|Main page||Talk page||Members||Resources||Popular pages|
|This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Feminism and anything related to its purposes and tasks.
|Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Auto-archiving period: 2 months|
|WikiProject Feminism||(Rated Project-class)|
|WikiProject Feminism was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 7 March 2011.|
I just made https://en.wikipedia.orghttps://demo.azizisearch.com/starter/google/wikipedia/page/Draft:The_%22Mighty_Girl%22_Effect because it seems to be a documented scientifically proven phenomenon with no wikipedia article. I have no idea how to get it attached to other gender studies/feminism articles on Wikipedia. Help please? Oathed (talk) 14:44, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
I am a former professor, now involved in startup buainesses. I occasionally edit out of WP retirement when I turn to a WP article for added sources and context, from a mainstream business news sourse.
Today, after being informed of a Spotify-related article in the NYT, I turned to the Call Her Daddy podcast article, and noticed both its datedness, and earlier removal of content that I thought well-sourced and substantive. Because the content that was removed related to varying views about whether the content and aims of the podcast align with some form of feminism, I raise the propriety of those edits here.
Specifically, after my first edit to return some of the inappropriately removed earlier content — wherein I added only a single well-sourced sentence regarding the former owner-distributors of the program in question — that edit, and indeed, its entire section were deleted.
Here are the two diffs that are relevant.
The original edit regarding feminism and misogyny was removed, ostensibly because it was seen as "mostly conjecture and WP:UNDUE" (with which I disagree, largely). The return of one sentece of it today was removed (along with rest of section), because it was stated that reputable discussion of the attitudes and mores of the owner-distributor of the podcast were not relevant (again, a persepctive with which I disagree).
I propose that the removed content be evaluated by several here, and the initiative be taken from this Project to evaluate what of the original content is worth fighting to have remain.
Note, the overall positivity of the article with regard to the podcast content, the removal of original content questioning the feminist bona fides of the program, and the rapidity with which my attempts at scholarly additional edits were identified and reverted, suggest the possibility that this article might have devoted editors committed to maintaining the current limited scope and perspective of the article.
Note, I edit intentionally from IP, which also may be the reason for the very rapid attention and reversion of these edits. (I will not return to logged editing, because of the various forms of bias and trolling that can take place here, I am least concerned that someone trace me via IP to Chicago, or whatever city I am currently visiting.) With regard/cheers. 2601:246:C700:558:2584:8D15:B064:AD34 (talk) 17:03, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 09:54, 20 July 2022 (UTC)