User talk:SusunW/Archive 15

Happy New Year, SusunW
 Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. — is wishing you a  Happy New Year ! Welcome the  2016 . Wishing you a happy and fruitful 2016 with good health and your wishes come true! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! May the 2016 go well for you.

Spread the New Year cheer by adding to their talk page with a Happy New Year message.

Thank you oh great master of categories and guru of technical stuff. Your contributions and assistance have made my work so much better, Wishing you health and happiness in the new year and looking forward to more collaborations :) SusunW (talk) 18:05, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
 * You are too kind, and I too undeserving. I'm always happy to be of help - looking forward to more collaborations throughout the year. :-) -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 18:07, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, SusunW!


Happy New Year! SusunW, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. North America1000 10:44, 2 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year 2016!

 * Thank you . I too am hoping that we have an amazing year. Thank you for all of your support and help. Got all of the RI women banners posted. It is so much better to collaborate and much less daunting :) Wishing you and yours a healthy and happy New Year. SusunW (talk) 17:37, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Susun, for inspiration and support, especially tireless work to make women known! Take my review, and the peace bell by Yunshui, with the best wishes! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:17, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you . May your new year find you happy and healthy with music filling your heart and soul. SusunW (talk) 16:16, 31 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Click on bell for the soft sound of peace (and jest) ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:31, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Malé Friday Mosque
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you!

 * Thank you ;) Technical stuff (like how to reply to your user name) I am not remotely good with, but sourcing is my thing. SusunW (talk) 19:07, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Ping only sort of works sometimes for me. the bots have a hard time with the characers in my user name, and it is just the cost of being who I am (and have been for 8+ years, so I was grandfathered in when the naming policy was changed)  But if you use User:7&6=thirteen that works fine.  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 19:36, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Barnstar for your contributions

 * Very cool. Thank you Ian. I must say it was less stressful than I thought it would be what with you and Gerda checking after me on the technical parts. Besides which I thoroughly enjoyed the collaborative pieces we did. :) SusunW (talk) 14:32, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You did a great job. I also noticed all the other women's biographies you managed to produce in January, scientists, educators, halls of fame... And you've already made a fine start on the Black Women. I see by the way that you've now created 537 articles on the main space, which averages out to about 45 a month. That's amazing!--Ipigott (talk) 14:52, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I had never counted them. I find it fun and relaxing for the most part and I learn so much about amazing people just writing about them. I try to avoid the drama on here and just produce. But, I have to say that since Sue started building all those red lists and I see how much has to be done, it motivates me. It's an adrenaline rush every time one turns blue. :) SusunW (talk) 15:20, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's certainly fun. That's why we do it. You don't have to count the articles. There's a routine here. Just make sure you put Mainspace and No redirects and you'll see them all.--Ipigott (talk) 15:38, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * 45 a month is certainly incredible if you consider the quality of Susun's work too.♦ Dr. Blofeld  18:18, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. That means a lot coming from you. It helps to be somewhat OCD, as I am a stickler for research before I write. It'd be far better for everyone if we could successfully correct the misconceptions about RS to allow us to use primary sources. There is a huge difference in a primary source and a self-generated source. SusunW (talk) 18:35, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Based on my experience, sometimes some of the finest details have to come from a primary source. If it is used sparingly and supported by a wealth of reliable sources this is perfectly fine. For things like Business executives I don't know what the "rules" formally are but some of the resume type sites like LinkedIn can often provide a good career backbone and then built on with reliable independent sources. The whole point is quality of information, accuracy and comprehension, and it so so happens that often people themselves are the best source of information about themselves. I think we need to relax a bit more in certain areas on here. I don't know what the current outlook is but I think you can get away with using the person's self published website as a source, provided that the article is well sourced to independent sources throughout. Also primary sources have greater strengths for things like career chronology and perosnal details, but can't really be trusted for documenting things like career achievements and gushing media comments so it depends on the case. The problem I think is more when an entire article is written by a primary source and no demonstration of notability in independent sources. So be a bit bolder on this, ask my opinion if you think you're overstepping the mark.♦ Dr. Blofeld  18:45, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I rarely use personal websites other than to mine them for information. I do use birth records, death records and census records as often they are the only sources that can piece together a woman's history. You'd be amazed at how many people take them out for being primary sources. As if a birth record is "original research" or somehow tainted. It's pretty straight forward born where, when, to whom. Not a lot of interpretation of data going on there. But even so, if they are backed up with multiple secondary sources confirming the year, it is to me a no–brainer. Not to WP "experts" though. *sigh* SusunW (talk) 19:05, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I think for some of the biographies you tackle you'll often find decent info on their own websites and find less detail in independent sources. In such cases I think it's OK to use their sites, only as a last resort though if you can't source it from elsewhere.♦ Dr. Blofeld  21:38, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Lucy Goode Brooks
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Mãe Menininha do Gantois
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Friends' Asylum for Colored Orphans
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * What a great article! Thank you for writing it.    78.26   (spin me / revolutions) 18:52, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Edith Irby Jones
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Elizabeth Rona
It looks very good! I went through the article with a copyeditor's eye. You certainly don't need me to find more references. Please ask User:Dr. Blofeld about the fair use images question; maybe he can also find pictures of her. Best, Yoninah (talk) 20:52, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you, . That is exactly what it needed. I found some pretty good images on commons. The one of the Munster Radioactivity meeting was great, as it had most of her teachers and mentors. Wish I had found some of the women. But, I didn't. Will ask Dr. B. about the photos. She is certainly deserving of an article and it mushroomed as I figured out to look for various name spellings. Appreciate your help a lot. SusunW (talk) 22:33, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Kaunakes
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Can you please help here Template:Did you know nominations/Mining industry of Cyprus? Nvvchar . 02:45, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I'll look at it, but it may take me a couple of days. My mama is here visiting. We are taking her on an excursion tomorrow and won't be home until late. SusunW (talk) 05:56, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * , sorry it took me so long. Limited time with my mama here. I'll try to check back in later. Let me know if you'd like any changes, but I think you should be good now. SusunW (talk) 17:39, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I have included your name in the credits. The reviewer has raised one more issue. Nvvchar . 04:23, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I changed the cite, she's being overly critical IMO and trying to create a gotcha scenario. SusunW (talk) 04:26, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Oak Ridge
I'll take a look, sure. Probably won't be until tomorrow evening sometime, but I should be able to get to it then - I've been fairly busy myself, too. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 06:53, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Rona
One fair use image File:Elizabeth Rona.jpg. You'll have to quickly move the article into the mainspace though so you can use it and it doesn't get deleted!♦ Dr. Blofeld  15:49, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks She's live now. SusunW (talk) 16:01, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Cool, article looks great as normal!♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:11, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks :) She was fascinating. Could not imagine there was no article on her. Wish I could use her tools. Those are cool. I'll nominate her as soon as I get bits and pieces cleaned up. SusunW (talk) 16:14, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Let me know when it's ready and I'll review it.♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:31, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I nominated it under Chemistry. Was just finishing up linking it to German Wiki and adding to the List of scientists. Think it's ready now. Thanks again. SusunW (talk) 16:33, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Bornö Marine Research Station Elizabeth Rona
Please sign your post. Beautiful article BTW. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 21:35, 8 January 2016 (UTC) Thanks. She was amazing. I couldn't believe there was no article on her. She fled Hungary so they didn't write about her, she fled Austria, so they didn't and most of the sources in the US said that because of her immigration status, she wasn't acknowledged in most publications in the states either. One source even said she rarely published. She published, but her name was never consolidated in any of the references. Mayhaps she will finally be pulled out of obscurity, thanks to the Tennessee Women's Hall of Fame induction :) SusunW (talk) 21:39, 8 January 2016 (UTC)


 * And thanks to your excellent coverage, Susun. You worked wonders in moving Elizabeth Rona from article creation to GA in less than a week. Well done! Don't you think achievements like this should be posted on WiR under Showcase?--Ipigott (talk) 11:40, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you She was just fascinating and it kept growing. Since my mom was here and I could only grab short bursts of data at a time, I wasn't sure where it was headed until it was already ready for GA. She can be posted wherever you would like. I noted she was not on the chemistry list Rosie got from Keliana this morning, so will have to remember to add her there after I come back from taking mama to lunch and the bus. SusunW (talk) 17:08, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Opaline Deveraux Wadkins
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Elizabeth Rona
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Elizabeth Rona you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 18:01, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the review She was totally fascinating to me, though admittedly I only understand bits and pieces of the research she did. I did 3 of the 4 Swedish articles. The 4th one, Kålhuvudet, I may get to tomorrow if time permits or someone else hasn't done it.  and User:7&6=thirteen were able to find several links I did not. Totally love that you found Tangl, Charles. I am sure that is the correct one, as he was "in charge of medical chemistry at University of Budapest" :) It takes a village. Thank you all very, very much. SusunW (talk) 20:43, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Getting something like a Hungarian woman chemist to GA is a remarkable achievement. If you want to further expand Electra, My Love, another Hungarian one which Charles has kindly translated go for it! It is named after a woman at least!♦ Dr. Blofeld  23:07, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I'll look at it. We will put mama on the bus tomorrow afternoon, so my life should return to normal (whatever that is) after that. SusunW (talk) 00:10, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * You both did remarkable work. Well done!  And we nominated this for a DYK, too.  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 00:19, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm distancing myself from being involved in the women project Susun, but you or anybody else is quite welcome to approach me for reviewing articles for GA.♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:41, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I totally appreciate the help . Most of my work is hard fought for sourcing, so when I find ones like Silverman or Rona with a plethora of sources it is like a present from the stars and I want to yank them out of obscurity. SusunW (talk) 17:52, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't know how you keep up. Surely occasionally you'd like to do your own thing for a couple of weeks and create a wider range of articles before moving on to the next editathon? Variation is what has always kept me interested as an editor. If it's the same thing, all month and every month, I tend to shut off, as I'm sure many would.♦ Dr. Blofeld  18:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I actually enjoy the editathons, okay, not necessarily the admin stuff that goes with them, but it has to be done. The beauty of them, IMO, is that one doesn't get bored, because they are always on different topics. Yes, the unifying theme is women, but there's a plethora of fields women are involved in, so I am always learning stuff when I write, which for me is what why I keep going. I get that everyone is different, but for me, life's fascination has always been with people. SusunW (talk) 02:26, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * If you ever feel like a break from biography, The Ascent is an amazing film and has been called one of the greatest films ever made by a female director. I'd love to see it at GA level! |248658&name=The-Ascent TCM article.♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:15, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I am positive you don't want to me write about movies. The only class I ever had trouble with in my life was a popular culture class in college on film. I had never seen any of the films. I don't even own a television. Wouldn't know the slightest thing about what is important to go in or leave out. I really feel like I am just beginning to get a handle on what is required for a GA on biographies. SusunW (talk) 02:26, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, I think editathons would be more enjoyable if we varied it with women's works too, not just bios. Films directed by women and books written by women are all part of the scope.♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:31, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't see that as an issue. In any editathon one can include women's works if that is what they want to do. Quite a few of the ones included on the music editathon going on right now are songs. In the religion editathon from December there were articles about Women in Shinto, the Women's Mosque of America, Christ Holy Church International, a book "Believing Women" in Islam, etc. In April, one of the lists will be for books and stories. Since the lists of redlinks for all of our editathons are crowdsourced, one could add works to any of them. SusunW (talk) 16:35, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Indigenous Women
You know, it never occurred to me that anyone who was not indigenous would feel uncomfortable writing indigenous women biographies. I'm trying to think about the comment you recently responded to and I wonder why that editor was so uncomfortable with the idea... the only think I could think of that he was thinking that non-indigenous individuals writing about indigenous people would be "colonizing" them all over again. But I think that the benefit to having articles on a person/subject that is marginalized outweighs any concerns of possible cultural appropriation... especially since anyone can help improve an article if there are mistakes that a person outside of the community wouldn't understand. Anyway, I wanted to see what you thought... Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:09, 10 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I agree with your assessment. I am from Oklahoma. My great-grandfather married twice. His first wife, my ancestor, was European by whom he had one child. His second wife was a full blood Osage and Cherokee and they had 12 children. All are my family. While I may not be indigenous, I certainly have an affinity and understanding of the issues faced, discrimination experienced, and am able to write about these topics with sensitivity and NPOV. If I have questions about presentation, I ask, before I publish. The assumption that there would be no indigenous people participating is incorrect, as well. I have written many, many articles on indigenous people and I rely on and readily expect other editors to make corrections and collaborate to make them better. Inclusion far outweighs the detriment of silence. SusunW (talk) 20:22, 10 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I agree. I'm actually as white as a person can be... though my kids are 1/2 African American. Knowing that as a white person, I'm not going to get everything, though, makes me very careful! That comment, though, totally caught me off-guard. I wonder if we can include any language in the edit-a-thon and the redlink page in order to head off this type of criticism. There may be others who would otherwise participate who feel the same way, but not say anything. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:27, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I honestly don't know. I think we have to AGF that people's intent is to follow the rules and present NPOV being sensitive to cultural differences. In a certain view, simply bringing it up lends credence to the idea that people of diverse cultures cannot respect others. But having been on the receiving end of prejudice, and most everyone has to some degree or other, we may need to put a reminder on the page that certain topics are extremely sensitive and to use caution with POV. SusunW (talk) 20:43, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * A minor correction: I did not mean to imply that WikiProject Women/Women in Red/Indigenous Women was being carried out by entirely non-indigenous women, but that I could see no Māori women involvement. I would encourage you to reach out to indigenous groups (and indigenous women in particular) to nominate their own article subjects and as far as possible participate in the writing of those articles. Stuartyeates (talk) 01:05, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Is there a Wikimedia Chapter in New Zealand? Would that be a good way to connect with Māori women editors? Do you have any other suggestions? --Rosiestep (talk) 01:59, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * There is currently not a Wikimedia Chapter in New Zealand, https://wikimedia.org.au/ is as close as it comes. New Zealand Wikipedians' notice board and the semi-inactive Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New Zealand/Māori task force are good places to find Māori women editors, I believe. Stuartyeates (talk) 02:12, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Wikproject IPNA has a similar problem, very, very few people who are actually Native American of First Nations, we need all the help we can get there....! But pinging for the indigenous women' projects, YES! Montanabw (talk) 06:13, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * totally agree about all the help we can get and we definitely want inclusive participation. If you know of anyone interested who will help, please do that. I have not notified the WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America or the WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the Americas, but have reached out to specific editors who I know are active and who I knew would help to compile the list. Obviously the goal is to notify the projects and gain their involvement, but when we started the list we had 3 entries and I wanted more substantial presentation so they would see we were serious before I made the contact with the projects themselves. Plus, we are eight months out and I don't want to drum up enthusiasm too far in advance so that we lose it before the event itself. What the ideal window is, 6 months before?, 3 months before?, IDK. SusunW (talk) 06:45, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * There's a real tension here. The more work you do before going out to indigenous stakeholders, the more 'serious' you seem, but also the less input those indigenous stakeholders stakeholders have because the work you've already done embodies your assumptions about the indigeuity that they're living. If I were planning this, I'd pick a small number of talk pages / noticeboards (maybe the ones already mentioned plus Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anthropology) and post a relatively short message aimed primarily at indigenous editors and fellow travellers. Then every couple of weeks (often enough to keep the thread from archiving), post a short update on progress so far and encouraging input. Stuartyeates (talk) 07:44, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * and that's what I thought I was accomplishing by asking specific people to assist. At least we have a somewhat respectable list now, multiple continents, multiple professions, so I guess it's time to make the plunge. SusunW (talk) 15:09, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The discussions at New_Zealand_Wikipedians'_notice_board and WikiProject Women/Women in Red/Indigenous Women are all about indigenous people as subjects not as editors or collaborators (objects not actors; classic objectification). WikiProject Women/Women in Red/Indigenous Women is particularly egregious, since it appears to be the core statement of what it is you're trying to do. Stuartyeates (talk) 18:54, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I am sure that your intent is well-meaning, but perhaps you should re-read what I wrote..."both indigenous and non-indigenous people ... involved in both creation of the list and the articles" makes it pretty clear, IMO that indigenous people are wanted as editors and collaborators. But, if you want to suggest other language, feel free to do so. SusunW (talk) 19:37, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * But that's what we all do on Wiki, : we write about people and things. That's not a bad thing to do. It's helpful to have articles about diverse groups of people--it will attract more editors from those groups! Having input from editors who are indigenous is ideal. But I can't agree with you that writing about indigenous women is "egregious" at all. Just because these women are the subject of biographies does not make them "objectified." It makes them visible. It's empowering and wonderful, not "egregious." We want to make as many notable indigenous women visible on Wiki during that edit-a-thon. We haven't done any work about how indigenous people are living... we are only compiling names of notable individuals for inclusion during the edit-a-thon. Maybe you can better express what you feel on the talk page for WikiProject Women/Women in Red/Indigenous Women where it would be more useful and more editors can help us shape the discussion. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:55, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't see this discussion as likely to be productive, so I'm going to unwatchlist a bunch of pages and withdraw. Good luck with your project. Stuartyeates (talk) 20:10, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Edith Mansford Fitzgerald
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Ida Silverman
Materialscientist (talk) 22:19, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Joaquin Clausell
Hi, there is a discussion going on at WT:DYK about DYK nominations which were never posted on the DYK talk page. Would you be interested in checking/polishing up this article and renominating it for DYK? I thought of you because all the sources are in Spanish, and the subject is Mexican. Best, Yoninah (talk) 21:55, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I can give it a shot, except my question would be that aren't I going to have to take it to GA? It is clearly over 7 days old and there is not much chance that I can do 5X what is already there in there are over 16000 chars already. Will probably take me a week or so to week through all the sourcing. SusunW (talk) 21:59, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * No, this is an "orphaned" nomination for which the nominator never did the final step to post it on the DYK nomination page. The DYK housekeeping bot found it and it has been recommended for removal from DYK unless someone wants to adopt it (and receive DYK credit for doing it). All you have to do is check the sourcing and renominate it under the "orphaned nominations" banner. (I can help you do the nomination when you're ready.) If you're interested, I'll write down your name at the discussion at WT:DYK. Please let me know. Yoninah (talk) 22:21, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll do it, we'll see how fast I can wade through the sourcing. SusunW (talk) 22:23, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Great. Most of the sources are offline, so they'll be AGF. Just make sure all paragraphs have at least one source, and that the few sources that are online are accurately stated in the article. Just pretend you're reviewing this article for DYK, and suggest a good hook. Here is the original DYK nomination: Template:Did you know nominations/Joaquín Clausell. Use the original template to post any new hooks, and make a comment to the effect that this is an orphaned nomination from November 2014 which you have rescued per the discussion at talk) 22:37, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, well it didn't take long since I could AGF the off-line sources. I added two hooks about his art since it seems to me that that is what he is notable for not being a lawyer. I have zero idea how to add a picture after the fact, so I did it the best I could. Also wasn't sure if a QPQ was required, so I did one. I don't need credit for it. That's totally unimportant. Please let me know if there is anything else I need to do to move it along. SusunW (talk) 03:16, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
 * You did great! I reformatted the nomination for you. (I just copy the template off another picture nomination and change the details.) Please put this on your watchlist so you can answer any questions that the reviewer might raise. I'll put it on my watchlist, too. Thanks, 22:58, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks :) I watchlisted both the article and the template yesterday. SusunW (talk) 00:42, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Between you, me and that wall over there, I am going to have to take a break from DYK again after this one. It is back at that point of the ridiculous. Maybe its just the holidays, or something in the water, but there seems to be a whole bunch of trivial nonsense going on which isn't aimed at helping articles but instead killing them. It's not just happening to my articles but to a whole slew of nominations of veterans as well as novices. Seems like every few months, the atmosphere over there becomes oppressive with ego. *sigh* SusunW (talk) 19:14, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I understand. The atmosphere over at Women in Red, in contrast, is really fine! I should get back to that project. I've been researching a biography for the Women in Music editathon for several days, only to see it get posted by someone else in the meantime. *double sigh* Yoninah (talk) 19:24, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Been there. Sometimes it helps to put on the list that you are working on it, but sometimes it still is created by someone else at the same time. Sometimes two versions can be merged and it works towards good article too. But, more often than not, the info available is limited and thus, the time spent only improved your own knowledge (looking for the positive in a bad situation). Yes, I love the attitude at Women in Red ;) By far, the most affirming project on WP, IMO. SusunW (talk) 19:34, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Georgeta Stoleriu
Hi, I was thinking of nominating this for DYK. Do you also know Romanian, or were you using Google Translate?! I looked at footnote 3 on Google Translate and found that it says that her students have won 50 international awards, not her. And I would like to know if this is your source for her 1200 concert performances, as the translation seems to say she "supported 1200 performances". Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 23:22, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
 * No, I don't speak Romanian. I put it through the translator and then back through but since I couldn't be sure, I thought I had changed it to the part about recording 3500 minutes on radio. Totally strange, I thought I changed that. Maybe that's when I lost my power the other day. Sorry. SusunW (talk) 02:08, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Malouma
Hi Susun. In addition to your own excellent research, I think I've contributed what I can to this. I've been through it quite carefully and done quite a bit of copy editing. Maybe there should be a Discography section, giving the details of her albums and any other recordings but I don't think it's really necessary. We haven't said much either about specific performances and I haven't managed to find much in the way of local reviews. My only other concern is that she perhaps does not come over in the article as such an exceptionally good artist as in some of the sources. Perhaps that's just as well. If there's anything more you would like me to add or research, just let me know.--Ipigott (talk) 17:26, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I am astounded at how much we have been able to do with her, considering the paucity of articles even on her country on WP. Your contributions as always have truly improved the article and I sincerely thank you for all of your work. I really do think we should propose her for GA, but there are still some questions on the talk page, i.e.
 * Is her grandfather Mohamed Yahya Ould Boubane her mother's family?
 * How do we reference her songs on the Ping Kong album by Duoud? I put it in the section and it can be corrected if someone thinks it is necessary. SusunW (talk) 00:23, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Should we do a separate section on her preservation work? I created a separate section SusunW (talk) 21:37, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Source for she was the first in her caste to be allowed in the Senate? I found this one again, finally SusunW (talk) 22:37, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Not to worry if you want to leave these for someone else. I also don't know that the discography section is necessary since I discussed it in the text. But we'll see what the others think. SusunW (talk) 17:41, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I found several more honors/awards and reviews. Nour got up as high as #14 on the European Charts according to WOMEX. Like you, I think there isn't much more to be done. If want to give a once over and add/copyedit anything else, I think it's ready to be nominated for GA. I'd love more pictures, but just cannot find any.
 * We first need to move it into main space. Once it's there, it should be nominated for DYK.--Ipigott (talk) 08:52, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Nicolette Bruining
Allen3 talk 00:06, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Kate Frank
Allen3 talk 00:07, 22 January 2016 (UTC)