Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Green/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

Pl. Can someone guide me how to edit in French in French Wikipedia?

[Humor]

I hope many of us might have heard about women's protests in France. For journalists and encyclopedists nothing surprising, at least every two weeks we can find a women's rights topic to take note about. Even months before French women went on ongoing protest I had complained @ WT:WIRED that the article on France only boasts ".France is one of the world leaders of gender equality.. it does not speak of the problem areas, and I suggested to audit all of Countries article pages one by one to see how much note they take about women's issues. Though as usual WT:WIRED largely ignored/ one may say played down my suggestion aka rant, IDK if French women took a clue from my rant @ WP:WiR and organized ongoing protests.( Anyways I got 'I said so' opportunity, so I have started believing in my abilities more:) ). French male Wikipedians and may be politicians too can very well take exception that it might have been Wikipedian incited protest:) so it would not be neutral to take note of Women's rights issues in France in the article France. If they find awkward to find arguments to say no then we can provide ready made ones from I was recently confronted with at one discussion page.:

It's a much large paragraph so shortened as much possible: "...Verifiability is not sufficient for inclusion. The question is what objective criterion in term of sources and beyond verifiability should we use to establish relevance. Logical relevance would be way too inclusive. One out of six women is victim of rape in the United States is certainly logically relevant to the subject of the United States and verifiable in official statistics.... The problem is that, based on logical relevance, the entire subject of rape should be covered in details in the United States article. Where do we stop, assuming that we should start at all?... It is a very simple question that we ask here. .." ( Ref not given to avoid charges of 'forum shopping' which my rants can't avoid anyways :))

Now some readers still would have legitimate doubt that clue for protests in France was taken from Wikipedia's women related projects and specially my posts then wait, it is just weeks back at this talk page itself I had requested inputs to improve the article 'Women's shelter'. Largely editors over here might have ignored it, but French women protesters have taken topic of additional budgets for Women's shelter on priority. So now I am pretty convinced, though I am being largely ignored over here at en WP talk pages, French seem to be taking clues from my suggestions here. :) So may be it's time for me to take classes in French language and join French Wikipedia. Any one there to guide me how to edit in French in French Wikipedia? pl. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bookku (talkcontribs)

Happy International Women's Day!

Happy International Women's Day! I thought today might be a good space for a WiG check in. How are things going for you in your part of the world? What have you been working on? I haven't had the capacity for a lot of editing recently (too much to do, not enough sleep), but I'm starting to think ahead for our first GA editathon event of 2023 -- the month of May might be a possibility, if that works for enough folks. Alanna the Brave (talk) 15:54, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

As I mentioned on my talk page, I've been recovering from a broken arm and surgery, which has put the brakes on everything somewhat. I don't think I've worked on an article for this project since Caroline Flack over 18 months ago. The real problem is a lack of book sources to be able to cover a subject sufficiently to GA (which is what has stopped me with Christine McVie) and a further problem from the articles I have written is making sure they're kept up to date and in reasonable shape. I am still contributing to Women in Red from time to time, and I've said before, working on these articles is something I should do rather tinkering away at London transport articles which I find easier to do. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:10, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
@Ritchie333: Sorry to hear about the broken arm! Ouch. :-( When you say the lack of book sources is an issue, do you mean overall lack of sources or lack of access to existing sources? If access is a problem, maybe one of the things WiG could work on this year is strengthening our collective resource-sharing capacity (I know we all have slightly different access to different things). Alanna the Brave (talk) 16:23, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Happy International Women's Day to you too, Alanna the Brave. Been there with the broken arm Ritchie333, wishing you a decent rehab. (Mine took about 18 months until I got full range of motion, however, I was 1) over 50 when I broke it and 2) living in a place where there was no such thing as a physical therapist.) As the Goal Tracking shows, I am finding these peace activists fascinating. Have worked my way through Austria and Italy. Not sure where I am going now, but I'm on the trail. I am also trying to review things still open from 2022, but reviewing is much harder for me than researching and writing. May or June works for me. SusunW (talk) 16:28, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
It's specifically access to the sources. In the case of Christine McVie, there are several Fleetwood Mac biographies around, but the problem is finding which ones are actually good for encyclopedic content, and which should be avoided like the plague as tabloidesque journalism. It is telling that once I've got a couple of good books on a topic, I can churn out a whole bunch of GAs using them (such as the glut of electromechanical musical instrument GAs I've written over the last few years). I'm happy to do the odd GA review; the problem is inevitably I don't know as much on the topic as the nominator does, and so it takes a while to wade through the article ensuring it's factually accurate, or at least appears to be.
Thanks for the comments about the arm, it is getting better but it's not fully healed yet. I can type with both hands at full speed now, which at least means I can crack on with things. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:36, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
You seem to be in much better state than I was Ritchie333. For weeks I couldn't pick up an empty plastic salt shaker. Went from that to incrementally filling it and finally bottles of sand. It took months of pinching clothespins to get finger flexibility back. That was when we decided we needed to move back to civilization and up to Mexico, where they have decent health services. And 100% agree, sourcing is almost always the obstacle. SusunW (talk) 18:16, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

First ladies of the United States

I've created a page at User:Thebiguglyalien/First ladies of the United States to track the progress of the U.S. first lady articles, with the goal of getting them all to good article status. I encourage anyone interested in this to look at it and see if there are any articles they'd consider improving. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:49, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Great goal! Good luck ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:08, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

WiR Talk re: Hafsat Abiola

Please see discussion on WiR Talk re: Hafsat Abiola, which may be an article that is of interest to this project as well. (Idem Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, also mentioned in same.) Thank you, Cl3phact0 (talk) 11:27, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments

Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 22:35, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Volunteers for next GA editathon (May or June)?

Hi all -- I'm putting out a quick call for volunteers to help with our next GA editathon (happening either May or June, depending when folks are free). I can set up the necessary pages and event templates, but I'm looking for (1) help with event promotion, such as mailouts and community bulletin board posts, and (2) some experienced GA reviewers to monitor our 20-Minute Assessment/Mini-review requests. Please let me know if you're interested (and whether May or June is better for you!). Alanna the Brave (talk) 14:38, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I am not technically oriented and have no idea how to do a community or mailout post. I also don't have the ability to do a short review (they take me hours and hours). But that said, I'm happy to coordinate promo with Women in Red if that helps. Let me know when and I can get it on WIR's monthly editathon invite. Either month works for me, but so that we have time to coordinate with other projects, June is probably better. SusunW (talk) 14:48, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
Thanks Susun! It's true, June would probably make for a less rushed prep time. Alanna the Brave (talk) 15:27, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
I'm happy to help out with the 20-minute reviews. Either May ot June should be fine. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 08:57, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Also happy to do minireviews - May/June are much of a muchness for me, I'll be mostly around. Mujinga (talk) 17:55, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Fabulous -- thanks Mujinga and BennyOnTheLoose! Let's say June, then. I'll be in touch with more details over the next few weeks (and if anyone else also wants to volunteer to help out, they're welcome to comment here too). Alanna the Brave (talk) 14:37, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Grace Hartigan

Hi WiG, I have spent some time trying to clean up the Grace Hartigan article. Y'all did such a wonderful job with Joan Mitchell, I thought maybe I could tempt the group to elevate another important Abstract Expressionist. Thanks to anyone who takes a look!. Best, WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 19:13, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Finding GA nominations about women

I was coming here to ask if anyone knew a way to filter GA noms to show women, but then I found that User:SDZeroBot/GAN sorting does this. I can't link directly but if you click on "Women" in the contents between "Biography" and "Media", it takes you to a nicely organised list. Mujinga (talk) 09:51, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

I love, love, love that you found that! I sooooo wish that the GA topics were better. As we've discussed, it is often difficult to place women in a single area of expertise. I mean like why do we have tons of topics dealing specifically about entertainment of various types, but I struggle to figure out where to put an activist. This year our focus is on pacifists, so what, pray tell do you do with them? We have "Military and War" (um no, just no, opposites while related are not the same), "Politics" (well, their actions were political, but no they weren't elected to office, so no), leaving the only choice "Social sciences and society". I find it quite frustrating. SusunW (talk) 14:41, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Haha! Actually that is pretty funny we have "Warfare" broken into Armies and military units / Battles, exercises, and conflicts / Military aircraft / Military decorations and memorials / Military people / Warships and naval units / Weapons, equipment, and buildings but no section on peace! Says it all really :) I do agree on the topics being suboptimal, my "Squatting in X" articles live at Social sciences and society > Culture, sociology, and psychology > Culture and cultural studies which doesn't seem very logical at all. "Social sciences and society" becomes this weird catch-all category ... as you probably saw I was a bit baffled where to put Helene Lecher. Mujinga (talk) 15:09, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Oh I totally get it Mujinga I mean, like what do you do with someone like Enrichetta Chiaraviglio-Giolitti. She advocated for education, but wasn't a teacher or an academic. It's insane that the cultural and social activities women were allowed to do get lumped into a giant catch-all, but "predominantly-male" activities have multiple subdivisions. Ugh! Perhaps with the new GA coordinators something can be done? SusunW (talk) 15:41, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
You can also use the Women in Green article alerts page to find GA and FA nominations of women – though there's no indication of what topic the article might be under. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 14:21, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
that's handy, thanks! Mujinga (talk) 15:12, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

FAR for Mary: A Fiction

I have nominated Mary: A Fiction for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 02:50, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

June GA editathon event is now open for sign-ups

Hey everyone! I've finished pulling together our June 2023 GA Editathon event page. I've gone with another "Wildcard Edition" (theme of any/all articles about women and women's works). It's open for sign-ups now -- feel free to invite others who may be interested. @SusunW: Can you add this to the WiR newsletter lineup? @Mujinga and BennyOnTheLoose: Mini-review requests will appear on our usual requests page, which you can bookmark for easy notifications (I'll "open" that page officially on June 1). Best, Alanna the Brave (talk) 16:53, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

On it. SusunW (talk) 16:55, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
Something to look forward to! Mujinga (talk) 17:31, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
I realize Delabrede took part in the last Women in Green event and I have encouraged further participation in this one. As virtually all the articles about women artists listed under pages created by Delabrede are already B-class, it looks to me as if it would not be difficult to promote several of them to GA. So as not to overburden Delabrede, perhaps other contributors interested in art or American history would like to nominate one or more of them for the event and help with the assessment. Unfortunately, as I am no expert in art or American biographies, I don't think I could take any of these on myself.--Ipigott (talk) 11:05, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
Thank you, @Ipigott!
Delabrede (talk) 14:39, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Frances Cleveland FAC

Frances Cleveland (which I had first improved as part of the October editathon) is currently a featured article candidate. Unfortunately, she was a woman, not a battleship, a highway, or a tropical storm, so the usual reviewers have ignored the entry and it's set to be failed due to lack of reviews. Ignoring for now the fact that FAC is one of the many areas of Wikipedia that needs reform, does anyone have advice on how to proceed? Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:08, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

@Thebiguglyalien: Sorry to hear about the difficulty -- lack of FAC reviewers does seem to be an ongoing issue (especially, as you point out, for non-battleships, highways and tropical storms!). One of our WiG goals this year is to review more FACs and peer review requests, so hopefully a few more members spot your article now and can contribute feedback. I can take a look at it over the next few days. Alanna the Brave (talk) 14:28, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll definitely owe you one! I do think that FAC and peer review could have a more prominent place at WiG. I would say that they should be easier to find, but it looks like the FACs are already listed on the main project page, so I'm not sure how much more visible they can get. The answer might just be to bring more activity to this project as a whole (easier said than done, of course). Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:02, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Thebiguglyalien Items 4 & 5 on the goal tracking page are for FA noms and FA/Peer Reviews. If you list nominations there, it may increase visibility. My time is really limited for the next week or so, because of real life stuff I have only managed to edit a few hours here and there, but I'll try to look at her after Tuesday. SusunW (talk) 16:19, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
As promised, I started, but will have to come back to it tomorrow. SusunW (talk) 23:33, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
Pass or fail, I really appreciate it. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:27, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
I just want to say thanks again to the users here that did review work on that article with me. It looked like this when I found it, and I decided to work on it specifically for entry in the October editathon. And now, again thanks to the help of this project and the people here, it's a featured article! Now the question is which one to revisit for FA next... Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:25, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Great job! Looking forward to the next one. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:30, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
Congrats Thebiguglyalien! :-) A job well done. Happy to assist with the review. Alanna the Brave (talk) 15:08, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
Congratulations! Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 16:27, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
Congratulations Thebiguglyalien! You could list it on the 2023 FA goals if you like. SusunW (talk) 18:13, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
I always forget about that page. I'll try to keep it updates as I nominate women's biographies. Between WiR and WiG, that's where most of my content creation is. For now, I've added all of my relevant GA noms from this year. On a related note, we are now on track to meet the wildcard goal, and then some. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:41, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Goals for 2023

I noted that we are half-way through the year and per our Goal Tracking, it does not appear as if we are going to make any of our benchmarks for this year. I see that there are nominations and reviews that are occurring which aren't being listed (I know that for example Mujinga reviewed Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Josette Simon/archive1 and both @BennyOnTheLoose and Alanna the Brave: started reviewing Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Frances Cleveland/archive2, of which Thebiguglyalien nominated) and don't know if these were inadvertent omissions or purposeful. I am unsure how we track our progress if articles don't get listed as they are nominated and reviewed, but if the present system isn't working, perhaps we need to discuss it? SusunW (talk) 14:58, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm kind of aware that there's goal tracking going on, but I haven't looked into it closely. It's unclear what exactly is supposed to be listed and by whom, especially since it seems that reviews need the ascent of both the nominator and the reviewer to be listed. It also probably doesn't help that it uses language and criteria that's at best vague and at worst racially insensitive. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:28, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
Good feedback Thebiguglyalien, thank you. Primarily if you nominate something you list it as , and when the status changes, you remove the N or C or mark as . On the reviews, they are listed when completed by whoever did them (in the case of a peer review or FA review the 1st reviewer lists them following the format of 1st and 2nd reviewer). Please feel free to change the language on the page to something more suitable or which makes it clearer, I doubt that Alanna the Brave will contest constructive changes. SusunW (talk) 19:11, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi SusunW, thanks for the comments it's inadvertent omissions on my part since I (like you) am much more interested in writing stuff so I tend to leave the admin for a time I feel like doing it and wrap it all together. I'm here now because I thought to add Phoolan Devi as a peer review since it didn't get any comments yet and I hope to take it to FA.

On the goaltracking, I personally am fine with not reaching targets as long as we all create stuff but actually I think on a few things we are on track:

  • Goal #1: Women, peace, and diplomacy (GA nominations):
  • "nominate 20 articles for Good Article (GA) status on the theme of peace and diplomacy" - so far we have 12 so that's good
  • "at least 13 article nominations with a BIPOC focus" - yes this one we might not reach
  • Goal #2: Wildcard category (GA nominations)
  • "nominate 40 articles about any women or women's works for GA Status." - so far we have 11 so 40 seems ambitious but the current event might help, also if we add the 12 from goal1 it's on track
  • "at least 13 article nominations with a BIPOC focus" - hard to say at this stage
  • Goal #3: Good Article nomination reviews
  • "at least 40 Good Article (GA) nomination reviews" - so far we have 25 so that's on track
  • Goal #5: Peer Review & Featured Article Reviews
  • "at least 15 PR or FAC articles about women or women's works receive feedback from 2 or more editors" - so far we have 5 so yes 15 might be ambitious but it's good to push ourselves!!

On the present system, well some of this stuff like the GA and FA noms could be automated by someone more technically minded than me, although the reviewing work I think we'd still have to add ourselves. There is stats stuff available out there - for example we could have Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Green/Article alerts like Wikipedia:WikiProject Squatting/Article alerts already have Wikipedia:WikiProject Women/Women in Green/Article alerts and we coould have WP:WiG stats like WP:SQUAT stats Mujinga (talk) 16:40, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

I suppose we could also add DYKs as well Mujinga (talk) 16:46, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
Good observations, Mujinga and yes, I focus on writing. I try to review, but it is a struggle for me. I'm also not remotely competitive, so who does what or produces what isn't on my radar usually. It just struck me when I went to post a review that we were not as far along as I recall us being last year and I wasn't sure if that was an accurate portrait, since I knew personally of several omissions, as noted above. Technology on WP is completely baffling to me and I leave it to others entirely. I appreciate your well thought-out analysis. SusunW (talk) 16:53, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
  • Thanks for leading this discussion, SusunW, Thebiguglyalien and Mujinga. As Susun notes, constructive edits and/or suggestions for improving the WiG Goals page are 100% welcome. I'm not too worried about reaching this year's goals yet, if only because we seem to have ebbs and flows of activity throughout the year. I'd like to note that we do have a general yearly Talk Page template to track non-editathon articles that have been nominated or reviewed by WiG members -- it's linked near the top of the Goals page, but I've noticed it's not regularly used, and may not be visible enough. Can I ask what you all think about the "13 article nominations with a BIPOC focus" line? I remember that the original intention was to help counter white/Western bias in our chosen articles and encourage members to improve articles about women of different nationalities/ethnicities/racial identities, but I don't know whether it's been particularly effective (or, as suggested, whether it's even been felt appropriate by all WiG members). Maybe there are better approaches we could be taking in future (e.g., partnering with other relevant WikiProjects on new GA or FA events)? Alanna the Brave (talk) 23:45, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

I've brought the article on Andromeda to GAN but am unclear how to proceed now: not even sure which WikiProject notice(s) it should have (do you include women in mythology who may well have been real...?). The article is largely on the history of (male-dominated) art but with a bit of mythology, a bit of scholarship, and a bit on race and gender ... not toooo sensitive a subject, then. If anyone has advice on how it should be positioned that'd be gratefully received. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:38, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Other Greek mythological women (e.g. Medea and Deianira) are included in WP:WMNHIST, so I think Andromeda could be too. The project itself says of its scope: Mythological, legendary, or fictional characters may be included in this project only if they have a high degree of significance for the understanding of women's history, as indicated by existing scholarship. The character's article should provide perspectives on the lives of real women and their activities, as interpreted by scholars. A character who is of interest because she embodies attitudes toward women may be covered more aptly by WikiProject:Gender Studies or WikiProject Feminism. You have worked on the article and would be best placed to judge whether that fits.
Regardless of whether or not you can tag the article as being part of Wikiproject Women's History, I would consider it definitely within the scope of Women in Green and you can list it on our Goal-Tracking page if you want. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 21:19, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
Many thanks! Done. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:40, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Angela Merkel is nominated for GA

Angela Merkel, probably one of the more difficult Hot 100 articles, was recently nominated for GA. Regardless of whether anyone here is interested in reviewing it, it might be one to keep an eye on. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:19, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

An interesting development re linking

I thought people might be interested to hear that after discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Linking#DL,_sections,_and_mobile_readers, the MoS got tweaked to permit duplicate links in the body of the text, on occasion. Obviously the devil is in the implementation but I'm broadly in favour of this since (for example) it means I can link a woman twice if she crops up as a friend in one section of another woman's biography and then plays a major role in the next section. To me that makes sense. Mujinga (talk) 10:45, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing this. I actually prefer multiple links in articles, but I'm always asking people to remove them. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:53, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
I think it makes perfect sense, and it has in fact always been permitted where the context required it, but people have preferred simple rules that could be applied mechanically, as they're easier to maintain. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:07, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
Definitely interesting, and it seems sensible considering that readers may pick and choose which parts of an article to read (meaning they may miss that first occurrence of linking in an earlier section). Alanna the Brave (talk) 12:55, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Peer review request for Sappho

If anyone has any time to read through Sappho and comment on the peer review, any comments would be greatly appreciated. I brought it up to GA back in 2017 and am wondering how close it is to being ready for WP:FAC. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 15:08, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

I need a couple of days to finish stuff already on my plate, but I'm happy to take a look, with the caveat that I am no expert on ancient history. SusunW (talk) 16:46, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi all. A new member here with academic background in art history. I saw that Georgia O'Keeffe was on the 100 list on the project's main page and I am wondering if there is anyone here willing to collaborate on the article? I won't have enough time in the coming months to do it on my own, but would be more than happy to divide the work up between several enthusiastic editors. I am happy to discuss in more detail if there is interest! Thanks! Ppt91talk 15:30, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Women at FAC

I'm happy to say there's a decent amount of women proposed as featured articles right now:

I honestly don't remember seeing so many - and I've probably missed one as well, apologies in advance if I have Mujinga (talk) 13:15, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

There's also Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Angel Aquino/archive1.
A very good turn-out indeed! Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 16:03, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for Angel Aquino, I'll do a source review for that now Mujinga (talk) 08:16, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Could add Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hot Sugar (song)/archive1 to the list as well Mujinga (talk) 13:09, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
In my experience, source reviews are the most avoided part by reviewers, so I am sure the nominator will be grateful. Thanks for putting this list here Mujinga SusunW (talk) 15:01, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello everyone, I have recently made some improvements to this template to make it easier to use. You can now just type the meetup number as the parameter (e.g. {{WIG|4}}) and the information about that meetup will automatically pull through. I've left a couple of queries on the template talk page too in case anyone is interested. Happy editing! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:10, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

FAR for Harriet Arbuthnot

I have nominated Harriet Arbuthnot for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 17:02, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

GAR for Carol Kaye

Carol Kaye has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please see Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Carol Kaye/1. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:15, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Discussion on collaboration on featured content, etc.

There is a discussion on Women in Red under FAs now on our Showcase page on how to provide improved collaboration between Women in Red, Women in Green and Women in presenting evolving FAs, GAs, etc.--Ipigott (talk) 12:46, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Requesting inputs at AFD - Islamic Bill of Rights for Women in the Mosque

Requesting inputs at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Islamic Bill of Rights for Women in the Mosque (2nd nomination) discussion. - Bookku (talk) 05:07, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

August record month for FAs and GAs

In connection with discussions on the Showcase page on Women in Red's talk page, this project may be interested to see that in August there were 11 new FAs about women or their works and 62 new GAs, both far in excess of the usual monthly averages. It seems to me that Women in Green probably worked on many more of these than those tagged WiR on their talk pages. It may be useful to ensure the banner is more consistently included where appropriate. In any case, congratulations on all the recent successes. Please let me know if any are missing from the lists or if any corrections are needed.--Ipigott (talk) 07:07, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

@Ipigott Perhaps the increase is attributed to Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/GAN Backlog Drives/August 2023? ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:02, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Another Believer: That certainly seems to be an important factor. Nevertheless it's great to see the interest in GAs concerning women. I carefully monitor the new GAs each day and I can confirm that many more have been promoted than those about men. Women in Green have also recently organized a Wildcard event which is producing results.--Ipigott (talk) 15:33, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Awesome! ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:01, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

October GA Editathon - Around the World in 31 Days

Hi everyone -- the event page for our October 2023 GA editathon is now live and ready for sign-ups! This event's theme is "Around the World in 31 Days," and participants are encouraged to nominate/review articles about women and women's works from as many different geographical regions as possible -- we'll see if we can cover at least 31 different countries (past or present). All experience levels welcome. Please share with any friends and colleagues who might be interested. A couple of volunteer items below:

  • @BennyOnTheLoose, Mujinga, and Vanamonde93: Are you okay to monitor the 20-minute assessments page again? We had some discussion last June about keeping this feature open on a more permanent basis, but I got distracted by off-Wiki work this summer -- let's try keeping it open after October.
  • Anyone interested in helping with event promotion? I'll be reaching out to other WikiProjects this week, but would appreciate any ideas or assistance you may be able to offer.

As always, if you notice any errors/typos on the page or have suggestions for improvement, please let me know (or start a discussion on the event talk page). Best, Alanna the Brave (talk) 19:26, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

I want to say that we should collaborate with regional or continental wikiprojects like WP:WikiProject Latin America and WP:WikiProject Asia, but I don't know how active they are. Any active participants at Wikipedia:The 100,000 Challenge might also be interested in this, although the challenge itself also isn't terribly active. And a more aesthetic suggestion: maybe at the bottom of "article outcomes", we could have a checklist of which countries have been covered. (Is the 31 country goal specifically for nominating articles, or would we also say it's done if someone reviews an old nomination from a given country?) Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:40, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
@Thebiguglyalien: I'll definitely reach out to regional WikiProjects (there seems to be some measurements of activeness here), and that's a great idea to try the 100,000/10,000 challenges too. Would you like to contact a few? The "31 countries" goal will also include reviews of older noms, not just new nominations. I've been pondering how we might best track the number of countries covered: a checklist would be a solid solution, but I'm also intrigued by the possibility of tracking countries via a global map, which could be really cool. Would take a bit of work, but the instructions don't look impossible... Alanna the Brave (talk) 20:42, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
@Thebiguglyalien; @Alanna the Brave: I've just posted the invite message on most of the regional WikiProject talk pages. Hopefully we'll get some responses, so I'll keep an eye out for any folk in those projects that might be interested. --Grnrchst (talk) 14:16, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
If we wanted even wider reach, then in a week or so we could make a request at MediaWiki talk:Watchlist-messages for a notice to appear on every registered user's watchlist, much like the Guild of Copyeditors drives do. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:47, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
Thanks Grnrchst! And wow, Thebiguglyalien -- I had no idea there was a simple way to request that kind of notice. I'm going to send a mass mailout to all WiG members tonight, just to catch anyone who hasn't seen the talk page notice, and I think the watchlist notice would be a great experiment (I can add it to my list for next week if you're not planning on it already). Alanna the Brave (talk) 20:53, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
@Thebiguglyalien: I've requested a watchlist notice request. We'll see what happens! Alanna the Brave (talk) 22:14, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
Hopefully that will do the trick. I've also left a notice at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations, since many frequent GA nominators and reviewers hang out there. And I might have also started working on six different biographies that I plan on nominating shortly after the event starts... Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:13, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
I'm happy to continue to provide 20-minute assessments if the community would find it helpful. I should be reasonably active through the month of October. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:00, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
Thanks Vanamonde! Much appreciated. Alanna the Brave (talk) 20:29, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
I'm also happy to provide 20-minute assessments. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 09:46, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
Me as well - and I'd be fine with keeping it open after October, cheers Mujinga (talk) 10:08, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
Fabulous -- thank you both! Alanna the Brave (talk) 13:03, 19 September 2023 (UTC)