Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2018-05-24/Blog


 * Thanks for the great initiative on the topic of creating women biographies on English Wikipedia to eradicate gender bias. Thanks @Barbara (WVS) for launching the Women in Red campaign which has actually helped to create several articles about women achievers by just not being the wives of husbands. This project has attracted several voluntary members and I especially dedicated to work for this great initiative. I am happy that I have made some women achievers to be globalised through English Wikipedia through WIR concept. Some of them including Sussanne Khan, Anoma Wijewardene, Vasantha Vaidyanathan, Doris Dana, Ameena Hussein, Satsorupavathy Nathan, Prabha Ranatunge, Yasmine Gooneratne, Jezima Ismail, Marie-Paule Miller, Natalia Deeva, Nele Alder-Baerens, etc.Abishe (talk) 22:42, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Ummm... The next blog is wrong? Eddie891 Talk Work 23:39, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks, fixed it ☆ Bri (talk) 04:44, 25 May 2018 (UTC)


 * , it is incredibly flattering to receive credit for such a successful undertaking that actually has been overseen by and hundreds of other volunteers. I've been a minor player in this effort and have only been able to create a dozen or so women's biographies myself. I will repost your comment to the Women in Red project page. Thank you for leaving your message here. Best Regards, Barbara ✐  ✉  10:13, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks, for the ping and for all you do to support Women in Red, including all those wonderful articles. Yes,, as Barbara states, Women in Red was co-founded by  and me in July 2015, at Wikimania Mexico City. But it is all about collaboration... everyone around the world working together on the project's scope: women's biographies, women's works, women's issues, broadly-construed. Hope to see you around!! :) --Rosiestep (talk) 15:36, 25 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Nice article. I certainly agree with your statement I learn as much from writing women’s biographies as I impart from telling their stories. Thanks. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:55, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for this stimulating essay. Your remark about subjects being pushed into the "great women" mold particularly helped me see useful parallels between issues I'm pretty well acquainted with in academic research, but had only vaguely felt but not really named as far as Wikipedia is concerned. As a fairly frequent participant in WiR editathons, I've often thought about the fact that as notability is currently conceptualized, we're only going to get as far with biographies as available sources will take us--and that definitely will not be to parity. I generally push that thought out of my mind, figuring I'll worry about it when I run out of sourceable but as yet-unwritten biographies--i.e. no time soon! But you make a great case for thinking about additional routes to getting at the under-described roles women have played in society, drawing on techniques of organizational history, history-from-below, and other methods. Thanks so much for the food for thought! Innisfree987 (talk) 03:26, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you all for the comments. It is encouraging to see that there are others who see the value of working on improving the coverage on women. Exactly, "as notability is currently conceptualized"; however, even adding back the families to those great men's lives will give a more accurate portrait of the influences upon them and their lives. They did not live in bubbles, though it often appears that they did. SusunW (talk) 05:57, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I couldn't agree more! Innisfree987 (talk) 06:25, 28 May 2018 (UTC)