Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Feminism/Archive 4 Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Feminism/Archive_4

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

photo of a naked five-year-old girl in wikipedia

recently i red the article about Lina Medina, youngest mother of the world (and so obviously victim of sexual violence). in the article was included a photo of her naked and pregnant. this is the image. (trigger warning: objectified pregnant naked child, medical photo) is there someone who wants to discuss that?--Alice d25 (talk) 15:18, 7 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

To add to the context for this, Lina Medina is the youngest mother in the world at 5 years old and the image in the infobox was being used to demonstrate this severe medical anomoly that has not been repeated since; this is the only incident of it happening at all and the rarity of the situation I think is important to note. Not to mention this section header leads something to be desired in terms of context it provides. Tutelary (talk) 20:49, 7 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, I've read the discussion. I've read the notes accompanying the image. And I don't know what it has to do with Feminism. I do see repeated attempts at censorship, using every possible tactic including accusing those in favour of including the image of supporting child pornography. It's already a very nasty discussion. When those who would claim to be seeking a clean life get active here things get very dirty. HiLo48 (talk) 21:12, 7 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please limit discussion to Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Photograph_of_naked.2C_pregnant_five-year-old_Lina_Medina or the article's talk page. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 21:33, 7 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you want to limit discussions to other places, perhaps we need to remove this thread. It has nothing to do with feminism. It was simply forum shopping by one of our self-appointed censors. HiLo48 (talk) 22:26, 7 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It is an inappropriate image. This is a sexual abuse survivor. BLP or otherwise, we don't need to treat this person like she's a sideshow freak. She's obviously suffered enough. End of story. I cannot begin to express my utter disgust that anyone would even think to argue otherwise. Poor child! Have you no soul? Montanabw(talk) 03:43, 8 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm pretty sure I have no soul, and I try to think without making such certain assumptions and insisting that others who don't think like I do are disgusting. Anyway, did you see EvergreenFir's post above about discussing this elsewhere? HiLo48 (talk) 03:51, 8 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yeah, and I commented there. Done here, I guess. Montanabw(talk) 07:50, 8 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Anachronistic use of 'feminist'

I have been thinking about the use of the category and subcategories of Category:Feminists, and generally the lead section description "was a X-nationality feminist" for 19th and early 20th Century people.

The "1st wave, 2nd and 3rd wave feminist" classification is not used globally (although even in English the word feminism is much younger than some people we call such in Wikipedia). In Swedish, Norwegian, Danish and Finnish women's rights advocates were literally called "women's issues' women" (kvinnosak). Feminist is used for a modern movement, not the one that advocated for the right to vote etc.

This comes in, as I'm about to soon create an article about a 1930s far-right female politician in Finland who also was a women's rights and temperance advocate. The word feminist feels especially ill-fitting here. Aren't women's rights advocate and suffragette better terms for that period of history? The problem is, only Category:Finnish feminists exists. --Pudeo' 00:20, 7 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The question is not what anyone's opinion on WP is, the question is "How do sources define the person?". If sources call this person a suffragette then it is appropriate to list them in the a new Category:Finish suffragists (a sub category of Category:Suffragists_by_nationality). It would also be appropriate if this is a "women's issues campaigner" to list them in Category:feminists. This inclusion isn't mutually exclusive. Furthermore you would have a major problem NOT listing a suffragette as a feminist due to the fact that suffragettes are defined as feminists by a library of reliable sources, similarly for women's issues campaigners--Cailil talk 12:28, 7 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The other problem of course, is what one wikipedian editor might call far right, another might call Christian centrist or another editor call libertarian and actual RS might use other terms. That's why we also use sources to describe their other political positions. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 15:29, 8 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please don't do this

Do you see a problem?

Almost the entire page is taken up by female pilots, despite them being a minority. Please remember Wikipedia's policies.

I'm going to assume it's someone here, because who else would be this interested in unbalancing the article in this very specific way? Please fix it.

Willhesucceed (talk) 12:24, 9 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Never assume who did what. You can look through the revision history to find out who did what if you are so concerned about responsibility. Or the talk page history for clues. Perhaps there was a female aviators article that got AfD'd so someone just dumped the contents in there. Baybe a female aviators article needs creating. Or maybe a female pilot's husband did it. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 15:06, 9 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Nominations are now open, in case anyone wants to take on the responsibility. Meanwhile, I hope those of us still ambulatory will participate in questioning and commenting on candidates regarding issues relevant to closing the gender gap and making Wikipedia a better place to edit for older people, shy people, civil people, people of color, academics, professionals, feminists and even assertive women like me ;-) Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 15:15, 9 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Slav women

On the Slavs page only one picture of a woman (Marie Curie) is used. I want to replace some of the male images with images of women, but I'm not sure which ones. I think Roza Shanina and Lyudmila Pavlichenko are good, and considering an image of Djokovic is used one of Maria Sharapova could be as well. All of these women are Russian though, and there should be more diversity. Any suggestions? Bridenh (talk) 02:43, 9 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See Category:Serbian women, Category:Polish women (Marie Walewska comes to mind because I've seen Conquest (1937 film) a few times); Category:Slovak_women, Category:Croatian_women and Category:Bulgarian_women. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 03:27, 9 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So I changed it up a bit. Now only 8 out of 30 are women. I think I'm going to leave it at that for now though, wouldn't like to scare men by making the forthcoming matriarchy too obvious. Bridenh (talk) 17:37, 9 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Today's Featured Article candidate

I've nominated an article related to Women's rights for Today's Featured Article candidacy, please see discussion at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Irreplaceable. — Cirt (talk) 21:29, 18 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gender Gap task force arbitration

Is about to close. Interesting reading from a feminist perspective. Check it out here. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 16:31, 23 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Flesh out an article?

Hey, can anyone help with the article "On the Equality of the Sexes"? It was put up for AfD and I've sourced it to where I believe I've established notability, so that part isn't a problem. What we really need is someone (or several someones) who are familiar with the work that can flesh the article out to where it's more than a stub. I've put some sources on the article, but it needs some TLC from someone more familiar with writing feminism articles. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 10:30, 25 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • I don't know if anyone has read this or not, but I really could use some help in fleshing the article out. I'm completely unfamiliar with the work and while I can do some stuff with the article, it would honestly be best if someone more experienced with writing articles like this and familiar with the work could come and help out. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 07:45, 27 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Misogyny and feminist theory

Most of the "feminist theory" section of the Misogyny article has been deleted due to being unsourced. If anyone wants to try rewriting it with sources, that would be most helpful. Kaldari (talk) 11:19, 29 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Expert attention

This is a notice about Category:Feminism articles needing expert attention, which might be of interest to your WikiProject. It will take a while before the category is populated. Iceblock (talk) 18:58, 9 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Priya's Shakti

Anyone here familiar with writing article's about graphic novels? This caught my eye today:

--Lightbreather (talk) 21:17, 17 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, I started a stub Priya's Shakti, and I'll do as much as I can, though graphic novels are new editor territory for me. Lightbreather (talk) 21:44, 19 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Canadian MRA group:

Just articles that I think need more people to improve them and to have them on watch lists. The more input the better. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 22:16, 31 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

List of feminist comic books

I created a List of feminist comic books in tandem with the creation of a stub for Priya's Shakti. Someone has already proposed deleting it, without any discussion. I DEPROD-ed it, but just in case it turns into an AFD, thought I'd place a heads-up here. Lightbreather (talk) 01:09, 20 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have started a related discussion about Priya's Shakti at RSN.

--Lightbreather (talk) 22:30, 23 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The problem is that "feminist" is too broad and too subjective a category. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 07:18, 9 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WikiProject X is live!

WikiProject X icon.svg

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Question at the Village Pump

There is a question at the Village Pump that should be of interest to this group:

Risk in identifying as a woman editor on Wikipedia

--Lightbreather (talk) 02:15, 23 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Breastfeeding has issues

While this might not be at the core of this projects interests I hope some here may be interested in improving the article anyway. I've stripped so much poorly sourced medical content, but even with WT:MED on it it could use some hand getting the advocacy and society portions vetted as well. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 22:09, 7 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notice and invitation

  1. There is a redirect discussion that may be of interest to this group.
  2. Have you heard of the Kaffeeklatsch? It is a test area for women to hear and support each other. The idea came about as a result of a discussion at meta regarding my IdeaLab proposal (yet open) for WikiProject Women.
Now that the klatsch has survived an MfD and WMF legal has said that it does not violate the non discrimination policy,[1] I am looking for women editors who might like to join.
Although I have started a couple of discussions, they are not urgent. For now, the "Please introduce yourself" discussion is more important! I want to take it slow at first and build a small group before trying to address heavy topics or come up with big goals. For now, the klatsch is there as a sort of refuge. I hope you will consider joining, and invite other women editors, too, if you wish.

--Lightbreather (talk) 15:57, 12 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jacques Rivette

Not sure if this task force has this broad of a scope, but it may be interested in including Jacques Rivette.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 17:40, 12 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Amy Pascal's business strategy to underpay female actors and "blame the victim"

Hello. I am not an expert on feminism, but hopefully some of you are. I was wondering if some of you might be interested in adding a subsection about Amy Pascal underpaying female actors, when she explained, "People want to work for less money, I pay them less money." at a recent Women in the World event. According to ThinkProgress, she blamed the victim even though, women don't have an option to ask for a raise, as Salon explains. I find this problematic because the article has a section saying, "In 2001, Pascal was honored with the Women in Film’s Crystal Award, which recognizes those whose work has helped to expand the role of women in the entertainment industry.[34] Pascal has been included in The Hollywood Reporter’s annual Women in Entertainment Power 100 list and Forbes’ ranking of the World’s 100 Most Powerful Women.[35][36] As of 2014, she was ranked as the 28th most powerful woman in the world by Forbes, up from 36th in 2013.[37]". Perhaps renaming that section from "Activities and awards" to "Attitudes towards other women" and expanding it with referenced context of her actual business policy would make sense? This is all I've been able to find so far; I expect more analysis will be published in feminist academic journals in the next few months/years.Zigzig20s (talk) 12:02, 18 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Be careful of making direct accusations of wrongdoing and criminal behavior against living people. Sex discrimination is illegal after all. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 17:22, 18 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's not an accusation. I linked to articles where she explains it is a conscious business decision on her part to pay female actors less than male actors as a business strategy, to save money. Read the articles. She even said it on tape. I don't think she would say it publicly if it were "criminal."Zigzig20s (talk) 17:28, 18 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The rewording works for me. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 17:56, 18 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK. As I said, I am asking here because I feel we would do with more external editors to expand/improve Pascal's page. Looking forward to reading how some of you think this topic should be covered. Thank you.Zigzig20s (talk) 18:22, 18 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Can we please get some input from you guys on this?Zigzig20s (talk) 14:54, 21 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Feminism in Mexico

Perusing the main page, I saw that Feminism in Mexico was listed in the category of "Pages needing attention" and thought, that perhaps, as I live here, I could add some information. "Pages needing attention" is an understatement. It has only 2 sentences in the entire article, which IMO speaks to "desperate need of attention."

I have been working for several days on creation of the page, but my strong suit is NOT theory. And I while I speak a tiny bit of Spanish, I am not fluent, by any measure. In addition, though I work in human rights with sexual minorities, and can do the section on "Gender Rebels," the section might benefit from someone who is part of that community and not cis. I am working on the history portion but would truly like to have collaborators for overall balance in the page. Anyone interested? It's very definitely a work in progress, no where near ready to "go live" ... but my working draft is here: User:SusunW/Sandbox 2. SusunW (talk) 18:25, 23 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't know if I have the time to help but I just wanted to say that the draft is looking excellent, really great work so far! Sam Walton (talk) 18:39, 23 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I didn't read the article, but the footnoting and sources look excellent. GeorgeLouis (talk) 09:08, 26 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wiki Ed "Editing Women's Studies" Brochure: Feedback requested

Hello all, Wiki Ed will be distributing a brochure to Women's Studies courses in the USA and Canada that edit Wikipedia as part of their classroom assignments. It will also be available on-wiki and as a pdf for anyone to read or use. I'm hoping to get some feedback on the brochure's contents -- if anyone has some time to review it, I've uploaded a Wiki draft here. We're looking to have it ready to print by March 3, so feedback would be most useful before then. Thanks everyone!

Eryk (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:18, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I made some suggested edits. GeorgeLouis (talk) 09:42, 26 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Violence against men (4th nomination)

A heated debate is brewing in this deletion discussion, and a threat to alert WP:Feminism was made. If they felt it necessary to mention in the discussion, clearly there is merit in following through. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:30, 28 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This was not a threat, you WP:Single purpose account. I am not involved with WP:Feminism (except for this alert or any alert I make here), but I hate seeing WP:Canvassing that is WP:Disruptive, which is what is going on in this case. A threat would be making clear that I will alert Talk:Men's rights movement/Article probation of this matter, which I might very well do, if no one beats me to it first. Flyer22 (talk) 07:19, 28 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ArtAndFeminism Editathons

ArtAndFeminism editathons coming up this weekend in 50+ cities. Find one near you (or participate online)! Kaldari (talk) 07:12, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia Primary School invitation

Hi everybody. On behalf of the teams behind the Wikipedia Primary School research project, I would like to announce that the articles Domestic violenceGender stereotypes, of interest to this wikiproject, were selected a while ago to be reviewed by external experts. We'd now like to ask interested editors to join our efforts and improve the articles before March 15, 2015 (any timezone) as they see fit; a revision will be then sent to the designated experts for review (for details, please see each articles' talk page). Any notes and remarks written by the external experts will be made available on the articles' talk pages under a CC-BY-SA license as soon as possible, so that you can read them, discuss them and then decide if and how to use them. Please sign up here to let us know you're collaborating. Thanks a lot for your support! Elitre (WPS) (talk) 18:06, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't understand. There is one article and one section of the same article. How does that work? GeorgeLouis (talk) 00:43, 11 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Topic(s) for new article(s)

While reading about other things, this hit my radar today. I can't find an article about the Red Stockings, or mention of this in the article about Iceland or about International Women's Year.

  • "The day the women went on strike". Guardian. October 18, 2005.
  • Johnson, Janet Elise (February 3, 2011). "The Most Feminist Place in the World". Nation.
  • Rúdólfsdóttir, Annadís Greta (October 28, 2014). "Iceland is great for women, but it's no feminist paradise". Guardian.
  • Davidson, Laura (January 10, 2015). "Why Iceland is hosting a debate on gender equality... for men". Telegraph.

--Lightbreather (talk) 16:44, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, I did find an article Redstockings, but it's about a U.S. group. Lightbreather (talk) 16:49, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Icelandic article (is:Rauðsokkahreyfingin) says that they first appeared in May 1970 while the New York group appears to have started in February 1969. Unfortunately, there currently aren't articles for Women's rights in Iceland or Feminism in Iceland. gobonobo + c 14:39, 12 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The clarification of an ArbCom decision about gender

A request has been made for clarification of whether or not a recent ArbCom decision covers topics like campus rape. Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:45, 10 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If I understand correctly, the determination was made that campus rape is a “gender-related dispute or controversy” so the ban applies to the campus rape page, and the case is now closed. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment&direction=prev&oldid=651502323 Those who want to make a controversy out of rape have determined that campus rape is controversial. Feminists said there is no controversy: rape is rape. If you want to include Campus Rape in the ban, word the ban better. Call it: "gender-related topics"
In addition, one feminist who spoke quite eloquently about the problem ended up redacting their comments after what I would characterize as inappropriate comments. The discussion brought up points that remain unresolved. I brought up that I don't think banning people from topic areas really make sense anyway unless they take responsibility for what they did. If they don't think it's wrong, they'll just do it in another area. I'm advocating requiring apologies in the Inspire Campaign to encourage more women editors. https://meta.wikimedia.orghttps://demo.azizisearch.com/starter/google/wikipedia/page/Grants:IdeaLab/Require_Apologies Beauxlieux (talk) 17:37, 15 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nelda Ramos

Please discuss. Bearian (talk) 00:43, 24 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Courtney Martin article needs a rewrite

Courtney E. Martin, co-editor of feministing.com and generally prolific online feminist writer, just survived an AfD in which I dug up a bunch of sources but don't have access to one and don't really have time to read the others in depth. Article is currently sourced almost entirely to Martin's own writings. Anyone interested? Opabinia regalis (talk) 07:16, 27 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ellen Pao Gender discrimination trial has concluded

The Ellen Pao gender discrimination lawsuit trial has concluded. One of its legacies is the tremendous coverage it received while it was in progress resulting in reams of text covering topics such as statistics of the numbers of women in tech and venture capital, legal information about gender discrimination lawsuits, and much much more. Talk:Ellen_Pao has captured over a hundred links to this info. I hope this resource can be useful for editors covering related topics. Ottawahitech (talk) 00:35, 28 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Women in..

FYI: a wikipedia search on Women in showed up FHM#FHM_100_Sexiest_Women_in_the_World as the first search entry. Ottawahitech (talk) 18:18, 22 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I get that too. I would guess that Wikipedia's search engine algorithm relies on factors such as edit frequency or page views. gobonobo + c 10:46, 28 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Participate in the Inspire Campaign! - & How to Require Apologies

I want to encourage WikiProject Feminism to take a look at endorse and discuss some of the Inspire Campaign ideas for addressing Wikipedia's Gender Gap before the funding application deadline tomorrow, but I think you can continue to endorse into April. At the moment, 581 people have participated. It would be great to get a lot more to show commitment to the issue.

I put forth the idea of requiring apologies which I think could create the structural change required to inspire more female participation (and create a more desirable environment for everyone) but I don't know wikipedia governance well enough to know how to get it enacted. If anyone has thoughts on how to do this, please share. I know it's probably a long shot to get enacted but I think even starting the conversation would be worthwhile. https://meta.wikimedia.orghttps://demo.azizisearch.com/starter/google/wikipedia/page/Grants:IdeaLab/Require_Apologies

I've also put forth an idea for addressing the Campus Rape pages https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants:IdeaLab/Involve_young_women_to_improve_coverage_of_campus_rape Beauxlieux (talk) 22:41, 30 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Marie Stopes

The article has been expanded in recent years. There's plenty of good material there already, and there's plenty of high quality biographies and other sources out there that could be used to expand and improve the article. If someone is willing to put in the work, this article could easily reach Good Article or Featured Article status. Just a matter of someone putting in the work. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 13:52, 7 April 2015 (UTC)--Reply[reply]

Consciousness-Raising Repository - Call for Feedback and Participation

This is a call for feminists who are interested in developing a resource on Wikipedia for collecting and publicizing stories from people who experience marginalization in the Wikipedia community. The purpose of the Consciousness-Raising Repository is to serve as a database of knowledge about the forms marginalization can take and as an outlet for users experiencing marginalization. Right now, we're putting together a diverse group of Wikipedians to oversee the construction of the repository and recruitment and collection of stories.

If you're interested in participating, please go to the Get Involved section and endorse or add your name to the list of participants.

We're also looking for questions and feedback to help crystallize the proposal. If you have any comments or questions, please feel free to message me or ask them on the discussion page --Radfordj (talk) 23:43, 9 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Centre for Women, Ageing and Media (2nd nomination)

Hi, It would be great if anyone could help to save the article we created about the Centre for Women, Ageing and Media by contributing to the discussion. It would seem that "WAM" is not notable enough, as the critics don't acknowledge the sources that are included. MaudeG3 (talk) 14:02, 11 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

MaudeG3, please remember to assume good faith when dealing with editors. Just because someone nominates an article about a women's centre does not mean they are misogynistic. Additionally, it is worth pointing out that your tone borders on canvassing, which is not allowed. Primefac (talk) 16:14, 11 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I edited my initial comment, I hope it is now more in line with your guidelines. (But it was not just because he nominated the article.) MaudeG3 (talk) 16:24, 11 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I give the above user credit for changing her comment and wish her the best in continuing to contribute to our encyclopedia. She can expect a gift on her talk page. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 06:51, 12 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Hillary Rodham Clinton

Interested project members are welcome to join WikiProject Hillary Rodham Clinton, a new collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia articles related to Hillary Rodham Clinton. ---Another Believer (Talk) 04:00, 13 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Feminism-focused Inspire Campaign proposal for distributed editing

Dear WikiProject Feminism: I wish to invite you to review an Inspire Campaign proposal and offer feedback if you wish:


What's special is this proposal looks to (re)value sporadic editing and respectfully honor the expertise of subject matter experts, without asking them to 'fix' Wikipedia's problems. This is a novel approach that may gain traction with edit-a-thons and WikiProject initiatives because it comes from a feminist pedagogical perspective for analysis in order to generate re-usable lists to share/work on. What ways has this project generated/distributed 'content gap lists' in the past? What would you like to see improved upon? My observation is often there are calls for editing because of 'storms' -- but there isn't systematic topical analysis... However I would look forward to your feedback and the possibly collaboration with WikiProject Feminism.


Monika Shameran81 (talk) 05:54, 25 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good proposal! I have no particular suggestions, just wanted to express enthusiasm for a well-thought-out plan. Binksternet (talk) 11:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you very much Binksternet! Shameran81 (talk) 20:00, 28 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I will leave a note about this on the proposal talk page, but one thing that all academics/SMEs need to understand, not just feminist ones, is that their contributions to WP can be easily reverted by anyone at anytime. So, there needs to be a plan included in the proposal to ensure that the edits/inputs to WP articles "stick" and frankly, the only way to do that, is to get a number of people to watch the articles constantly and indefinitely and revert any attempts to remove the SME's edits. There's no other way around it. It's how WP works. Cla68 (talk) 23:42, 25 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for taking the time to comment Cla68, I responded on the proposal talk page. Shameran81 (talk) 20:00, 28 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the idea. I want to know who are these experts? How do they define women's knowledge? How is this different than a women's edit-a-thon? Also enlisting college students, i think is unethical. The TOS says paid editing must have full disclosure, but getting credit is coercion. Anyway, the gender gap is certainly a problem. Check out the idea to disassociate feminism from women editors.https://meta.wikimedia.orghttps://demo.azizisearch.com/starter/google/wikipedia/page/Grants:IdeaLab/Disconnect_%27feminism%27_from_editing_by_women Frederika Eilers (talk) 06:19, 14 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marion Harvie Barnard

Can we get expert input? Bearian (talk) 20:30, 7 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Bearian: This just took a little research, but still needs people to weigh in. I am not from Indiana, but a very brief search on the web showed multiple sources supporting that Barnard was an officer in the Indiana suffrage auxiliary. Anyone else who can contribute or weigh in with a vote? SusunW (talk) 05:13, 10 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The above article was kept, and there is an interesting discussion on the page referenced above concerning the difficulty of researching women who were active in the "old days." BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 11:58, 17 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Making category Fictional swordsmen sword fighters to be gender neutral.

Would this be a collaboration with the many fiction projects that would be in WikiProject feminism's interests? Bullets and Bracelets (talk) 05:39, 11 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Seems a positive step. What page do we go to implement (pun) it? BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 12:00, 17 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wouldn't this be more of a WP:GGTF systemic bias thing? I dont see how this fits inside the scope of Wikiproject feminism which is to improve articles about feminism. PS You'd have to go to WP:CFD to request a move. Bosstopher (talk) 12:07, 17 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Large Edits Needing Revision

Looks like some school projects came due today. Seeing some large edits on feminism-related pages that could use some attention from experienced editors.

EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:00, 17 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Community discussion on harassment reporting

There are many current proposals as part of the 2015 Inspire Campaign related to harassment management. I’ve created a page, Meta:Grants:IdeaLab/Community discussion on harassment reporting meant to serve as a central space where the various stakeholders in these proposals and other community members can discuss which methods might serve our community best so that we can unify our ideas into collective action. I encourage you to join the conversation and contribute your ideas!OR drohowa (talk) 02:30, 22 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Attention required

The Feminist legal theory is an important major topic, and the text is good start, but it seems abandoned and severely underdeveloped. Staszek Lem (talk) 19:02, 24 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, it needs http://www.iiav.nl/ezines/web/AmericanUniversityJournal/2005/No1/american/fineman.pdf EllenCT (talk) 23:34, 25 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Feminist aesthetics

@Peter Damian: I enjoyed reading [2] and I wish you the best success. I agree Feminist aesthetics could use a lot of help from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-aesthetics/#AesEvLife for example. EllenCT (talk) 23:38, 25 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Seeking support from experienced Wikipedians! More Female Architects on Wikipedia


my name is eleanor chapman, I am based in Berlin and with anna schmalen, justine clark (australia) and lori brown (usa), have applied for a grant to write more women architects and designers into wikipedia. we welcome comments and support for our project. in our own countries, we hosted wiki writing parties on march 8, international women's day, as a way to begin these efforts. https://meta.wikimedia.orghttps://demo.azizisearch.com/starter/google/wikipedia/page/Grants:IdeaLab/More_Female_Architects_on_Wikipedia In particular, we would welcome expressions of support and mentorship from experienced Wikipedians, as we are relatively new here. We look forward to hearing from you! Eljoch (talk) 14:55, 25 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Eleanor, I would be glad to help you with that. I am a civil engineering student at TU Berlin and a contributor to wikipedia since 2013. So I would really like to meet you in person. I therefore invite you to this event I am organizing with my friend:Wikipedia:Hack-A-Thon/Feminism. I am sure we could find further support here. I am also part of the women edit group of Berlin. I'm sure you could find supporters there, too. Looking forward to meet you. EarlyspatzTalk 11:12, 3 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Women's cricket

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_unusual_dismissals_in_international_cricket&action=history. Editor removed all references to women's international cricket from an article about international cricket. Please talk to editor — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:16, 3 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I couldn't see the WP:Diff there. Can you provide one? BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 21:23, 3 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think WP:WikiProject Cricket is probably a better venue for this issue. Oh and by the way, you're supposed to WP:AGF, accusing a fellow editor of bad faith based on a single edit is not a good idea. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 21:39, 3 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mattress Performance (Carry That Weight)

This has been an article with a lot of debate and discussion surrounding it, it's been contentious. Today, the article was blanked, then fully restored and later gutted and given full protection (admins only). Please weigh in with your opinion on the talk page or ANI if you have worked on this article over the past few months. Liz Read! Talk! 21:36, 3 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I stress the importance of going to Liz's "last good version" before you defend the current page, you need to have something to compare it to. SoSadddd (talk) 16:57, 5 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussion about adding conscription section to sexism article

There is an ongoing discussion at Talk:Sexism about adding a section on conscription, if anyone's interested. Also, for some reason, that article was not listed under WikiProject Feminism, so it was not showing up on "Article alerts" or "Hot articles" previously. I've added it to the project and assessed it. Kaldari (talk) 21:16, 8 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Just discovered that Wikipedia has no article on catcalling (just redirects to the tiny wolf-whistling article). Kaldari (talk) 17:29, 11 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've changed it to redirect to Street harassment which I believe covers catcalling, though I could be mistaken. Sam Walton (talk) 18:58, 11 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Task force

Does WikiProject Feminism currently have a task force? If so can you please post a link to it here? Thanks! Maranjosie (talk) 14:51, 14 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Maranjosie. We don't have any specific task forces. What did you have in mind? Kaldari (talk) 17:10, 14 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Importance scale

The project banner on article pages has a link for "importance scale" that leads to Wikipedia:WikiProject Feminism/Assessment where there is no mention of importance assessment. Where are the criteria for assessing importance for this project? Richerman (talk) 10:39, 17 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Baroness, Duchess, Empress and Viscountess articles

Thinking about the bias of just having male articles for different male titles I recently submitted the following RM:

Relevant points are being raised at the RM and now I'm wondering about other options. Monarchy and nobility aren't my topics but I think that development of articles such as Baroness, Duchess, Empress and Viscountess may be useful.

I've also posted this at Wproj:Discrimination GregKaye 20:05, 7 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For those who don't know the abbreviation, we are talking about Wikipedia:Requested moves here. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 07:02, 12 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The actual discussion is at Talk:Baron#Requested_move_7_April_2015. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 07:06, 12 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The proposal has been rejected, or put on ice, or something, but might I ask here if there is any kind of organized movement among Wikipedia editors for "de-sexing" article titles? The suggestion made at the page referenced above seems to be eminently sensible, not only in the case of royal and noble titles but in many others as well. Yours, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 11:56, 17 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is an interesting debate and thanks for the link to the orig discussion. I find it depressing that the Princess articles says "feminine equivalent of a prince". I think it's unlikely there will be equal articles for female titles. So, I prefer the redirect. Note: actress redirects to actor and programs like ms word actively don't like actress, hostess, or waitress. Not that i think corporations should dictate the evolution of our language, but it seems to be reflective of what's happening imo. Frederika Eilers (talk) 00:11, 22 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]


The article sexual coercion is exclusively about non-humans, while reproductive coercion is about humans, but not really about the tactic of coercion to engage in sex. Should we get an admin to change sexual coercion to "sexual coercion in non-humans"? Or make a new article about "coerced consent" or "sexual coercion in humans". I guess we need to write this article before we even bother renaming the non-human one. ::sigh::
btw, i invite you all to hanging out in the irc channel #wikiwomen -- it's rather desolate. Frederika Eilers (talk) 01:54, 15 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How strange... sexual coercion is the term used for humans in the IPV literature... EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 02:02, 15 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Okay, glad you also think it is weird. Frederika Eilers (talk) 01:00, 22 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:English feminists


Category:English feminists has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page.AusLondonder (talk) 18:21, 25 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mattress Performance (Carry That Weight) listed at Requested moves


A requested move discussion has been initiated for Mattress Performance (Carry That Weight) to be moved to Columbia University performance art controversy. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 23:21, 28 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Suggestion: Add corresponding "men in X" for every "women in X"

Hello all. I don't edit very often, so please forgive me if I posted this in an improper manner or in the wrong place. This seemed the right place since people here would probably be knowledgeable about gender sensitivity more than most. I'd be happy to move this to wherever the right place would be if this isn't it though. :) Anyways. I was wondering whether in addition to categories and pages like "women in X" and such, a corresponding "men in X" could be added. I know that it's important that there be a "women in X", as it helps to find women in fields in which they are underrepresented. However, having "women in science" and "scientists" in the same level to me seems to encourage the thought process that men are the default, and women are odd and/or made exotic. I hope that "men in X" corresponding with "women in X" would give the best of both sides. JonathanHopeThisIsUnique (talk) 21:15, 1 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey Jonathan. You'd probably be able to generate a more productive discussion at the gender gap task force which is meant for discussing systemic bias issues of this nature. Wikiproject feminism is meant more for collaborating to improve the encyclopedia's coverage of feminism. Bosstopher (talk) 21:25, 1 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for replying, Bosstopher! I'm going to put this suggestion to them then. Thanks for the help!JonathanHopeThisIsUnique (talk) 00:07, 2 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mattress Performance

There is a discussion at the BLP noticeboard which may be relevant to this wikiproject. --Sammy1339 (talk) 00:51, 9 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Visible title discussion at the Hillary Clinton template

There is a discussion taking place on the talk page of her template navbox concerning what name to use as the visible name of the template, 'Hillary Rodham Clinton' or 'Hillary Clinton'. Randy Kryn 21:16, 13 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RfC - Mattress Performance (Carry That Weight)

There's currently an open RfC on a topic that may be of interest to readers of this wikiproject.--BoboMeowCat (talk) 03:21, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ally skills workshop at Wikimania

The Wikimedia Foundation has given a grant to the Ada Initiative to conduct ally skills workshops at Wikimania this July as a pilot scheme. Valerie Aurora of the Ada Initiative recently wrote to the gender-gap mailing list:

"The Ally Skills Workshop teaches men simple, everyday ways to support women in their communities. This workshop will be laser-focused on techniques that work specifically in Wikipedia and related projects, including how to use existing policies and suggestions for advocating for new policies. It will also teach people about the mindset of trolls and what strategies work best for foiling them."

The pilot scheme emerged from the proposal I made last year to the Foundation's IdeaLab based on experiences at the GGTF. Thank you to everyone who supported it.

The aim is eventually to extend the scheme in the hope that it will make things less fraught for women involved in dispute resolution. Editors of any gender are welcome and can sign up here. Active admins willing to help women are particularly welcome. Sarah (talk) 01:20, 29 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sexual harassment policy

There's an RfC here about whether we ought to have a gender/sexual harassment policy. Sarah (talk) 22:56, 16 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Paper that may be of interest to this project

I am not very interested in feminism either on Wikipedia or IRL. However, I am much more interested in what academia thinks about Wikipedia, so I am posting this new paper in Computers and Composition about Wikipedia and feminism for the members of this WikiProject to read. Everymorning talk 01:20, 4 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If anyone without Science Direct access wants the PDF feel free to email me. -- haminoon (talk) 09:11, 4 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The New Campus Anti-Rape Movement Merge Proposed

A proposal to merge The New Campus Anti-Rape Movement article with the Campus sexual assault article is being discussed at Talk:Campus sexual assault. This discussion may be of interest to WikiProject Feminism. Carl Henderson (talk) 06:12, 28 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're invited! Women in Red World Virtual Edit-a-thon on Women in Leadership

You are invited!World Virtual Edit-a-thon on Women in LeadershipCome and join us remotely!
World Virtual Edit-a-thon on Women in Leadership
Dates: 7 to 20 September 2015
Love Heart KammaRahbek.SVG

The Virtual Edit-a-thon, hosted by Women in Red, will allow all those keen to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Women in Leadership to participate. As it is a two-week event, inexperienced participants will be able to draw on the assistance of more experienced editors while creating, translating or improving articles on women who are (or have been) prominent in leadership. All levels of Wikipedia editing experience are welcome. RSVP and find more details →here← --Ipigott (talk) 09:41, 30 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're invited! Smithsonian APA Center & Women in Red virtual edit-a-thon on APA women

Asian Pacific American Women World Virtual Edit-a-thon
Sarah Chang before performing.jpg
Love Heart KammaRahbek.SVG
"The Smithsonian APA Center invites you to attend the 2nd annual Wikipedia APA an editathon for cultural presence, which will be held during the month of September 2015. We are thrilled to invite you to Wikipedia APA, an editing event for improving and increasing the presence of cultural, historic, and artistic information on Wikipedia pertaining to Asian Pacific American ("APA") experiences. The second Wikipedia editathon dedicated to APA content, this project will occur as physical events during September 2015... as well as remotely, with participants taking part from all throughout the world."
Did you Know that 15% of the biographies on Wikipedia are about women? Not impressed? WiR focuses on "content gender gap". If you'd like to help contribute articles on women and women's works, we warmly welcome you! WiR will be hosting one of this world virtual edit-a-thon. The 3-day event will focus on improving Wikipedia's coverage of Asian Pacific American women and their works (books, paintings, and so on).

--Rosiestep (talk) 03:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New Campus Anti-Rape Movement article up for deletion

Discussion of the proposal to merge The New Campus Anti-Rape Movement with Campus sexual assault (see above) went on at Talk:Campus sexual assault. The editor proposing the merge judged that more input was needed, and listed the article at Articles for Deletion. I think this article may be of interest to WikiProject Feminism. Please see the AfD discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The New Campus Anti-Rape Movement. Thank you. Carl Henderson (talk) 21:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User pageantfan (2nd nomination)

Hello feminism experts. The above user box is being nominated for deletion. Anyone interested may wish to comment.—Anne Delong (talk) 19:27, 7 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Should United States say anything about relative wealth of minority women?

Please see: Talk:United States#RFC on relative wealth of Americans. EllenCT (talk) 01:04, 11 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Equity and gender feminism

The equity and gender feminism article is under discussion for deletion, and has been for a few days already. Feel free to join in. Nick Levinson (talk) 18:13, 23 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WikiProject Feminism

I created a nanostub about a notable woman designer. Shall I add {{WikiProject Feminism}} to its talk page (so that somebody else can take care of it), or this project is specifically for feminism? - üser:Altenmann >t 03:13, 22 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I guess not. - üser:Altenmann >t 19:42, 23 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Altenmann, this project covers articles and issues about feminism, so if that's the case with the article by all means add the template. Sarah (talk) 20:49, 23 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No thats not the case. I have already read the statute of this project. What I need is a kind of antigenderbias task force. (I assumed it be somehow related to feminism. I guess I was wrong.) Got one? - üser:Altenmann >t 21:52, 23 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm not sure what you're looking to do exactly. If you want to ask whether someone is interested in developing the article, you could ask at WT:GGTF, or at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women or one of the latter's sub-projects. Sarah (talk) 22:23, 23 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
yes, that's what i need. thx, - üser:Altenmann >t 23:22, 23 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is Third-wave feminism equal to Neofeminism?

In June 2015 it was proposed to merge the article at Third-wave feminism into the article at Neofeminism based upon the perception that they are the same topic. The lead at Third-wave feminism even states: Third-wave feminism (also known as Neo-Feminism). There has not been much discussion of this proposal to date. Does anyone disagree with it? Discussion at Talk:Third-wave feminism#Merger Proposal. --Bejnar (talk) 19:25, 26 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

a discussion on Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard

There is a discussion going on here: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard, section: Talk:Jess Greenberg that may be of interest and that other editors are welcome to join. Tuesdaymight (talk) 14:53, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WP:JCW needs help

WP:JCW, a compilation of all |journal= parameters of citation templates has recently updated. A few women/feminism-related publications are heavily cited, and lack articles on them. Any help on writing those would be greatly appreciated (and we even have some guides at WP:JWG (journals) and WP:MWG (magazines), to help editors create these articles). I took the liberty of compiling a list, although I'm no expert on the topic, and I'm only basing myself on the titles of these publications. I could be missing a few, or include things not really related to the project, so feel free to edit the below list.

Note that for some of them, it might be preferable (e.g. if they fail WP:NJOURNALS or WP:GNG) to expand the articles on their publisher/associated societies with a section on the journal/magazine, and create a redirect to that section, rather than create a standalone article. But I leave that for others to decide. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 01:39, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@The Vintage Feminist: Going to ping you given you've recently created Feminist Review. If you're looking for other journals to write about, the above list is probably as good a place to start as any. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 14:24, 2 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've been getting all 41 of journals listed by Thomson Reuters in the category of "women's studies" onto Wikipedia. All 41 of them are now on this list.
The current rankings, according to Reuters are:
#1 Women's Health Issues, #2 Journal of Women's Health, #3 Gender & Society, #4 Psychology of Women Quarterly, #5 Asian Women, #6 Sex Roles, #7 Women & Health, #8 Violence Against Women, #9 Gender, Place & Culture: A Journal of Feminist Geography, #10 Feminist Economics, #11 Radical Philosophy, #12 Social Politics, #13 Gender, Work and Organization, #14 Signs, #15 Feminist Theory, #16 Health Care for Women International, #17 Feminism & Psychology, #18 Journal of Middle East Women's Studies, #19 Politics & Gender, #20 Journal of Gender Studies, #21 European Journal of Women's Studies, #22 Asian Journal of Women's Studies, #23 Journal of Women & Aging, #24 Affilia, #25 International Feminist Journal of Politics, #26 International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics #27 Women's Studies International Forum, #28 Gender and Language, #29 Hypatia: A Journal of Feminist Philosophy, #30 Feminist Review, #31 Feminist Studies, #32 Travail, Genre et Sociétés, #33 differences, #34 Feminist Legal Studies, #35 Women & Therapy, #36 Frontiers: A Journal of Women's Studies, #37 Journal of Women, Politics & Policy, #38 Australian Feminist Studies, #39 Journal of Women's History, #40 Indian Journal of Gender Studies, #41 Feministische Studien. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 15:12, 2 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's... rather impressive actually. The three I mentioned are used more often on Wikipedia than many on that list, if you're looking to write more of those. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 16:00, 2 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Incredibly impressive work. Those journal infoboxes look terrifying! Brilliant creations, thank you. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 21:25, 2 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Pao effect

I just started The Pao effect as a minimal stub. It is about the momentum for gender equality that Ellen Pao's gender discrimination lawsuit started. If no one helps, this article will be deleted within a couple of hours, IMWE (in my wiki-experience). Ottawahitech (talk) 11:20, 11 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It looks like a neologism to me. Only two of the four sources you added mention the term. However, since it's so new, there are likely to be more sources appearing with time, so if it is nominated for deletion you can always suggest moving it to Draft for a while and then back when it's more developed. (It would be nice to find who "coined" the phrase.) The small amount of content could also be part of the Ellen Pao article with a redirect from the term. In any case, since this topic appears to be drawing continuing interest, your work will be included in the encyclopedia one way or another.—Anne Delong (talk) 20:12, 11 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re-organization of WikiProject Women

There currently is a discussion about the future organization of Wikipedia:WikiProject Women and several other women-related Wikiprojects and taskforces at the above link. Some aspects may be of interests to editors of this project and your participation in the discussion would be appreciated. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 12:08, 13 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're invited! Women in Red World Virtual Edit-a-thon on Women in Architecture

You are invited!World Virtual Edit-a-thon on Women in Architecture sponsored by the Solomon R. Guggenheim MuseumCome and join us remotely!
Women in Architecture Guggenheim Logo.jpg
World Virtual Edit-a-thon on Women in Architecture
Dates: 15 to 25 October 2015
Love Heart KammaRahbek.SVG

The Virtual Edit-a-thon, hosted by Women in Red in parallel with a series of "physical" Guggenheim edit-a-thons, will allow all those keen to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Women in Architecture to participate. As it stretches over a week and a half, inexperienced participants will be able to draw on the assistance of more experienced editors while creating, translating or improving articles on women who are (or have been) prominent in architecture. All levels of Wikipedia editing experience are welcome. RSVP and find more details →here←--Ipigott (talk) 10:47, 27 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

50 Good Articles?

We are only 1 article away from reaching 50 Good Articles! There are currently 3 articles awaiting Good Article assessment: Tiffany Doggett, Fifty Shades of Grey, and The Fine Young Capitalists. Any volunteers? Kaldari (talk) 00:48, 25 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, Kaldari, I'm reviewing Tiffany Doggett as a GA Candidate. Any help with additional GA Reviewers for the others would be most appreciated. — Cirt (talk) 12:52, 17 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Atlantic - How Wikipedia Is Hostile to Women

WikiProject members may be interested in above article, either as a potential good source for Quality improvement of related articles, or simply to read. — Cirt (talk) 18:33, 21 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RFC: 2015 Art+Feminism Grant

Art+Feminism has prepared a combined renewal of our IEG grant and PEG grant. If awarded, these grants will fund: childcare and refreshments for the 2016 international Art+Feminism Edit-a-thons; in-person training sessions for New York-city based volunteers and online training sessions national and international node organizers; the expansion of our outreach to post-secondary institutions and international Wikimedia chapters; building sustainable infrastructure for node organizers; and making our materials more intersectional. We seek community comment to help complete the grant process: here -- Theredproject (talk) 00:00, 23 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Scientific American source/prevalence of domestic violence data at the Domestic violence article

Opinions are needed on the following matter: Talk:Domestic violence#Should the Scientific American "rates of domestic violence are roughly equal between men and women" material be included? A WP:Permalink for it is here. Flyer22 (talk) 05:58, 23 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rape in Germany

A user continues to remove the material that he doesn't like. Please see this page. (talk) 04:09, 24 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I responded on your talk page. Your material - the part about the explanation of the law is wrong (and poorly sourced - you can't use the media to explain the judicial interpretation of legal terms; you must use high quality legal sources). Even if we accept your source, your addition is still wrong because it is misrepresenting the source (with regard to the explanation of what constitutes the offense of rape under Section 177 of the Criminal Code of Germany). Please do not play with legal terms. I'm perfectly fine with you adding that the law has been criticized for being too narrow and that there are political discussions about changing it, but please don't misrepresent what the law actually says! 2A02:2F01:506F:FFFF:0:0:50C:5057 (talk) 04:22, 24 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Centre for Equality and Inclusion - new article

I've created a new article on the organisation, Centre for Equality and Inclusion.

Centre for Equality and Inclusion is a non-governmental organisation based in India that works towards female empowerment and women's rights.

If you'd like to help with research or to improve the article's quality, source suggestions would be appreciated, at Talk:Centre for Equality and Inclusion.

Thank you,

Cirt (talk) 14:50, 25 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're invited! Women in Red World Virtual Edit-a-thon on Women in Science

You are invited! Join us remotely!

World Virtual Edit-a-thon on Women in Science

Love Heart KammaRahbek.SVG
Women Science.png
  • Dates: 8 to 29 November 2015
  • Location: Worldwide/virtual/online event
  • Host/Facilitator: Women in Red (WiR) in collaboration with Women scientists: Did you know that only 15% of the biographies on Wikipedia are about women? WiR focuses on "content gender gap". If you'd like to help contribute articles on women and women's works, we warmly welcome you!
  • Sponsor: New York Academy of Sciences
  • Event details: This is a virtual edit-a-thon hosted by WiR in parallel with a "phyisical" event during the afternoon of Sunday, November 22 in New York City. It will allow all those keen to improve Wikipedia's coverage of women in science to participate. As the virtual edit-a-thon stretches over three weeks, new participants will be able to draw on the assistance of more experienced editors while creating, translating or improving articles on women who are (or have been) prominent in the field. All levels of Wikipedia editing experience are welcome.
  • RSVP and learn more: →here←--Ipigott (talk) 11:30, 29 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sara Alpern

Does anyone have access to anything that will help definitively establish Alpern as notable? Her works seem to be cited on a frequent basis but I have not been able to find materials that will clearly meet WP:AUTHOR or WP:PROF. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 03:45, 2 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comfort women

Apparently some editors, including myself, have had trouble adding information on "comfort women" coerced by the Koreans into prostitution during the Korean and Vietnam Wars. The sources seem fairly solid on this: .[1][2][3][4][5] but I'm getting some pushback from established WP editors. If anyone here is interested in joining the discussion, it's here. Cla68 (talk) 05:52, 3 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Other editors interested in getting involved in this would do to well to read previous discussions on the page Cla links, notice both the quality of sources Cla68 is using (which are primarily self-published or from Japanese outlets,) as well as Cla68's previous involvement with gender issues here, as well as knowing that Cla68 sought to punish the administrator who moved Chelsea Manning's article to it's proper title. There's certainly a place on Wikipedia for discussion of Vietnamese comfort women, but I would be careful in assuming that Cla68 is earnestly editing articles about gender to ensure that important historical events are accurately represented. Vietnamese comfort women should certainly be documented here, but it'd be a good idea to be aware of Cla68's past with regards to gender related issues in approaching this one with him. Kevin Gorman (talk) 06:15, 3 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Kevin, I know you didn't appreciate it when I once criticized you for your problematic attitude towards gender equality issues here in Wikipedia and I'm aware since then you've tried to improve your support for gender equality and representation. I appreciate your efforts to do so. However, please don't let your personal animus towards me get in the way of addressing an important women's issue which has so far been suppressed in Wikipedia. In fact, I invite you to also participate in that talk page discussion. The topic is more important than me and you. Cla68 (talk) 06:39, 3 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • {{citationneeded}} re: the first half of your statement.I'm unwilling to facilitate any unwitting people from entering in to the cultural buzzsaw this situation will likely involve, and your previous involvement in gender issues and your particular approach here make me think that (a) it's going to suck for anyone who unwittingly gets involved not aware of the background, and (b) your prior involvement in gender issues strains the ability of a reasonable person to follow WP:AGF w/r/t your actions re: gender. Kevin Gorman (talk) 21:13, 7 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • From what I can see you agree with Cla68 on this issue, but refuse to help him because he's Cla68? Isn't that just cutting off your nose to spite your face? Brustopher (talk) 21:39, 7 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gail Godwin

The article is about a female author known in part for feminist themes. I've shared a draft for consideration here and thought the discussion may be of interest to editors here. David King, Ethical Wiki (Talk) 04:57, 12 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lead sentences needing improvement

I generated a list of lead sentences needing improvement (specific to WikiProject Feminism). Please help improve them so that they are easier to read. Kaldari (talk) 02:36, 14 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Reporters covering gender discrimination has been nominated for deletion

FYI Category:Reporters covering gender discrimination has been nominated for deletion:

Nominator's rationale:... journalists in this category have covered other topics...Can you imagine the category clutter if we started categorizing career reporters by every story topic they write about? Ottawahitech (talk) 10:45, 14 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

help with article written by a colleague - how do we stop it being rejected

a colleague has written an article upon an artist who was regarded as globally significant in the mail art movement of the 1970s a major counter cultural and experimental art movement


it keeps getting rejected even though it has independent verifiable sources of high level - I am concerned that the rejections are by people with little experience in the art field

this is the letter that I wrote to the last person to evaluate this draft -

Dear SwisterTwister - I am wondering what is your knowledge of the recent history of contemporary art from the 1960s onwards also the sources that have been used include the Conversation which is an international journal of commentary on major cultural and political issues published in several countries and in several languages and a website from the university of Western Australia and the Lomholt Mail Archive one of the world's best collections of mail art for the importance of Mail Art see https://en.wikipedia.orghttps://demo.azizisearch.com/starter/google/wikipedia/page/Mail_art and Pat was globally renowned as one of the key women in the Mail Art Movement I am a little concerned about the knowledge base from where your evaluations of notability come from - I am a curator and an art/design historian/theorist in Australia and I know the history of art in my country and globally very well I will send these links through to the art portal too - as I think that the notability criteria could also be evaluated in that context too Bebe Jumeau (talk) 14:08, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Bebe Jumeau (talk) 14:21, 19 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

help with article

Hey everyone, I'm trying to submit an article for quite a while now and it keeps being rejected. Can anyone help me with some tips? This is the link: https://en.wikipedia.orghttps://demo.azizisearch.com/starter/google/wikipedia/page/Draft:Women_Help_Women

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by P. Utopia (talkcontribs) 18:34, 22 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am just a wikipedia user, who writes and edits occiasional themes around art and culture and history but I note that the same person who rejected the draft of my colleagues article also rejected yours - SwisterTwister - both articles with female content - and I note there are major newspapers cited in your article - so why are these not seen as verifiable sources ...

Bebe Jumeau (talk) 14:27, 19 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

GAR for Bra

Bra, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. sst✈(discuss) 04:28, 24 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're invited! Women in Red World Virtual Edit-a-thon on Women in Religion

You are invited! Join us remotely!

World Virtual Edit-a-thon on Women in Religion

Love Heart KammaRahbek.SVG
  • Dates: 5 to 15 December 2015
  • Location: Worldwide/virtual/online event
  • Host: Women in Red (WiR): Did you know that only 15% of the biographies on Wikipedia are about women? WiR focuses on "content gender gap". If you'd like to help contribute articles on women and women's works, we warmly welcome you!
  • Event details: This is a virtual edit-a-thon hosted by WiR. It will allow all those keen to improve Wikipedia's coverage of women in reigion to participate. All levels of Wikipedia editing experience are welcome.
  • RSVP and learn more: →here←--Ipigott (talk) 11:00, 3 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Misogynistic "MGTOW" page started

Literally, and proudly, misogynistic they are. Just a heads-up... new page https://en.wikipedia.orghttps://demo.azizisearch.com/starter/google/wikipedia/page/Men_Going_Their_Own_Way Worth keeping an eye on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:37, 26 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

BLPN discussion on whether women who report being raped can be referred to as "victims"

Here -- the usual crap. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 17:58, 29 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I've just noticed for the first time what an abysmal shape Women's suffrage is in. That is to say, there's about as big a gap as I've ever seen between this article's current state and the importance of its subject as a topic of both historical and current topic! Anybody volunteers want to help me whip it into shape for the new year? Snow let's rap 06:30, 26 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Snow Rise: That sounds like a lovely new year's project. I'm in. :) I'll comment more on Talk:Women's suffrage as things come up. Permstrump (talk) 18:36, 29 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm adding the redlinks to the Women in Red redlink lists. :) If you find other potential redlinks for us to work on, please add them or let me know. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:18, 29 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Awesome, good notion! I'm gonna "nibble at the corners" so to speak, tightening the prose in some section that appear to have been poorly translated, but I'll open a discussion on the talk page concerning larger organizational issues soon, for those interested. Snow let's rap 00:39, 30 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Andrea Dworkin reassessment

Andrea Dworkin, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. BlookerG talk 01:30, 30 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tagging articles (n00b question)

I was about to tag Talk:Sophia Duleep Singh for this project, but I wanted to double check a few things first. It's already tagged for WP:Women's History. Does it matter if it's tagged for both? What happens after it's tagged? And of lastly, does it make sense to tag that article for this project? Permstrump (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

By "tagged" do you mean adding a {{WikiProject Feminism|class=c}} template at the top? If so, then yes, I would say that is entirely appropriate, and no, it doesn't matter how many previous links to other wikiprojects have been added, provided that they are all more or less reasonable given the subject matter of the article. These links merely serve the purpose of informing the contributors on the talk page of where they might be able to seek assistance, advice, or discussion on the article at hand, and provide a rough ranking of how important the article is seen to be within the framework of the relevant project. Unlike WP:categories, which are placed on the front-facing article itself, placing one does not have very many complicated implications for readers, editors, bots, maintenance and WP:verification, so you can feel free to be somewhat liberal in where you place them. Snow let's rap 01:14, 31 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, that's what I meant by tagging. Hehe. Thanks! :) Permstrump (talk) 05:09, 31 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Invitation to an online editathon on Black Women's History


Black Women's History online edit-a-thon

Love Heart KammaRahbek.SVG

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Women in Red events by removing your name from this list.)--Ipigott (talk) 12:02, 27 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia Primary School invitation for domestic violence and sexism

Hi everybody. On behalf of the teams behind the Wikipedia Primary School research project, I would like to announce that the articles Domestic violence and sexism were selected a while ago to be reviewed by an external expert. Unfortunately, the expert who had agreed to review had to decline later on. Our first call for community review was already 6 months ago and since then the two articles have changed quite a lot. We have identified another expert to help review the articles. We would like to ask interested editors to join our efforts and improve the articles before October 31, 2015 (any timezone) as they see fit.
A revision will be then sent to the designated expert for review. Any notes and remarks written by the external expert will be made available on the talk pages under a CC-BY-SA license as soon as possible, so that you can read them, discuss them and then decide if and how to use them. Please sign up here to let us know you're collaborating. Thanks a lot for your support! -- Anthere (talk)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Margaret Murray/archive1

Hello everyone; there's an article languishing at FAC about Margaret Murray, a 20th century feminist who was also a pioneering early archaeologist and folklorist. It doesn't seem to be capturing the attention of FAC reviewers (other than me)- if anyone has a few hours free, your comments would surely be welcomed by the article's author. Thanks, Josh Milburn (talk) 08:48, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WP:FEM promo sent through AfC?

Do you all know about this event?--Mr. Guye (talk) 01:13, 9 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please join in the discussion...

I have proposed to change the name of the Vaginal flora article to 'Vaginal microbiota'. Though it is not always apparent, I sense that there are more opinions needed from women editors and those editors who have identified themselves as being part of this project. Please comment here: Talk:Vaginal flora. Best Regards,

Barbara (WVS) (talk) 22:24, 13 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Social justice warrior - move discussion

Notifying this WikiProject talk page as article is relevant to the topic

There is a move discussion ongoing related to this WikiProject.

  1. Article = Social justice warrior
  2. Move discussion at Talk:Social_justice_warrior#Requested_move_6_April_2016.

Feel free to comment however you wish.

Thank you,

Cirt (talk) 02:35, 6 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Women's History Month worldwide online edit-a-thon

AF Mark 3.jpg
You are invited...
Love Heart KammaRahbek.SVG

Women's History Month worldwide online edit-a-thon

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)
--Rosiestep (talk) 20:59, 20 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Please comment and fix. Bearian (talk) 23:35, 11 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Feminist scholars category

I would like to see a Category:Feminist scholars subcategory of category:Feminists and category:Scholars. I don't know enough about either category's criteria to know who to include, but maybe a bot could be programmed to recognize people who appear in both (or their respective subcategories) and then tag them if there is overlap?

The phrase "feminist scholars" gets used and this would be useful in explaining what it means by giving examples.

I recognized a similar Category:Feminist studies scholars but I'm not sure if it's the same thing. This sounds like it would refer to a scholar with a degree in a field of "feminist studies" while "feminist scholar" sounds more like it could be any type of scholar who is a feminist? (talk) 18:51, 17 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Body Positive Movement

Participants in this project might be interested in this new article. As written it is unduly promotional, but it has enough positive aspects that I would prefer to leave improvements in the hands of editors who have a better understanding of the topic than I do. Looie496 (talk) 16:16, 26 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lise Meitner

The Lise Meitner page sounds as if it was written by Otto Hahn. I'm a terrible writer and a terrible editor, but I would be very appreciative if someone took a look at Lise Meitner's page and helped to construct an entry that focuses more on Ms. Meitner and less on her collaborators.



"After the war, Meitner, while acknowledging her own moral failing in staying in Germany from 1933 to 1938, was bitterly critical of Hahn, Max von Laue and other German scientists who, she thought, would have collaborated with the Nazis and done nothing to protest against the crimes of Hitler's regime. Referring to the leading German nuclear physicist Werner Heisenberg, she said: "Heisenberg and many millions with him should be forced to see these camps and the martyred people." She wrote to Hahn:

'You all worked for Nazi Germany. And you tried to offer only a passive resistance. Certainly, to buy off your conscience you helped here and there a persecuted person, but millions of innocent human beings were allowed to be murdered without any kind of protest being uttered ... [it is said that] first you betrayed your friends, then your children in that you let them stake their lives on a criminal war – and finally that you betrayed Germany itself, because when the war was already quite hopeless, you did not once arm yourselves against the senseless destruction of Germany.[42]'

Hahn received this letter but it did not harm his friendship with Meitner, because he knew that she had no idea at all of the real existing situation in the Nazi era after her escape in July 1938. After the war in the 1950s and 1960s, Lise Meitner again enjoyed visiting Germany and staying with Hahn and his family for several days on different occasions, particularly on March 8, 1959, to celebrate Hahn's 80th birthday in Göttingen, where she addressed recollections in his honour. Also Hahn wrote in his memoirs, which were published shortly after his death in 1968, that he and Lise Meitner had remained lifelong close friends.[43"

Really? Hahn knew Meitner "had no idea at all of the real existing situation in the Nazi era after her escape in July 1938."? That's mental.

and "(Meitner) died on 27 October 1968 at the age of 89. Meitner was not informed of the deaths of Otto Hahn (d. July 1968) or his wife Edith, as her family believed it would be too much for someone so frail.[4]" Why is that included? Again, mental! Zoestrauss (talk) 18:56, 15 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Class Projects

Is there any creative thought out there as to how to improve the phenomenon of class projects, especially in gender related articles? Encouraging more people to get involved in editing is a great thing. But I see a lot of content, especially in gender articles, that seems dumped en masse by undergrads to get a grade. I wonder if it doesn't make more work in the end for other editors trying to fix all of the things that were dumped and forgotten.

I started thinking about this today when I had to blank a section posted by a student on Domestic Violence and posted a page's worth of things wrong with it in the talk. I've deleted lots of student generated material in the past. Simply put, most of it doesn't conform to WP standards and a lot of it is bloat, tangentially related material shoe horned into an article.

I appreciate that women and gender studies departments want their students to contribute. I believe they intend to do a good thing. I probably would have joined WP a lot earlier if my WGS professors had done something similar. But I get the impression that the professors are more concerned with whether the students regurgitated the things they learned in class, than they are about whether their students produced well sourced and written contributions.

The only thing I can think of is some kind of requirement that professors demonstrate some moderate understanding of WP standards before they register to do this as a group. That way they may better judge their student's contributions on their likelihood of improvement and longevity, and not on the standards of an undergraduate essay, which are much lower than the ones here.

Thoughts? Timothyjosephwood (talk) 22:19, 23 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Trouble finding references? The Wikipedia Library is proud to announce ...

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library

Alexander Street Press (ASP) is an electronic academic database publisher. Its "Academic Video Online" collection includes videos in a range of subject

areas, including news programs (notably shows like 60 minutes), music and theatre, lectures and demonstrations, and documentaries. The Academic Video Online: Premium

collection would be useful for researching topics related to science, history, music and dance, anthropology, business, counseling and therapy, news, nursing, drama,

and more. For more details see their website.

There are up to 30 one-year ASP accounts available to experienced Wikipedians through this partnership. To apply for free access, please go to WP:ASP.

Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 08:10, 25 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ada Summers

Hi guys, if you have time/can find the sources over the next few days then I'd please ask that you help me expand Ada Summers so she meets the DYK length criteria (it/s about 2/3rds of the way there so far). Thanks, GiantSnowman 11:48, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi GiantSnowman. At this moment it looks nearly eligible but it is on a 7-day cusp and might fall over that chasm. I think it needs to get to 1500 characters and it is at 1400 and change. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 08:27, 25 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Women are everywhere"

Hi, "Women are everywhere" is a project about the gender gap problem in Wikipedia, with a focus on Italian Wikipedia. You can find a draft for an Individual Engagement Grant at this link https://meta.wikimedia.orghttps://demo.azizisearch.com/starter/google/wikipedia/page/Grants:IEG/Women_are_everywhere. It would be great if I could have your help and your feedback on this project to improve it. Many thanks--Kenzia (talk) 10:24, 2 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussion at SPI

SPI Policy discussion may be of interest to project members: Wikipedia_talk:Sock_puppetry#Sexist.2C_discriminatory_language_in_WP:FAMILY. Montanabw(talk) 04:46, 3 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ban Bossy

Hi there! Anyone willing to take a look/edit pass at the article lede at Ban Bossy or contribute to the discussion on the talk page? There were concerns about the lede's neutrality and also concerns about lack of specificity. The recent evolution has gone:

The Ban Bossy campaign is a television, radio, and magazine advocacy campaign launched in 2014 that criticizes the use of the word "bossy" over concerns of harmful effects on girls and women.
Ban Bossy is a television, radio, and magazine advocacy campaign launched in 2014. The campaign criticizes the use of the word "bossy" to describe assertive girls and women, on the basis that the word is stigmatizing and may discourage girls and women from seeking positions of leadership.
The Ban Bossy campaign is a television, radio, and magazine censorship advocacy campaign launched in 2014 with the mission of eliminating the use of the word "bossy" from the English language due to the campaign's claim of its perceived harmful effect on young women.
Ban Bossy is a self censorship campaign launched in 2014. The campaign criticizes the use of the word "bossy" to describe assertive girls and women, believing that the word is stigmatizing and may discourage girls and women from seeking positions of leadership.

Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:11, 6 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Interested in virtually editing?

Hi! I was wondering if anyone would be interested in attending this event either in person or virtually. It's an edit-a-thon at the University of Virginia as part of a larger Take Back the Night event and will occur next Wednesday. Wikipedia:Meetup/Take Back the Night at UVA

I also needed help finding articles for the edit-a-thon, either to edit or to create. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 03:50, 6 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tokyogirl79, see talk on Domestic violence re: creation of a DV in same sex relationships article. With the section already on the DV main plus the referenced lesbain DV article already created, much of the content already exists, just needs a bit of extra research and a judicious merger.
There's also been a suggestion on DV to create a media section (see talk also), which should be relatively simple. I would like to see it become it's own article honestly. Timothyjosephwood (talk) 17:58, 6 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

2016 Just For The Record IEG & PEG Grants notification — intersectional & gender diversity on Wikipedia!

more gender diversity on Wikipedia!

Just For The Record has prepared a combined IEG grant and PEG grant application to work on the promotion of more gender diversity on Wikipedia with an intersectional perspective. These grant applications build upon the exciting results of our 2015-2016 Brussels-based series of events addressing the gender gap on Wikipedia. Just For The Record has created a network in which expertise on these questions is created and shared. With our new applications, we want to expand this knowledge and network beyond the context of the edit-a-thon!

If awarded, the PEG grant will fund: location and refreshments for the 2016-2017 Just For The Record edit-a-thons. If awarded, the IEG grant will fund: research and analysis into the representation of gender on Wikipedia, combined with the construction of a research/ambassador network, leading to an intersectional non-sexist guide on how knowledge and history can be written in a more diverse way. We seek community comment, discussions and endorsement signatures (section at the bottom of the pages) to help complete the grant process: here and here! Many thanks, Lfurter (talk) 09:37, 9 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Please discuss. Bearian (talk) 19:58, 27 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Women's Shelter

I am currently working on editing the Women's shelter article and was hoping to get advice and guidance. I plan on editing the introduction to add more references and to give a more comprehensive overview of what women's shelters are and offer. I also plan on adding sections on services and effects to further reader's knowledge about the functioning of these programs. Lastly, I hope to add more links to sites where people can access resources. Let me know what you think of these proposed changes and whether you notice any other flaws. Slklose (talk) 19:51, 27 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Link to Women's shelter. Bearian (talk) 19:58, 27 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for editing this article. I linked to a few in the see also section. Bearian (talk) 20:05, 27 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gender representation on corporate boards

Hi, I will be updating the page on Gender representation on corporate boards of directors and would be grateful for any advice. My proposed amendments are listed on the talk page: Talk:Gender_representation_on_corporate_boards_of_directors. Please let me know if you have any suggestions. Scowch (talk) 16:24, 28 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Equity, gender, and victim feminism articles

I just noticed an anonymous editor [re]created articles for victim feminism, gender feminism, and equity feminism.

The articles are on my watchlist because I participated in an AfD about "equity and gender feminism" last year. It's a combination term via Christina Hoff Sommers to contrast, more or less, ~~[liberal feminism, individualist feminism, and/or first-wave feminism] and ~~[radical feminism, social construction of gender]. "Victim feminism" is basically an antifeminist or postfeminist pejorative mostly intended for the latter.

I'm playing a little fast and loose with some very complex ideas, I know.

There's no way victim feminism should have its own article, but I'm hesitant to think any of these should exist. From what I gather (editorializing now), at least in popular discourse today, the distinction is most commonly made by e.g. the gamergate or MRA crowd to separate "valid" feminism from "feminazis"/"SJWs".

My inclination is to send victim feminism to AfD, merge selectively and redirect equity feminism to liberal feminism, an merge selectively and redirect gender feminism to radical feminism or postfeminism (not because it's synonymous, of course). I'm not completely confident I have it right, though, so as I don't think anybody's watching those articles, I'm hoping to get some other opinions and/or eyeballs here. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 18:47, 6 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My gut reaction is that your proposal sounds like it makes a lot of sense. I'll look at all of the articles more thoroughly after work tonight and post an update in the event that my opinion changes. PermStrump(talk) 20:19, 6 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Permstrump: Inclined to move forward with the afd at least. Thought I'd check in to see if you (or others) took a look and have thoughts on the matter. I'll probably boldly redirect the other two for now and open a merge discussion if it's reverted. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 14:31, 13 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Victim feminism is itching for a deletion. A one line article on a uncommonly used pejorative doesn't do anyone any good. Otherwise, I wonder if some broader article on reactionary feminism or something similar might encompass multiple such topics in something more resembling an actual article. They've got sources. Can't fault them on that. TimothyJosephWood 15:00, 13 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just going to go ahead and bump this. The AfD was just relisted again after a while of no participation. Hoping to get some additional voices to push it one way or another rather than a no consensus outcome. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 22:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'd push for a merge of most of this material into assorted relevant articles. BTW, anyone here want to weigh in at the AfD for Resting bitch face? Montanabw(talk) 23:02, 1 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]