immediately be-trolled with GNG/AfDs. I may be wrong though. Either way, I'm appreciative of any and all feedback on making it good to help get it to the finish line. TheMusicExperimental (talk) 17:54, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Influential women
I don't know if any of these names have your interest but Berlingske has an annual list of the Most Influential Danish Women. The 2019 list is behind a paywall but the 2018list is immediately accessible to all. Forgive me for posting it here and not on the crowd-sourced list but I didn't want to engage in listing individual names since I don't known which one of them (if any) you might find interesting. Mette Reissmann may btw also soon be relevant in case she ends up as Soc.'s final candidate for the position as Lord Mayor of Copenhagen at next year's s municipal election.Ramblersen2 (talk) 12:29, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this. Those in politics probably already have articles. I'll have a closer look at them in a day or two. However, as you may have noticed, I am more comfortable writing the biographies of women who are no longer living. Next time we subscribe to Berlingske, I'll have a look at the 2019 list too.--Ipigott (talk) 12:38, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
 * In connection with Reissmann, I've just been looking at the article on Frank Jensen. It seems to me as if it could be significantly improved, especially in connection with his ten-year term as Copenhagen's mayor.--Ipigott (talk) 13:14, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
 * True. But I too prefer dead people (that sounds SO wrong!) and I'm in general not too keen on engaging in work on politicians either since the list of biographies of people from more interesting industries (mainly architects and artists) that I would like to expand is already horribly long. And I'm also haunted by a wish to make a somewhat decent start on an English-language article about Landboreformerne (which it would be useful to be able to link to in literally thousands of articles about villages, manor houses etc) but find it a rather overwhelming and unmanageable job and therefore keep postponing it. So I think I will leave it to others to give Frank Jensen a makeover. But maybe I'll get around to making some minor improvements at some point.Ramblersen2 (talk) 15:04, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

November edit-a-thons from Women in Red
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:51, 28 October 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging

October harvest
beautiful Main page today, don't miss the pic by a blocked user (of a 2013 play critical of refugee politics), nor a related video, interviews mostly German, but music and scene. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:19, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for alerting me. You have certainly put together an interesting article on Katrin Lea Tag. The user you refer to has been blocked from the EN wiki but apparently not from Commons or the image would not have survived. I hope you will be inspired to create more bios of scenic designers and back-stage people in opera under November's Stage+Screen+Radio+Podcast. We need to expand our coverage of behind-the-scenes women. Did you notice that Smerus has become a member of WiR? It will be interesting to see how he contributes. The priority of the moment is of course Fanny Mendelssohn.--Ipigott (talk) 08:07, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I smiled when I red the WiR November newsletter, - as if I had known. I saw Tag's work in three productions (four operas, more on my talk), and found it fascinating. - Thank goodness images are not deleted just because their author was found socking. - Fanny Hensel is interesting! - Would we say Clara Wieck after she married?--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:14, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
 * That's certainly a powerful argument. I also note that in the German-speaking countries there seems to be far wider understanding of Fanny Hensel. As for the English-speakers, they seem to want to preserve the Mendelssohn connection. Perhaps the article should have a section on the naming controversy. You could suggest it under the peer review.--Ipigott (talk) 08:27, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I said it all in the move request, which went by WiR. It actually doesn't matter how the article is named, as long as we don't confuse readers by "Mendelssohn published" or "She published" when before Mendelssohn, while the title page of her Opus 1 (visible in the article) has Hensel in big letters, and nèe in small. - For me, that would clearly indicate HER will to be called, but Wikipedia goes by COMMON NAME, - a bit disrespectful I think. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:35, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you for the wonderful barnstars and for recognizing the participants.--Ipigott (talk) 07:25, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

thank you also from me, - and the Asian woman with some looks from me was on DYK a few days ago. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:32, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Hi Ipigott! I was wondering if you could help me with something. I recently created a page (Jack Schwadron) and it was nominated for deletion. I have 46+ credible sources listed. I wrote back to them on the talk page and explained this, but another user collapsed my comments. Why would he do that and do you know if its possible to undo this action? Also wondering if you could help show me how I can vote to keep for my page. So crazy how this has all happened - wikipedia is wild! Thanks in advance <3 BigMusicBaby (talk) 22:18, 10 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks,, for alerting me on this. It might be too late to prevent deletion but I have added Keep to the deletion discussion (which shows you how you can take part in other deletion discussions). It's a pity you did not let me know earlier as the seven days for reactions has now elapsed. As for the collapsed text, I wouldn't worry about it too much. It can still be seen and appears in full in edit mode. In any case, I'm happy to see that A Beautiful Noise seems to be OK.--Ipigott (talk) 10:00, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Wiki/Women/Womxn Meet Up for Movement Strategy Implementation
Uggghhhhhh...I would so love to do this. I am away from home almost every weekend now and it's getting difficult to do my Winter routine and be here at the same time. I was telling Susun that I may have to pause being a Wikipedian until March or April of 2021. That's when we are getting ready for the thaw. The nights are getting so long and soon the sun won't even rise above the horizon. I am going to hold on as long as I can though. If I disappear one day just look for my return next Spring. :) --Tsistunagiska (talk) 17:20, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * That looks as if you are north of the Arctic circle. Here in Denmark the days get pretty short at this time of year but we do still see the sun from time to time. That looks like a good guess. I've just been looking at your informative article on Chilkat State Park. In any case, enjoy your hibernation. We look forward to your return when it gets a little warmer.--Ipigott (talk) 08:33, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your kind words. We are about 40 miles+ above the edge of the circle. It was -29c this morning. Today's high is -23c. We will have a heat wave later this week when it warms to -14c. Good times!! I so appreciate my wood stoves. Melting some ice this morning for water to cook with. --Tsistunagiska (talk) 14:29, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I grew up a lot further south near Chilkat in Haines, AK. Lived there from about 13 years old until the Summer of 2018 when we moved here. --Tsistunagiska (talk) 14:31, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Women in Red
Hi Ipigott, thank you for your kind words. I do plan to get back creating more biographies. At the moment, I am overseeing the WikiGap Pakistan Challenge but once I am free will start again. Regards Khilari&#38;historian (talk) 17:46, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
 * That sounds interesting. Have you noticed we are now running our Women in Asia contest?--Ipigott (talk) 19:30, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I would have participated if I was not overseeing the WikiGap. I have mentioned it to the WikiGap participants lets see if any work on it. Regards Khilari&#38;historian (talk) 20:56, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Sophie Howe and others
Many thanks for reviewing the pages I've made recently - Sophie Howe, Minette Batters and so on. Very much appreciated. To explain what I'm doing, I'm working my way through the BBC Radio 4 Women's Hour Power List 2020 announced on 16 November. Of the 30, 17 were not mentioned in Wikipedia. I am working through, and if they are sufficiently notable, staring a page for each.--MerielGJones (talk) 13:12, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * It's been a pleasure for me to look through your well presented, informative biographies, especially as most of them are about women. In this connection, I was wondering if you would not like to become a member of Women in Red where we are trying to chip away at the dominance of the coverage of men on Wikipedia. I think you could help us along and perhaps encourage others to participate. If so, you can register as a member in the box at the top of wp:Women in Red. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 16:38, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your kind comments. I have looked at the WiR pages on-and-off for some time, especially the talk page. Do I have to do something in particular if I become a member of Women in Red?--MerielGJones (talk) 19:38, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * There are no obligations and on the basis of your contributions to women's biographies, you are already doing more than most members. As a member, you'll be posted from time to time on our evolving priorities. I think you'll find it a hospitable community. I've also been assessing many of your past articles. You can see from here that about half of them have reached C class. That's quite an achievement.--Ipigott (talk) 07:48, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, I will sign up to WiR! Thanks for assessing my past articles.--MerielGJones (talk) 22:13, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Women's poll tax repeal movement
I haven't taken it live yet as we are still trying to get the redlinks done and I am still trying to find someone who works on women's history to review it, but it has stabilized and I think we have the organizational part done. Trying to figure out what goes where in it was challenging. I'm shooting to nominate it on the 25th, so if you could look it over and give it a copyedit that would be wonderful. If you don't have time, I get it. Thanks so much. SusunW (talk) 14:32, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll have time to take a good look at it tomorrow.--Ipigott (talk) 16:23, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm having difficulty with the sentence "For black women, suffrage was only a part of the struggle to eliminate inequality. Members of the National Association of Colored Women's Clubs campaigned against Jim Crow laws (legal statues regulating and enforcing racial segregation in the United States), lynching, peonage, and in favor of voting." It doesn't seem to hang together.--Ipigott (talk) 09:42, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
 * You need to assign the quote "sell democracy to the Third World was seriously hampered by continuing racial injustice at home".--Ipigott (talk) 10:16, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I think I've now done what I can with copy editing. It's certainly an extremely detailed and informative article but I think it needs a more clearly worded section on the Harper v. Virginia ruling which put a final end to the poll tax requirements. It is well expressed in the lead but not so much in the body of the article. I was also wondering whether it would be possible to find more images, perhaps some of demonstrations or the outcome of court cases, etc. Maybe some could be found in the press. I look forward to seeing the article on mainspace and hope you can promote it to GA and then FA. It also occurred to me that could draw on the article to enhance all the lists and timelines she has been putting together on suffrage state by state.--Ipigott (talk) 11:20, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much Ian. I'll look at those things today. As for images, I am working on finding more. I really, really, really want to use this as the lede image. I know that the AP Wirephoto did not copyright it, but the problem is proving whether it was published in 1966. So far, I only find this cropped one, which loses the beauty of the words above her head. I've written to her daughter and have asked about leads for Virginia archives which might help determine if it was published. He also said he would work on a category, but he just got back from vacation, so it had to take a back seat to RL work. SusunW (talk) 13:53, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

December with Women in Red
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:42, 26 November 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Susan B. Anthony II
Last one from the poll tax redlist. I think she easily qualifies for a GA. If you have time and the inclination, could you give it a copyedit? Thank you so much. SusunW (talk) 19:22, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I've been through this but there was not much to change in copy editing. However I think you could perhaps provide a few more details on her involvement in the poll tax issues. For example, in Women's poll tax repeal movement, you explain that Pepper's bill failed but you do not mention this in the biography. According to Wilkerson-Freeman, she also appears to have been active in Alabama. Anything of note there?--Ipigott (talk) 10:31, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks Ian. Can do, and your note also reminded me to try to find something about her work in desegregation. She specifically mentioned it was concerning housing. I found it astonishing that she was involved in the 1940s in that. However did a rich white woman from Pennsylvania become involved in that? Wish I could find a way to access her autobiography. Let me see what I can do. SusunW (talk) 15:16, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

A question
Hi, someone left a note on my talk page telling me not to add my new articles to the Metrics pages because the bot will take care of it. But I see that you have been adding articles. Should I continue adding pages as I create them? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 22:55, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The bot picks up new biographies of women if they are included on Wikidata (nearly all of them are). It does not pick up more general articles about women such as organizations, works of art or books, sports events, etc. Those are the ones I add. All members of Women in Red are encouraged to leave a WiR banner on the talk pages of pertinent articles, preferably one based on the month-by-month priorities or simply "template:WIR-150" for #1day1woman if nothing more specific applies. Even "template:WIR", (preferably "template:WIR 2020" with the year) will do. It's also useful to list them on the corresponding meetup page as this not only gives an idea of how successful a priority has been but it also provides opportunities for inclusion in the social media, especially Twitter and Pinterest. Thanks by the way for your continued support of articles about women on DYK. It's great to see them appearing almost every day. November was a particularly good month with 69 relating to women.--Ipigott (talk) 08:09, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation, and the compliment. You can also thank for being so prolific! Yoninah (talk) 10:20, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Spot on, . Susun is indeed going from strength to strength with all her GAs and FAs. Her articles are such interesting reads, I always look forward to helping her along with language problems and with any copy editing she thinks is needed. She's not only improving Wikipedia's coverage of historic women but providing us all with a more general understanding of the (forgotten) contributions women have made to our evolving civilization.--Ipigott (talk) 10:56, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Beyond her accomplishments on Wikipedia and with WIR, Susun is also a wonder and amazing human being. A great attitude and always willing to help, she also takes time to get a little more personal and shows an interest in how you are doing in life. She exemplifies the Cherokee (Otsalanvlvi-we are all brothers and sister) and Lakota (Mitakuye Oyasin-we are all related) belief's that we are all connected in this world --Tsistunagiska (talk) 13:42, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * What a beautiful way to wake up with my first cup of coffee. I am truly humbled. I have a passion for keeping women from being forgotten and I try to do a little each day to make sure their stories are told. But the truth is, I am often confounded by the technology here and could not work without the help of so many others. It is an honor to work with each of you. You make what I do more comprehensible and reach a wider audience. We are each richer for the collaboration with each other and I appreciate and admire each of you and your work more than I could ever express. SusunW (talk) 14:12, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Marge Frantz
This one is tied to the poll tax group by virtue of her dad Joseph Gelders, which found. I was fascinated by her story. I do not think that she and her husband ever divorced and I wasn't quite sure how to write that. Each lists their "spouse" in their obits, as well as their partners. Anyway, if you could give it a once over, I definitely think it is GA material. Thanks! SusunW (talk) 18:28, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Very little to copy edit on this one. I think you need to expand a bit on Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. What is the CIO? Anything more on Eleanor Engstrand?--Ipigott (talk) 11:47, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'll work on that and as TJ pointed out adding why she left the communist party. Truly appreciate your help. SusunW (talk) 14:18, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, you are so good! Found an obit for Engstrand that gives a good bit of information. I think the article is much more interesting now. SusunW (talk) 16:18, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Lady Lacoste
And while I'm here, how would you title an article on this woman. Common name is Lady Lacoste, but that seems wrong. Do I use Marie-Louise Globensky (her maiden name and how Wikidata has her) and this thesis calls her? Marie-Louise Lacoste, like the first link does? Marie-Louise Globensky Lacoste or Marie-Louise Globensky, Lady Lacoste? Titled people always confuse me. Thanks. SusunW (talk) 22:45, 2 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I would title it Marie-Louise Lacoste, then start the article Marie-Louise Globensky, Lady Lacoste.--Ipigott (talk) 08:01, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much. It is so confusing to me. SusunW (talk) 14:18, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, and Marie-Louise Lacoste is done. If you have time to give it a look, that would be great. SusunW (talk) 18:15, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Done. More difficult than most of your recent additions to copy-edit. I don't think she would have considered herself a "Québécoise", given her royalist affiliations. I doubt the term existed at the time -- certainly not in English. Had a bit of difficulty with the "ill"s. You refer to two of her daughters in the lead - a bit confusing. But for me, after spending five years working in Montreal in my twenties, it was of course very interesting.--Ipigott (talk) 19:54, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * You know it was hard, as French is so difficult for me, but I thought it particularly weird that so many of her children and her husband had articles, but she did not. Thank you so much for your help. SusunW (talk) 20:04, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for making sure she has an article too. There are serious gaps in the women's history of French-speaking Canada and in general the French speakers are not too keen to document people who supported the British crown, however much they helped the provincial institutions. Just look at the Quebec licence plates: "Je me souviens" - but they prefer to remember some more than others. I'm all for remembering them all.--Ipigott (talk) 20:25, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Me too. I never did understand history that tells only part of the story. It's no wonder there is so much difficulty in understanding the complexity of our world. SusunW (talk) 20:35, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

"Spontaneism (art)" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Spontaneism (art). The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 5 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 23:24, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * For anyone interested, I have suggested we should now make the redirect to the recent article on Spontaneous realism.--Ipigott (talk) 10:11, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you so much, . I really appreciate your kindness.--Ipigott (talk) 16:37, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Women's poll tax repeal movement
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Who might this be?
If you have the time, I could use some help with a problem. This source (p 84) contains this statement "Thanks to Denmark's delegate to the League [of Nations] (a woman who also happened to be vice-president of the ICW), in 1930 a resolution requesting that discussions be resumed was put before the Assembly and adopted". Why they didn't name her I have no idea, but it cites the statement to This article, which is in French. Is there any hope that it identifies the Danish woman by name? If you are busy, no worries. Wishing you and yours a wonderful holiday season and I hope we all have a better (and less stressful) 2021.SusunW (talk) 22:34, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
 * In the article you linked to, two Danish delegates are mentioned: Henni Forchhammer and Anna Westergaard. Thanks for your holiday wishes. All the best to you and yours too. 2020 might have been a difficult year in many ways but we nevertheless managed to make considerable progress on Wikipedia, especially with all your GAs. I look forward to collaboration on women's citizenship in 2021 - a really important topic.--Ipigott (talk) 08:50, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the help! I think Forchhammer was probably the person I am looking for as her bio says she was a delegate from 1929-1937; whereas Westergaard's article indicates she served from 1935. But at least with names, I can do some research and narrow it down. here's the link to the proposal on nationality and what I have barely started. SusunW (talk) 15:00, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Seasons greetings both! Glad you're still here and active. This site feels like a ghost town compared to years back! † Encyclopædius  16:50, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Speak for yourself, my dear friend, and all the best for Christmas and the New Year. I must say we have never had a better record than this year's achievements. But your insistence on not participating is sadly missed.--Ipigott (talk) 22:01, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hope you have a lovely holiday season . Still plugging away. SusunW (talk) 22:30, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy holidays

 * Thank you very much, Natherzone, and all the best to you and yours too.--Ipigott (talk) 16:27, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Patrol
Hello. Please look at the article if it doesn't bother you - Polina Pushkareva. Thank you. Namerst (talk) 10:34, 27 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks for getting in touch on this. You'll see I've edited the article quite a bit, adding sort, categories, etc., and also making a few copy edits. You should be more careful with your sources. Several of those you've included here are not really secondary. You'll find more advice on how to write women's biographies at Women in Red, e.g. our Ten Simple Rules or our Primer for creating women's biographies. I see that quite a few of your earlier articles have been about women. If you intend to write more, it might be useful for you to become a member of the WikiProject. You can register by clicking on "Join WikiProject" on wp:Women in Red.--Ipigott (talk) 12:25, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Please tell me how to evaluate the actions of an anonymous editor? Namerst (talk) 21:48, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * You might not have created a user page but no registered user on Wikipedia can remain anonymous. I can find all the articles you have created, all your contributions, and even detailed statistics on all your work. Thanks, by the way, for developing such an interesting article on Aviasales.ru. May I take this opportunity of wishing you all the best for 2021. Please keep in touch, especially if you create more articles about women.--Ipigott (talk) 08:36, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I mean, the anonymous editor has put this article up for deletion. You can view? Namerst (talk) 08:54, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * : I think your anonymous user, like me, was a little concerned about the need for more independent sources. I've added one and removed the tag. It frequently happens that registered users are listed with their IP address when they fail to login after their login has been automatically removed after 365 days. It's happened to me more than once.--Ipigott (talk) 10:52, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello. Happy New Year! Please see the article. The anonymous editor again submitted the article for deletion. Namerst (talk) 09:36, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
 * : Don't worry. It's not valid and has been deleted.--Ipigott (talk) 14:19, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

A New Year With Women in Red!
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 03:02, 29 December 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Happy New Year 2021!


Abishe (talk) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! It's the last day of 2024 and tomorrow will be . Hope the coming year brings pleasures for you. Have a prosperous, enjoyable and a productive . This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.


 * Thank you very much,, and a Happy New Year to you and yours too.--Ipigott (talk) 14:27, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Dutch artists
Thank you for the encouraging words on my articles on Dutch women artists! I don't know how I wound up in the Netherlands, but I like it here. And I am particularly intrigued by the era between the two wars. Artists fleeing from and to the Netherlands, and some of them, sadly being caught up in the Holocaust. As you may have gathered from some of my posts on the WiR talk page, I am working on a list of artists who participated in Onze Kunst van Heden. I am mainly working off-line in a complicated spreadsheet, trying to determine which artists truly fell into obscurity. So far I've research about 150 of the 700+ artist who participated. A rough guess, at least 30% so far have an article in English, Dutch, or appear in Wikidata. I pause to create pages for the women artists and sometimes (sometimes) write up their husbands. Best, WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:48, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Looks like a really interesting and useful project. Please keep us updated on further progress. Thanks also for all the Asia contest barnstarts and awards and for your preparatory work on Africa.--Ipigott (talk) 08:25, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

2021

 * Thank you very much,, and all the best to you and yours too in 2021.--Ipigott (talk) 09:13, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Haiti
I am not writing Haiti's part yet, but because it was united with the Dominican Republic between 1822 and 1844, it comes into play. I found a copy of the Civil Code of 1825 as later amended, but alas, can only glean bits. This says on page 448, if I translate it correctly that a woman who has lost her nationality by marriage to a foreigner must give up her Haitian property. It does not say that she automatically does lose it. But, going on the fact that Bolivia adopted the Napoleonic Code and it specifically says she does, I think it probable that indeed she does lose nationality. If I am reading this correctly, see note 19, wives were required to follow the nationality of the husband until termination of the marriage, but it is speaking of French wives, so am unsure if this is a comparison of the French code or applies to Haitians. Can you help? Thanks! SusunW (talk) 17:26, 3 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Your text first explains that only Haitians can own property and that the clause referring to foreigners (para 2 of Art 46f) of the Code Napoléon has been deleted from the Haitian code. It goes on to say that if a Haitian has lost Haitian nationality through marriage, the foreigner cannot acquire property. If he inherits property from a child, its value must be paid in money (Art 2 & 5 of the bill of 30 October 1860). The Constitution still stated at the end of the 19th century that a Haitian woman who acquired a different nationality through marriage had to sell her property in Haiti within a certain time.


 * Note 19: "(26 June 1880). A French woman who marries a foreigner follows the status of her husband unless her marriage does not grant her the nationality of her husband, in which case she remains French. If the marriage is dissolved by the death of her husband, or by divorce, she regains French nationality, with the authorization of the government, provided she resides in France or returns there, stating that she intends to settle there.
 * "If the marriage is dissolved by the death of the husband, the status of French may be granted by the same decree of reintegration to minor children on the mother's request or by further decree if the request is made by the tutor with the approval of the family council."


 * Hope this helps.--Ipigott (talk) 12:26, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay, so now I have started on Haiti. I think this chapter, "Influence du marriage sur la nationalité" is probably pertinent (pages 91-108), but alas, I cannot figure out how to make it text short of typing out the whole thing. Any chance you have time to read it and give me a summary in the Haitian section? I would be very grateful for the help. Obviously no rush, as there are many countries yet to do. SusunW (talk) 15:35, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I have looked through it quickly but I don't know how useful it will be as it is a rather confused discussion on the articles pertaining to Haitian nationality for women. The basics are the points I summarized above. I'll read through it more carefully tomorrow and let you know if there's anything of real importance.--Ipigott (talk) 15:49, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks! SusunW (talk) 16:02, 14 January 2021 (UTC)


 * p92 presents Art. 5 of the 1889 constitution:
 * A foreign woman married to a Haitian follows the status of her husband.
 * A Haitian women married to a foreigner loses her status of Haitian.
 * If a marriage is dissolved, she can retrieve her Haitian status by adhering to the formalities provided by law.
 * A Haitian woman who has lost her status through marriage with a foreigner cannot own or acquire property in Haiti under any circumstances.
 * A law will regulate the means of expropriating propery she owned prior to her marriage.
 * There is then a summary of the discussion behind these provisions which took place in the constituting assembly. On p94, it is explained that under French colonization, marriage was not commonly practised as the sexes came together freely, despite the prohibitive clause of the 1685 Code Noir. As a result, succession law was virtually unknown in St Domingo. This led to Toussaint-Louverture's introduction of special provisions on marriage in the 1801 constitution under Title IV:
 * Art. 9: In accordance with the civil and religious nature of marriage, leading to the purity of morals, married couples shall practice the underlying virtues, and will always be distinguished and specially protected by the government.
 * Art. 10: Divorce will not be practised in the colony.
 * Art. 11: The status and the rights of children born under marriage will be provided for under laws designed to promote and support social virtues so as to encourage and cement family ties.


 * Except in 1805 and 1807, all the constitutions before 1843 contained Articels 9 and 11 above. Nevertheless, natural unions with Haitian women continued on a large scale even in France. On occasion, men married Haitian women in church but such marriages were not recognized under Haitian law. Children born under such marriages were considered to be Haitians but this was rather vague, as the mothers in some cases kept their Haitian nationality and in others a foreign nationality.


 * Under the terms of the 1843 constitution, any descendent of an African born in Haiti was deemed to be Haitian under the jus soli system. As a result, children born in Haiti by a Haitian woman married to a foreigner were nevertheless Haitians. Moreover, the resulting penalties for Haitian women married to foreigners led not only to denationalization but to dispossession for the benefit of her heirs. Although these provisions were repealed in 1860, they were never properly enforced. Haitian women married to foreigners carefully concealed their possessions and managed to escape the law.


 * The bill of 30 October 1860, seeking to legalize relationships between foreign men and Haitian women, stated that marriage would not change the woman's nationality. If the foreign husband inherited property in Haiti, he had to sell it, obtaining the proceedings of the sale in cash. Children born under such marriages were generally Haitians.


 * These provisions were modified by the 1874 Constitution which stated under Art. 6: A Haitian woman married to a foreigner acquires the status (nationality) of her husband.


 * The 1879 constitution clarified the case of women who had lost their Haitian nationality. "In such cases, the property and property rights which she owned prior to ceasing to be Haitian will continue to be regulated under Haitian law. But in future she will not be able to acquire property in Haiti.


 * These provisions however led to confusion. As a result, on 10 October 1884, the National Assembly modified Art. 5 to read: A foreign woman who marries a Haitian will acquire the nationality of her husband. A Haitian woman who marries a foreigner loses her Haitian nationality. If she is widowed, without having children from the marriage, she can retrieve her Haitian nationality by fulfilling the formalities required abroad in order to acquire Haitian nationality. A Haitian woman who loses her nationality as a result of her marriage with a foreigner cannot under any circumstances acquire property in Haiti.


 * The remainder of the article discusses the confusion between different versions of the constitution for women who married during earlier periods while the final section discusses how the nationality of a woman is regulated abroad, highlighting differences in France, Britain and certain South American countries.


 * Let me know if you require any further details.--Ipigott (talk) 14:09, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Ian, you are a master! Thank you so much, very helpful. I was surprised, just as I was that the US article had no mention, that the very detailed article we have on Haitian nationality and citizenship never mentions this issue. I'm slogging away at it, working through the Americas for now. SusunW (talk) 14:39, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Good lord this is hard. I've read the constitutions of 1918, as modified in 1928; 1932; 1935, 1939 and am finding no indication that these mention nationality. So, going back to the Nationality Law of 1907, Stevens says in 1933 that the article which effected marriage was 9. I think, but am unsure, that this (p 14) says article 9 was modified in 1942 to allow retention of Haitian nationality and possibly that they could repatriate if they formerly lost their citizenship through marriage? Can you also check [this against the last paragraph in the section to ensure that my text is accurate? Again, I appreciate your language skills and hope that I am not overtaxing you by my repeated need for assistance. [[User:SusunW|SusunW]] (talk) 20:41, 15 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Yes, you are right about Art 9. The new version replaces "loses her Haitian status" with "retains her Haitian nationality." The new Art. 3 states: A Haitian woman, who as a result of her marriage to a foreigner had lost her Haitian nationality in accordance with the former Article 9 of the Bill of 22 August 1907, in order to recover it will simply have to make a declaration in the prosecutor's office of her place of residence stating that she takes back her Haitian nationality. Your interpretation of the Nouvelliste article seems to be correct although all the modifications seem very confusing.--Ipigott (talk) 10:57, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! Yes, it's really confusing. It's why I haven't moved anything to the main articles on nationality for any place yet. I want to proof each one and I want to try to make it less confusing, if that is possible before it is moved. Besides which it will make it easier to create the table if they are all in one place. SusunW (talk) 13:25, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Your ping (re deleting problematic names from redlists)

 * This is a follow-up to an item on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red: "Please click each red link in your list before asking others to create articles"

Thank you for pinging me, but I decided to WP:DISENGAGE. That said, now that I see that your principal interests are IT and culture, there might be something I can learn from you. What's your take? ◅ Sebastian 08:02, 7 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for posting here and taking an interest in my background, . I was concerned by your recent WiR message as I spend quite a lot of my wiki time welcoming, encouraging and mentoring new contributors, especially women who face more difficulties than men in coping with Wikipedia's tech-heavy editing requirements. As you probably know, many of them quickly fall by the wayside. I think our contributions on the WiR talk page may lead to at least some minor improvements in this connection. The Wikidata redlists are important as they are widely used as a basis for creating new women's biographies in virtually every sphere. I may spend a day or two trying to put together a list of articles which have been deleted more than once in the more popular areas of interest as it seems to me it would be a useful addition to our current guidelines and items to address at editathons. Drop me a line if you think I can be of any further assistance. Strange, btw, that this year your imminent Wikipedia day is going to coincide strikingly with your own interest in democracy. Und wenn es nicht zu spät ist, alles Gute zum neuen Jahr.--Ipigott (talk) 10:49, 7 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your nice answer. Nein, es ist noch lange nicht zu spät; just the other day I read on someone else's talk page a tongue in cheek greeting for 2020, and the person replied ⸉Thank you, there are still 12 hours left.⸊ Funny you noticed the Wikipedia day; I don't know why it is on that day and I never observed it. There are two birthdays in the family close to it, so I was usually distracted.
 * Welcoming constructive editors is a good cause; that's also a motivation for me to check speedy deletions, because in the past I experienced that many well-intended rookie editors get their wrists slapped by someone inappropriately adding a speedy tag. That seems to have improved of late, btw. So, when the editor who created the article that started this got bitten, I felt sorry for, because clearly just was trying to help where help was needed. It seems you offered putting together the list because of the same motivation. Do you really think it would take a day or even two? If I understand it correctly, the list for the last quarter was WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by nationality/India, which has 841 939 redlinks. Assuming it takes ~2 seconds to click on a link and see whether it contains a notice about prior deletion, the whole list would take about 1800 seconds = 30 minutes. Or am I misunderstanding something? ◅ Sebastian 11:33, 7 January 2021 (UTC)


 * I tend to take a pretty pragmatic approach to this sort of thing. What I had in mind was to take a few of the most popular Wikidata redlink lists and click on the "site links" column to find those most frequently included in other language versions. For instance, if you take WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Missing_articles_by_occupation/Actresses, you will see that there are about 80 redlinks with 10 or more site links. I would then check them out to see which articles had already been created and deleted more than once. (This could also be a useful way of seeing which ones really deserve an article on the EN wiki in cases where there have been no deletes.) Once a basic list exists, I would then hope that others would add to it when they experience similar problems. So a day or two seems reasonable to make a start. I'll let you know how it progresses.--Ipigott (talk) 12:08, 7 January 2021 (UTC)


 * I see that there are many more actresses than Indian women – about 5000. (But why is that so?) Checking all of them would, according to my estimate, take around 2.5 hours. If there are a handful of such big lists among the most popular, I can see that that easily adds up to a day or two. Do you mean it's more pragmatic to work on those lists instead of whatever list comes up in the next contest? But why? Or do you mean by “pragmatic” that you only want to check those with 10 or more site links? Since there are only about 80 of them in the actresses list, that would just take a few minutes per list. Still, if there are several hundred suchs big lists, it could conceivably add up to a day or two. You see, I'm confused. But don't worry about it; I don't need to understand your plan. As long as you're happy with it, I'm happy, too. ◅ Sebastian 13:40, 7 January 2021 (UTC)


 * It's simply a matter of covering the most frequently deleted first as these are the ones which are likely to attract and then upset new contributors. As Wikipedia keeps stats on absolutely everything, I'm pretty sure some tech wizard could put together a list of multiple deletions of women's biographies sorted by frequency of deletions. (Any ideas, , ?) But for the time being, our Wikidata redlists will help. I'll let you know when I have a first draft. I've been looking at some of the nationality lists and it certainly seems as if pornographic actresses are the most commonly deleted. So it might even help simply to suggest that new editors should avoid them. Then there are also the American singers and dancers on the corresponding redlists. The very fact they appear there as having articles in many other languages but not in English should be a warning.--Ipigott (talk) 14:11, 7 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for asking me but I'm afraid this is outside my skill set.--Oronsay (talk) 14:36, 7 January 2021 (UTC)


 * OK,, I've made a start on this: User:Ipigott/WiR redlinked women warning. I'll post it on WiR talk and see what they think about it. It could for example be linked from WikiProject Women in Red/Redlist index and from some of our essays. People could be invited to add any articles with have created similar problems.--Ipigott (talk) 13:49, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , it should be possible to create a list automatically, although not with ListeriaBot. I'll try and report the results later. MarioGom (talk) 08:46, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Are you already working on this? --MarioGom (talk) 09:22, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi MarioGom, thanks for asking – and, above all, for helping Ipigott with your expertise. No, I'm not working on Wikipedia this weekend, and I'm not planning on interferring with Ipigott's plan on this; has much more experience in this area than I do. ◅ Sebastian 16:07, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for offering your expertise on this. Personally I think it would be a very useful development but from the WiR talk page I see that not everyone agrees. Perhaps we should wait a few days and see how things develop.--Ipigott (talk) 16:18, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , ok. Let's see. MarioGom (talk) 16:16, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Re: Women in Red
Hey. Thanks for the nice message! I will absolutely go through those lists at some point. For now though, I'll be focussing on making pages for all MFs and mayors. I'm not exclusively focussing on women for that, though most of the MFs without pages are women. I might look through some of the WiR redlists from time to time and just pick someone. Excited to be part of the WiR project, so thank you for the nice welcome! Kaffe42 (talk) 15:13, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

WIR DYK
I noticed that since 1 Jan you've added 4 DYKs to the #1day1woman | 2020. Should they, instead, be on the #1day1woman | 2021? Oronsay (talk) 18:50, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * No, I don't think so as they were registered with the 2020 #1day1woman. Those created in 2021 will of course be added to the 2021 version if they appear on DYK. Thanks for monitoring these additions. It's good to know there's someone keeping a check.--Ipigott (talk) 21:33, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I only found it because I hadn't taken the page off my watchlist! Your reasoning makes sense, but I did see several at the bottom of last year's list saying "(from 2019)". I defer to you though. Oronsay (talk) 22:44, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I simply click on the talk page banner and list the DYKs on the page that turns up - not just for #iday1woman but for all the others too.--Ipigott (talk) 08:20, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Westpac Outstanding Women Awards
Hello, I have appreciated your commentary on my work as I have been learning to edit. Last night I created this page: Westpac Outstanding Women Award, which has since been proposed for deletion based on lack of notability. You can see both the proposal and my thinking about why it is notable on the discussion page Articles for deletion/Westpac Outstanding Women Award. To be clear, I am not canvassing for support; as a learner, I would value hearing your thinking on this matter. Particularly, I feel strongly that, for small countries like Papua New Giunea, notable topics will pretty much never rate on the scale of a US notion of notability -- but that does not discount the notability for PNG. However, there are many notable women in red brought up by this award. Thank you, Oughtta Be Otters (talk) 22:43, 17 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for posting here. I agree with your reasoning for inclusion of this article and have voted "keep" on the discussion page. There is indeed a misconception on Wikipedia that one size fits all. We need to be far more pragmatic in recognizing the need for writing about developments of this kind which contribute so much to advancement in disadvantaged countries and regions. When you create new articles, don't forget to include appropriate banners on the article's talk page, including WikiProject Women and Wikiproject Women in Red if women are involved, both of which cause AfD's to be listed on their project pages. This in turn leads more editors to contribute to the discussion. When you contribute to talk pages like mine, you should place your contribution at the bottom of the page as that is where people look for new items. Finally, your work on this article — as well as that on Ione Quinby Griggs and Corrina Gould — has been of a high standard. Keep up the good work and let me know if you run into any more difficulties.--Ipigott (talk) 10:39, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , Thank you -- I am so grateful for your generous ongoing feedback as I learn. I'm delighted to realize (somewhat obviously) that I can and should put banners on the talk page -- makes total sense! Less obvious and also extremely helpful was your feedback that a page about an award should be about the award and not the winners thereof.
 * FYI: As a librarian, my specialty is research and I am specifically interested in putting in the effort to demonstrate (deserved) notability when the way sources or topics are included/created/shared makes it challenging to do so. I actually started editing after discovering that some individuals I admire were extremely challenging to source correctly. Digging for sources and thinking critically about them is my love, so if there is any way that can be helpful to other editors you encounter, please feel free to send them my way. Oughtta Be Otters (talk) 17:36, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * FYI: As a librarian, my specialty is research and I am specifically interested in putting in the effort to demonstrate (deserved) notability when the way sources or topics are included/created/shared makes it challenging to do so. I actually started editing after discovering that some individuals I admire were extremely challenging to source correctly. Digging for sources and thinking critically about them is my love, so if there is any way that can be helpful to other editors you encounter, please feel free to send them my way. Oughtta Be Otters (talk) 17:36, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Apparently a very encouraging article to new Editors
Is there an award for the most encouraging new article? I counted 13 editors who had one of their first 10 edits in the Trudi Gerster article within the last 24 hours. Thats an accomplishment, right?Paradise Chronicle (talk) 22:12, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Looks to me as if they could well have been working together at an editathon or on a course. Let's see whether they continue editing.--Ipigott (talk) 07:14, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Ahh, an editathon. And yes, there was a Switzerland focused editathon yesterday. There are more editors now. But still mostly new ones.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 12:01, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

2021
Have a good new year! - On the Main page today Jerome Kohl, remembered in friendship --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:47, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello there, hope I'm adding this comment correctly. Thank you for the warm welcome and editing resources. We have similar interests, and your user page is a great read. I look forward to learning a lot (more) and making helpful contributions. Appreciate the guiding hand! Stipedisciple (talk) 05:35, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Your advice
Ian, hi. Can you please take a look at Draft:LastObject. It is a properly stated WP:COI contribution about a Danish sustainable products manufacturer. Two references display red error text (soft hyphen character) and I don't understand how to fix it. Thanks! Peter. --Bbarmadillo (talk) 19:33, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Done. To remove soft hyphens, just retype the text.--Ipigott (talk) 20:52, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot! Did't realise it was that simple. --Bbarmadillo (talk) 06:40, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Ipigott Sorry to bother you again. Can you please check reference #5 at the stame article? I tried to edit the title, but the error persists. --Bbarmadillo (talk) 18:36, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Climate Change Performance Index
Hey, I noticed you worked on the climate change performance index article. Would be useful to have a few tables to show exactly on how the index was calculated, and have up-to-date information available at wikipedia/wikidata. In particular: This info can be put on a new wikipedia article containing the table, or directly placed at wikidata. Contact User:Bluerasberry if you prefer to include it to wikidata. --Genetics4good (talk) 10:44, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * table on current actual emissions per country participating in Paris agreement
 * table on allowed emissions per country participating in Paris agreement


 * Thanks for contacting me on this but my last edit on this was back in 2014, no doubt in connection with a pertinent news item. I am not really involved in this area although I certainly support the objectives. I suggest you post a message on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Climate change. You are no doubt aware of all the tables listed under Category:Climate change-related lists. Maybe those addressing the items you refer to simply need updating, especially the List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions.--Ipigott (talk) 13:48, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello!
Hello! Created an article about the writer - Oleg Roy. Look here please! Thanks! Namerst (talk) 13:04, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Your translation of the Russian article seems to be pretty good but all the sources, listed film names, etc., are in Russian. For our English-speaking readers, I think it would be useful to draw on a few English-languages sources too. For example, and . You might even be able to expand the article on the basis of these. As far as I can see, none of his books have been translated into English.--Ipigott (talk) 14:21, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your answer! I will try to improve the article. Yesterday I created a new article - Victor Orlovsky. Look here please. Is the article relevant to the English Wikipedia? Namerst (talk) 11:20, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Same advice as before, starting with . He's obviously now a big name in Silicon Valley. You need to bring the article up to date.--Ipigott (talk) 11:37, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I added links that I could find. Look here please. Thank! Namerst (talk) 11:48, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
 * OK, so now you can also try to improve Oley Roy.--Ipigott (talk) 11:53, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank! I added several sources to Oleg Roy's page. Namerst (talk) 12:19, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello. Can you help change the title of this article - «Victor Orlovski» (1). I didn't notice and wrote it wrong. Thank! Namerst (talk) 17:30, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Done.--Ipigott (talk) 18:27, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello. Created another article about Yaroslav Andreev. He's like Lil Huddy, only from Russia :) Namerst (talk) 11:05, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Can't find much about him in English and he doesn't seem to have an article on the RU wiki. It looks to me as if you need more good secondary sources. Might not be notable.--Ipigott (talk) 11:16, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * In Russian Wikipedia it is - 1. Namerst (talk) 11:26, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * In the publication Forbes and some others consider his biography, activities and success in great detail. Namerst (talk) 11:34, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * OK, but as I've said in connection with your earlier articles, it would be really helpful to find one or two sources in English. See, . In that way, non-Russian speakers can check things out.--Ipigott (talk) 11:43, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I have added these sources. Thanks for the help. Can you help with patrolling? Namerst (talk) 12:10, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi! I wrote an article about the Russian model. To Ekaterina Dmitrievna Astashenkova. Please take a look! Namerst (talk) 09:54, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for alerting me every time you create a new article but I think that by now you have gained enough experience to write articles which are about sufficiently notable people to be accepted. Just let me know if you run into any problems or need specific assistance. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 09:59, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Can you help with patrolling the article? Namerst (talk) 10:01, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Let's just see how others review it. It's not a good idea to keep calling on the same person to handle reviews. As it's International Women's Day, I don't foresee any problems.--Ipigott (talk) 10:04, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Update
Okay, so hopefully, I now am back to work regularly. I moved the section on Argentina and maybe figured out how to do a chart. Can you review the section on Argentina and make sure it is clear? Thank you so much. SusunW (talk) 16:33, 21 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Looks good to me, chart too. Just two minor points: You write "birth in Argentina was the basis nationality of a child". Do you really mean "basis" or should it be "basic"? Then in referring to wives in the plural, you first use "their husband's" (no doubt to indicate that each wife had just one husband). But later you say "wives were required to follow their husbands' authority". It would be good to be consistent as this is likely to come up in connection with many other countries. Similarly, "From 1914, married women, foreign or Argentine, did not derive nationality from their husbands" should possibly be "...from the[ir] husband". Personally I prefer "husband's" (maybe even "the husband's" rather than "their hustand's", but I'll leave it up to you.--Ipigott (talk) 15:37, 23 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Assassinat du colonel Dosso Adama / Les gardes de corps d’Allou Eugène et Dogbo Blé avouent : "Nous l’avons tué et jeté le corps sur l’autoroute" As you have not responded, I may not have pinged you correctly. So here we go again.--Ipigott (talk) 11:38, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
 * This is truly weird, but I got neither of these pings. I did however, get an e-mail that you pinged me in this second instance?? No clue about WP technology. I think basis for. Jus soli, born on Argentine soil, didn't matter who the parents were. And yes, it should be husband's because legally one could only have one. Lemme go work on it a bit. SusunW (talk) 14:44, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay, I changed them all to singular, as I think it reads better, wife, she/her, woman, etc. I truly thank you for looking this over. It's pretty complicated stuff and I am not always sure I am clear with the distinctions. SusunW (talk) 14:55, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Fine. Just let me know if there's anything else you need help with. Strange about the email. I usually only get emails from Commons and Meta.--Ipigott (talk) 15:12, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I know, right? Perhaps they are changing to some new thing? Except that I got this one. Bizarre. As you can tell, I'm moving the ones I've been working on all month to mainspace. Finally found a copy of the Vetancourt book, 6 libraries later, at Duke Law School. Last night the librarian there told me the book was in storage, but she has ordered it and will send me the chapters on Uruguay and Paraguay, which should be a big help. Also bought a copy of "Fransman's British Nationality Law" which should help with Guyana and the Caribbean. I feel like I have my "sea legs" on the topic now and will just continue like this drafting for most of the month and then moving them. It worked well to do the Spanish ones as a group as there were overlaps and I understood the topic better by doing that. It also makes me wonder if the legal structure article should be by "Empire" rather than "continent". But that is still rattling around in my brain. SusunW (talk) 15:26, 24 February 2021 (UTC)