Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red/Archive 66

Wikidata redlist for indigenous women
In preparation for our August event, is there a way to create a Wikidata redlist for indigenous women? If you are able to create it, please add a link on the event page and our Index. Thank you. --Rosiestep (talk) 10:18, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I've looked into this but in the end I thought the best way forward was to expand the existing crowd-souced list, adding any useful directories and related sources/indexes. I'm happy to see has posted a second CS list. One of the best ways to find new names is to look at Wikidata lists for countries with native populations but it's often necessary to look at the foreign-language articles to establish whether the women are indeed natives or not. Maybe we could investigate Wikidata "indigenous people (Q103817)", but on the basis of the equivalent Commons category, the items appear to refer mainly to tribes and populations rather than to individuals. There are nevertheless a few names which could be added to the first CS list if anyone has time.--Ipigott (talk) 10:04, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the shoutout . Part of the problem of finding indigenous women is that both on Wikipedia and in Wikidata, they are often listed by their nationality. So Saami women are listed as Finnish author. The Russian and English Wikipedias are really bad about this. I've been thinking about converting the red link list on my subpage into a table, but a lot of the people don't even have Wikidata items yet, which would mean I have to do that first. And please feel free to add more women to my redlink list; that's what it's there for :) -Yupik (talk) 12:52, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Here's an example of the de-indigenizing of people I was talking about. The Russian Wikipedia article on her calls her российская, which just refers to her being a Russian citizen, not Russian by ethnicity, yet the Wikidata item says she's Russian in English instead of Mansi. So when other people translate the description from English to whatever language, they're going to say she's Russian and the cycle will continue until someone gets tired of this kind of misinformation and fixes as many of them as they can. Here's another one, this time for Ulla Pirttijärvi-Länsman. It is incredible that she was ever listed as "Finnish singer" with no mention of her being Saami since Ulla has spent her life spreading Saami music around the world by herself and in various groups. Yes, she's a citizen of Finland, but she's Saami. So please keep an eye out for this and change it. -Yupik (talk) 18:27, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I've been having a discussion similar to this one with on Wilma Mankiller's bio and whether to include her citizenship as both American and Cherokee. I typically do not include a country of origin on indigenous people, unless it is needed for clarification, i.e. like the Dakota who have organized governments in both Canada and the U.S. or the Quechua who reside in numerous South American locations. But in Wikidata, it seems that to correct the issues, we should indeed list both their legal tribal and national citizenship. But then how does one do that with historic accuracy, respcting tribal sovereignty before official recognition and organization of indigenous governance? I am thinking of the noted case of Willard Stone, who was unenrolled, but an internationally known sculptor of Cherokee heritage but a non-citizen of a Cherokee tribe. Maybe the easiest way is if there is verification of citizenship we include both a tribal and national statement in wikidata field "country of citizenship" and if there is no verification of citizenship in a specific indigenous nation, then the verified heritage goes only in the field "ethnic group"? (And that made me wonder if a list could be generated from "ethnic group" data?) SusunW (talk) 16:35, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * is this doable? --Rosiestep (talk) 20:59, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Redlist can indeed be generated based on the Ethnic Group property in Wikidata - https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P172 ... here fwiw is a count of items for each of the P172 values - https://w.wiki/6r9 ... let me know for what values you want redlists. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:37, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * You know I am not technical, so I would think all of them, except ones that start Afro-X, Asian-X, etc. But maybe I am wrong? Pinging to weigh in and also asking anyone if we should create a best practice on the inputting of their tribal nationality? SusunW (talk) 23:37, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for providing this, . If want to create a Wikidata list of "Indigenous peoples", maybe we start with these, and we can add others thereafter (e.g. there are a lot of "Foo people" but not all of them are "ethnic groups")? If we're trying to create a list of "Ethnic groups", we may want to do so by continent, e.g. "Ethnic groups of South America". I think we need additional editors to review your list (https://w.wiki/6r9 ) and weigh in, though, on "indigenous people" vs. "ethnic groups", etc. --Rosiestep (talk) 01:29, 7 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Indigenous peoples of America
 * Indigenous Australians
 * Indigenous peoples of the United States
 * Native Hawaiians
 * Indigenous peoples of Oceania
 * Aboriginal Australians
 * First Nations
 * Aboriginal Tasmanian
 * Indigenous peoples in Brazil
 * Native American
 * Indigenous peoples in Colombia
 * Indigenous peoples in Argentina
 * Indigenous peoples in Canada
 * Indigenous peoples in Ecuador
 * indigenous peoples of the Philippines
 * I finally realized that giant Wikidata message will finally go away and make a list. At any rate, I see:

I am barely through 1 page and part of another. There has to be an easier way, because I am having to pull up groups and examine them. I think our terminology is really vague, i.e. impossible to tell from some articles if people are indigenous or an ethnic minority. Maybe we can use the groups here List of indigenous peoples to define the search terms? SusunW (talk) 14:57, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Cherokee (Q105405)
 * Mapuche (Q178484)
 * Sami People (Q48199)
 * Cree (Q117191)
 * Ojibwe (Q255872)
 * Navajo (Q108266)
 * Quechuas (Q134936)
 * Baiyue (Q774615)
 * Innu (Q497568)
 * Island Caribs (Q27106)
 * Métis people (Q262457)
 * Yazidis (Q200885)
 * Lezgian people (Q1129737)
 * Mokshas (Q1943269)
 * Mohawk people (Q116971)
 * Lakota people (Q333049)
 * Karo people (Q633375)
 * Choctaw (Q324516)
 * Garifuna people (Q863927)


 * The major issue that I can see with using ethnic group to call up people is that a lot of indigenous people don't have any such reference in their Wikidata item. I've been adding them in as I go for the Saami, but it's missing close to 100% of the time. Also, for the Saami, I haven't been adding in the Q code for "Sami people" but the subgroup that they belong to, e.g "Skolts" (Q1673765). This item by the way has instance of "ethnic group" and "indigenous people"; could that be a solution for the groups that we call up? -Yupik (talk) 15:51, 7 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Also the whole idea of official status for a person is loaded. There's a huge mess been going on for years in Finland as to who is Saami, who can be added to the electoral roll and vote in the Saami parliamentary elections, etc. The same stuff is going on elsewhere too (blood quantum, etc.) so I've taken the approach that if the person is accepted by the community as one of them, their closest relatives are, they consider themselves to be, and sources refer to them as being part of the community, then they are. -Yupik (talk) 15:57, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Exactly my point, it's a complex issue. (In the U.S. it can be a federal crime, as well as a crime in some states, to represent that you are indigenous if you do not officially have tribal membership. Heritage and legal membership in a sovereign nation are two different things there.) But I think we need to have a best practice for how we input people in Wikidata. If the tribal affiliation is known, I think it needs to be added to "citizenship" and if not known to the ethnic group or better indigenous people, but I have never seen the field "indigenous people" on any wikidata entry. How does one create it? SusunW (talk) 16:16, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * In the statement section, create a new statement with the property P31 (instance of). Then for the instance, create a new one and use "indigenous people" (Q103817) as the type of instance. If you want to add in "ethnic group" too, then add a new instance to the existing one and use "ethnic group" (Q41710). (I might be slow in answering today since I'm on the Gulf of Finland right now, so anyone who wants to chime in, please feel free to :D) -Yupik (talk) 16:26, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry, that is above my paygrade. I have absolutely zero idea how to add anything to Wikidata beyond the data that pulls up with the gadget. The platform is not intuitive and I cannot edit directly on that platform as it is technically beyond my skill. (Which is why I wish to heaven that someone would reinstitute the bot that used to add authority control data from articles to Wikidata.) SusunW (talk) 16:37, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I can add them in next week during the Wikimania hackathon if no one gets around to it before then. -Yupik (talk) 16:39, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

I've taken the liberty of adding a handful of names from Gerald Wertkin's Encyclopedia of American Folk Art to the meetup page - all are taken from the entry on "Native American Folk Art" save Betty Manygoats, who has a separate entry (and whose work is in the Smithsonian American Art Museum, so she absolutely passes notability). I'm not sure how many of them pass the notability threshhold, but I figured the fact that Wertkin cites them as examples implies they might be worth looking into. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 02:09, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * , : May I suggest we bring in our Wikidata expert to either comment on this discussion or to go ahead adding "indigenous people" to Wikidata (and possibly also adding some important ethnic groups). Once this has been done, we would then need to go through the names under Category:Indigenous people and all the relevant indigenous lists as well as all those we have added under WiR meetups on indigenous women. Quite an assignment but probably worthwhile if we want to take things seriously. There are still some 20 days left in August during which we could at least make a start on this.--Ipigott (talk) 09:24, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
 * by all means, I think it's a great idea. -Yupik (talk) 13:47, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

I have been following this conversation with interest, because last I checked, there is very little in the large aggregator databases such as VIAF that can help with this task of listing people properly by tribe/nation/community if they are not "citizens" in the legal sense. Just something simple such as the recent win in Oaklahoma to reinstate the Indian Child Welfare Act is poorly covered here on Wikipedia, much less elsewhere in Oklahoma and the USA. We should use the "Wikimedia project" property for this with "ethnic group" as qualifiers and link to a central "Indigenous women" sub-project page, here on enWP and on Wikidata. Jane (talk) 06:21, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

New Daughters of Africa book
Hello. Thought I let you know that a sequel to Daughters of Africa came out this month titled New Daughters of Africa. This could help expand the amount of African women writers in Wikipedia. As you can see, the previous book doesn't have all blue links either, if anyone is interested. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:46, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this. Anyone interested in creating a redlist from those in the book? I see most are already covered although of the 49 beginning with A, B or C, the following 10 are still missing: Agnès Agboton, Lisa Allen-Agostini, Michelle Asantewa, Yvonne Bailey-Smith, Ama Biney, Candice Carty-Williams, Rutendo Chabikwa, Panashe Chigumadzi, Angela Cobbinah and Juanita Cox. As there are about 200 names, that probably means some 30 more would be redlinked.--Ipigott (talk) 10:26, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Glad you're interested. There's at least 20-30 missing women in the first book overall from A-Z --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:18, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Then maybe you can start a redlist covering both books. I'll try to add to it as time permits but at the moment I'm trying to improve coverage of Sámis.--Ipigott (talk) 07:50, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

In the news regarding Indigenous Women event + Sámi women
This may interest some of you. --Rosiestep (talk) 22:41, 11 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks. See also Wikimania Sami language course and Liv Inger Somby, journalist and scholar, to speak at Wikimania about the Sámi people.--Ipigott (talk) 08:04, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

New list
I have the list of updated and new ONDB articles for August in a redlist at User:Rich Farmbrough/temp239 - still some formatting to do, and I suspect we have articles for most of these, but as it is a women centric month, I thought you might be interested. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 22:01, 11 August 2019 (UTC).


 * Hi and thanks for the link to the new ODNB entries. Can the names be added to this list (WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by dictionary/ODNB) or is there a reason to keep them separate? --Rosiestep (talk) 22:22, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * A majority have wikidata entries and are now showing up in our (now amended; long story) ODNB redlist. I've found the odd August addition which doesn't have a wikidata record & will probably do something about it. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:13, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * You can use it how you like. It is a mixed gender list however.  All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 14:50, 12 August 2019 (UTC).

Rebecca Adamson
I am trying to save a page from deletion. The subject seems pretty notable to me. Perhaps someone could chime in and give their opinion.Patapsco913 (talk) 01:28, 12 August 2019 (UTC)


 * I think most readers of this page are seasoned enough to make up their own minds, but I remind you of Canvassing, Patapsco913. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:42, 12 August 2019 (UTC)


 * For whatever its worth, the nominator of this and many other current AFDs affecting this project just started editing Wikipedia in June, and in July and since has gone on a huge tear of creating Speedy, PROD and AFD requests. They've gotten a bit of pushback from various editors on their talk page. According to their user page their pet peeve is "corporate spam" so they seem to target any living person who, basically, has a job at a company of some kind. I know we are not supposed to bite the newbies but really new users who immediately become deletionists are my personal pet peeve. IMHO Its not a good way to start your Wikipedia career. --Krelnik (talk) 17:37, 12 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Voicing my concerns, in the case of an article I've been following, the user mentioned by nominated it for AfD and a brand new user, who joined Wikipedia that day and whose only editing at that stage was to create User page, Talk page and a new Category, was first to support the AfD and has done very little other editing since. Also, the same nominator was responsible for the AfD for Articles for deletion/Sandra Appiah - see discussion below. Oronsay (talk) 20:11, 13 August 2019 (UTC)


 * If you think there might be something nefarious going on there, you could ask for a Sockpuppet Investigation of the involved accounts. You never know. (But often I find its just a super-over-zealous newbie). --Krelnik (talk) 00:04, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

What name to use
I'm trying to create an article about a Broadway actress, but I have no idea what name to use. The book Theatre World 1945-1946 season (published in 1946) and two online sources that I found say Patricia Marshall. The Los Angeles Times obituary says Marriam Pat Gelbart. Variety says Pat Gelbart. SL93 (talk) 17:24, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * She appears to have married & changed her name mid-career, some 70 years ago and after Theatre World 1945-1946 season, so I'd go with Variety etc as Pat Gelbart as the title, but of course redirects to cover all other variants. Johnbod (talk) 17:36, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Assuming this Wikidata entry is for the same person, I'd stick with that and use Patricia Marshall. Nick Number (talk) 17:45, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Why? a) when in doubt, in my experience it is fairly safe to assume WD is wrong, and b) the only source there lists performances up to 1957 only. Johnbod (talk) 20:21, 13 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Obituaries in the Performing Arts, 2018 says, "She largely retired from performing following her marriage to writer and producer Larry Gelbart in 1956" (although the entry mentions a few appearances thereafter). Her information at Internet Broadway Database shows 1957 as the year of her last Broadway play. IBDB has no listing for Pat Gelbart. I would use Patricia Marshall, since that seems to be the way she was better known to the public. Eddie Blick (talk) 00:12, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I used Patricia Marshall. SL93 (talk) 02:55, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Elizabeth Pirie
Hi there, I've just done a draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lajmmoore/Elizabeth_Pirie for numismatist and archaeologist Liz Pirie, please could some have a look and let me know what to improve? User:Lajmmoore/Elizabeth_Pirie (Lajmmoore (talk) 13:04, 15 August 2019 (UTC))
 * I did some formatting for you, here's some stuff I don't know:

Hope that's of help. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:33, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Is she a writer? The lede says she's a numismatist, (studies of coins, no?) but she's known for her articles and books, so I'd say she was a writer and numismatist
 * Dates (such as death and birth) need to be actually cited in text.
 * books need to be cited.
 * The "Selected articles" - were selected by

Thanks v much User:Lee Vilenski - will get on it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lajmmoore (talk • contribs) 13:46, 15 August 2019 (UTC)


 * About "Selected articles": I think that "Selected publications" is a pretty standard Wikipedia section heading - it just means "a selection of their publications, with no attempt to give a full list of these", and needn't say by whom. Selected by the editors of the article as noteworthy, I guess.
 * I'd also say that when listing books it's more important to give publisher than place of publication (though fine to give both). The ISBN should also be given where there is one, and if you use the template ISBN this forms a link through which readers can verify info about the book. I don't believe they need to be cited beyond this. If I want to list a book in a "selected publications" for which I can't find an ISBN (eg too old), I'll link it to a catalogue record from Worldcat or COPAC - the latter of which has moved since last time I looked at it, and now seems to be "Library Hub" - see here for a listing of her books held in UK research libraries.
 * I'm not sure it's necessary to specify "writer" for every academic or researcher who has published books: it goes with the territory of being a research academic. Pam  D  14:30, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks very much : I've added ISBNs now (I'd copied another similar article, which did not have ISBNs)5 - I did  select some of the articles (one from each decade), because there are SO MANY. Will come back to adding the rest of her bibliography (Lajmmoore (talk) 14:41, 15 August 2019 (UTC))


 * (after e/c) And on the basis that "if it's good enough for a featured article ..." see William T. Stearn for use of "Selected publications". Also not called "writer" (was a botanist), and note linked ISBNs in book listing. (Ah, on checking, they've used the cite book template, another way. Perhaps that was what was meant above by "books need to be cited"? I interpreted it as "books need to be given references to show they exist".) Found Stearn by rummaging around at Featured articles for someone contemporary who'd have written books as publication of their research. If I can't find chapter and verse in WP:MOS for a question I often try to find a relevant Featured Article to use as a model or example. Pam  D  14:48, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * On the subject of style, titles of long works such as books should be italicized, and short ones such as articles should be enclosed in double (not single) quotation marks. Nick Number (talk) 16:05, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

I've created redirect from Elizabeth Jane Elphinstone Pirie and Liz Pirie, and added her to the surname page at Pirie. Pam D  16:17, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Sandra Appiah
Would it be worth taking Articles for deletion/Sandra Appiah to deletion review? It looks like it was closed as "delete" with one !vote in favor of deletion and two !votes against. Counting the nomination, that's a pretty even split in opinion; I'd usually expect a "relist to build consensus" in that kind of situation. Nor did it look like the sources were evaluated properly, with Le Figaro being called unreliable and interviews being deemed to count for nothing (which is, at least, debatable). XOR&#39;easter (talk) 18:10, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I think if i had noticed it, i would've voted to keep it. Looks like a decent article. The Forbes' 30 under 30, i thought, was a big honor. Fred (talk) 18:39, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I have no opinion yet on the merits of the article itself, but that's irrelevant for DRV (where the argument should be about the quality of the close, not the notability of the subject). I think there's a strong case to be made at DRV for reopening the discussion. So I would encourage you to do that. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:20, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * OK, done. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 20:08, 13 August 2019 (UTC)


 * FYI this AFD was by the same extremely new user we were discussing above under Rebecca Adamson. --Krelnik (talk) 00:06, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * But I don't think they are focussing on women: they seem to be taking a vast number of biogs, both m and f, to AfD, and !voting "delete" on many others. On a mission to reduce what they see as corporate spam! Pam  D  05:59, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

It might be worth pointing out that Forbes puts out 1470, x of y lists every year, so it is not a particularly good indication of notability.  scope_creep Talk  00:29, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Indian Women in Science Edit-a-thon at JNCASR, Bangalore
On 31 August 2019, Indian Women in Science Edit-a-thon has been planned to be conducted at JNCASR, Bangalore. This is the fourth iteration where a group of like-minded people will be joining their hands to develop the women related articles on English Wikipedia. In this event, participants will be encouraged to create articles on Indian Women in Science while also introducing the new participants to Wikipedia. For more information, please visit - Indian Women in Science Edit-a-thon/2019

I request Bangalore-based community members to be part of the offline event and others can are welcome to participate online.--Ananth subray (talk) 07:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

South-American first lawyers
I have added a list generated from List of first women lawyers and judges in South America to WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Law. It's not been cleaned for blue-links yet. Hope it's helpful. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 13:15, 16 August 2019 (UTC).

FP report again
Well, we're up to two WiR featured picture candidates: Pauline Adams is passing, and I just nominated Louisa May Alcott, a nomination I'm quite pleased with, as it's been a long time coming. The rest of the FPCs are non-human animals, plants, and fungi plus, a car, and the one theatre illustration I did at the moment, so women are pretty prominent. Fun fact: As Louisa May Alcott was an American Civil War nurse, I also get WP:MILHIST credit for her. Also, I'm putting her in for Massachusetts in my "Faces of Progess" project. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 05:06, 14 August 2019 (UTC) Three: I finally redid the Woman Suffrage Procession image I did back in 2013. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.9% of all FPs 05:06, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

All are currently passing. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.9% of all FPs 20:42, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Invitation to participate
G'day everyone, over at WikiProject Military history we are running another backlog drive, and would like to invite members of WikiProject Women in Red to participate. The drive is being run next month, via WikiProject Military history/September 2019 Backlog Banzai. You would be very welcome! Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:16, 17 August 2019 (UTC) for the Milhist coordinators.
 * Thanks, . Good to see you have included WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Military and WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Military at the top of your list of requested articles.--Ipigott (talk) 09:26, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Sikhanyiso Dlamini
I was poking around the Eswatini page in preparation for August's proposed country lists, and found a couple images of her I think have a good chance. But I'm having some trouble judging between them, so what does everyone think of these?

Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 02:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * They're both lovely photos (I have a niece in eSwatini right now, so this caught my eye). I would choose option 1 mainly for the eye contact. Penny Richards (talk) 05:31, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I particularly like the first one too for the same reason Penny gave. -Yupik (talk) 13:08, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Right! I've nominated it. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 14:17, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Interesting to know that the second image is even being considered. I would have argued it was not very appropriate [as the main article image] for Wikipedia. HandsomeBoy (talk) 20:30, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh, grow up. Breasts exist, and this is a celebration of chastity, so it's clear they're not considered sexual. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 01:51, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi. Thanks for your comment, but it seemed a bit unfriendly. What do you think? Sincerely, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 05:28, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorrym just.. y'know. If we can't handle non-sexualised breasts from a culture that doesn't have the same taboos about them, we're kind of being super prudish. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 15:09, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

For the record, I agree with you on principle. We're going to have to recognize that there are cultures different from ours, and they'll often have a different concept of what parts of the body are sexual and what aren't.

Unfortunately, showing breasts on the main page has the rather depressing liability of causing a lot of unnecessary Controversy(tm) among those who are super prudish. It could distract from discussions surrounding the quality of the image. Glad we were mostly able to avoid that here, though. I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding to your message (talk to me) (My edits) @  14:05, 29 July 2019 (UTC)


 * The first one seems to be more appropriate as the main picture for a biography, since it's closer and with direct eye contact. About breasts, we shouldn't really care, : Wikipedia is a project meant to be universal, not for and by a particular culture. So the ours you mention is not relevant, and not really clear who includes that ours. --MarioGom (talk) 00:41, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * , no. We have to care about potentially provoking a derailing conversation that distracts from the mission of Wikipedia. It's an unfortunate reality we have to live with.
 * To clarify, the "our" I'm talking about is the English-speaking world that the English Wikipedia is read by. I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding to your message (talk to me) (My edits) @  04:36, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * To clarify, the "our" I'm talking about is the English-speaking world that the English Wikipedia is read by. I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding to your message (talk to me) (My edits) @  04:36, 17 August 2019 (UTC)


 * As a reader and editor of enwiki who was not born or ever lived in the English-speaking world, I guess I disagree ;-) Wikipedia editions are per-language, not per-region. --MarioGom (talk) 13:21, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * , you'd have to acknowledge that there's a systemic bias towards English-speaking regions that can't entirely be rectified, though. I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding to your message (talk to me) (My edits) @  19:06, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

New list: Communists
I created a Listeria list of communist women. Criteria for inclusion is political party membership and they are sectioned by country. It is currently under WikiProject Socialism but I'm happy to move it to WiR, I'm not sure which section it belongs to though. Any feedback or help is welcome: WikiProject Socialism/Redlinks/Communist women. Thank you! --MarioGom (talk) 14:11, 17 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Spasiba, comrade. We've taken that list into collective ownership diff --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:49, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Ah, a list of red women in red! XOR&#39;easter (talk) 14:53, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure about this. Next? A list for - women? Fill in the blanks for any other group of women. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 18:35, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Why not? I thought the point of the redlink lists was identifying notable women across different areas of interest: occupation (from orientalists to TED speakers), countries, ethnicity and religion, education institutions or even related to the cannabis industry. Notable members of political parties by ideology is a useful criterion for some editors. That is not so surprising given the amount of existing politics WikiProjects. --MarioGom (talk) 22:46, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Convicts, Lunatcs, and Women!
As File:Convicts Lunatics and Women! Have No Vote for Parliament, ca. 1907-1918.jpg does have some ableist issues, but because I do believe in "warts and all" history, I'd appreciate any assistance making sure this image - now up at FPC - is properly contextualised. If it passes, I'd like to prep it to go ASAP. POTD is always way behind where it should be, so we can probably just slip 'er in. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.9% of all FPs 07:10, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

State decorations
What do you think about adding per-country redlink lists for women who received state decorations (e.g. state orders, courage medals)? Here is an example for Yugoslavia: WikiProject Women in Red/Awards/Yugoslavia. --MarioGom (talk) 10:43, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I think this could be very useful. Especially for a lot of the high-level Soviet awards - Hero of Socialist Labor, for instance, that sort of thing. I know there are a lot of people falling through the cracks in those lists. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:13, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Whatever, as long as we don't use the non-word "condecoration." Wikipedia has enough jargon as it is. Sincerely, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 18:32, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Oops. That was a bad translation. Fixed. --MarioGom (talk) 22:26, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The Yugoslav partisans could be useful in connection with our September focus on military history. Perhaps,, it would also be useful to have a Wikidata redlist based on Yugoslavia?--Ipigott (talk) 08:05, 19 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Created the State decorations (WD) section with Albania, France, Soviet Union and Yugoslavia. Accuracy and completeness varies greatly between countries. Also the quality of data differs a lot. For example, in the case of Albania, the awards property in Wikidata was not set for anyone, so added female recipients of the highest rank decoration. On the other hand, the list of Soviet Union is in the thousands, so I limited it to articles present in at least 3 languages initially. Queries still need some refinement too: the way properties are currently filled in for awards for each country are quite different, I didn't come up (yet) with a query that generalizes well over different countries, so they have some ad hoc tuning at the moment. --MarioGom (talk) 11:06, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Idea for September: Women in World War II
Hey people! On 1 September 1939, World War II started with the invasion of Poland by nazi-Germany. This year, this will be 80 years ago. Whilst almost soldiers were men, there are numerous important female figures during the war, including politicians, resistance fighters, etc. As such, I propose dedicating an event in September to Women in World War II. --MrClog (talk) 23:16, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Hm, interesting idea, but my feeling is that eighty years is not a very good hook for an anniversary series. Why not a hundred years? Besides the obvious ratification of the women's suffrage amendment to the U.S. Constitution, we have the rebuilding of Europe and much of Africa and Oceania in 1919 after the end of WWI. So far as October 1919 goes, we have Oct 19, the first US Distinguished Service Medal awarded to a living female recipient, Anna Howard Shaw. How about a series of article about women who have won medals of one sort of another? BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 04:59, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Whether or not we develop this as an anniversary, it seems to be an interesting idea for special focus. Maybe it should be expanded to cover "Nazi victims of World War II" from throughout continental Europe. I keep coming across Jewish women and other disfavoured ethnic figures who had achieved considerable notability until the Nazis either murdered them or prevented any further advancement. I suppose we should start by compiling a crowd-sourced list. We have already had Women of War and Peace this year but that was mainly devoted to the peace movement. I see it has been tentatively scheduled for September in the ideas page. Maybe we should wait until October or November and see how our redlist(s) develop in the meantime. In addition to the meticulously maintained Nazi records, there are a number of specialized lexicons and directories which are devoted to these people. We need to include these in our redlists, especially those which can be freely accessed. With your knowledge of Dutch and German, MrClog, you should be able to help us along. may also be able to help. Perhaps  could also help by providing a Wikidata redlist based on "resistance fighter" (Q1397808).--Ipigott (talk) 10:23, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , I would love to help creating a red link list, but this won't be for the coming 2.5 weeks because I'm on holiday then. Could you post a little update at the Ideas page? --MrClog (talk) 12:24, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Resistance fighters --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:53, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much. Looks really useful.--Ipigott (talk) 15:13, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Another thought, perhaps: what about women who have been named Righteous Among the Nations? There's a database at Yad Vashem which can be sorted by gender: http://db.yadvashem.org/righteous/search.html?language=en. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:04, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * There is also a significant amount of missing articles for Soviet women who participated in the Eastern Front: Galina Nikolayeva, Zoya Vasilkova, Tamara Lisitsian, Olha Avilova, Ninel Kuznetsova, Elvira Eisenschneider, Klavdiya Nechayeva, Meri Avidzba, Kłara Sołonienko, Mariam Basina... Full list on Wikidata. --MarioGom (talk) 14:02, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Yugoslav Partisans: Kata Dumbović, Anđa Ranković, Judita Alargić, Nada Matić (partisan) (Wikidata query). Are other users interested in the topic? --MarioGom (talk) 09:27, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm working on a list of women who participated in World War II, as regular military personnel, partisans, etc. Any feedback is appreciated: User:MarioGom/sandbox/Women in World War II. --MarioGom (talk) 16:31, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Zodwa Nyoni
Hi Again, I've got a draft for playwright Zodwa Nyoni Draft:Zodwa_Nyoni and wondered if anyone was free to provide some suggestions for improvement? Thanks for help/advice (Lajmmoore (talk) 13:59, 16 August 2019 (UTC))
 * I, for one, will look at it. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 17:29, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * You need more information about her life and particularly how she was brought to England by her parents. Is she back in Africa now? Don't be afraid to write too much; it can always be cut back. I've edited directly on your draft, so I might suggest you take it back to a sandbox and work on it some more. She looks like a good subject for Wikipedia. Best of luck. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 17:45, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I would suggest separating the Works section into two sections: Works, and, Awards and honors. The works can be described in more detail - from a general overview to specific content. The awards can be listed and cited individually. Netherzone (talk) 03:06, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Article needed
Renée Habib (1924-2009) was the worlds first purely paediatric renal pathologist.  scope_creep Talk  20:41, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
 * There are some decent sources:
 * And quite a few others that mention her as notable pioneer in the field. --MarioGom (talk) 21:57, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
 * And quite a few others that mention her as notable pioneer in the field. --MarioGom (talk) 21:57, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
 * And quite a few others that mention her as notable pioneer in the field. --MarioGom (talk) 21:57, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
 * And quite a few others that mention her as notable pioneer in the field. --MarioGom (talk) 21:57, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Illustrators book
I followed up a mention of Blanche Fisher Wright over on WP:Women, and found a book Women Illustrators of the Golden Age which might be a source for more articles. Pam D  12:38, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Nora Houston
I just added a new article for Nora Houston. She was an artist and suffragist from Richmond. I would love for someone with an art background or interest in art to expand on that part of her life in the article! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScoutHarris (talk • contribs) 21:48, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Very nice - and always nice to see a fellow Virginian 'round these parts. :-) She's been on my list for a while. I know she warrants an entry in Raleigh Lewis Wright's Artists in Virginia before 1900: an annotated checklist, of which I own a copy - I won't have time for a couple of days, but I'll dig it up and see if there's anything in there worth adding. (Incidentally, some of my own dead are buried at Shockoe Hill as well.) -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 00:44, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * , wonderful! I look forward to reading what you're able to add. Thanks so much. ScoutHarris (talk) 00:49, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Weeeeeeeeeeeell, don't get your hopes up. There isn't often very much of use in Wright. I find it a fascinating resource largely because it shows just how few artists of any stature Virginia has produced, alas. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 00:57, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * , haha well if people are at least thinking about her when they weren't before, then I've done some good work. ScoutHarris (talk) 00:59, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I feel like you've done more for her legacy than Mr. Wright ever did, though. :-) -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 01:00, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

- Mediocre scan, but it's a good start. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.9% of all FPs 13:09, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Britannica biographies we still don't have
I have compiled a list of Encyclopedia Britannica woman biographies we still don't have.

These women are the cream of the crop of notable ladies in red: a rich and full biographical entry is dedicated to each of them in the most prestigious English-language encyclopedia – but not Wikipedia.

This list is a combination of Listeria and lots of manual work (you can see the raw list ). I have removed entries that only have a Britannica "directory page" ("redirects" in Wikipedia speak). I've also removed 23 entries that only have Britannica Book of the Year entries (see that list ). The remaining 34 names in the list below should be made a priority to this WikiProject.

So WiR, do you think we can catch up with Britannica?

Cheers – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 11:21, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Yipee! LOADS of Americans. One sort of diversity goes up, another goes down. Johnbod (talk) 12:49, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Any reason why the Britannica Book of the Year ones aren't as important as the other ones? --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:13, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * They're short, not part of the regular encyclopedia, and are about topics that were perhaps important only for a given year. Basically, they are obituaries in this case. Britannica also does not update them and keeps them "for historical reference only." There are probably notables in that list as well, so feel free to turn them blue! – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 13:06, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay. There are a few that look interesting there. Also, two of the blue links above are actually redirects. Virginia Kirkus and Merrill Ashley. If someone wants to take Ashley, I'll do Kirkus. Makes me wonder if there are other blue links that are redirects. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 03:15, 5 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much,, for putting this useful list together. I see several of the names have already turned blue. I was in fact pleasantly surprised to see that only 34 of Britannica's biographies of women are without a Wikipedia equivalent. I've looked at several of the articles and agree that most of those who are still missing deserve to be included. As they are nearly all about Americans, I'll leave them to those of you who deal mostly with English-speaking women.--Ipigott (talk) 10:23, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
 * You could take the french journalist Sylvie Kauffmann if you want ;) I'm thinking about doing the South African politician, Japanese supreme court justice and/or the german-american ladies first to diversify my article creations :) . --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:09, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I was planning on working on Hisako Takahashi in the next few days, so if you've already started on her article please let me know so we don't duplicate each other's work! Mcampany (talk) 20:12, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I was more leaning towards Thenjiwe Mtintso. You can have Hisako Takahashi if you want :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:17, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks! Mcampany (talk) 20:32, 31 July 2019 (UTC)


 * This is wonderful, thanks! Excited to work on Eagle Woman. Much appreciated.  originalmess  how u doin that busta rhyme? 23:05, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Is it possible to add this list to our redlists so it's not lost in the archives? Thanks! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:44, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
 * do you know where these lists fit in the red link index? – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:27, 22 August 2019 (UTC)


 * I think it should be added to this section: WikiProject Women in Red/Redlist index. If possible, could you make it so that only the redlinks remain after each update (currently, the bluelinks remain on the list)? Thanks. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:56, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * It arrived. WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by dictionary/Encyclopædia Britannica Online --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:04, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Yup, 's list is automatic. But it will contain the "directory pages" (Britannica "redirects"). – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:01, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Tuija I. Pulkkinen
I have started working on a page for Tuija I. Pulkkinen. She is a space physics professor. NAS member - so not controversial. She has some wiki data -but no page. Klarson GPS (talk) 22:52, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Originally posted on Project page: Announcements, with query: Is this an ok place to put this kind of information? Not really sure of all the protocols for the group. Moved to Talk page by RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:55, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Eulabelle Moore
I'm trying to create an article for the African American Broadway actress Eulabelle Moore (1903-1964). She also had a role in the film The Horror of Party Beach. I found plenty of reception that can be used in the article by searching newspapers.com and Google which is great, but I'm having trouble finding anything about her personal life. I do know from a Google Books search that a 1960 Playbill has a biography by reading the only snippet available - "Eulabelle Moore was born in Texas and educated at Hamline University and the ..." SL93 (talk) 02:15, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Who's Who in Hollywood has something. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 03:47, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

New Yorker interview with Amy Wax
Hi all. I'm not sure where to bring this up, but since I've been active at WIR, I thought I'd bring it here. The wikipedia article on General knowledge is mentioned in a New Yorker interview with Amy Wax today. The problem is that the article on general knowledge relies heavily on the work of Richard Lynn and supports a view that is very fringe and inappropriate to be written in wikipedia's voice. I haven't been active on wikipedia recently, but I did want to give a heads up that the page has some significant problems and is being linked to from the popular media. Best, Smmurphy(Talk) 19:45, 23 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks Smmurphy. Lynn seems like a very poor source for such an article. I've dropped a note on the article talk page and on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Psychology; it would be ideal to get expert input. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:44, 23 August 2019 (UTC)


 * I also brought it to the attention of the folks at the fringe theories noticeboard. --Krelnik (talk) 22:00, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Just knowing there's a Fringe Theories noticeboard makes me appreciate Wikipedia a little more, so thank you. Penny Richards (talk) 19:43, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

French speakers welcome on Draft:Marguerite Gonnet, French resistance fighter during WWII
Hi, I'm currently working on Draft:Marguerite Gonnet, mother of nine and all-around badass who became leader of a resistance cell during Nazi occupation of France. Lots of sources are in French, which I speak none of. Any help expanding this in anticipation of a move to mainspace would be great. Enwebb (talk) 18:53, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata - "Missing articles by nationality" vs. "country of citizenship"
In the WiR Redlist Index, I saw that we had 2 redlists for Finnish women: a CS list and a WD list. Although every name on the CS list has a Wikidata item, all the names don't appear on the Wikidata list. Example: Liisa Pimiä (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q11875847) (even though Liisa's Wikidata item includes "country of citizenship" = Finland). Any ideas on what the issue is? I'd really like to get rid of the CS list if/when we sort this out. Plus: is "Missing articles by nationality" a misnomer? Should it be ""Missing articles by country of citizenship"? --Rosiestep (talk) 14:35, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The SPARQL query for that list has a limit of 1,000 results. Removing the limit would yield 7,473 results. Maybe too many? We could include only those that have an article in, at least, two languages. The total would be 1,431. It would be less arbitrary than 1,000 random results. --MarioGom (talk) 16:59, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * , yes, that would be good (include only those that have an article in, at least, two languages). Then we could do away with the CS list. Thanks. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:59, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * the same limit applies to other country lists too. For Angola it is not a problem, the total list is well under 1,000. For France, the total is 26,184, with two languages it is 4,317 and with three it is 1,256. I guess we could choose minimum number of languages depending on the country (e.g. 0 for Angola, 2 for Finland, 3 for France...). What do you think? --MarioGom (talk) 18:17, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * IMHO it's always good to limit the lists to the items with at least 2 sitelinks: it gets too noisy otherwise. Nemo 19:23, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I think that depends on the list. For example, with France and its 26,184 entries the full list is just unmanageable and it makes sense to trim it. Sitelinks seems to be the most sensible criteria for trimming, since we could assume that there more sitelinks, the more notable it is. For others like Angola, using 2 minimum sitelinks would bring the list from 100 entries to just 3. A lot of the removed entries would still be perfectly notable, such as members of Angolan parliament. If we applied the limit everywhere, it would not help editors interested in improving coverage of Angolan women, and we would be reinforcing systemic bias. --MarioGom (talk) 22:05, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * For countries with a large number of items, e.g. France, I think trimming the "nationality" list by removing certain occupations might be the way to go. For example, if we removed actresses, painters, politicians, and writers from the France list, it would be smaller. By using "clickable buttons" across the top of each of these list pages (see WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Zoologists as an example), editors would have handy access to these large occupation groups for France. --Rosiestep (talk) 22:56, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * For France, that step on its own would give us 11,762 rows, or 8480 with a filter for 1 sitelink, 2,443 with 2 sitelinks. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:15, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * And vaguely supposing France to be typical, here are the counts of other occupations once we've removed the above four - https://w.wiki/7N5 --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:34, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Let's see if there are other opinions on this idea. Also, would it make sense to create additional occupation and country lists (e.g. musicians? singers?) besides actresses, painters, politicians, and writers? --Rosiestep (talk) 23:50, 22 August 2019 (UTC)


 * (arbitrary outdent) These are the counts of occupations for redlist candidates ... https://w.wiki/5ic ... we could maybe do by-country for 'no occupation' people, researchers, singers, journalists ... perhaps a group list for sportspeople, all for the purpose of deducting these from vanilla by country lists. Not sure how far down the list we go before we find each new list's contribution to the deduction becomes negligible. Plus doing tabbed user interfaces for each. Small job, then. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:12, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I think sportspeople by country of citizenship is a great idea. --Rosiestep (talk) 05:26, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
 * All of this is over my head. But, I am curious if anyone has started lists for defunct countries for September? It's just over a week away. SusunW (talk) 04:21, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata - defunct countries
I am curious if anyone has started lists for defunct countries for September? It's just over a week away. SusunW (talk) 04:21, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Any idea of which countries should be included here? Maybe it would be sufficient to cover those which have become defunct over the past 100 years -- or even just those since World War II. We also need to firm up on our meetups for September.--Ipigott (talk) 07:16, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
 * My guess is that there will be few women in older defunct countries, but my immediate thoughts were the Ottoman Empire, East Germany, Rhodesia, Wallachia, Moldavia, Gran Colombia, The Holy Roman Empire, Yugoslavia, etc. Obviously, that is very limited and those that became defunct in the previous 100 years makes sense to broaden the scope. SusunW (talk) 14:58, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I think we should also give attention to Czechoslovakia. And how about Newfoundland which used to be a country in its own right? Ditto Hawaii?--Ipigott (talk) 13:52, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I tried to create a Wikidata-based list, but I think quality of data is not enough (see results). List of former sovereign states may be more useful. Some of the countries that should probably be included: Rif Republic (1921–1926), Tanganyika (1961–1964), Sultanate of Zanzibar (1856–1964), United Arab Republic (1958–1971), South Vietnam (1955–1975), East Germany (1949–1990), Soviet Union (1922–1991), Czechoslovakia (1918–1939, 1945–1992), Yugoslavia (1918–1941, 1945–1992), Serbia and Montenegro (1992–2006). Should we set the criteria to sovereign states that ceased to exist within the last 100 years then? --MarioGom (talk) 08:56, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * That sounds like a good plan to me. I think if we make it too narrow, we will not find many results for women. SusunW (talk) 14:13, 26 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Redlists for Soviet Union and Yugoslavia state decorations may be of interest for this meetup. --MarioGom (talk) 20:11, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata redlist for Writers
Trying to prepare for the Writers editathon we're doing in September, I thought about this... The query for redlist for writers contains many "do not include" occupations, e.g.:  Should it also contain "do not include" countries which have a standalone Writer redlist, e.g. Argentina (wdt:P27 wd:Q414)? --Rosiestep (talk) 15:53, 24 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Yes & no. iirc a majority of writers are listed in one or other of the by-country writer lists, since they include "rest of world" and "no country" lists. (No country is capped at 5000, so there will be some, perhaps many, no country authors missing from the by country lists). My !vote continues to be that lists of 5000 should be removed; for me, Writers is no exception. So far as the editathon is concerned, perhaps use the by country lists instead of the single list? --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:00, 24 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Here's a new list fwiw - WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Writers having awards --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:15, 24 August 2019 (UTC)


 * That's a good list to have although many of the awards are not "notable" enough to justify articles. (At some point, it might be useful to draw up a list of literary awards by country which are considered sufficient to justify notability.) As for the general list on writers - which I know you don't like - would it be possible to include sitelinks and perhaps exclude names without any sitelinks? One of the advantages of a general list, is that you can easily search for specific criteria, e.g. children's writers by country with image. I find this useful as it provides a useful overview before looking at the country-based lists (for those countries which have them).--Ipigott (talk) 13:36, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

request for guidance/help/advice
Yesterday I was editing the article on Minerva Kline Brooks as part of WiRs focus on suffrage. I added an infobox and started adding inline references when I realized that major portion of the article had been copy and pasted from The Encyclopedia of Cleveland History. I worked on rewording the facts so that they were no longer copyrights violations. I then realized that the article really depended on one source, again the Encyclopedia of Cleveland History. This morning it occurred to me that perhaps Minerva Kline Brooks should have been flagged AfD rather than me spending time trying to raise it to WiR standards. The original poster notes that they "Added family background known to me personally through oral history", which is yet another red flag. Please look at version https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Minerva_Kline_Brooks&oldid=884999713 to see the article as I first saw it. Here's the article from the Encyclopedia of Cleveland History

I ask interested editors to take a look and perhaps tag this as AfD and also, if it should be kept, make sure I have changed the wording enough to avoid a copyright violation.

Thanks! WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 18:16, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Given the fact that the copyvio was introduced right at the start of the article's life, I think it would be best to nuke it and start again. I'm not even sure an AFD is necessary here, honestly. I have some chores to attend to for much of the afternoon, but I can delete it and prepare the way for a new article if you think that's the way to go. I'd be interested in output from others on the subject as well. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 18:50, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Also: looping in, because she has far more experience in dealing with copyvio than I do, and would better know the way to proceed. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 18:53, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Also: is she notable? My inclination is to delete her entirely (if other agree).WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 20:27, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * My own feeling: she's in a couple of biographical dictionaries/directories involving a major city, so she passes the notability threshold. Don't forget, though, that I'm an inclusionist of the first rank; others' mileage may vary. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 00:13, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I've done some more copyright cleanup and I think it's okay now from a copyright point of view. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 02:05, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Awesome - thanks for taking a look. I think that, given the work, it's good to go; I wouldn't delete it on grounds of notability, though again others' mileage may vary. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 02:21, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree that it now should be kept. Thanks and  for cleaning up the article. It is very nice to post a query to this page and get the needed feedback from the experts! Best, WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 18:35, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * While looking at the references for Minerva Kline Brooks, I got sidetracked into writing a new article about her stepmother, Effie Hinckley Ober Kline (1843-1927), who founded the Boston Ideal Opera Company. So that's another incoming and outgoing link for Minerva's bio. Penny Richards (talk) 21:49, 26 August 2019 (UTC)