Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red

Woman of the day: a new one each day from our women's biographies

Noblewoman

The Noblewoman article is in very poor condition and really needs expanded. It shouldn't be too difficult to do it, what with other wikipedias work available. Its a particular aspect of a segment of civil society that doesn't get much of a look in, yet is a comparatively large and important part of that society, both in the present and from a historical perspective. I would do it myself but have other fish to fry and have so many other articles of my todo list, that I've stopped adding to it at the moment. It really needs a proper with lots of excellent images that would suit it. scope_creep^Talk 09:12, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this up, scope creep, but it seems to me we need to delve into histories covering elite and noble women in Europe and Asia. The current article is based on the French version. There also seems to be extensive coverage of noble women in Spain. Perhaps those documenting nobility in Russia. the Middle East and China could also contribute. I'm not too sure it "shouldn't be too difficult" as a meaningful world history seems to be sadly lacking. Any concrete suggestions?--Ipigott (talk) 17:16, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Ipigott: How goes it? Unfortunately no. It does have a quite a large scope certainly, but the reason I said it should too difficult is because there is a mountain of sources on it. The good thing about the aristocracy as a group is that they tended to document their own existance quite well, at every level of their society in every country they existed in. Before World War I, they were dominant as a group in Europe. I reckon there is a probably six months to years work in it, easily but the sources are readily available. It just needs somebody that is capable of writing large complex articles that can take it GA/FA and get it done. Theyre is several article that can be spun out of it, e.g. how fashion changed, social mores. Loads probably. scope_creep^Talk 18:38, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your response, scope creep- I think that rather than basing development on the aristocracy's own records, what we need are links to neutral contributions by historians or researchers. If you don't have time to work on the article yourself, I suggest you list some of your reliable sources on the article's talk page. That may encourage future work. In any case, I hope that in due course you will find time to work on the article yourself.--Ipigott (talk) 11:37, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

The tendency among recent historians, especially when talking about women, has been very much to use "the aristocracy's own records", in the form of letters and diaries. A global article could be taking on too much - as the mess at gentry shows. Johnbod (talk) 13:30, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Yea, I suspected that. I suspect there will be a lot of that. I've not done any work on it at all. You would use academic sources if you could, if they are available. Unless somebody else knows better, there must historians of that group surely, who will probably be part of the group right enough, since they are quite secretive and closed to preserve their own power, money and prestige. The group that nobleman and noblewomen belong to are known as society, which is the most power group on earth, certainly in the west. Its called other things in other places, but certainly society in the uk. They are the moneyed elite. To get an idea of how they work, which I only found recently, take a look at Napoleon. He is attacking Russia. He is part of society. While he is attacking Russia, he decides to visit the czar who welcomes him, who are all part of society. All equals. So it shows the society transends normal normal civilisation, existance. That elite group don't act for man in the street. It may be difficult to write it but needs to be done. scope_creep^Talk 16:32, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Frankly, that's a strange way to look at the peace negotiations leading to the Treaties of Tilsit in 1807. Johnbod (talk) 06:50, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Pictures on editathon page

Traditionally there was a picture of a woman in the infobox of the event page, from within the topic of the event. I've noticed that these have been missing in recent months. Please can someone review my additions to 321, 322 and 323 for next month? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:56, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks MSGJ, They look good! Because the template generates a page with a WiR logo as a place holder, the photos sometimes get away from us. Please feel free to nudge or add. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 23:09, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

I couldn't work out how to change the image - is there an explainer somewhere? Lajmmoore (talk) 22:34, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@Lajmmoore: the event page template is {{WIR meetup header}} and the template documentation at the bottom of the page explains how to add an image and a caption, but perhaps it should be explained somewhere else as well. TSventon (talk) 12:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Affiliation Committee

Hello folks, I've put myself forward for the Affiliation Committee (!) - supporting new affiliate organisations. If you think I would make useful contributions there, please add a note on the meta talk page. Nominations are open for a few more days, it's a really interesting and strong field of candidates and there might be others you'd want to support too Lajmmoore (talk) 22:33, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Ecofeminism/gender studies - Draft:Mary Mellor

Hello folks, I've been pluggin away at an article for Draft:Mary Mellor for a while, and I wondered if anyone more familia than me with ecofeminism might be able to help out. Her books are widely reviewed and she was a professor with a named chair, so meets notability, but much more is written about her books than her. I've been finding and using reviews of her books to expand the draft, but because I am really unfamiliar with ecofeminism it's taking me ages. If anyone else has more context than me I'd be so appreciative of some help (cross-posted at WP:Climate change) Lajmmoore (talk) 12:48, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

You're right that there isn't very much out there that's not book review related. Here's what I could pull up.

• Sex discrimination fight: Boffins in test case
• Female revolution is hard to swallow
• Author is off to Japan

I hope that gives at least a few things to add to the article, Lajmmoore. Silverseren^C 16:54, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

• Although it is not recent and is in connection with one of her publications, there seems to be quite a lot about her here. Hope this helps.--Ipigott (talk) 17:14, 9 November 2024 (UTC) This interview might provide a few clues.--Ipigott (talk) 18:37, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
• There is an "about the author" in German for Argument-Sonderbände - Volume 216 1994 on Google Books snippet view, beginning Mary Mellor wurde 1946 in Cornwall geboren and ending Mary Mellor lebt mit ihrem Partner und zwei Kindern in Newcastle [Google translation: Mary Mellor was born in Cornwall in 1946 ... Mary Mellor lives with her partner and two children in Newcastle]. TSventon (talk) 17:59, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
• North East History cites her 1980 Newcastle University PhD thesis (cited elsewhere with variants of the full title so search for "Motivation, recruitment and ideology"). TSventon (talk) 03:36, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
• I have also found a 2003 archive of her staff page at Northumbria. TSventon (talk) 19:56, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

• According to this she was a councillor for Tyne and Wear Metropolitan Council, so she is probably the M. Mellor elected in the 1973 Tyne and Wear County Council election (better sources needed). TSventon (talk) 20:19, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

  Thanks so much @Ipigott, @Silver seren and @TSventon I really appreciate all the digging! Lajmmoore (talk) 17:56, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

• Looks to me as if it could safely be moved to mainspace.--Ipigott (talk) 11:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

2025 "priority" initiative

We Can Edit

Shifting this topic out of archive and back here for further discussion.

I'm already looking forward to planning for WiR's 2025 Year-Long Priority Initiative. Here's historical data regarding previous/present Year-Long Initiatives for consideration:

• Jan-Dec 2024 / Education: 883 articles (through Oct 17)
• Jan-Dec 2023 / Peace & diplomacy: 211
• Jan-Dec 2022 / Climate: 131
• Jan-Dec 2021 / Women's rights: 461
• Jan-Aug 2020 / Sports: 386
• Jan-Dec 2019 / Suffrage: 572
• 2018: none
• 2017: none
• Feb-Dec 2016 / Science: 462

I'll also make a suggestion for 2025 to get the ball rolling: Music. (Reasoning: It's super broad. We already have a lot of redlists. Hoping this attracts new editors, if not forever, at least for the 12 months we'd be doing this event.) --Rosiestep (talk) 16:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Music is a great idea! Some other broad topics for future consideration: Business, Politics, Visual arts. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:26, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Rosiestep: Your choice of Education for this year has proved to be a great success. My only concern with Music is that with or without a WiR focus, we'll continue to see the topic as one of the major attractions for articles about women. I must say I like the suggestion of Business. We seem to be reaching a point where women are proving to be increasingly prominent in the business environment around the world, both in acquiring key positions in existing companies and organizations and in individual entrepreneurship. If we choose the topic, we could also encourage more attention to be given to the history of women's business achievements. We should in any case also try to reactivate interest in Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Business in which Another Believer has been so active.--Ipigott (talk) 08:30, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Business is indeed a broad topic and the topic might certainly attract new participants beyond our current editors. As we're 51 days from January 1st, we should probably make a decision soon. Thoughts? --Rosiestep (talk) 20:13, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I would therefore like to suggest that participants should express their preference for "Music" or "Business", or suggest another topic for consideration. I agree with Rosie that we should make a decision fairly soon. But we need to establish a much wider consensus.--Ipigott (talk) 13:02, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

I'd prefer Music. For those interested in the ongoing planning of Women in Red events, please join the conversation over at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Ideas. As well as suggestions for topics, we need editors to participate in creating meet-up pages and proof-reading. The same group handles these mundane tasks every month and if you enjoy participating, please consider contributing. We have had an editor TheResilientEngineer BOLDLY step up to the plate, suggesting a topic, create redlists and then creating the meet-up page. Brava! We need a few more please. As you can see, topics are being scheduled for each month of 2025. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:13, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Happy to help @WomenArtistUpdates! I think people have enjoyed doing engineering this month so that's great news! I've also learnt a lot about how wiki works by getting involved in setting up an event. Thanks all for the support too!

ON 2025 topics I understand why people would like to do music. However, through my recent STEM/Eng endeavours I've found a lot of women that fit more into the business sphere. This is an area where I expect (like engineering) it would be highly beneficial to get greater representation of business leaders and entrepreneurs and it's sufficiently broad that there will be overlap with monthly initiatives. TheResilientEngineer (talk) 11:52, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

I also prefer music, for a variety of reasons, mostly selfish (I enjoy music and learning about musicians, and they tend to have more interesting photos to use, being two of them). Penny Richards (talk) 17:21, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

While I fully agree that our Ideas page is where we should discuss future developments, I think the preferred topic for 2025 merits discussion here. We can later reflect on how to integrate this discussion on the Ideas page.--Ipigott (talk) 17:29, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

There was an alternative proposal somewhere, that the year-long focus would be on getting suitable draft articles published — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:32, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

• Hi MSGJ, Yes you are correct that there was some discussion about getting draft articles into main space. That conversation is at https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Ideas##PendingDrafts That links back to https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Women_in_Red#Women-related_articles_at_AfC which is now dead. I cannot find a discussion labeled "Women-related articles at AfC" in the these archives. Proposed by Rosiestep, suggested as a year-long by Lajmmoore. Best, --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:47, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
• The discussion was archived at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red/Archive 145#Women-related articles at AfC. TSventon (talk) 18:29, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

I think we should continue our traditional approach, focusing on women from a particular sphere of activity. As far as I can see, the topics suggested until now are: music, business, politics and visual arts. Unless there are other suggestions, we need to establish which of these appears most appropriate. Perhaps SusunW, Espresso Addict, Adam Cuerden, Lajmmoore, Horse Eye's Back and Alanna the Brave who have previously commented on our year-long focus would like to comment. All other contributors are of course welcome to comment too.--Ipigott (talk) 16:29, 12 November 2024 (UTC) Also Megalibrarygirl.--Ipigott (talk) 16:41, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

My vote goes with music or visual arts; the guidelines for inclusion of businesspeople are a bit complex to explain and such articles are very prone to a swift G11 deletion, sometimes followed up by a block; not opposed to politics, but I personally find such bios a bit dull. Espresso Addict (talk) 16:37, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Any of these topics would be interesting, but I like music for next year's theme -- I feel like it may be easier to find missing music-related biographies across a broader swathe of history (and more widely geographically, too). Alanna the Brave (talk) 18:57, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

My vote is for music. Oronsay (talk) 19:09, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the ping, I think that music would be an excellent topic for the coming year. If I were adding something to the list it would be Food and Beverage (with a dual focus on both notable women and notable women owned businesses), but that can easily wait a few years. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 19:47, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

• On this basis, it looks as if Rosiestep has once again hit the nail on the head. Unless there are any strong objections, I think we should go for Music. --Ipigott (talk) 20:18, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

  Music sounds good to me! Lajmmoore (talk) 21:56, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

  Just want to note I missed these later comments before I wrote my message above. Obviously I'm happy to go with the majority/flow :) TheResilientEngineer (talk) 11:54, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

  I will also get to work starting a "sound engineer (WD) redlist"! I'm partly joking, but I will do what I can to find those areas of cross-over between engineering and music. TheResilientEngineer (talk) 17:33, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Our open letter to the Wikimedia Foundation

Faced with the possibility that the identities of certain contributors to the article Asian News International (ANI) could be revealed to the Delhi High Court in connection with a case under which ANI is suing WMF, we have launched an open letter to WMF and called for signatures. I am pleased to see that many WiR members have already signed but I wonder whether those who have recently joined from India have had a chance to participate. Whether the threatened contributors to the ANI article are men or women, it seems to me vital for us to ensure that they are not treated as criminals and that their personal identities remain fully protected. I therefore invite you all to look into this matter and add your signature if you agree with the petition.--Ipigott (talk) 12:45, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

See here for recent developments.--Ipigott (talk) 13:27, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Despite some misunderstandings, writing on Wikipedia talk:2024 open letter to the Wikimedia Foundation, Jimbo Wales makes it clear that no user information has been disclosed.--Ipigott (talk) 09:11, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your organizing on this topic @Ipigott. I was happy for the chance to express my support. Innisfree987 (talk) 09:15, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

For those interested, the next hearing seems to have been scheduled for 18 December. There's some interesting background here.--Ipigott (talk) 17:33, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Adele Willie

I have started Draft:Adele Willie, adapted from Simple English Wikipedia's article on her for Geofocus: Islands Q–Z. The article may technically be in a state where it can live in the mainspace, I believe that there are issues which should be cleared up first. I've not gone through all the sources in detail, but I did catch at one discrepancy between the text and it's source (which i have removed in both versions). If someone could go over the sources, make sure everything in the article is backed up in them, and clean up the prose to be more in line with English Wikipedia's standards I would really appreciate it. MRN2electricboogaloo (talk) 00:20, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Sarah Cunningham (painter)

Hello again -- Can anyone help out with this one? 31-year-old British artist recently found dead as her career was beginning to take off. Created by Thriley; I've expanded it a little, and added a few sources, but notability has been challenged. Anyone who can read German would be particularly welcome to check the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung source (available in Proquest); my German is very rusty! Thanks in advance, got to go offline shortly. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:51, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Despite the obits, I'm not at all sure that she would have been considered notable as a painter if she had not been a suicide case. I see the notability notice has been removed but I still think we need to see firm recommendations of her work.--Ipigott (talk) 16:32, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

I was the one to remove the notability tag, largely after finding the (brief) FAZ coverage; international coverage of deaths of nonnotable people is imo rare. There's two sources in the article that pre-date her death; one is very short, the other (the website Cultured) I can't comment on the reliability. I couldn't find a lot more on Ebsco/PQ top level searches but haven't tried searching specific publishers/newspapers, which I find usually gives better results. Espresso Addict (talk) 16:43, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, the FAZ article was certainly worth including as a source. It is actually based on this Lisson Gallery article which also mentions two awards. Strange to say, while the Lisson article would probably be considered a primary source, when it is quoted in a German newspaper, the details it reveals become acceptable. I've found quite a few recent articles in the foreign press about her but they simply report her disappearance and death, e.g. this one in Danish.--Ipigott (talk) 11:31, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Indeed, I don't know what we can make of the Lisson Gallery source, as they were (and possibly still are) selling Cunningham's works. It might be worth adding reputable news sources from other countries, even if they have no further information, just to indicate that the death has hit news internationally. Does anyone know whether Cultured or Cultured Magazine ([1]) is reliable? It looks ok but I can't find an article on it. Espresso Addict (talk) 14:54, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

There is a newish Wikipedia article, Cultured (magazine). TSventon (talk) 16:00, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Oh, thanks, TSventon -- all I was finding was a magazine on cultivating cannabis! ETA: Ah, looks to have been recreated this year after deletion in 2020: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cultured Magazine. Espresso Addict (talk) 16:31, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Copyright symbol with a line through it?

Yesterday, I started a biography on Margaret O'Connor Wilson. I found this page which has an 1880 photo of her, which I've added to the article's External Links section. The page with the 1880 photo has a section titled "Rights". The Rights section has a "C" symbol with a line through it followed by the words "IN THE UNITED STATES". Does anyone know what this means? Thanks. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:33, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Rosiestep the symbol links to a page with an explanation beginning The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States. TSventon (talk) 17:39, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, TSventon! I didn't notice that the symbol had a link! And, of course, I'm grateful that the photo is in the Public Domain. I'll upload it now. Thanks again. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:53, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Anne Leahy

If anyone can help locate sources on Leahy I would appreciate it. I found one solid book in google books which I shared at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anne Leahy but would appreciate help locating other WP:RS. Thanks.4meter4 (talk) 06:32, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, 4meter4, for drawing our attention to this. I saw the AfD had been withdrawn but thought it would be useful to add three more citations.--Ipigott (talk) 11:11, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the help gathering WP:RS. I figured there had to be more out there due to the significance of that book entry.4meter4 (talk) 15:12, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Harriette Kershaw Leiding

I would be happy to have some help with this biography of a Charleston, South Carolina author (also a photographer?). I found precious little biographical information but her works are interesting. Thanks! FloridaArmy (talk) 13:58, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Expanded somewhat, added refs, links, infobox. Turns out both her grandfathers already have Wikipedia articles, so she can have incoming links from both of their pages too. Penny Richards (talk) 15:57, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

AfD on Beverly J. Stoeltje

Hello again -- Expertise required for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beverly J. Stoeltje; folklore/anthropology academic, with interests in things as diverse as rodeo, beauty pageants, queen mothers in Ghana. Thanks, Espresso Addict (talk) 19:29, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

The AfD was withdrawn and closed, but the article is still tagged as having too many primary sources and could possibly be improved using the sources that were found within the AfD. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:27, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

I've had a little go with some of the sources I uncovered, but left the tag in place. Espresso Addict (talk) 01:36, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Lisa Sharkey

If anyone can help locate WP:RS on Sharkey I would appreciate it. I found this video on her being honored as a distinguished alumni at Washington University in St. Louis in 2024: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPOmW1p5cxg There are some notable awards listed in her wikipedia biography, but the sourcing for them is apparently not good which is why it is now at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lisa Sharkey.4meter4 (talk) 21:43, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Parker Molloy

Project members may wish to comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parker Molloy. All opinions welcome, and any assistance in locating WP:RS is appreciated.4meter4 (talk) 03:46, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Help finding photos of White House officials

There are five Chiefs of Staff to the First Lady of the United States that are missing an image. I think it is likely that public domain photos exist for at least some of them. It would be awesome if someone with more experience in this area could help find them and put in Commons!

• Joanne M. Drake (1986–1989) Nancy Reagan
• Susan Porter Rose (1989–1993) Barbara Bush
• Maggie Williams (1993–1997), Hilary Clinton
• Andrea (Andi) Ball (2001–2004), Laura Bush
• Lindsay Reynolds (2017–2020), Melania Trump

TJMSmith (talk) 17:33, 23 November 2024 (UTC)