User talk:Rosiestep/Archive 37

New stub/article on 'Emily Stipes Watts'?
Dear Rosie, I hope you are keeping well? On 26 September 2015, we exchanged a few messages in which you kindly suggested:
 * If you ever want to collaborate on some article, pop by and let me know, i.e. know of any women musicians, singers, entertainers who are notable but aren't covered yet on Wikipedia?

Well, I have now drafted something about Emily Stipes Watts in one of my sandboxes and I was wondering if I could impose on you with a gentle request to have a quick look at this very advanced draft, whenever convenient to you, and then kindly to advise me about the best course of action, please? As you will notice if you scroll up to the previous section in that same sandbox, I am in the process of preparing a new section in the Ernest Hemingway article, to cover the subject of Hemingway and the Arts (or some such section title). So, as I was looking for sources, I very quickly found her book and bought it straight away, so I could learn and develop the required encyclopedic prose. Then, it occurred to me that it would be nice if our encyclopedia had a stub or article on her, and I then remembered your WikiProject Women activities and thought I'd seek your advice, as I don't often create articles from scratch. Essentially, my project has now split into two sub-projects: first create a new article/stub on Emily Stipes Watts (if desirable), then update the Hemingway article with the new section on the Arts, for which I now have a handwritten draft. Obviously, the new Hemingway section would rely on ESW's book as its main source, and so I thought it'd be nice to have an article on her too. There is no rush at all, Rosie, and I am very happy to wait as long as it takes for you to find the time required for this, in your very busy schedule. Questions going through my mind right now are: Very many thanks, in advance, for any advice you may offer, Rosie. With kind regards; Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(guestbook) 19:33, 16 June 2016 (UTC) P.S.: I have now realized that you're away until 27 June, at which time I will be unavailable until 9 July. I can only apologize for my exceedingly bad timing (!), and hope that you will forgive me... As I said above: there is no rush whatsoever, and we'll work on this together if you wish and whenever you feel like it. Until then, enjoy your conference and I wish you the greatest success with it. With kindest regards; Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(guestbook) 20:04, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) Is there too much prose for a stub? Or not enough for an article?
 * 2) Given the paucity of online sources, is it worth creating a new stub/article for this person?
 * 3) If so, should I create a new page for Emily Stipes Watts straight away and run the gauntlet of the deletionists; or create Emily Stipes Watts (draft) and learn how to submit a draft for review (I have never done this before)?
 * Dear Rosie,
 * Just to let you know that I finally took the plunge and created the article on Emily Stipes Watts today.
 * Get well very soon and thank you for everything you do for our encyclopedia, and in support of your fellow editors through so many, worthy projects.
 * With kind regards;
 * Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(guestbook) 10:10, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, this is a really nice article on an interesting woman. Thanks for creating it. Let me see what I can do next with it. :) --Rosiestep (talk) 15:25, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Dear Rosie,
 * Thank you for taking the time to reply, especially given your current health issues, and also for applying those helpful improvements already; I am very grateful! If/when you have the time, please kindly point me to wherever I can learn how to do this, unless of course it requires special editorial privileges and/or tools.
 * Thanks once again for your helpful assistance, Rosie, and get well soon.
 * With kindest regards;
 * Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(guestbook) 16:42, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, I created this Wikidata entry. As it is linked with the Wikipedia article, the Authority Control info (VIAF, etc.) auto-populates. --Rosiestep (talk) 00:42, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Find the cat


Smallbones( smalltalk ) 14:38, 17 June 2016 (UTC)


 * LOL and thank you . Really appreciate that. Are you here at the conference? (P.S. can't find the cat... must tilt to find it...) --Rosiestep (talk) 16:56, 17 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, blue shirt with a couple of red stripes. Zoom in.  This photo was one of those situations where I start to feel real uncomfortable, sensing that somebody was watching me.  I didn't find the culprit until after I uploaded it to the computer.  Smallbones( smalltalk ) 18:07, 17 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Found the cat! :) Haven't found you. Let's meetup at the break? --Rosiestep (talk) 18:51, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

I too thought you gave an excellent overview, clearly presenting all the key facts and the growing spirit of motivation and participation. I also found the cat, sitting exactly where one of ours also looks out on the world at our home in Luxembourg.--Ipigott (talk) 09:34, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, ; that's means a lot to me. It's a great picture! --Rosiestep (talk) 11:19, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

I'll check it out tomorrow, well done Rosie!!!♦ Dr. Blofeld  21:58, 18 June 2016 (UTC)


 * thanks, amigo. :) --Rosiestep (talk) 00:26, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Though belated my hearty congratulations on your receiving the much deserved 2016 Wikimedia award and for the excellent speech at the Wikimania conference. Nvvchar . 03:19, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * , Thanks! --Rosiestep (talk) 03:36, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

 * Thanks, ! I am so happy we met, and can't wait to see you again! Be well, amiga. :) --Rosiestep (talk) 00:30, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Best of luck dearest Rosie!♦ Dr. Blofeld  21:56, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Aww, you are so sweet, . Thank you! --Rosiestep (talk) 00:30, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
 * So are you Rosie!! Watching the speech now and so far you've done amazingly well. I could never stand up like that and find so much to say LOL! You come across as one of the most sincere, genuine, intelligent, passionate and beautiful people I've ever seen speak, and I really mean that! I've always knew you were, but seeing you in person speak even more so. Your heart is bigger than Papua New Guinea itself LOL! I say Goaribari Island for Featured Article status! So proud!♦ Dr. Blofeld  07:39, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Omg, you are so nice; thank you. FA, don't know, but it certainly can be improved beyond how it reads today! Let's work on it in July, ok? --Rosiestep (talk) 15:54, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Haha, I'm sure it would never reach FA quality!! It would be good to have a GA on Papua New Guinea topic though!♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:32, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Pan-American Conference of Women


There you go. Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:30, 22 June 2016 (UTC)


 * this awesome! Thank you for improving it so quickly! --Rosiestep (talk) 11:40, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Ditto, great work.--Ipigott (talk) 08:44, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Halls of Fame
Hi Rosie. If you find the time, it would be great if you could send the invitation out by mass messaging. I'll try to follow up with a few additions although I'll be on the road all day tomorrow.--Ipigott (talk) 08:51, 23 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)

DOINK


Done. -— Isarra ༆ 11:02, 23 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Grazie! Love it! --Rosiestep (talk) 11:38, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Church of St. Pietro, Esino Lario
Oh famous one, thought you or a wikimania page stalker might feel like adding to this as it's local ;-) Time permitting of course! ♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:25, 24 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Like minds, amigo: I created Church of St. Pietro in Ortanella yesterday so need to do a redirect with yours, or merge, or something! Can't get to it now... --19:10, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

LOL!!! Honestly I didn't check your contributions at all!! I wouldn't have created a double! That's just spooky!! I saw it in the article and it wasn't linked! The Esino Lario one might be better than in Ortanella as that's only a frazione I think.♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:19, 24 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I know, freaky! Like minds... Whichever article you think is better, just go with it. Now I have to write another article before midnight for my Day3 of #100wikidays. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:35, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Can you sort out the editing history and merge Church of St. Pietro in Ortanella to Church of St. Pietro, Esino Lario so Rosie is credited?♦  Dr. Blofeld  19:46, 24 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Hey -  The article I created (Church of St. Pietro in Ortanella), which predates the article you created (Church of St. Pietro, Esino Lario), has been merged into yours with no attribution for my work. In general, I wouldn't care, but it's best practice for attribution history to be correct, and I need the credit because of User:Rosiestep/100wikidays. I'll sort it out after I get home from work if a page-stalking admin doesn't jump in first. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:42, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Yeah I asked  to merge the histories, I took for granted he had done it!♦  Dr. Blofeld  16:50, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Congrats
Congrats on being honored "Wikipedian of the year" --Tito Dutta (talk) 19:29, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks . Really appreciate that. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:36, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
 * +1 :) --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 19:41, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks,, that means a lot to me. And congrats to you, too!!!! --Rosiestep (talk) 19:57, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I was flattered by the completely unexpected mention. Enjoy the rest of your time in Europe! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 20:14, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

You're officially mentioned in an encyclopedia article now!. I didn't create it!♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:42, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
 * wow, go figure! --Rosiestep (talk) 19:57, 24 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Chiming in with joyful song: two women this year. He seems to go by Impact ;) or just Precious #1 --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:41, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
 * thank you! It's beautiful! --Rosiestep (talk) 11:24, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I found it when I looked for an image to illustrate this serenade (DYK), then used it as a reminder to self to go outside, especially in certain conditions, - top of my talk until I find something better ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:20, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

All my love to you, dear Wiki-mom! <3 Keilana (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
 * My sweet Wiki-daughter,, Hard to put into words how honored I am to share this with you!!!!!!!!!!
 * Oh stop it you two you're getting me all teary-eyed. Drmies (talk) 23:38, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
 * You and me both, Drmies. :') *snif* Keilana (talk) 00:11, 26 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Hey I just read the Signpost article. Many felicitations! Well done. Softlavender (talk) 05:23, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, ! --Rosiestep (talk) 15:49, 5 July 2016 (UTC)


 * "Wikipedian of the year" So very well deserved. Of course, Keilana, too! Buster Seven   Talk  18:23, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, ! --Rosiestep (talk) 20:26, 9 July 2016 (UTC)


 * I just had reason to visit Keilana's user page and what did I spot? I'm stoked for you. Big congratulations!  Schwede 66  19:41, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks,, and hey, we need to work on some NZ articles. :) --Rosiestep (talk) 20:53, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, you wouldn't believe it but they are still demolishing heritage buildings in Christchurch, with the fate unresolved for lots of them. Just spotted this article; have never heard about somebody being successful in having a heritage registration removed. Do you want to start that article? Commons. Are you still active at DYK?  Schwede 66  20:02, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * , I haven't been active on DYK of late because of its drama, but been thinking about starting up again. Let me look at that building. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:11, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, I nominated an article at DYK today, so there's that. But I can't find much on the Public Trust Office building, Christchurch. Do you have access to any gbook sources, e.g. when the building was constructed, etc.? --Rosiestep (talk) 04:45, 16 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Ok, I have made a good start; the official heritage entry was rather useless. Ideas for further work:
 * You could extract an architectural description from the 7 May 1925 source.
 * There's been lots in The Press in recent years about the current owner trying to have the building demolished.
 * Info on the owner itself; the main shareholder hiding behind the company name is a brother of Antony Gough (and there's certainly potential to write a few articles on notable Gough family members; some of them are having a rather public spat in court with one another)
 * I've seen it mentioned that Cecil Wood designed further Public Trust offices (Dunedin and Timaru), and I will have a look whether I can find anything. The Dunedin building is certainly a beauty, but not registered.  Schwede 66  21:21, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * , thank you so much. Really appreciate this! --Rosiestep (talk) 11:25, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations! ;-))
This is indeed a great award, Rosie. And you really deserve it. Congratulations!--Ipigott (talk) 15:39, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes, thoroughly deserved. I'd also argue that Ipigott deserves it!♦ Dr. Blofeld  06:29, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations! I sign every single word written by Pdebee.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:11, 26 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you, . Appreciate all your kind words!! --Rosiestep (talk) 15:57, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Today is the first day I am back from my month-long journey and I was thrilled to see this! Congratulations! Well deserved and so happy that your dedication has been acknowledged. SusunW (talk) 18:56, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Welcome back! Missed you! --Rosiestep (talk) 22:37, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Wow! All the best! Smallbones( smalltalk ) 02:35, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Indeed, I think I offered congratulations somewhere, but can't recall where, so CONGRATULATIONS (again)! Montanabw (talk) 04:34, 27 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks, !!! P.S. still traveling (I'm in Toronto, waiting for flight to get me back home). --Rosiestep (talk) 22:37, 27 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Sending good travel karma and hoping you have a much better return trip than we did. Still fighting the bloody cold I got on our return trip and a 101F fever. Ugh! SusunW (talk) 22:42, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh, Susun, that is no fun! Hope the rest of your trip was very wonderful. Let's get caught up after I'm back home. P.S. got your cold + a sore throat. Must go to work tomorrow nonetheless. --Rosiestep (talk) 23:11, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
 * SO MANY CONGRATS! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 14:29, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
 * , thank you! --Rosiestep (talk) 01:56, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Spy woman
I want you to link and tag the talk page on the Martha Peterson article to wherever it needs to be placed.The Cross Bearer (talk &#124; contribs) 03:57, 27 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi . I added some talkpage banners. If you'd like further assistance with the article, I would recommend leaving a note on the WP:WikiProject Women in Red talkpage. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:33, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Hi Rosie, It has been my pleasure meeting you! Wish you have made it home safe

May Hachem93 (talk) 21:20, 28 June 2016 (UTC) 


 * and ditto sentiments from me. And I hope we can work together on some exciting project! --Rosiestep (talk) 03:07, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Article about you
Someone else has created an article about you (see here.) Just thought you should know. Everymorning (talk) 16:33, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Indeed. If you want to call WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE I will do the deed (though I can't see it meeting any CSD criteria, the Guardian piece means you clear A7, and hence G10, and not G11 either) - I personally would never want an article about myself on Wikipedia, and would hope I can stay out the fringes of notability to ever deserve one. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  16:47, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for letting me know! Thanks for the offer, amigo. But I think I'll take a tip from Emily and avoid getting involved with it. --Rosiestep (talk) 01:36, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Jahna Lindemuth
I thought this new article I just started may interest you: Jahna Lindemuth. I'd love to collaborate with you on it, as I know womens issues are close to your heart. Enjoy, and thanks!Juneau Mike (talk) 01:24, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi . So cool that she was selected for the job! I've done a little bit to the article but I'm guessing there might be more sources around early August when she takes over the job, e.g. where she did her undergrad, etc. --Rosiestep (talk) 03:52, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * There is a profile of her available (here). We can't use the photo because it isn't free use, but there is some good information available there.Juneau Mike (talk) 07:38, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Problems I see: one, we appear to be dancing around and not directly addressing the notability of the Hartman murder/Fairbanks Four, which is understandable because it would amount to a lot of work to present properly (fun fact: Marvin Roberts is the grandson of Billy McCarty, the last surviving musher in the 1925 serum run to Nome). There's been a lot of lip service given to increasing our coverage of indigenous topics, but it's really only lip service considering how many admins/other regulars have been tearing down the efforts of others to increase that coverage, and specifically have been battling me over my efforts WRT Alaska Natives.  Two, I don't believe the photo of Lindemuth passes fair use criteria, in that it merely shows what she looks like and presents no historical context.  Mike, I don't want to delve into your business, but considering you're in Juneau, I would think that to mean you're in a much better position to go take a free photo yourself than just about anyone else.  On related notes, Mike uploaded a photo of Greg Fisk which was deleted for simliar reasons.  Now that enough time has passed, it should be restored so that it can be refactored as a FU image.  Also, I've been on a hunt lately for images which have fallen out of copyright, many of which I've added to Alaska Women's Hall of Fame and other places.  I do have some on a handful of past attorneys general;  one of them is of Grace Berg Schaible, but it was taken in the 1940s.  Summer in Alaska means work/outdoor opportunities which aren't available other times of the year, so I haven't had the opportunity to be as active on here.  Also, Beeblebrox is gone for the entire summer, which means that I've put off various Alaska-related things because his input may be helpful. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions  21:57, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

WIR automation
I said I'd try to help with the documenting of new pages, and such. Could you link me to the sample data again? Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:20, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi ! Here's a link to where the data conversation is happening. Here's a link to the Metrics page and the Metrics talkpage. Thanks again for improving that picture; good job! --Rosiestep (talk) 03:36, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * So, going to be automated alreadu? Alright, that makes it easy =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:41, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Also, I'm trying #10wikicommonsdays as a test. See how it goes, then adjust rules to make sure it's fun, and make sure I have time for bigger projects still. I intend for every image to be of or by a woman. Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:39, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * hope so (automation, that is). Good luck with #10wikicommonsdays; I'm doing #100wikidays! --Rosiestep (talk) 03:49, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Your thoughts on this one?
Alanna Shaikh. Montanabw (talk) 01:56, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
 * , keeper. Thanks! --Rosiestep (talk) 19:23, 3 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Need more folks to look, the deletionists have really dug in, I guess that supporting development of services and support based on women's issues is not notable in the eyes of some. ( /snark).  Montanabw (talk)  22:57, 3 July 2016 (UTC)


 * +Margot Abad. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:50, 5 July 2016 (UTC)


 * de-prodded. Now to  to find a few sources on that one before it goes to AfD.   Montanabw (talk)  00:03, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I tried looking for sources on Shaikh in Arabic but find nothing except her TED talks. No other sources available than those you found. Also tried Abad, but find nothing other than 2 films. No information on her life or details of any other work. SusunW (talk) 03:19, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Punjab edit-a-thon
Hello friend, A multilingual national-level edit-a-thon is being conducted at this moment with an aim to create or improve Punjab-related articles. A community that will create or expand the most number of articles during this edit-a-thon contest will be awarded a trophy during WikiConference India 2016. Best contributors' recognition may also be considered. We need your help here. Please join right now as a participant and help your community. Thanks and regards. --Tito Dutta (talk) 16:12, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
 * It'd be great if you join it. --Tito Dutta (talk) 21:31, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Where do I start, e.g. do you have redlists (a list with redlinks and references)? --Rosiestep (talk) 00:37, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * No we don't have redlinks yet. We suggested any article related to Punjab. Should a list of article be added? --Tito Dutta (talk) 09:03, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * yes, that would be helpful. I have no idea where to start and that would be true of others. It would improve the possibility of editors participating who live in other parts of the world, e.g. WP:Women in Red has links to redlists in every meetup page. This is why there are so many articles listed in every meetup's Outcomes section. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:29, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * A list has been started yet, and we'll expand soon WikiProject_India/Events/Punjab_Edit-a-thon --Tito Dutta (talk) 14:32, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Good. I'll watch for the lists. WP:Awaken the Dragon held the same kind of campaign in the spring regarding Wales. As the lead coordinator,, had developed lots of lists to engage participants from all over the world, it was very successful. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:43, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Template
I don't know how you created the template on the other halls of fame, but I just created North Carolina Women's Hall of Fame. Can you make the template so I can add it to the few articles which have already been created? As always, thanks so much for your expertise! SusunW (talk) 18:02, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
 * , here you go! --Rosiestep (talk) 19:17, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Women athletes
Please see:

https://thegymter.net/gymnast-database/

The entire website (and I believe several others) concentrates on women's gymnastics and apparently has many fans. Remember the huge difference between male and female athlete BLP numbers. How do we get a few of their fans to write some articles over here? Smallbones( smalltalk ) 21:56, 3 July 2016 (UTC)


 * , are you ok if I copy this convo on the Women in Red talkpage so we get additional eyes on this? --Rosiestep (talk) 00:34, 4 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Please do. I should have done it myself, but am pressed for time.  Smallbones( smalltalk ) 15:51, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Margot Abad


The article Margot Abad has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Failure to meet Wikipedia notability guidelines. Lack of any proper referencing, sources and any substantial information regarding Margot Abad.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on |the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Tseung Kwan O (talk) 08:41, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Participants in the WiR June editathons
Hi Rosie. I've spent the last two or three days trying to list the participants in June. Here's the result. I tried to start with the entertainers but then noticed that most people had participated in several areas. I have therefore tried to list the overall involvement of each editor. I was surprised to see how many had addressed other interests (especially art and writing) which were not a priority for the month. And I not sure how we should send out thank-yous. I think it will be far too complicated to send out separate thank-yous for enterainers, Jewish women, LGBT, scientists and other. Any ideas? (I also have a list of at least 30 more editors who probably accidentally became involved by writing just one article which happened to be about women.) While I was researching the list, I also added many more articles to the lists on the editathon pages. I think the listings now are more or less complete: 348 articles on Women in Entertainment, 55 on Women in Jewish History, 51 on LGBTQ Women, 93 on Women Scientists and around 300 more on women in other spheres. That means there were at least 800 new articles in June (and probably several hundred more on sports).--Ipigott (talk) 15:02, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * thank you for working on this. I'm at the airport and won't be able to look at the link closely until tonight. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:52, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. No rush. Take it easy.--Ipigott (talk) 15:54, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi again Rosie. As you have not responded to this, I suppose you have been overworked on several fronts. I've just returned from a three-day trip and will try to sort everything out myself tomorrow. --Ipigott (talk) 16:01, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi . I asked if he had feedback on the metrics. --Rosiestep (talk) 22:26, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in Wikipedia mini summer program
Greetings Rosiestep:



It appears you have participated in an editathon in the past. We are doing a mini research study involving past editathon participants to transform and improve Wikipedia. If this sounds like something quick you would want to do this summer, please sign up to our mini summer research program.

You can read more about our project here.

Together we can revolutionize Wikipedia!

Thanks & Cheers

Wiki crowdresearch (talk) 15:22, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

American Nurses Association Hall of Fame
Though most of its inductees are women, this one is not strictly a woman's hall of fame. Do we still want to create a template and if so, do you care to do it? There are pictures on each of the links if someone wanted to do fair use for each of the ones we have an article on that does not have a photo, but it took me three days just to create the list. Added to the September nurses' editathon redlist, maybe someone will be interested then. SusunW (talk) 22:53, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I think it's a really good list, ; thank you so much for putting it together. A template would be useful but I don't have it in me at the moment to create it. Maybe over the weekend. I'm still recovering from the cold I acquired on my return trip, although by today, I'm much improved, now that I'm on an antibiotic for sinusitis. Mostly, though, I'm exhausted. --Rosiestep (talk) 05:05, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I totally understand. It has taken me nearly two weeks to get over whatever it was that I caught in the airport between Paris, JFK and Mexico City. It's also why I was hoping someone else would do the photos. I still am exhausted. Hope you feel better soon. SusunW (talk) 13:59, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanking you with a barnstar
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)
 * thank you. Very cool with the various logos; promotes all the good stuff which happened in June! If you want me to deliver any thank you notes, or thank you notes with barnstars, using MassMessage, would you please point me to the specific list(s), and I will do so. You may have given me the link earlier, but I'm still exhausted/sick so don't know where to look for it. Sorry. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:32, 9 July 2016 (UTC)


 * The link is here. I don't think we need to send out any more thank-yous for the June editathons (I sent out 12 barnstars and 49 simple thank-yous) but you will see from the list that several editors have contributed strongly on women's biographies in general and/or on women scientists without specifically contributing new articles to the editathon priorities. These include (65 informative stubs),  (six scientists),  (five scientists and many improvements),  (two scientists and 18 other biographies),  (six scientists and 37 draft upgrades),  (12 biographies),  (13 biographies) and  (10 biographies and general support). Perhaps we could consider developing an award for contributions to Women in Red in the widest sense. But don't worry about it now. Just have a good rest until your health improves.--Ipigott (talk) 08:36, 10 July 2016 (UTC)


 * we should develop a Women in Red barnstar. Probably with our logo and a barnstar. But I'm no designer. Maybe suggest it on the project talkpage? Maybe Isarra could design something... she is a designer. But, yes, it would be good to have something. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:12, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

You are officially wiki-famous
Don't look now, but you are on the Main page. I knew the DYK nomination had been checked, but wasn't aware when it was going to hit - to be frank there have been more interesting things on the internet today! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  12:56, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * thank you. Humbled. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:08, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keilana (talk) 14:35, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * You might feel humbled but I certainly feel honoured to have been associated with such a creative Wikipedian for quite some time. I hope our cooperation will continue in the future. Well done!--Ipigott (talk) 15:01, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Precious #1: you deserve it! - I wrote a new woman article, to mark the occasion, Elsa Reger, translated and to be expanded, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:02, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * , thank you! And, Gerda, nice article. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:10, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
--- Another Believer ( Talk ) 22:03, 11 July 2016 (UTC)


 * thank you! --Rosiestep (talk) 02:06, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates
You might find this rather satisfying just now. My #10wikicommonsdays, combined with Chris trying to promote notable Indonesians, has resulted in a likely Women-in-Red approved situation there. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 07:18, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * these are wonderful! Can I vote on them, too, or is there some limitation? --Rosiestep (talk) 22:38, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Can't see any reason you'd be disallowed. Here's the official criteria. Have fun! =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:26, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ (good job!) --Rosiestep (talk) 16:25, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/Carol Greider
I've added an alternative here. Could you look it over? Thanks! Adam Cuerden (talk) 08:45, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Palais de la Méditerranée
Added what I could though most sources are in French. It would probably benefit from a fluent speaker working on it!♦ Dr. Blofeld  10:10, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Rosemarie Kuptana
Just wondering if you have a few minutes and could take a look at Rosemarie Kuptana and fix whatever needs fixing. I don't usually create biographies. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 23:41, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, somehow missed this till right now. Clueless why. I promise to circle back to it tonight after work. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:18, 18 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for fixing that up. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 04:56, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Featured pictures
Everything from 2013 on, at least, is documented at User:Adam Cuerden. And as you go back, you'll see why I'm making a conscious effort to do more restorations of women: I was very clearly part of the problem. I mean, I didn't mean to be, but I can do a lot better. Adam Cuerden 01:25, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
 * , wow. Thank you! --Rosiestep (talk) 13:35, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

You got mail
Just checking whether you've still got the same email address as back in 2011.  Schwede 66  08:49, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:19, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/9
Scan the lists of new content and see if you can spot what's different about July. ;) Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:55, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * love the images! Yay! Hey, I hope you consider supporting the UN campaign with some images; announced it on the WiR talkpage a couple of hours ago. --Rosiestep (talk) 04:04, 21 July 2016 (UTC)



http://www.cisd.soas.ac.uk/research/women-and-the-un-charter,7990664

I'm just going to put this picture and that link here. I was working on this before you even told me about the United Nations editathon... Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:18, 21 July 2016 (UTC)


 * , cool! --Rosiestep (talk) 13:43, 21 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)


 * Working on Genevieve Fiore I discovered she was a delegate to the 1975 UN World Conference on Women, which was part of the International Women's Year. The conference gave birth to CEDAW, thus is incredibly important, IMO.,  I know this is right up your alley, but don't know if you have time to work on it. I'd love to collaborate with you on it if you are interested. SusunW (talk) 19:56, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * you know how to pull my heart strings: a women's conference. Yes, I will look at it asap (I'd rather work on this than breathe or sleep). --Rosiestep (talk) 20:17, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * <3 <3 'Twas the plan :) I'll continue working on Fiore and will pop over and see how you're coming after a bit. SusunW (talk) 20:30, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject X
Hello Rosie. I have created a draft for WikiProject Women Writers at WikiProject Women writers/sandbox. Please let me know what you think. Harej (talk) 19:36, 22 July 2016 (UTC)


 * I looked at it and in general, I'm somewhere between "I like it" and "I love it". There are some changes I'd like to suggest but I don't have bandwidth at the moment because my wiki attention is glued elsewhere --> hours of planning meetings. I'll circle back though when I can carve a bit of time to give further comment. In the meantime, pinging others (alpha order) who've been instrumental in this project for their thoughts, as well as Page Stalkers. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:13, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Happy to hear it's a step in the right direction. I look forward to seeing more feedback. In the meantime, the page isn't working at the moment; I think one of the embedded pages accidentally grew too large and is preventing the whole page from loading. I will investigate; it should be fixed shortly. Harej (talk) 20:19, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't see anything except and invoke message? SusunW (talk) 20:28, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Right. After brief investigation it turns out one of the automatically generated lists is too long, causing the page to be un-renderable. Should be fixed shortly. Harej (talk) 20:30, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * It should be fixed now. Harej (talk) 20:40, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, the page is working fine now. WP Women writers has tended to take second place to Women in Red over the past year but it is actually a very important project in its own right. Now that we have begun to give more attention to the improvement of existing articles, we should really be developing better tools for monitoring quality development. The page setup looks fine to me but perhaps we could introduce some new features such as a list of the hundred most popular articles by page views (cf. Denmark popular pages) or a list of articles on which editors are ready to collaborate for upgrading to GA or FAC. More comments later.--Ipigott (talk) 10:36, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I love it! Can we do something similar for WiR? SusunW (talk) 15:19, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
 * , I like it too. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:44, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

I have posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women writers. Harej (talk) 20:17, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Indigenous women's editathon
Since we are about a week out from the start of this editathon in August, I posted a note on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the Americas, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of Australia, about the upcoming event. When we do the invitations, can we make sure that one goes to each of these projects + Africa? Can I do anything to help? Create the sign-up sheet (what number are we on), maybe? SusunW (talk) 17:13, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I will admit, I am a little worried about finding material for this (from the image side of thing). Historically marginalised people can sometimes be hard to get good photos of. Mind you, what I do manage will be particularly valuable, I think. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:54, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I totally agree In my experience, any photos of indigenous women are hard to come by. Finding ones that fit WP criteria, even moreso. I am loving the photograph work you are doing. Makes the women come alive in a way that just words cannot do. SusunW (talk) 19:05, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I might have some luck with the Maori; Te Papa, the National Museum of New Zealand, actively promotes Maori life. And I may get a few - is it "First Peoples" that's the preferred term now? - images from the Library of Congress, simply as their collection is so massive, and the Hawaiian and Arctic areas shouldn't be too bad either. But it's going to be... fun... getting much beyond that. Of course, I do find that once you've researched it a bit you learn how to find a subject, so it may be that things will improve then. Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:19, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * - you might try to reach out to regarding images in NZ. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:41, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * - the National Library is the best spot to go looking for photos of Māori and it's important to know that they generally don't show the license that is appropriate, but PD-New Zealand outlines the relevant rules. How to extract high-resolution photos from their database isn't straightforward, but there are some instructions on this page (and if that needs updating, please ping me).  Schwede 66  19:54, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Some good pictures of Te Puea Herangi at the very least... I'm not sure I know the right names to search for yet, though. Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:17, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * love the picture. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:58, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Does someone have time to create the meetup page for this event (and Polar Women event)? I'm tied up with meetings for m:Grants:PEG/FloNight & Rosiestep/WikiConference North America 2016 through the entire weekend. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:32, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I will try. If I screw it up, someone with more technical savvy will come along and help me, I am sure. SusunW (talk) 23:27, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/19 and WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/20 Hopefully I got it mostly correct. I don't know how to do the template, nor the invite, nor update the Nav box entries for these two. Also didn't know what had been decided about working on Olympic athletes. SusunW (talk) 00:10, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I did figure out how to update the Nav box. Now must go for dinner. SusunW (talk) 00:26, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah! Someone tweeted my message SusunW (talk) 15:15, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, ! I'm hopeful someone on the team can create invitations and the template in the next day or two. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:39, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:14, 25 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Picture looks great . Thanks for creating the invitation, Rosie. I sent it to the WikiProjects above and my friend Yuchitown who has been helping us curate the list. SusunW (talk) 15:01, 25 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Library of Congress is good for Native American women. Fair use can often work for state historical society archives, which are a rich source for images in the US and Canada.   Montanabw (talk)  20:53, 25 July 2016 (UTC)


 * do you have time to create the talkpage templates for these 2 editathons? --Rosiestep (talk) 21:59, 25 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Sadly, no. Too big of a learning curve and I'm like 6 days behind on article editing... too many fish to fry!  Montanabw <sup style="color:orange;">(talk)  22:07, 25 July 2016 (UTC)


 * No worries. I'll do. It's just replicating Template:WIR-UN 2016 for the new events by creating Template:WIR-IW 2016 (indigenous women event) and Template:WIR-PW 2016 (polar women event). --Rosiestep (talk) 00:49, 26 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

DYK for Palais de la Méditerranée
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:16, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Query re: translated articles from other projects
Hi Roseistep, I don't want to clutter the current AN thread but notice you've commented there. I've often wondered this: do you think many people who translate articles from other WMF projects to en-WP actually check the sources etc. I worry about perpetuating rubbish across a multitude of projects and definitely did find some examples of that a few years ago. - Sitush (talk) 13:53, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, . That is certainly possible. "Buyer, beware" and all that. For WP:RS, I check what's checkable (e.g. if there's a link) and I AGF what isn't (no link). For WP:N, I do my own research regarding the person/place/thing. If everything checks out, I do the translation; if not, I move on to something else. I've been doing wiki translations for years, even before becoming an immediate supporter of 's WP:WikiProject Intertranswiki. I've only been using the Translation Tool for a couple of months, and, as I mentioned, I love it, when it works. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:14, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It's food for thought. I wonder how many others are as conscientious. N would usually be picked up eventually; RS and plain old misrepresentation/misinterpretation is far more problematic. My experience is mostly re: Indic articles, where stuff sometimes comes across from one of the many Indic-language projects and the quality is often horrendous. There isn't much I can do there as, to my shame, gibberish --> English is about my limit when it comes to translating.


 * In a sense, the issue of propagating, perpetuating etc poor content is similar to the problems that face WikiData. Eg: if WikiData takes info from poor persondata in en-WP articles (I know persondata is all being moved over there). - Sitush (talk) 14:23, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

The idea is to use a foreign wiki article as an initial template I think,  translate material which is perfectly appropriate and encyclopedic and most importantly ensure that it is verifiable and properly sourced. The Intertranswiki project is supposed to be aimed more at identifying missing articles from other wikis and ensuring that they have an article in English. Most articles on other wikis are not well sourced, so it's rarely a good idea to fully copy. I know when I translate anything I always ensure that the information copied is checked externally to google web/book sources and that there is no original research. I am aware though that quite a few people do translate entirely from other wikis and sourcing might not always be up to scratch.♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:54, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I rarely directly translate something from another project; mostly I use the other WP project's page as a guide. Different projects have different standards. For example, many of the Scandanavian projects have RS and don't need much work to translate an article; but many articles from the Spanish project have no sourcing at all and I write a lot of articles on Mexican subjects. So a lot depends on the project and their definition of RS as to whether I translate or not. I pull all the sources I can from their article and see if it matches what is in the article. Then I research myself to see if there are sources to supplement the information and/or clarify anything that might be not fully supported in the article. If the subject is notable and the information is not supported by the other project's sources, I just create an article from scratch. SusunW (talk) 15:40, 28 July 2016 (UTC)


 * I work more like than anything else. But we've already ascertained that we are peas in a pod.   --Rosiestep (talk) 16:43, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Except I think you are probably less OCD than me Rosie ;) SusunW (talk) 16:45, 28 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for enquiring into the extremely important area of Wikipedia translation. Like you, I have noticed many translations of poorly sourced articles which, surprisingly, are often accepted on the EN wiki, simply because they are translations. Even some of the more critical editors justify this practice in discussions on acceptability, stating for example "I have great respect for the NL-wiki". Recently, we have been using Wikidata lists of EN redlinks to focus on missing biographies in different areas. I must say I am amazed to see how many poorly referenced articles are included in these listings . Personally, I prefer to translate from languages I understand as I like to check out the sources and expand the articles from sources I find myself, even if they are in languages other than English. Another problem is that on-line sources which were used five or ten years ago for non-English articles have often disappeared. Some can be re-identified but most can't. So I fully support the comments from, and  that we must be able to verify sources even if we work on articles from wikis in other languages. All this though with one footnote: far too many translated articles are deleted because English-language editors use the EN (usually American) versions of Google to look for sources. Far more sources are revealed by using versions of Google for the language in question. It can also be useful to search in foreign-language encyclopaedias, databases, press archives, etc., making sure the name of the person or place is spelt in the search language rather than the English equivalent. If you find errors in Wikidata, you should correct them or bring them to someone's attention. While there were indeed errors in Persondata, there is no reason to suppose that the boxes people add to new articles are any more accurate. Some people seem to copy boxes from one article to another, often forgetting to update important details.--Ipigott (talk) 13:14, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Totally agree . As we have discussed previously, searching in Google.com.mx (were I live and it defaults) gives different results than say Google.ca or Google.ru. It is surprising to me how few people actually search in the country they may be researching. SusunW (talk) 14:44, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Susana Romero
Rosiestep, I assume you studied Spanish (I never did, and my Italian gets in the way). Did you plan to come back to the acting credits at teh end of this article? Have a look at the edit I just made; the translation tool rendered "Radio" as "Irradiate", translated someone's family name as "Monkey", and so on ... please check my work and see if I missed anything! I decided to simply omit 99% of the listings of others involved in the films, yadda yadda, which simplified the task somewhat, but I may well have mucked up. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:12, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi I am sorry I missed this earlier as I am traveling (and will be back on the road in 72 hours for more wiki travel). Thanks for improving the article; it is better. Because of my co-organizer involvement with Wiki Conference  North America, I am immersed in wiki event planning, so these days, I'm lacking the time to do much follow-up with article writing. I appreciate that you did what you di. Thanks for having my back!! As far as Argentine actresses go,  has some expertise in this area. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:32, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Digital Anthropology research
Hello Rosiestep, 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? Thank you for taking the time to read this email. 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) 00:23, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, apologies for not noticing your post until now. I've been doing wiki travel and I'm back on the road with wiki travel in 72 hours for an event at the United Nations. Your project interests me greatly so I'd like to share my answers to the 5 questions with you. Deadline? --Rosiestep (talk) 13:26, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Henri Negresco
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:41, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/Ana Santos Aramburo
As you can see, it's been featured. This means your article will be on the main page (eventually, think there's a two year delay) Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:41, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
 * OMG OMG OMG, this is fantastic! You rock! --Rosiestep (talk) 02:23, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

DYK for 500 Club (Atlantic City, New Jersey)
Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:07, 5 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  09:58, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Article on Hally Wood
Dear Rosie, (By copy: ) I hope you are keeping well and that you recovered fully from the sniffles of a few weeks ago? Here is another article I have been improving recently, about the late musicologist Hally Wood. I feel I've now achieved pretty much all I could on this one; so, when you have the time and inclination, please would you (and our friend SusunW) kindly look at it and sprinkle your customary magic upon it? Thank you very much in advance. In continued gratitude and with kindest regards; Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(guestbook) 22:08, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Looks good! I only made a few minor tweaks. Added Authority control template to pull in her World cat identity and added projects to the talk page. Critical to put WP Woman on the talk page to keep track of articles created. Nice article. SusunW (talk) 22:29, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Dear
 * Thank you so much for your blisteringly fast and most helpful interventions, including your eagle-eyed detection of the 'Woody' > 'Wood' typofix, which had eluded me all along! Thanks also for your Authority Control action and for the all-important talk page headers. I will bear the 'WP Woman' flag in mind for talk pages of future such articles; thank you for the tip! I am delighted you liked the article.
 * With kind regards;
 * Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(guestbook) 22:48, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Nice article, ! --Rosiestep (talk) 03:09, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi ,
 * I am glad you approve. As a related topic, please forgive my density about such things: for the Emily Stipes Watts article, you had kindly created this Wikidata entry; should the same be done for Hally Wood's article? Thank you for your patience. With kind regards; Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(guestbook) 10:04, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
 * , yes it should. I'm traveling so unable to do so at the moment. Perhaps you want to give it a try? Kind regard, --Rosiestep (talk) 15:09, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Dear ; Yikes! Seriously though: unfortunately, I wouldn't know how to do this to save my life; does one require any special tools/privileges? I have none at all (hyper-vanilla editor, here!... ). Also: I apologize for intruding while you're travelling. Please kindly consider doing this when you're back, and/or have the time to teach me and watch me executing it in real-time. That way, any clumsiness on my part would be instantly repaired. Thank you for your consideration, and have a pleasant/fruitful trip.  With kindest regards; Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(guestbook) 15:33, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
 * It's there And yes, it should be done on all articles. If you want to do it, there is a gadget that can be installed to make it easy. Edgars 2007's instructions state "To start using it, place at Special:mypage/common.js this line, follow instructions at the top of page about reloading page and go to some biography":


 * Once it is installed, there will be options at the left under "tools" that let you create a "person" entry. When an entry exists, you will see in the same section "Wikidata item". Trust me, I am not remotely technical, so if I can do it, I have faith you will be able to as well. SusunW (talk) 15:47, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Dear , Thank you so much for taking the time and trouble to provide your detailed guidance (immediately above); you're so nice and thoughtful! Thank you also for pointing out that Hally Wood's name had already been entered on Wikidata (I had never been there before and need to learn about it...). At least, we won't have to do it this time. One question though, and please excuse my innocence of such things: when I look at the Authority control field at the bottom of the Emily Stipes Watts article that you and Rosie completed recently, I can see it has three fields with links: "WorldCat Identities", "VIAF: 92845424" and "ISNI: 0000 0001 0998 3945". However, the Hally Wood article only has the first two you kindly added yesterday, and is missing the 'ISNI' link; this is what prompted me to ask Rosie the initial query above, because that was the action she took for the Watts article. So, how do we add this 'ISNI' link into the Wood article, please? Or is it not needed? Thank you for your continued patience with me, and please only reply if/when convenient; no rush at all. With kind regards; Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(guestbook) 16:27, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
 * typically if you input Authority control (and it matches what is already in the database), it will pull in all of the applicable links. There are lots of them. Look at the bottom of Emmeline Pankhurst, for example. In other cases, the data is not manually loaded and one has to add it. I look up and ISNI  if it is not there. The format is  Not every person has an entry in every database, but Wood does have an ISNI entry, if you want to add it, or I can do it for you. A bot will take it to the Wikidata entry if you input it as indicated. SusunW (talk) 16:52, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Dear, ✅
 * I am most grateful to you for showing me the way, and I will keep your crystal clear instruction in my files for future reference. With kindest regards and deep gratitude; Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(guestbook) 17:16, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

WikiConference scholarship requested amounts
Hi Rosiestep! I don't recall if we've interacted before on here. You're the only one with a WP username listed on the WikiConference scholarships page, though, so here's my question: are scholarships intended to cover all round-trip travel, accommodations, and some daily living expenses? Given travel from Midwestern US, do you think, say, US$1500 is a reasonable requested amount with return of unused funds and a grant-style breakdown/report of expenditures? (I don't need an "official" answer, just rough guidelines.) Thanks, Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) 03:25, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, and thank you for reaching out to me. In order to help out as many Wikipedians as possible, the scholarships will be partial, so, very very very roughly, closer to $500 than US$1500. Note, too, that in 2014, there were about 50 scholarship application; in 2015, there were 192; and we are expecting even more this year. So don't delay, and make sure your application is as complete as possible. --Rosiestep (talk) 03:41, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you, . Appreciate that very much. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:13, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Signpost Help
Greetings Rosiestep,

I saw the Signpost article concerning contacting you for more information about joining the team. I have been an avid reader of Wikipedia for around a decade now and a contributor (many of my edits minor and related to improving readability or removing graffiti) for almost as long. If you would be interested in talking more, please contact me via my talk page.

Hope to hear from you soon!

-Historic 66 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.98.101.2 (talk) 21:21, 13 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi, Did you leave this post on my talkpage? If it is you, thank you so much for reaching out to me, and let's continue the conversation! --Rosiestep (talk) 12:46, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Hey! Yes, that was me. Sorry I didn't sign the message properly. Would you prefer to talk here or via email? --Historic 66 (talk) 13:24, 20 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Wonderful, . I emailed you inquiring about your interests with the Signpost, e.g. what would you like to do; often would you like to do it; and so on? As you haven't been very active on Wikipedia, I wasn't able to discern on my own which areas might interest you. Thank you. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:23, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Women in Red main page
Hi Rosie. I though I should first seek you advice on drastically cutting back the length of the main WiR page. Although it consists of several separately editable sections, the whole page as displayed at WikiProject Women in Red is now enormous. I would suggest cutting back the Events section to not more than the past three months with a link or collapse to the remainder. The Requests section contains a template to Women scientists but most of the articles to be created are already blue links. Can these not be deleted? The Showcase section is now far too long, particularly the DYK lists which run to 37 KB with listings running back to September 2015. Can these not be summarized, archived and/or collapsed? It's good to have the Featured Pictures but perhaps their size could be reduced, possibly with a link to a separate page. Perhaps you also have some suggestions on how to present the project more efficiently and attractively. may also be able to come up with automatic archiving features. I await your response before acting too boldly but one solution might simply be to delete most of the dated info.--Ipigott (talk) 08:43, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

I'd get rid of the big DYK list, it just doesn't need to appear on the main page. Nor does the big list of past events. They're gone now. I'd fix it but the page is all controlled externally. That's the problem when you have a set up that you can't just simply edit... Things like a list of past events and DYKs belong on sub pages I think, a sub section of the main page and then a link to a subpage. You shouldn't have to ask somebody whenever you want to make changes, but this whole thing was designed by Harej in a way which most baffles me and most users it seems.♦ Dr. Blofeld  08:49, 14 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi . In the short-run, I think it is easy enough to create archive pages for the sections that are too long, e.g. just like for Metrics. This way we don't mess with 's programming on the back end. In the long-run, we'll have to decide -on the WiR talkpage, not here- if it makes sense to remove WiR from the WikiProject X model so we have full control over our subpages. If you'd like to start a conversation about that, I'd recommend doing so on the WiR talkpage vs. here, and copy this convo over to the WiR talkpage.
 * Go for it! --Rosiestep (talk) 12:41, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
 * the Load WikiProject Modules template is just a wrapper that loads subpages. You can edit the subpages freely. Most of the WikiProject's page length is from ordinary wikitext. I strongly encourage reporting only summaries on the front page, with more information on subpages as needed. The new Metrics section is a good example. Harej (talk) 22:58, 14 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Archive, archive, archive. Ask people such as  to help you set up archiving if you don't already have someone on the project who can help!   Montanabw (talk) 01:32, 15 August 2016 (UTC)


 * I agree. Can - or even  and his team - set up a system to archive everything more than two months old? Or should we just delete huge chunks anyway? They can always be found in the history.--Ipigott (talk) 08:35, 15 August 2016 (UTC)


 * I prefer archive, not delete. Can one of you ask (on the WiR talkpage) to assist with that? --Rosiestep (talk) 14:21, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Looking at the present page, I'm not sure that archiving is necessarily the best option.

First, in this case, it's not straightforward process that it can be done by a bot. As it's not a talk page, you don't have chunks of text with a regular timestamp for a bot to examine and decide to archive, so you're going to have to do most of it manually. Second, I'm not exactly sure of the problem you're trying to solve. A large page is not in itself a problem: the problems are usually either difficulty in finding required content or slow response when editing. Is anybody having difficulty actually loading the parent page?

I've had a good look at the setup for WikiProject Women in Red. The parent page transcludes 8 sub-pages: Of these, Metrics has something built in that resembles an archive, but isn't. The content in the "archive" never appears on the page, so you have to follow a link to see what the metrics are based on. That's a good idea when hardly anybody wants to look at the content, but is not what you'd want for other content.
 * WikiProject Women in Red/Events
 * WikiProject Women in Red/Tasks
 * WikiProject Women in Red/Metrics
 * WikiProject Women in Red/Showcase
 * WikiProject Women in Red/Press
 * WikiProject Women in Red/Research
 * WikiProject Women in Red/Resources
 * WikiProject Women in Red/External links

All but one of the other sub-pages are not large, namely: Events, Tasks, Press, Research, Resources and External links. Even if they grew, I'd still recommend using a collapsed section for convenience of the reader, just as you've done for "Prior months" in the WikiProject Women in Red/Tasks section.

That leaves Showcase, which I agree would benefit from trimming. if there are no performance issues with loading and editing, then I'd recommend using a collapsed section for "Earlier Images" for the and "Prior months" for the DYKs. I've just made exemplar edits to do that for those two sections for you. To update, simply move the collapse top further up when needed. However, if you are finding performance issues, then ping me and I'll set up some manual archiving for you. --RexxS (talk) 15:37, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time and trouble to look at the WiR page and all its subsections. Thanks too for introducing collapsed sections which make it much easier to browse through the various sections. Your advice on using the collapse approach for the other sections as they grow is probably a good way to deal with natural expansion.--Ipigott (talk) 16:15, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I think one of the problems is that the events need to go elsewhere, they bloat the landing page. We could do a rotating banner or something that maybe transcludes onto the page, but gets updated elsewhere.  Montanabw (talk) 05:20, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I think the problem with the mainpage is that it has too much going on. I'd rather that it be quite clean and neat, with links for the subpages, rather than transclusions., if you're attending WikiConference North America, we can discuss this in more detail. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:52, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I've put the previous events into a collapsed section for now - is that any better, ? In the longer term you may want to re-organise the way the page is presented into a tab-like system - see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation for a rather garish example. The present 'module' system is very attractive and I won't disturb the good work done by James and his team. If I had a free hand, I'd move the current navigation with its aesthetically pleasing icons to the top of the page where users tend to expect navigation to be; then I'd split off the large sub-pages so that they loaded alone, leaving the smaller sub-pages as a single page. A short, concise landing page could be created which would contain the navigation at the top, linking them all together. Just my opinion, of course. --RexxS (talk) 14:10, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I like the tab-like system a lot, but I understand it to be difficult to expand (e.g. add new tabs). In lieu of tabs, we use collapsible buttons at the top of WiR editathons, e.g. WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/20, as they are easy enough for me to create. I think we can all agree that the Women in Red mainpage needs a facelift. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:22, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * A tab-based scheme need not be difficult to expand. AFC uses the template start tab to create theirs (see WikiProject Articles for creation/tabs). The Clickable buttons that you use are fine: they do just the same job. Personally, I like the current icons best - they could still be used. By all means share your thoughts with ; I'm sure he'll have good ideas about how to implement a face-lift. --RexxS (talk) 14:44, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I've put the previous events into a collapsed section for now - is that any better, ? In the longer term you may want to re-organise the way the page is presented into a tab-like system - see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation for a rather garish example. The present 'module' system is very attractive and I won't disturb the good work done by James and his team. If I had a free hand, I'd move the current navigation with its aesthetically pleasing icons to the top of the page where users tend to expect navigation to be; then I'd split off the large sub-pages so that they loaded alone, leaving the smaller sub-pages as a single page. A short, concise landing page could be created which would contain the navigation at the top, linking them all together. Just my opinion, of course. --RexxS (talk) 14:10, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I like the tab-like system a lot, but I understand it to be difficult to expand (e.g. add new tabs). In lieu of tabs, we use collapsible buttons at the top of WiR editathons, e.g. WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/20, as they are easy enough for me to create. I think we can all agree that the Women in Red mainpage needs a facelift. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:22, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * A tab-based scheme need not be difficult to expand. AFC uses the template start tab to create theirs (see WikiProject Articles for creation/tabs). The Clickable buttons that you use are fine: they do just the same job. Personally, I like the current icons best - they could still be used. By all means share your thoughts with ; I'm sure he'll have good ideas about how to implement a face-lift. --RexxS (talk) 14:44, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * A tab-based scheme need not be difficult to expand. AFC uses the template start tab to create theirs (see WikiProject Articles for creation/tabs). The Clickable buttons that you use are fine: they do just the same job. Personally, I like the current icons best - they could still be used. By all means share your thoughts with ; I'm sure he'll have good ideas about how to implement a face-lift. --RexxS (talk) 14:44, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * A tab-based scheme need not be difficult to expand. AFC uses the template start tab to create theirs (see WikiProject Articles for creation/tabs). The Clickable buttons that you use are fine: they do just the same job. Personally, I like the current icons best - they could still be used. By all means share your thoughts with ; I'm sure he'll have good ideas about how to implement a face-lift. --RexxS (talk) 14:44, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

I've mocked up a scheme to show how you can separate out the large pages at WikiProject Women in Red/sandbox - the navigation could be customised and the landing pages for the large sub-pages changed to taste while keeping James' Project X scheme. See what you think of that, just as a first draft of what is possible. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 21:29, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * , I really like the look of it. What does everyone else think? --Rosiestep (talk) 03:51, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I like it.  Montanabw (talk) 23:10, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Good to have the icons at the top. Not at all sure we need tasks. Maybe there should be a short slot for Showcase on the main page with links. Otherwise I like the "cleaner" look.--Ipigott (talk) 09:25, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi . We like the mockup with the icons at the top (similar to tabs, which we discussed previously). Can WikiProject X offer us, Women in Red, that type of design?  It would work well for us. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:37, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I do like this, Rosiestep and Ipigott. Thank you RexxS for your work. I'll see if I can set it up as an option. Harej (talk) 20:19, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you, . --Rosiestep (talk) 02:44, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject Film/Golden Hollywood Contest
Doc's just started up this contest about topics and articles covering Classical Hollywood cinema. Do express if you are interested or not by signing up under the "Editors Interested" section. Thanks. — Ssven2  Speak 2 me 10:18, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

WiR September editathons
Hi Rosie. I've made a start on Women in Nursing but I'm still a bit confused about Meetup 22. Is it Women Labor Activists (which I prefer) or Blue-Collar Women as was also suggested? (I think both present minor problems for users outside North America but given the spelling of Labor, rather than Labour, I think we can go along with that. I'm not sure whether we are working with sponsors for either. Maybe you can handle the invitations via mass messaging, adding suitable illustrations if necessary. If you pressed for time, just let me know. You also mentioned not too long ago that you were thinking of re-initiating editathons on the popular topics of writers, artists, etc. Any further developments on this?--Ipigott (talk) 10:49, 26 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi, I'm not leaning one way or another on this so deferring to you plus for a decision. I would be glad to send invites through MassMessage. No sponsors for either of these as events (the leadership of WMNYC and WMDC are concentrating on the upcoming WikiConference North America). I still like the idea of having one large category as an event to attract a large group of editors, but haven't developed the thought and won't have bandwidth until after the conference is over. However, if any of you would like to pick one -per month or per quarter- that would be great! --Rosiestep (talk) 14:22, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I've had guests in from out of the country for a week and they will be here for another few days. I am good with whichever name you want to call it Ian. Women Labor Activists is perfectly fine, if that's your preference. SusunW (talk) 14:55, 26 August 2016 (UTC) Agreed and I agree Ian. If we have "Lady Smith" who campaigns for workers rights but may not fit the blue collar tag. Victuallers (talk) 07:16, 27 August 2016 (UTC)


 * I think I've now completed the basic pages for September. : I've created a draft invitation at WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/21 & 22/Invitation & Thank you & Barnstar. Perhaps you would like to change the colour or add an image for the Labor Activists. If you don't have time, just send it out as it is.--Ipigott (talk) 10:13, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Added image. Invite sent. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:45, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Looks good, ! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:37, 27 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

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. So if you're doing work on British women or castles or something such add them to the list. Thanks.♦ Dr. Blofeld  12:30, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Tonight: Live and archived links for Bay Area WikiSalon
Bay Area WikiSalon, Wednesday, August 31:

If you cannot join us in person tonight, we are streaming (and later archiving) the presentation by former EFF intern Marta Belcher. We expect her to be live starting between 6:30 or 6:45 p.m. PDT and talking and taking questions for about 30 minutes thereafter.

Here is the YouTube stream link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-t8V79s2-og Here is the link to join the Hangout on Air: https://hangouts.google.com/call/ezrol7dafjfwxfh2ilpkjyxoaue

You can search for it on the Commons and YouTube later too.

Wayne, Pete, Ben, and Stephen MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:50, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Campaniles
Did you ever identify the town with multiple campaniles? I think I took photos of the town on the way back, which should give a name, but I haven't had time to go through my pictures yet. (Indeed I add more to my unprocessed collection every day.) I'm currently working on African female scientist stubs. I always hope stubs will encourage new editors, but I have no evidence for this eminently researchable hypothesis. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 20:14, 3 September 2016 (UTC).


 * No, I never did! Darn!  That would be so awesome to sort out. I hope your or I eventually does and then let's work on that village's articles. I'm swamped with WikiCon North America planning so no chance I can give it any attention till after that event. Hope you get the photos up on Commons, and send me a link so that I can look at them, and remember, and smile. --Rosiestep (talk) 05:17, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Could it have been San Gimignano in Tuscany which is famous for its many church towers or was it somewhere closer to the lakes?--Ipigott (talk) 12:14, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * They were visible while we were driving up the SP65. (Rich and I were by chance on the same wiki bus; a row apart.) --Rosiestep (talk) 15:33, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Then it was probably somewhere else. The SP65 is about an hour's drive from San Gimignano.--Ipigott (talk) 06:52, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


 * , always tag the stubs for one of the women's wikiprojects, otherwise they are lonely AfD bait.  Montanabw (talk) 23:31, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Will do. Thought we were considering putting something in  to simpify this?  Did that never happen? All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 11:31, 5 September 2016 (UTC).

Break
If you feel like a few minutes adding to Trewithen House and Hemmick Beach nomming, go for it! If too busy, no worries!♦ Dr. Blofeld  20:41, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Cool articles. Maybe over the weekend though I'll be traveling. --Rosiestep (talk) 05:04, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I know you're a trekky fan, perhaps that would have been more on topic today ;-) Bet it makes you feel old that it's reached its 50th anniversary already!♦ Dr. Blofeld  06:53, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Yup, love Star Trek! Doesn't make me feel old, though. ;) --Rosiestep (talk) 13:50, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
 * +Dr. Blofeld: "Rosie, can you give me a haircut?
 * +Rosie: "Damm it Jim! I'm a Doctor, not a Hairdresser!" ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:07, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Hahaha! --Rosiestep (talk) 20:28, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Another one if you want to co nom and credit Susun too Joanny Thévenoud.♦ Dr. Blofeld  15:51, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Being honest, close to impossible for me to work on and/or nom articles until after the conference. The conference organizing team is working every night till 10p my time (which is 1am Eastern time where most of the team is located). Exception: I'm still working on #100wikidays, mostly 2 sentence stubs. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:32, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * No content needed, just a DYK nom for Joanny now! I don't bother with DYK anymore though, as somebody usually ends up criticizing it haha, so no worries.♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:45, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Nigerian women contest
Hi Rosie. I'm really sorry to bother you on your talk page but as you have not responded to any of yesterday's discussions on this, I thought I should address you directly. I feel very guilty about bringing the Nigerian preliminary plans to the attention of WiR before they had clearly defined the arrangement for their contests. It now turns out that their first contest, Nigerian women entertainers, is planned very specifically to take place from 20 September to 19 October. Your encouragement for us to support Nigerian women with a wider mandate extending to the end of October led immediately to publish a WiR23 editathon page at a time when I was trying to establish further details of the contest with the Nigerians. The initial work on the contest page came shortly afterwards. Understandably, is now upset that our efforts are moving attention away from the Nigerian efforts to WiR. To straighten things out, I think we should delete WiR23, or failing this fully adapt it to a notice announcing the Nigerian contest, clarifying the dates (20 September to 19 October) and the coverage (Nigerian entertainers). We should also build on the Nigerian list of red links rather than our own. I have invited Olaniyan to provide the text of an announcement we could post on our main page but have not yet had any response. I could draft something myself and send it to him for approval if I do not hear anything. I think we need to be very careful about our relations on Africa. does not seem to be receiving very much support from (see here). Please try to get back to me as soon as you can on this.--Ipigott (talk) 09:12, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, thank you for your contributions so far. I will really want to clear air on the fact that i am upset. I am never upset about anything because we all are here to contribute to Wikipedia.The concerned i showed was based on the fact that since we have a contest page in place with a unique concept, therefore creating a new page would amount to confusion.Olaniyan Olushola (talk) 11:01, 14 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Olaniyan, for your clarification - but I think we both agree on the focus and I look forward to participating in your contest.--Ipigott (talk) 11:09, 14 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment removed.


 * I don't think it's just Olaniyan and but also the way Wiki Loves Women has been arranged with different sets of women priorities, one month at a time. I initially had the impression that Olaniyan was very happy about our support. I believe one aspect of the work is in fact to encourage more women editors from Africa too which is entirely in keeping with the WiR agenda. I personally would feel much happier about the whole thing if we could just point to the current contest on entertainers now that we have the basic details. There is already quite an extensive redlink list of Nigerian women entertainers. That would not prevent us from having a separate, more general editathon on African women at a later date, perhaps in collaboration with what  and  and the Goethe Institut see as priorities. But I have the feeling the more support I try to give to these initiatives at the moment, the more confusing everything seems to become. Maybe I should just leave the admin to everyone else and take part directly in the Nigerian contest as it stands. After all, if our work is not appreciated, there's little part in contributing to anything.--Ipigott (talk) 10:57, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I, for one, truly appreciate your work Ipigott. I believe you are no part in the current issue at stake, just an unfortunate person taken "in between". I feel a bit heart-broken myself at the moment. I thought an acceptable path had been found with the Stubathon, only to find myself spending hours responding on talk pages and seeing my mailbox pile up with emails from Dr Blofeld. I do not like conflicts, I do not like at all that a fellow wikipedian get insulted and I have work to do. I also feel like setting myself aside for a while. Anthere (talk)


 * Thanks,, for you kind words. I would just point out, though, that it was thanks to that I originally became aware of the Nigerian initiative. I then searched around a bit and found from here that Wiki Loves Women and the Goethe Institut were in fact covering four counties. In addition to Nigeria, there were also Côte d’Ivoire, Cameroon, and Ghana. I thought all of this could be coordinated in collaboration with Women in Red but things seem to have backfired. At the moment, like you I feel like withdrawing from further involvement. We can get back together when things have calmed down and at least the Entertainment phase of the Nigerian contest has been completed. I would also like to assist with French coverage of Côte d'Ivoire and Camaroon, perhaps in collaboration with Wikidata.--Ipigott (talk) 14:01, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

I am speechless. So... the way you think our current disagreements will be solved is by resorting to fallacies and personal attacks on a fellow wikipedian ?!? Look, we have a honest disagreement on Challenge. Nothing wrong about that. In a normal world, this is done by honest talking. But here... I believe your behaviour is not acceptable (No personal attacks)
 * you are diverting the issue (talking of Shola character rather than talking the contest disagreement) : Red herring
 * insulting Shola caracter : ad hominem attack
 * assume Shola is not answering you because he wants to take credits of things when the truth is that he simply wants some peace because you are behaving like a bully : Begging the question
 * asserting that most will agree with you that Shola is the root of the problem : bandwagoning
 * creating a false dilemma, as in "Shoal either works with me" or "completely alone" : "either-or fallacy"
 * selecting facts ("I have done nothing but trying to help". Really ? What when you added usernames on the 10k challenge without the added people knowing ? : Card stacking
 * Generalising quickly and sloppily (if he joins your frame, changes will be massive, if he does not... peanuts) : hasty generalization

So, my suggestion will be that you apology to him now. Shola is a great person and one that rarely (if ever) get upset. He has a pleasant character easy to live with. You simply need to stop interfering and be a bit more respectful.

We are at a loss of what you are really trying to achieve here.

Anthere (talk) 11:06, 14 September 2016 (UTC)


 * +1 support for 's response to Isla Haddow (talk) 11:15, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Further, @ - at the moment, the way you are operating, harassing people and casting doubt on their dedication and commitment to Wikipedia, just because they do not fit in with your “idea” nor respond as quickly to your insane pace, is just not on. Olaniyan was completely right to get upset about having his edits “entered” by you into your 10,000 challenge. He also has a duty to his team and to his project. He has to discuss things with them first. He cannot make decision on your whim. He has processes and procedures to follow (funders, partners and the team to discuss things with) and no doubt your erratic messages, bombardment and questioning has now got him completely confused.
 * I am glad that responded. Many would not have. Many would have seen this space become brutal and non-safe with your remarks.
 * We want to make it clear. We do not support your 10,000 contest … but we said we would look into working with you on the Destubathon along with WIR. Maligning any member of the WLW team just because he doesn’t agree with your methods does not make for a sound working relationship. I hope your remarks do not damage the relationship between WLW and WIR or others. Isla Haddow (talk) 11:22, 14 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Comments removed.


 * Really, I think you need to take the time to read what I wrote. I said that your pace was insane and that the general talk space had become brutal because of how you have talked about your understanding of his character. Shola doesn't have the data connections and cannot stay online all the time - and as I said, he has to consult many people in order to proceed. It is normal for this to take a few days. You, on the other hand, working alone and with your firstworld internet connection, expect an immediate response.
 * Unlike what you wrote about Shola, what I wrote was not a personal attack on you but an explanation of why Shola could not operate the way you do.
 * That having been said, the destubathon and partnership with WIR is a good idea. Perhaps we should all keep to logistics, a plan of action, etc. and not go for personal comments. In that way, we can all proceed in a positive fashion. Isla Haddow (talk) 12:39, 14 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Dear Page Stalkers: I worked at my day job facilitating an event till 6p. Then I drove home and worked on WikiConference North America planning committee from 6:30p-10:30p. Now, I'm going to write my #100wikidays article before getting some sleep. I will be back at work tomorrow for a 6:30am event. So if I am slow to read and respond to all of the posts here, at Women in Red, and via email, please be patient with me. Thank you. --Rosiestep (talk) 05:53, 15 September 2016 (UTC)


 * I can see you're up to your neck at the moment so I'll just try to sort out the WiR/Nigerian problems myself. If you don't agree with my changes, you can always revert. Take it easy!--Ipigott (talk) 07:50, 15 September 2016 (UTC)


 * To keep you up to date: I've now revised the WiR23 page to bring it fully into line with the Nigerian contest on women in entertainment. I've also been working on their list of red links. I now intend to add clickable buttons to the top of our other editathon pages in order to encourage wider participation in their contest. I think the lesson we have learned from all this is that we should complete discussions with the organizers of other events before we over-interpret what they are trying to achieve. Over the past two or three days, most of my wiki time has been spent on pouring oil on troubled waters. The good news (at least for me) is that positive relations appear to have been restored. I may not, however, be correctly pursuing the objectives of WiR or acting in the interests of better overall coverage of Nigerian (or African) women.--Ipigott (talk) 07:03, 16 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the time you've spent on this. I agree with every sentence you just wrote. #lessonslearned --Rosiestep (talk) 13:04, 16 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Glad to hear you agree we're back on track. Now all we need to do is to encourage our members to participate. Do you think it would be appropriate to draw attention to their contest through our mass mailing? I think it would be sufficient to write a short message expressing our support of their contest. See their message on the WiR talk page. Alternatively we could just point to WiR23.--Ipigott (talk) 07:14, 17 September 2016 (UTC)


 * - I don't think we need to do anything more in terms of mass mailing, participation encouragement, etc. More could put us off track. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:34, 17 September 2016 (UTC)


 * OK. Let's just leave further publicity in the hands of the Nigerians and Wiki Loves Women. Unfortunately, up to now our efforts of support do not seem to have led to additional participants. But let's see how things develop.--Ipigott (talk) 07:30, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Help plz
Hey Rosiestep, if you have a moment, or if your army of edits has a moment, Miriyam Aouragh needs a bit more material to flesh this out, esp. her biographical background. I'll go through the databases for reviews of her work, but whatever y'all can do to improve the article is greatly appreciated, including categories and links to the new article... Thanks! Drmies (talk) 16:05, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I did a bit of this and that, but wasn't of much help. The BLPs can be a challenge. But she is definitely an interesting person, one to watch in future years. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:00, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Every bit helps; thanks Rosiestep. Drmies (talk) 03:06, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election
Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway, and as a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 23 September. For the Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:01, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail!
v/r - TP 04:28, 21 September 2016 (UTC)


 * - responded. Thank you. --Rosiestep (talk) 06:14, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Women in sports...
Question - I came across the following Category:American female alpine skiers, and am having trouble determining where the bar is regarding notability. Some of these bios don't meet GNG such as this one Wendy Allen or does it? There are others in that category as well. <span style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em; color:#A2006D;">Atsme 📞📧 12:00, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
 * - do any of you have time to check this out for as I don't have bandwidth at the moment? --Rosiestep (talk) 13:22, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
 * There are hundreds like this one every month. If an individual has been involved in the Olympics or a recognized team in virtually any sport, it appears to be sufficient for a Wikipedia article. I don't think I have the time (bandwidth???) or inclination to look at any of these in more detail. It should be a matter for WikiProject Women's sport.--Ipigott (talk) 13:37, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

.... and if you look at the reference given or the versions in other languages then I would be very surprised if being the 2nd best skier in USA does not get you notability. The best way to test notability is to try and expand the article - which Ive started. Victuallers (talk) 13:42, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
 * , I know virtually nothing about sports. I'm so hopeless on the subject, that I find writing about any sportsing person to be a challenge. I think though, that each sports type has a certain bar of notability. I'd suggest following the guidelines here, WP:ATH. It seems pretty helpful. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:14, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you all for your prompt responses - much appreciated! <span style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em; color:#A2006D;">Atsme 📞📧 00:52, 23 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for taking this on and giving the correct answer to the query. As I frequently look at the AlexBot lists of new articles on women, I really see so many of these one liners. I think that very often the people behind them simply process lists they find elsewhere, often fully or semi-automatically, spending anything from 20 to 40 seconds on each item. I know there are hundreds if not thousands of similar stubs which would benefit from just a few more details about the person involved. Unfortunately, I don't think anyone really has enough time to expand them consistently. And after all, maybe a one-line stub with a reference is better than nothing at all. As far as I can, very, very few of them are deleted. And they do all enhance our metrics!--Ipigott (talk) 09:40, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Would it not serve a more useful purpose if the stubs were combined into a comprehensive list rather than scattered about as incomplete bios because they lack secondary sources to expand them? For example, we have List_of_Olympic_medalists_in_athletics_(women) (possibly the source of numerous stubs or vice versa) so we could have Olympic medalists in skiing (women), and so on for each category rather than having multiple stubs or should we have both? <span style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em; color:#A2006D;">Atsme 📞📧
 * Today, it's a stub; 5, 10, 20 years from now, maybe not. If an article meets notability requirements, its brevity is not an issue. The question of brevity has been debated on wikipedia over mushrooms, spiders, and rivers. The answer is the same:  if an article meets notability requirements, its length and/or quality aren't reasons for deleting/merging it. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I realize I am in the minority, but I do not understand the point of stubs in general. For the most part, they give too little information to be useful. Yesterday, I ran across one that said, in essence, XXXX was a women's organization created in XXX. It was disestablished in XXX. No organizational purpose, no ties to other articles, no indication of significance whatsoever. After googling it, I discovered enough information to not only add notability to the stub, but to create an article on one of its early presidents. I have no desire to be the article police, and don't really enjoy doing janitorial work, but it's the nature of the beast. Even if there was a "rule" that all topics of less than start class had to be on a list, someone would have to monitor that for compliance. There are "rules" now that topics must be notable, and yet many people can't be bothered to state what is notable about their stub topic. It takes all kinds to build an encyclopedia. We each do what we can to improve it. I'm of the keep it it might be useful rather than the delete it variety. SusunW (talk) 14:55, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
 * On the subject of stubs, I reckon about half the articles on the EN wiki are stubs. Sports is a good example: on WikiProject Sports, there are 2,761 stubs vs. 2,898 start or higher. WP Women's sport is even worse: 16,572 stubs vs. 9,175 start or higher. Even if we take WP Women writers, we have 10,165 stubs vs. 11,156 start or better. And these include only the articles which have a wikiproject entry on their talk page. Most don't. Some of the stubs can be useful when they have a reference or an EL site providing more information but I fully support all those destubbing initiatives. The worst thing about poor stubs is that they discourage the creation of informative new articles as people want credit for creating new articles themselves. I don't know of any generalized system for giving credit to those who bring stubs up to start. Perhaps that's something WiR could take on. After all, our overall aim is better coverage of women, isn't it? Maybe we should be specifically giving more credit to destubbing.--Ipigott (talk) 18:30, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

, it appears the creator of the Wendy Allen bio I first mentioned was a dedicated stub creator, now retired User:Doma-w. I'm still of the mind that lists would serve a better purpose than 10,000 stubs about questionable notables, & then we can build from those lists. How are these stubs getting past AfC reviews? I was advised in a prior AfD discussion that being a purple heart recipient wasn't notable. I guess it's not a big deal to lose a limb saving lives which is why I was curious about where the sports bar was set for notability. I've seen multiple articles of relatively unknown fish species consisting of nothing more than a taxobox-style lead which I thought were better suited for Wikispecies but that didn't fly, either. I'm not that familiar with bot patrols or if we even have such a thing to sift through stubs with a single cited reference. I stumbled across the following AfD a while ago so it appears stubs are an issue: Articles_for_deletion/Mit_einem_Bein_im_Grab. Ironically, I've spent far more time than I thought necessary arguing at AfD over clearly notable women bios while all these stubs go unnoticed. <span style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em; color:#A2006D;">Atsme 📞📧 20:23, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Not too sure about lists as an alternative. I compile lots of lists myself but most of them consist of blue links supported by informative articles. I see them as a gateway to those wishing to research a given topic more deeply. If compiled properly with not just the article titles but a few words of explanation on each, they can help people find what they are looking for. Anyway, I'm really glad to hear you are helping to provide support for women's biographies threatened with deletion. Keep up the good work.--Ipigott (talk) 08:15, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Invitation for mass messaging
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)

Hi Rosie. I've created editathon pages for our two October editathons. If you have a moment over the next day or two, you could send the Invitation out by mass messaging.--Ipigott (talk) 14:41, 24 September 2016 (UTC)


 * I've apparently used a non-free image here. I'll check it out and make any necessary change.--Ipigott (talk) 15:38, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
 * It's OK now, I think.--Ipigott (talk) 15:45, 24 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

WMC

 * Women's Media Center (WMC) 2015 report Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:10, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I think it is fascinating and not remotely surprising. Things change in teeny, tiny increments. Women are harder to write about because sources just do not cover them or their achievements in the same depth that men are covered. SusunW (talk) 17:26, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Absolutely, ... the thing I hate seeing though is the old tired explanation that "if it wasn't written about, obviously it wasn't important." BS. :P Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:43, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Right there with you . We are the invisible majority, though our majority is slight. I just finished watching a series on systemic racism which talked about how laws were formed to divide people by class mixing in racial distinctions so that people of color were seen as lower on the totem pole than poor whites. As they were running through the list of "laws" that favored whites, I kept thinking, white men. Women didn't have the same legal protections. It seemed so strange to me, that a university program, designed to evaluate how human rights abuses and bias occur, would utilize a program that in itself was biased and made women non-existent. SusunW (talk) 18:08, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
 * That sounds really interesting, . What was the program? And I agree, I find myself asking that question now when I consume media: where are the women and people of color? I just heard about a new book by Carol Anderson called White Rage: The Unspoken Truth of Our Racial Divide and I can't wait to read it. Hopefully, as a woman, she'll not just look at men in her studies. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:18, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I watched it at a public lecture. Maybe I can find out the name or links for it. SusunW (talk) 18:28, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
 * No worries, . I know you're busy. If you run across it, that's cool. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:32, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Speaking of Women's Media Center, I was delighted to speak with Robin Morgan today of WMC regarding Women in Red. The interview will air before the end of the year. :) --Rosiestep (talk) 02:01, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Very cool will you post a link when it goes live, please? SusunW (talk) 06:33, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
 * , yes! BTW,, I said your real name while talking about the WiR origin story as, of course, we're joined at the hip with that. --Rosiestep (talk) 12:36, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Cool Rosie, (just back from hols) my name is on my talk page. I'm very proud of the project and its origin. To be running a year later and to have an effect on a %age of 1.25 m articles is impressive. Seeing the parallel projects in Korean, Spanish, Italian, French, Nigeria, Ghana etc is a joy Victuallers (talk) 14:38, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Sully
Highly recommended film if you've not seen it, it's really quite an emotional experience! I had a tear in my eye near the end!♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:32, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Cool. It's on my To Do List. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:43, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Help
How to upload an LOGO by fair use? I did it yesterday, but apparently I did not do it right, so then remove the logo. Assaf ♦ talk 20:26, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi and thanks for reaching out to me.  It appears that someone had uploaded the logo for Hapoel Be'er Sheva F.C.  to Commons, but the upload had a licensing problem, so the image was removed from Commons by one of their admins. For this reason, you can't use it on Wikipedia. If a Fair Use image is uploaded to Commons, it can be used in the article. Hope this helps. --Rosiestep (talk) 01:42, 29 September 2016 (UTC)