Hi Ian. Thanks for reviewing Vivienne de Silva Boralessa! Just a quick question though.

I see you switched the sort tag from "de Silva Boralessa, Vivienne" to "Silva Boralessa, Vivienne de". Is there a convention for surnames like de Silva here on Wikipedia? I only ask, since "de Silva" in its entirety is an actual surname here in Sri Lanka. - ක - (talk) 16:57, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes, Jesuschristonacamel, the usual way of listing names like this for alphabetical sequencing in categories, etc., is to take the first meaningful element from the family name as explained under Wikipedia:Categorization_of_people. See for example Rubén da Silva, Estanislau da Silva, Ludwig van Beethoven, Marquis de Sade, Antoine Charles Louis de Lasalle, etc. Nevertheless, as far as Sri Lankan people are concerned, I see that this practice has not been followed in the majority of cases. We have, for example, A. E. de Silva, Aravinda de Silva, Arjuna de Silva, Vajiranath Lakshman De Silva, and many more sorted under "D", while Albert de Silva, G. P. S. de Silva, and Shan Wijayalal De Silva are sorted under "S". If you think there is a special reason why Sri Lankan Portuguese names should be treated in a special way, then I think we could open a discussion on Wikipedia_talk:Categorization_of_people. Nevertheless, I see that standard works such as the Encyclopaedia Britannica list them under the true family name rather than under the "de", "da", or whatever. If you want to go back to "de Silva" rather than "Silva" I will not revert. Anyway, it's good to come in contact with a well established editor from Sri Lanka. If you are keen to create biographies on other women from your part of the world, perhaps you should join us on Wikipedia:Women in Red. In any case, please keep in touch and let me know if I can help you out with anything else.--Ipigott (talk) 20:06, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

No, that's fine. I'm new around here so I was wondering what the policy was. There does seem to be quite a lot of variation in the way the rule's been applied to Sri Lankan names- Aravinda de Silva was one of the first pages I checked after I noticed your edit, and that's what made me curious as to why certain pages had S and others had d.

I can't think of a coherently specific reason why they should be given specific treatment if the original Portuguese names have been treated the way set out on the Categorization page- there probably is one to be made, possibly something to do with the fact that 'de' and 'da' still hold a meaning to speakers of the Romance Languages and are treated as somewhat of a grey area between a given name and a surname, while they're treated as just another part of your surname with no special significance if you're from an ex-colony that doesn't still use Portuguese/French etc. It'll take a more knowledgeable soul than me to present such an argument in a half decent way, however.

Still, food for thought. Thanks for the help :)

- ක - (talk) 21:32, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

I think I am going to nominate it for GA but I have two things I must clarify. When did her husband return from exile? (He did because they had three more children) and a blog I found said she received an award from the United Nations in 1993, but I cannot find anything about it. It is possible I missed it in the Portuguese thesis, as I had to translate it one page at a time, which was quite cumbersome for 300+ pages. I am wondering if you can help solve these two issues and give the file a copy edit? Any help you can give will be immensely appreciated. SusunW (talk) 16:48, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

SusunW: I'll have a good look at it tomorrow.--Ipigott (talk) 16:55, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you so much, Ian! By the by, most Spanish sources use Carmen Casco de Lara Castro or Coca de Lara Castro. All English sources I found call her Carmen de Lara Castro. SusunW (talk) 16:57, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

I cannot find anything about her husband other than that he was a professor. However, I found the children's baptismal dates, which gives a fairly good idea that his exile was about 5 years. It could have been less, I have no way of knowing, so just added the dates to give context. SusunW (talk) 01:02, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Page 52 of the Portuguese thesis also tells us that as a soldier he had fought in the Chaco War. See also Footnote 87. Page 59 tells us that on being exiled, he spent some time in Argentina and Uruguay before returning to Paraguay. On Page 62, it is stated that he returned from exile one and a half months after the 1947 Revolution or Paraguayan Civil War, i.e. in October 1947 (based on the interview cited in Footnote 108). You already mention that he helped the political prisoners around that time. You can find numerous other references to Luis Mariano Lara Castro simply by searching for "Mariano" in the text. I have not found anything on the United Nations.--Ipigott (talk) 10:50, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

I see from here that in 1992 she received an award from the United Nations for her contribution to humanism and human rights.--Ipigott (talk) 10:59, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

From here, it appears the award was granted jointly to Carmen and her husband.--Ipigott (talk) 11:09, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

You are amazing! I so appreciate the help and will add these posthaste. She was fascinating. Hard to write, as I had to read a lot about all the atrocities that were going on in the country to try to put her story into context, but so worth it. Truly a notable woman in my book. SusunW (talk) 13:45, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

• If you are going for GA, I think you should try to find more images. Perhaps some have been published in the press. There are also a few items needing attention. I'm not too happy about the heading "Teaching career" as the section says very little about her teaching. It seems to be more about family developments. In the last sentence you mention "two wars". Which ones? I also think it would be useful to expand on the national and international acclaim she has attracted. If I can help out with any other specific items, just let me know.--Ipigott (talk) 14:34, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

I renamed it early career and family, added a bit about her uncle being exiled after the Chaco War and changed two wars to reflect the Chaco War and the Civil War. There are virtually no pictures on Paraguay that I can find—either on or off WP. I did manage to find one of the legislative building, or what was the legislative building when she served. I can find no free images of "Monumento a las Residentas, Luque" the statue that was erected at her instigation for Paraguayan Women's Day. Nor of the house in which it is alleged she was born in "La Casa Cueto Alvarenga", which according to this was part of the Convent of San Francisco and has photos with the family in the house. Any search for the convent in Paraguay just yields tons of stuff called (Basilica, Catedral, Convento, etc.) "... Señora de la Asunción" in the search in Mexico, Peru, Argentina, but nada in Paraguay. As usual, I am a total failure in looking for photographs. I don't really know what to say regarding her recognition, it's one of the reasons I wanted to find the UN info. Were there any Spanish newspaper archives, I am sure we would find more information about her international ties. There seem to be few articles about her in English, which is a total shame. Feel free to add anything you want, as your additions always improve an article. SusunW (talk) 17:03, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

I put a photo request on the talk page for both the monument and the house, maybe someone can find usable images. I added an image of Stroessner. I was able to find where she has been the subject of conferences and articles have been written on her from Argentina and France, as well as another article from Brazil. I also added a bit about her participation in the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights review processes. Short of saying that internationally she was considered to be the leading human rights figure in Paraguay in her day, I don't know what else I could say about her international acclaim. Nearly every document says that but I thought that it would be viewed as puffery and IMO, her records seems to speak for itself. SusunW (talk) 13:57, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

SusunW: I think you have reached the stage where you could submit the article for GA. We can then deal with any other suggestions made. Once again, you've done a really impressive job. Well done! While I'm here, I accidentally came acrross SusunW/Esther De Mezerville in the main space. I think it needs to be deleted.--Ipigott (talk) 15:30, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Again, I thank you for your help. It's a much better article now :) I agree with you that the link on de Mezerville should be deleted, but I have zero idea how. Clearly it was one of my first attempts to move an article and I had to move it twice. SusunW (talk) 15:39, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

I need to speak to Marti WMF but I'm thinking that given a lot of countries won't have an even amount of women bios that the contest would be best split into six continents and give larger prizes for whoever does the most articles from the most countries. We'll still need to further develop the Women in Red missing article banks over the next six weeks I think and try to get some missing articles listed for every country. If I can't get a bot coded I'll need another donor to donate something so I can give a decent prize for whoeever reviews the most articles. All it will need is to check prose count using the tool and check there's no unsourced paragraphs.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:10, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld: Does that means the contest will definitely be going ahead in November? If so, will be just be for the month of November or will it extend further? By the six continents, do you mean Africa, Asia, Europe, North America, South America and Oceania? Maybe it would be sensible to allocate one continent per month over the next six months: maybe Asia/November, Africa/December, Europe/January, Oceania/February, North America/March and South America/April. That will also make it easier to monitor progress each month and update red link lists month by month. We'll also have to adapt our WiR forward planning.--Ipigott (talk) 10:03, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

It's definitely going ahead, yes, because I have an obligation to WMF to come up with a toolkit. It's going to be one contest, most people won't want to edit heavily like that over six months. One month of intense creation. If it's a success and relatively easy to run again then the next one could be focusing on Women in Green and a quality core writing contest but we;'ll see. If nobody can be bothered to code a bot then we'll just have to give a very decent prize for whoever checks the prose count and refs on the most articles. To make the contest more manageable I'm going to split by continent, doing it now.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:09, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Countries without wikidata lists. If we could root out what countries currently don't have lists and autogenerate some more?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:17, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Many of the apparently missing countries are covered by the Wikidata list on Africa. Other missing countries include: Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Azerbaijan, Barbados, Cape Verde, Cook Islands, Dominica, East Timor, Eritrea, Fiji, Georgia, Grenada, Guyana, North Korea, Laos, Lichtenstein, Maldives, Micronesia, Monaco, Montenegro, Nauru, Netherlands, Oman, Palau, Palestine, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Qatar, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Solomon Islands, Suriname, Tajikistan, Thailand, Tonga, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Ukraine, Vanuatu, Vatican City, Yemen. Those in bold need priority treatment. I'll see if I can create Wikidata lists tomorrow.--Ipigott (talk) 15:20, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld, the more I think about it, the more I think that this contest will be huge, so 1 month might not do it justice. Would you consider 2 months, if not the 6 which Ian mentions? --Rosiestep (talk) 17:13, 13 September 2017 (UTC) I hope the toolkit includes step-by-step instructions for how to create the Wikiedata redlists! I, for one, could definitely benefit from that! --Rosiestep (talk) 17:14, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Ian. 6 months would be crazy for contest!! Even 6 weeks is really tough, but I guess this will be easier given that people will be sharing the workload. Shorter periods of intense creation work best to avoid burnout. If at a later date we do one focusing on quality, then it could be like 3 months maybe. Remember the idea is to produce a toolkit though to replicate the contest, so after it is run so reason why it couldn't be run every other month or something and focusing on one occupation or one continent. But it will need to be largely auto run!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:23, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld: Most of the countries are already covered. Paraguay was already listed; Azerbaijan, East Timor, Georgia, Netherlands, North Korea, Suriname, Tajikistan, Thailand, Turkey, Turkmenistan Yemen had been created but not listed and the West Indies had been covered under Caribbean. I'll now see whether any of the others still need to be created.--Ipigott (talk) 09:04, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Of those remaining, in terms of population the most important are Papua New Guinea, Laos, Oman, Qatar, Fiji, Guyana, Montenegro and Grenada. Have I missed any out?--Ipigott (talk) 09:53, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

• OK, I've now created them all although there were no names in Laos and Qatar and very few in most of the others. Anyway, I think we've now covered pretty much the whole world. I was wondering whether it would be useful to create separate lists for some of the African countries, e.g. Algeria, Cameroon, Egypt, Ethiopia, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Madagascar, Mali, Mauritius, Morocco, Mozanbique, Niger, Senegal, South Africa, Tanzania and Tunisia. I can see from the Africa list that all of these have quite long lists of red links. Perhaps I'll just go ahead and do it.--Ipigott (talk) 10:49, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

All these are now Wikidata listed. Many of the former British colonies have very few red-listed women as they are predominantly English-speaking. But I'll go ahead and add them anyway.--Ipigott (talk) 11:58, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

• For the record, I also created Belize, Laos and Qatar but they are empty (no red links). I'll leave them as they are as one fine day work might be undertaken on their women in other languages.--Ipigott (talk) 15:43, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

I will be working in the Caribbean for this contest. Don't have a list per se, but am planning on plowing my way through Dictionary of Caribbean and Afro–Latin American Biography SusunW (talk) 16:07, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

That sounds like a great basis for covering historical women.--Ipigott (talk) 16:16, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Amazing Susan that you,'re going through that book. I noticed it last year and even considered buying it as a prize for a contest. Very valuable, thank you.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:50, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks very much, but it's been fun sorting things out and making sure we have global coverage. Over the next few days, I'll try to put together continent-by-continent lists including the Wikidata links. I think they will be easier to follow for the contest, especially if you are going to award prizes by continent.--Ipigott (talk) 15:01, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

If we can't get a bot I'll need to simplify the format as much as possible. I might need to just have one world list submitted and formatted with country flags like the Africa contest main page but unlike the destubathon just keep one list on one page and leave it up to contestants to work out themselves what countries they need to cover or aren't covered. That would make it easier to patrol the new entries and approve or decline them. If I give a big prize for most countries done worldwide, that should motivate people to create as many as possible. The original idea of $15 per country I think would be time consuming even if it meant we got more countries. We'll also give decent prizes for the ten women occupations, so overall the prize system should encourage diversity globally and topically.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:52, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld: The bot expert who has given us most assistance on WiR is emijrp. May I suggest that you address him on his talk page and let him know what the basic requirements for the contest are. If you are able to compensate him for his efforts, I think you should let him know how this would work out.--Ipigott (talk) 13:12, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, he seems our best bet on this. I think 1000 bytes bare minimum requirement, an observation I amde during the Destubathon with African women bios, sometimes it's tough to get 1.5 kb, 1 kb readable prose I think will be fine. We can always have destubathons at a later date anyway.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:16, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld: I'm glad to see he's agreed. I'm sure you'll be happy with his work. In this connection, I see you've been developing the country coverage in each of the "continents". I'm a bit concerned about where you are going to place the non-Latin Carabbean islands and countries of Central and South America.--Ipigott (talk) 20:24, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

We'll just include the Caribbean and islands with Latin America but rename it to reflect this. Btw can you archive your talk page takes ages to scroll down on a pad!♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:08, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld: Archive done, apologies. OK, but then we'll also need to be clear about Belize, Guyana, Suriname and French Guiana. It may be easier just to have "Canada and the United States" as one heading and "Central and South America" for the other. If we can get it sorted out, I can also do more on the red links.--Ipigott (talk) 09:49, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Feel free to move it and do what you like. If I couldn't get a bot coded I was simply going to have one contest page and list but I would prefer to split by continent. Best not to list missing articles on the entry pages in thinking about it though because if we get numbers participating the pages will soon get big with entries and comments and will probably need to be split.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:56, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello Ipigott. Thanks for helping me with the issue on Finnish diplomats articles. It seems that some Users are still having issues with it. You can see the latest comments about the issues with some users how have made life difficult on my editing. The last comment about some issues was raised by User: Shirt58 here in my talk page [1]. If you can comment about the issue. Any way thanks a lot about the last time on the issues of my articles on this matter. --Mannerheimo (talk) 10:34, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Mannerheimo: The article looks fine to me. I've done a bit of copy editing and added defaultsort which is important for biographies.--Ipigott (talk) 20:46, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:54, 25 September 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Thanks, Sue, but I do it because I enjoy it, particularly when working with people like you.--Ipigott (talk) 06:35, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

I was actually planning on working on something else today, but after you welcomed me to WIR, I thought the least I could do was destroy a red link.

So here it is Kathy Delaney-Smith. Red yesterday, blue today.

Wait, we can do better:

It was red yesterday, but it can be read today.

Probably the stubbiest thing I've ever moved to mainspace but I'll expand it.--S Philbrick(Talk) 21:04, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Looks like a good start. Great to see you participating.--Ipigott (talk) 06:36, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Can you decipher where either of these people are from? [2] Try as I might, I have come up with nothing from either what appears to be Shedlafsky, Poland or ?, Hungary. I see nothing in town listings of Poland that use "sky", though some towns use "ski" and I am also fairly sure that "sh" is represented by some other letter. I also don't think W is a consonant in Hungarian. Looking at a list of cities in Hungary, I see diddly between V and Z. So I am thinking this is a linguistic issue. Thanks if you can help. If not, no worries. SusunW (talk) 23:20, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

SusunW: The first seems to me to be the interpretation an English-speaking official gave to a Polish immigrant pronouncing Wodzisław Śląski. It's in the south of Poland on the Czech border. The handwriting of the Hungarian town is too poor for me to interpret. I would say the bride's name was Sadie Heller (rather than Keller). --Ipigott (talk) 10:21, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you so much. Yes, the handwriting is atrocious. Her last name is written on the document 3 times and each time it is rendered differently, thank goodness for typewriting ;) SusunW (talk) 12:41, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Ipigott. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, List of the world's most prominent women, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

2. remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
3. save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:30, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Ipigott,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether List of the world's most prominent women should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of the world's most prominent women .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks,

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:13, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

I need your language skills if possible. [3] Is her birth name Bohuslava Josefa? Who might her parents be? I have a friend in the Czech Republic I maybe able to ask, but you are always my first go to. SusunW (talk) 14:51, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Sorry. I'm going to pass on this one. I think you should ask you Czech friend.--Ipigott (talk) 15:54, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

I did, she says it is really archaic Czech and even she is going to have to ask someone ;) SusunW (talk) 18:09, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi! I guess I have a problem and you may be helpful. While checking the list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by nationality/Turkey, I spotted some requests for biographies, however for men, namely Ahmet Necip Bilge, Ali Şevki Erek and Esat Canan. In the belief these were misplaced, and the list is maintained by the bot ""Listeria", which is owned by User:Magnus Manske, İ posted a note on Manske's talk page on October 8. After waiting for a response three days long, I posted a reminder asking for a reaction. Nothing happened. Can you please check the matter abd tell me what is right or wrong? Thanls. CeeGee 14:57, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

CeeGee: Thanks for letting me know about this. The problem is not the responsibility of Magnus Manske. The errors stem from miscoding in Wikidata. I will correct them. If you come across any more errors, please drop me a line.--Ipigott (talk) 15:02, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much indeed for your quick response that clarified the situation. CeeGee 15:07, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

CeeGee: Now that they are now coded male, they no longer appear on the list.--Ipigott (talk) 15:10, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

I have responded to this on the discussion page. In particular, the category is useful for automatically monitoring new women's biographies and assigning the correct gender on Wikidata.--Ipigott (talk) 10:38, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello Ipigott, we are going to start a new challenge in 2 weeks. As this is the largest one ever organized by fi-wiki, I would greatly appreciate, if you as a "challenge veteran" could take time to look at the instruction pages and tell us if all the necessary information has been provided. (And, if interested, you could also register...). The challenge is here: Wikipedia:Finland100 challenge. Kind regards, --Tappinen (talk) 20:37, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi there, Tappinen. I'm certainly not an expert on challenges and contests but I have a pretty good overview of the general rules. I've finally found the time to look carefully at your challenge pages. Everything looks fine to me. The only problem for you is that there are two other major competitions in November, Wikipedi Asian Month and the WiR World Contest. So I hope editors will find time to improve or translate the articles about Finland. At first sight, it looks to me as if most of the articles are already in English, Norwegian and Swedish but some are completely missing from the de, fr and es wikis. If I had time to participate, I would probably want to translate some of them into these languages as that would be easier than making improvements in English. I probably won't have time but there might be others like me. So I would just like to ask, is it possible to register for more than one language? If you need further help with anything, let me know. And congratulations on your anniversary.--Ipigott (talk) 14:19, 20 October 2017 (UTC) @Tappinen:--Ipigott (talk) 14:20, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the CEs! Yes, one registration per person is enough, and then you can get points from all the named wikis. (We want to know the "home wiki" only to be able to place the barnstars in right places.) I will try to clarify this. If WiR accepts edits in other languages, then Tove Jansson, Ansa Ikonen, Helene Schjerfbeck and Edith Södergran could be two birds with one stone! --Tappinen (talk) 14:32, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Tappinen: WiR is always supportive of efforts to create women's biographies in any language but this year's contest is limited to English. But Nattes à chat and her French-speaking friends might like to create a French version of Ansa Ikonen and they could of course make improvements to the others. I must say, though, that only four women out of 37 famous people (10.8%) is pretty low, especially when 18.8% of the Finnish biographies are about women. You could have selected a couple more. How about Tarja Halonen and maybe Kaija Saariaho or Aino Ackté?--Ipigott (talk) 16:08, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

We started in 2015 with a more balanced list, but the criteria FA/GA/OK (in fi-wiki) was more dominant than gender criterion. We already made an exception for Schjerfbeck, her works became free this year so we wished the famous someone would improve the article before this November. During this year I have concentrated in bringing all the en-versions to somewhat decent level because very few people will probably start from the Finnish versions anyways. Saariaho was my saddest story, I put quite a lot of effort in it but the Finnish version failed in the OK-vote. --Tappinen (talk) 16:31, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

...and I forgot to mention Sofi Oksanen. So at least 5. --Tappinen (talk) 16:34, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello Ipigott. Thanks for your welcome message. I am looking forward to introducing my students and colleagues to Women in Red. I will be sure to let you know if there are any problems that you can address. Also, we are doing a edit-a-thon on November 1 as part of the Aphra Behn and Frances Burney Societies meeting in Pittsburgh PA, USA. Here is our meet-up page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Aphra_Behn/Burney_Society_2017_Conference_Edit-a-thon. Our subjects will be early modern women! LLRungegordon (talk) 19:57, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

LLRungegordon, KellyDoyle: I've posted an announcement on the main WiR page. I hope it will help to attract participants. I'll try to keep an eye open for new articles based on your redlinks. Let me know if there's anything further we can do to help.--Ipigott (talk) 07:12, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

I've just noticed this is the second Pittsburg editathon with a focus on women within just a few weeks. See 'Edit-A-Thon' aims to edit Pittsburgh women into Wikipedia.--Ipigott (talk) 07:56, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

And I see that KellyDoyle is also in the news. You're doing a fantastic job. Keep us posted on any future WVU libraries events you are arranging.--Ipigott (talk) 08:37, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

-Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:19, 21 October 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

I saw the ad you posted at GOCE. WIR normally focuses on biographies, but according to the complete rules for The World Contest all new women-related articles created in the main space in November count. So articles on women's sports or women's health issues would count. – Reidgreg (talk) 18:36, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for sending the invites and adding some missing articles to the liust, appreciate it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:27, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do on the Asian list tomorrow.--Ipigott (talk) 18:42, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello Ipigott. You've been helpful in the past as I am working on my skills with Wikipedia. I joined the Wikiproject: Women in Red and have written three bios on women. One was just proposed for deletion. I'd appreciate your take on this; could you take a look at it? Mindy Carlin. She is a local/state level lobbyist/public administration industry person. I totally understand she may not be as notable as someone like a first lady but she has won many awards from various chambers of commerce and is also mentioned in many different sources. Thank you very much! Thsmi002 (talk) 05:49, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Thsmi002: Thanks for bringing this to my attention. By a strange coincidence, I am no stranger to the Leesburg area. I've looked at Mindy Carlin very carefully but I'm afraid to say nearly all the references you give are either primary sources or very short mentions of her name with no background details of her achievements in the local press. I have also searched the Loudoun Times-Mirror and the Patch but was unable to find anything worthwhile. Maybe SusunW who has better access to the press will be able to find something. When you are writing the biographies of living people, it is important you find secondary sources which document real achievement and not just awards which appear to be handed out on a regular basis rather than for something specific.

I have also looked at your Natasha Gajewski which now has a deletion tag too. Here I think the article shows she is sufficiently notable for the article to be kept, especially as her app has been widely reported in the press. I also see you have written several other interesting biographies, e.g. Toby Orenstein, which seem to be OK. You certainly seem to be mastering Wikipedia's editing techniques and are creating lots of new articles -- so I'm sure you'll be contributing much more to WiR. It's good to have you as a new member of the project. Let me know if there's anything else I can help with or drop us a line on the WiR talk page.--Ipigott (talk) 08:46, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Thsmi002 First, thanks for writing articles for WiR. I am sorry you are experiencing AfD already, but such is the nature of writing about living people. I find nothing for either of these women that you don't already have. Unfortunately, the sources do not meet WP RS guidelines, as they do not appear to be curated or editorially controlled and do not have the in-depth coverage required. That does not in any way mean that these women aren't notable, just that they don't appear to meet our guidelines at this time. For Carlin because she is a lobbyist, it is very difficult to write an article which will not be promotional. Local awards typically do not work toward notability, in the way that a widely recognized state, national or international award would. On Gajewski, the issue is that there is very little in RS about her, as opposed to her app. Her device appears to have been covered in at least two journals [4], [5] it is also mentioned here [6]. She might make it through the AfD process on the basis of the journal information, but expect to hear arguments that she is not notable, though her app might be. You may benefit from reading the our essay on WiR about creating an article. If I can help you at any time, feel free to ping me. SusunW (talk) 15:29, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your response and insights. Interesting that you've been to Leesburg. I am from the U.S. but have never heard of it. I've done some additional editing on the Mindy Carlin page. Namely, add details from new sources, some of which are more notable such as the Washington Post and Richmond Times where the individual is actually quoted and not just mentioned. Also removed information gleaned from the company website to improve reliability/accuracy and remove advertorial language. I was somewhat discouraged when I saw that the same moderator that flagged the article actually added COI and AD to the article. I was just trying to improve it by adding details from better sources and removing non-encyclopedic language. I did go through and make more changes since the updated flags. I am not sure the other reviewer sees that this article is written with the WIR project in mind although I did mention that to the talk page. Could you take another look? I appreciate it! Thsmi002 (talk) 15:31, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Thsmi002: I've had a look at your additions on Carlin but I'm afraid I don't have a subscription to the Washington Post and therefore cannot check out the references. Perhaps Megalibrarygirl would like to take a look. Although some reviewers are sympathetic to the objectives of WiR, most simply look at all new articles as they come up. I must say some of the statements in the article looked pretty promotional. When writing biographies on living people, it's best to avoid sources directly related to their places of employment as they were probably directly involved in the write-ups.--Ipigott (talk) 15:58, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

I am sure it is difficult to review all the new entries as they come in...especially with everyone being volunteers. I think the entry, Mindy Carlin is starting to take shape and improve. Could you be more specific about sections that seemed promotional? Is that the section with the numbers on the partnership? I thought it showed notability that there is significant weight/importance but wasn't sure how to word it in a non-promotional way. In regards to my other entry, Gajewski, I will take a look at the sources uncovered by SusunW. Thanks! Thsmi002 (talk) 16:09, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

I can access the Washington Post articles, SusunW, but they just namecheck her. We need something meatier, Thsmi002 and I haven't found any good references for Mindy Carlin in the databases. :( Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:16, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello Megalibrarygirl, it's a pleasure to meet you and thank you for chiming in! I'll see if there are more verifiable sources. I am finding many pictures of Carlin with other notable people during discussions and panels but they all seem to be copyrighted. Some of them are on flickr. What is the process for obtaining permissions from the copyright holder? I am emailing the Virginia Attorney General's office to see if their official photos are part of the public domain. She was involved in a discussion with current Attorney General Mark Herring when he legalized gay marriage in Virginia and there is a neat photograph but I am not certain what the copyright protections are for it. Will wait until I hear from a representative from their office. I really do appreciate working with everyone on here. I love the goals of WiR! Thsmi002 (talk) 21:32, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello Ipigott, Megalibrarygirl, and SusunW. Since my last message, I've actually found several "meatier" articles where Carlin is of a focus. With one of the new sources, I elected to create a new section called "Controversy" and was considering moving the section about the Loudoun charter school there also. I was surprised that after I included these new sources, the article was changed from its current status to AfD. Especially since the articles span a somewhat extended period of time and show direct interaction with other notable figures. Would any of you mind taking another look? Thsmi002 (talk) 04:35, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Thsmi002: I'm sorry the article has now been AfD'd but I really don't think the controversy incident adds anything to Carlin's notability. If Megalibrarygirl has not been able to find anything useful, then I'm afraid she probably doenn't meet the minimum requirements for inclusion. I know how frustrating it must be for you after spending so much time and trouble researching the article but just take it as a step on the way to gaining experience. I think the publicity tone stems from your paraphrasing Carlin's presentations on her company site and her council profile. Articles have a much better chance of acceptance it you can pinpoint an outstanding achievement or if a widely recognized award has been earned for exceptional performance or service. One thing you might do is to explain on the article's talk page that you are not closely connected or related to Carlin and have no interest in promoting her image. You can also stage the reason you created the article on the AfD discussion page.--Ipigott (talk) 10:30, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Thsmi002 I think that Carlin is a case of WP:TOOSOON. She seems as though she may be notable in the future. You may want to "userfy" the information you collected by putting it in your sandbox or userspace. That way, when more articles turn up about her, you can be ready to publish. :) Then you can move on to other projects and not have your work disappear if the article is deleted. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:09, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Ipigott and Megalibrarygirl, I really do appreciate your guidance and have learned from this experience! I will userfy the page. If I notice any updates in the future, I may revisit it! Thanks again. Thsmi002 (talk) 14:11, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Where was the list of women again?♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:57, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld: Do you mean "Smith, Bonnie G., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Women in World History, Oxford University Press, 2008. ISBN 978-0-19-514890-9". You can find it on the List_of_biographical_dictionaries. Are you able to access it? I'm starting to compile a List of fully accessible biographical dictionaries. If you know of any others that anyone can access, please feel free to add them. I might also add a list of those accessible by subscription later.--Ipigott (talk) 14:22, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

ODNB, Rosiestep? Good idea on the list, I started that Bibliography series remember. Dr. Blofeld 15:29, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

I think it's this one, right? Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by dictionary/ODNB --Rosiestep (talk) 15:39, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld: You seem to be looking for Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by dictionary/ODNB. Since my last reply, I've added several interesting new titles to my list which are fully accessible. I don't know to what extent they'll be useful for the contest as there will be a tendency to quote verbatim as they are nearly all PD.--Ipigott (talk) 15:41, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld: Sorry for duplicating Rosie's reply in the above. I was wondering whether you are also aware of Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by dictionary/ADB, Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by dictionary/DNZB, Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by dictionary/Feminists Who Changed America, and the various lists under Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by dictionary/US Black Women in Dictionaries. Perhaps you could include some of these in your template: Women in Red missing articles by nationality. The lists "by dictionary" are in the template:Women in Red.--Ipigott (talk) 16:17, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

This article which you started 4 years ago has now been duplicated in topic, though with different sources, by new article Gerhard Sisters. In my urge to create redirects for that one, I checked on Emme Gerhard and found not an incoming redirect but a well-established shorter article. (And, yes, there's a redirect to that from Mayme Gerhard which you created at the same time, thanks.) PamD 17:24, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

PamD: Thanks. I've made the necessary redirects to Gerhard Sisters which is much more detailed.--Ipigott (talk) 09:59, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello! Last year, you signed up to participate in Wikipedia Asian Month (WAM) 2016 on the English Wikipedia. The event was an international success, with hundreds of editors creating thousands of articles on Asian topics across dozens of different language versions of Wikipedia.

I'd like to invite you to join us for Wikipedia Asian Month 2017, which once again lasts through the month of November. The goal is for users to create new articles on Asian-related content, each at least 3,000 bytes and 300 words in length. Editors who create at least four articles will receive a Wikipedia Asian Month postcard!

Also be sure to check out the Wikipedia Asian Art Month affiliate event - creating articles on Asian art topics can get you a Metropolitan Museum of Art postcard!

If you're interested, please sign up here for the English Wikipedia. If you are interested in also working on other language editions of Wikipedia, please visit the meta page to see other participating projects. If you have any questions, please visit our talk page.

Thank you!

- User:SuperHamster and User:Titodutta on behalf of The English Wikipedia WAM Team

This will be the last message you receive from the English Wikipedia WAM team for being a 2016 participant. If you sign up for WAM 2017, you will continue receiving periodic updates on the 2017 event.

• SuperHamster, Titodutta: Are you sure you want people to create articles from Wikipedia:Requested articles/Biography/By nationality. Most of them do not seem to have much to do with Asia. You should create a list specifically for WAM.--Ipigott (talk) 16:39, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure you read my question - these people already have an article (as in the example I gave), but Wikidata is including them as if they're redlinks, with a nonsense redlink that isn't immediately clear because they're piped to their ordinary name. The item number is in the redlink itself, not in the item column. This makes it very difficult to know at a quick glance if an item included on the redlink list actually does not have an article (because quite a few do). The Drover's Wife (talk) 20:19, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

The Drover's Wife: I was in fact responding to your "Where are these specific lists?" but I now see you thought I was commenting on your remarks under "False bluelinks on Wikidata lists". Here I agree you have a valid point, especially on the piped entries, and it would certainly be useful if editors with competence on Wikidata went through them and corrected them. I have suggested to a few keen editors on Wikidata that it would also be useful if they could set up a noticeboard on Wikidata where we could list problems of this kind. (So far no response.) There is also an enormous problem of sorting out duplicate listings, often caused by minor variations in spelling between different languages. Rosiestep is becoming increasingly interested in Wikidata developments. Perhaps she could act as our representative on these matters.--Ipigott (talk) 08:05, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

As Jane023 is more experienced in Wikidata than I am, I've added her to the conversation, but I will take a look at the example when time permits, e.g. after the conference. --Rosiestep (talk) 12:33, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I had included Jane too on my original noticeboard suggestion.--Ipigott (talk) 13:59, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

I think the notice board should probably be in two places, one on a "Red link lists talkpage" where the problems regarding Listeria lists can be discussed (where issues like the above can be discussed) and one on Wikidata regarding item numbers and possible merge problems or other issues. I have created a WikiProject Women on Wikidata and included a Wiki monitor for various languages with specific cleanup tasks for data. The one for English Wikipedia is d:Wikidata:WikiProject Women/Wiki monitor/enwiki. You can place any questions about that list or specific Wikidata items on the talk page of that monitor. Jane (talk) 06:20, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Jane023: Thanks very much, Jane, that's a good start. I'll make an effort to inform all those who have been raising problems with Wikidata.--Ipigott (talk) 07:44, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Just a note, though we're not accepting pre November entries, people can still submit stubs or article improvements to the main list, they just can't count for prizes that's all.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:24, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld: I think you were mistaken about the date of creation of Darreg's submissions: they were moved from draft on 1 November.--Ipigott (talk) 11:27, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld: All the new stuff seems to be going straight onto the "Article achievements" rather than under the users. Perhaps you have deleted some valid submissions? If so, could you restore them to the "continent" pages. Things seem to be progressing very quickly.--Ipigott (talk) 11:32, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Well, there will be a lot of editors not wanting to compete for prizes. I think I've made it clear what is required. Can you please format the Asian page like the others and remove the missing articles and all that and I'll look into the ones I've deleted and check if they were drafts. I've aired the issues so far to Emirjp.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:38, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Interviewed in today's Irish Journal.ie in an article titled "Wikipedia's community is 85% male, and founder Jimmy Wales isn't sure how to fix it", Jimmy Wales "praised a 'great' Wikipedia community called Women In Red".--Ipigott (talk) 12:32, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

That's good, though WIR is aimed primarily at upping the proportion of women bios, the editathons do encourage more female participation.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:58, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

If you have time and interest, I am stumped on her. I found a French source, but of course the only thing I could glean from it was her birth date. If she was one of the earliest French-Antillean writers, preceding the Negritude movement, why am I missing any writing before the 1950s? I suspect she published poetry while she was in France (otherwise why would her writing be depicted as belonging to the Surrealists?--which I picked up in a blog, so not a reliable source). Is there anything in the Mansfield text that might help explain the mystery? Then I also found this that talks about the feminist movement in Martinique and mentions her, but I cannot copy it into a translator so again am stumped. If you can help, that'd be great. If not, no worries. SusunW (talk) 18:53, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello Susun, if you inspect the source of the patrimoines-martinique page you can with a little patience extract the text (or turn it into a much simpler local html file whose display you can copy), so you can then feed it into a translator. (talk page stalker) --Mirokado (talk) 19:36, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Mirokado thanks for trying to help! I'm sorry, but I have no idea how to do that. I am technically challenged and short of just typing all the French into a translator program have no idea how to access the text. I am really good at running various language texts through multiple translator programs to ensure that I have a good grasp of the data, but my skill with technical stuff is non-existent. I have no idea how one would "turn it into a local html". SusunW (talk) 19:42, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

SusunW: I'm looking at it now and will report back soonest. Nice to know Mirokado is still faithfully viewing my talk page.--Ipigott (talk) 19:45, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello again Susun, please check your email! --Mirokado (talk) 19:52, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you both! I really appreciate the help :) SusunW (talk) 19:56, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

SusunW: There's nothing in the sources you mention to say that she published anything before the 1950s but I understand she did not publish some of her written works until much later. [Here] is the record of her publications from "The European Libary". According to Mansfield, La plaie was not published until more than 20 years after she completed it. But the European Library record shows that it was first published in 1957 and republished in 1979. Is there anything more specific I should be looking for?--Ipigott (talk) 20:21, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

I wish I could tell you Ian. I strongly suspect that she participated in the circle of intellectuals that her husband did and possibly published in the same journals, but I have no proof. His French article fr:Thélus Léro is much more detailed than the one on English WP but totally undocumented. I think there is enough on her article to prove notability, especially with the Oxford Press bio, so it isn't in jeopardy. But you know me, I prefer the bio to be less sketchy and it just puzzles the heck out of me why she would be classed in the 1920s writers movement if she didn't publish before 1950. SusunW (talk) 20:31, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

You might be interested in these snippets: [7], [8]. Perhaps you can find more on her sister-in-law Jane?--Ipigott (talk) 20:59, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Again, thanks to you both. I'm going back to her now and see what I can add. And yes, Ian, Jeanne/Jane should be on the list of missing articles :) SusunW (talk) 23:16, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

I didn't add much, but the sources helped me straighten out the chronology and also led me to a source which gives all the members of honor of the Women's Union of Martinique, so I posted it on the missing artices page. Obviously, it will require someone who speaks French work through them, but there are bios of each of the women ;) SusunW (talk) 00:15, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Just to inform you, if you notice any other strange requests at Requested articles for Biographies by nationality, it might be from sockpuppets of Joanna Gunadi. It would help to both look at the page history and a comparison of the accounts in case these requests seem suspicious. Hope this helps! jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk • contribs) 14:44, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Jd22292: I don't know if I'll have time to look into such details but if you suspect any problems, you'll have to give me user names.--Ipigott (talk) 14:54, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Particularly, a request made a few weeks back by Alfred Gonzalez seemed to match a similar request made days earlier by another now blocked sock, Mohamed Maaloul. See also Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Joanna Gunadi. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk • contribs) 14:58, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

OK, but I'm no expert on this kind of thing. Others should be looking for suspect user names.--Ipigott (talk) 15:09, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

There's an interesting article in the Houston Chronicle about a recent editathon at the University of Houston. Rosie was there, stressing the importance of writing articles about women, and correctly citing the proportion of women's biographies as 17.16%, up from 14.5% in 2014. (I think there was a report saying that the number of women editing Wikipedia was less than 15% in 2014 but was the percentage of biographies really as low as that?). Do we have any records of who participated at this year's two Houston editathons and how active they have been? It would be interesting to see how many have been contributing. I can only find this.--Ipigott (talk) 14:02, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Slight correction: I wasn't in Houston; I was interviewed while traveling from Stockholm. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:05, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Rosiestep: Thanks for the clarification. I thought there was a problem with those dates. But how absolutely dreadful! Can you not even avoid the paparazzi when flying across the Atlantic? I hope the Houston Chronicle paid you a reasonable fee for all those details. What is that 2014 report you referred to with 14.5% women's biographies? I've been searching but I can't find it.--Ipigott (talk) 15:41, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

I have an AffCom call in 13 minutes which I must prepare for, but it's an article Roger and I used for our Wikimania 2015 presentation, which was linked on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias/Gender gap task force. Perhaps with some digging, you can locate it. I don't get paid to do interviews. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:49, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I know you don't. I was only joking.--Ipigott (talk) 15:51, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Rosiestep: As for the report, I've found Wikipedia:Writing about women which states "Only 15.5 percent of the 1,445,021 biographies on the English Wikipedia were about women as of January 2015." The reference is here but unfortunately I can't read the article. I think it's important as it gives a starting point for our progress. But I can't find a figure of 14% anywhere. Perhaps Victuallers can remember?--Ipigott (talk) 16:09, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

https://pulsearch.princeton.edu/catalog/727964 Xx236 (talk) 12:27, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I am pretty familiar with the lives and principal works of the Carl Nielsen family and will be expanding Anne Marie Telmányi considerably. I'll probably be working on it for the next 24 hours or so but you are of course very welcome to contribute as you wish.--Ipigott (talk) 15:44, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for creating the article about Anne Marie Telmányi. Nice work. --Mirokado (talk) 19:32, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Nice to hear from you, Mirokado. Not really in depth coverage but I thought she should be on the EN wiki as an important member of the Carl Nielen family.--Ipigott (talk) 19:52, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

• Vami IV: Thanks very much, very kind of you. I see that many of the earlier articles I added to the Nordic Challenge (which I have continued to support} have been copied over to the European Challenge. This month I have been adding my new biographies to the World Contest. I'm really not sure how all these link together. Perhaps Dr. Blofeld can explain. I should also congratulate you on contributing over 50 interesting women's biographies to the World Contest. Great work!--Ipigott (talk) 07:41, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
  • You humble me, my friend - the figure is probably 45 or 46, including those articles I did not submit as contest entries. –Vami_IV✠ 08:23, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

• Well, from this it looks as if you've started at least 50 worthwhile articles but I must admit I haven't checked your submissions to the World Contest. An average of over two new articles a day is pretty good going.--Ipigott (talk) 08:40, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi, on the contest progression page for some reason 22nd didn't get done and Day 21 is massive. Can you look into it and ensure two days weren't put on one bar? and work out what was done on Wednesday. Cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:57, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

I haven't created any of these before but I'll look at it. That probably explains why the graph isn't working.--Ipigott (talk) 09:14, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld: I now have the numbers but I can't do the percentages. From the 19th to the 20th (day 20), there were 67 new articles, from the 20th to 21st (day 21): 68; from the 21st to 22nd (day 22): 161, from the 22nd to 23rd (day 23): 108, and we started the 24th (day 24) at 1921 which means we have 32 up to now. Can you handle the rest?--Ipigott (talk) 10:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

As you seem to be away, I've updated the whole thing. Hope it's OK. The reason day 21 is massive is that I edited all David Eppstein's backlog.--Ipigott (talk) 11:08, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I was offline and just came back on now and was about to comment! 100 divided by 66 x whatever the article count is for the day, you seem to have done it now so cheers!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:11, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Just what I need at the moment.--Ipigott (talk) 12:48, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

I wonder who sent this unsigned message.--Ipigott (talk) 13:03, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Can't remember what lists we have but I found Magyar Lexikon. I've started two entries from it but the entries are short.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:12, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld: Just click on Resources on the main WiR page.--Ipigott (talk) 13:23, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Why, how many articles have you not added because they were under 1 kb? You can add the more decent ones which might be shorter. No unsourced/badly formatted entries or sub stubs though. Under 1kb is discouraged and not accepted for the contest itself but I did say people can create whatever they want if not competing and improve existing articles too.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:05, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

There have been well over a hundred, many of them quite reasonable short stubs by Lugnuts. You'll find them all in the metrics. More specifically, I did not add quite a few of those created by David Eppstein as they were below the 1000 B mark but pretty good all the same. I very much supported your suggestions that the submissions should be informative and not just short stubs. I would suggest you either try to expand Éva Balatoni the article or delete it from the contest list. It sets a bad example.--Ipigott (talk) 15:30, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

It sets a bad example? LOL, OK Ipigott. :-) Google her, can't see that many sources I could use, can you? It's 800 and something bytes, hardly 200.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:33, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

I really feel the contest has produced a much higher standard than the run of the mill we usually see each month. I intended to create some reasonable length articles myself today but as collaboration is encouraged, I might just see what I can do with Eva. But I'm tied up with other things at the moment.--Ipigott (talk) 15:49, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I see it's now 800. It was about 550 when I looked at it from the list. That's what I objected to. So there's practically nothing left to do. I'll get to it sooner or later but have to leave now. --Ipigott (talk) 15:52, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Day 26 36 articles?? Surely more than three times that can you recheck?♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:12, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

146 articles I checked.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:31, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld: My sincere apologies. That's the figure for today. We must have missed a day again. As I've explained before, this is not really my area of expertise. I would actually be happier if you could sort it all out. I tried to iron out the last set of problems a few days ago as you requested but I may well have inadvertently caused additional problems. It took me about an hour to check all the edit counts, etc., that time and I would really not like to go through the whole thing again. Unfortunately I did not keep all my records so I would have to start from scratch again. If you haven't been able to sort it out within the next few hours, I'll see what I can do about it but I would rather do some creative editing. One way of resolving the mess would be to concentrate on the last five days of the contest only where we are aiming for 83 articles a day. I would delete everything else including the graph. With two sets of targets, I think the current page must be rather confusing for those who view it. But as you are running the contest, I'll leave it up to you.--Ipigott (talk) 09:00, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

No apology necessary, easily done. It only takes me a couple of minutes to check the start figure from the previous day and where the last entry before midnight is on the list and do a quick calculation so leave it to me. I'm more interested in diversity personally than quantity, that's been the real benefit of this for me.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:54, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld: I managed to sort it out anyway. It was not as serious as I thought

Hi, do you have a list of the 80 people who contributed? I just want to send them the barnstar.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:49, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld: There are 79 names on the scoreboard. Then there's David Eppstein (219 articles plus a few stubs), Dr. Blofeld (56 plus stubs), Rosiestep (39), Ipigott (38) and Megalibrarygirl (19). I think Lugnuts has created about 210 on sports women. There might be others. I haven't checked all the names but these are the main ones.--Ipigott (talk) 14:59, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld: Just to make sure I'm pinging you.--Ipigott (talk) 15:01, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

I don't think all my entries were stubs, the vast majority were under 1.5kb though I guess.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:18, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

• Dr. Blofeld: I immediately corrected it to "plus stubs" but you didn't see the correction. Could you double check to see if all 219 articles from David Eppstein on the contest page are over 1000 B running prose. If so, he seems to have created more than anyone else, even if he withdrew from the contest. I see you already awarded him a barnstar.--Ipigott (talk) 15:25, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Ah I thought you meant over 56 stubs. Some were a bit too stubby I admit. Did he create that many? I thought it was 118. Wouldnt matter if they were under 1kb!♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:32, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

I just clicked through the contest list. Maybe you could do an alphabetical sort to see if any have been included more than once. I can only count 125 women's biographies from this list. So maybe the total for the contest also needs checking.--Ipigott (talk) 15:39, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

125 sounds about right.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:44, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephanie Braganza (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 22:14, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

I've found quite a number of third party press reports on this but others do not seem to agree. Perhaps Megalibrarygirl and any others who have time would like to look at it. I'm afraid I'm tied up with other things today.--Ipigott (talk) 12:50, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, Ipigott, I'll take look today. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:13, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for looking at this one, Megalibrarygirl. I've just realized I "created" this article. In fact I just picked it up from Simple English as I was reviewing additions to Wikidata. As Ser Amantio di Nicolao recently pointed out, there are quite a few valid biographies there which are not in the main EN Wiki. I'm not usually in the business of promoting pop singers. But I suppose variety is the spice of life! Maybe people create bios in Simple English as they are less likely to be deleted.--Ipigott (talk) 16:59, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Does this give any clue as to why she died so young? SusunW (talk) 17:18, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Pages 13 and 14 of the piece by Dr. Carrillo Suaste, tell us that she was seven months pregnant when she died, after delivering a daughter who also died shorty afterwards. The death apparently occurred close to sunrise on 22 August 1880 when (or shortly after) she was travelling from Mexico City by train. Hope this helps.--Ipigott (talk) 08:40, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I was fairly sure there was more information in that source. SusunW (talk) 14:43, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

SusunW: I'm not at all sure she died on the train itself. I would say something like "after travelling by train to Villahermosa from Mexico City".--Ipigott (talk) 16:17, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

SusanW: Hello, what an interesting article, thank you for writing this. I also read through parts of this booklet and was wondering, should we make mention that her daughter also died? I added a short sentence but if that is not needed, feel free to remove. I thought readers may be left wondering what happened with her daughter. They may be unable to find anything because it sounds like she (the daughter) hadn't yet been given a name. Cheers! Thsmi002 (talk) 18:50, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. That's very thoughtful of you.--Ipigott (talk) 06:49, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

I have a toolkit to make from the contest by the end of the month. Would you like me to create some templates and instructions on how to replicate the world contest but for different regions of the world so hopefully next year we can run more contests every few months? I think doing an annual women world contest would be good but it's too big a scope I think to want to do it many times a year.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:56, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld: That sounds very interesting. How about applying the tools to a contest on Nordic Women around April and perhaps South-Saharan African Women around July? Then we could have another World Contest in November.--Ipigott (talk) 15:00, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Well, I can draw up some templates and instructions to enable WIR to quickly create a new contest for regions of the world, so if you wanted to do one for Nordic women and south Saharan women that would allow them to be easily created. Emir's bot will need to be run to make them easily runnable. I need to demonstrate to WMF that my contest and toolkit model is actually being used for development long term.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:05, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

I could have a go a running things myself but the first time round I would need help from you and Emijrp. Perhaps we could also invite other volunteers to help things along.--Ipigott (talk) 15:10, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm going to work on something in Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Contest toolkit.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:33, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Finding it difficult to even want to be on the Wikipedia site at the moment, but I really need to get this toolkit done soon!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:52, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, Ian, for keeping up with this list. I really enjoy (and appreciate) seeing the names added one by one by one. And Merry Christmas to you and your family! --Rosiestep (talk) 14:47, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Rosie and all the best for you and your family for Christmas too. We've been doing very well with new members: already 18 in December. I see you've been faithfully adding new images every day. You must soon have reached 100 days.--Ipigott (talk) 14:58, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

That's about 1 per day in December so far; nothing short of amazing, IMO. I bookmarked many images before I left home, otherwise I would not been able to stay on track while traveling. 21 days to go. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:19, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much. And the same to you.--Ipigott (talk) 08:27, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi Ian,

I spent more time on research and writing and I think that Draft: Caryn Marooney is close or closer to what you suggested. I found more on early life, although I could't pin down DOB. The alumni notes of the Brearly School was a great citation you found and encouraged me to try a few creative searches. I have now also filled out the article with a more personalized account of her career and comments from others about her. Hope this is what you had in mind. Happy to keep working on it.

Best,

EdBC1278 (talk) 00:31, 22 December 2017 (UTC)BC1278

I found several references to her birth and personal information, for example here, and here and here. As you can see, her married name is Brunicardi. She was born in 1967 and is probably 50 years old.--Ipigott (talk) 15:39, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help. I did see the public record sites, but in the past, I haven't cited to these because of the policy prohibiting primary sources. Perhaps there is an exception for DOB that I don't know about? Do you have experience with this scenario?BC1278 (talk) 18:33, 22 December 2017 (UTC)BC1278

Wishing you all the best for 2018 and beyond! --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 20:48, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you all for these kind messages. I've just regained access to the internet after being away for a few days. All the very best to you all for a successful 2018.--Ipigott (talk) 16:40, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:13, 27 December 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Hello Ipigott. A reminder about Under-representation of science and women in Africa: Wikimania 2018 an opportunity to bridge the gap. Thank you! Ear-phone (talk) 19:05, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Ear-phone. I and my friends on Women in Red have tried to offer strong support for the coverage of African women. Have you any specific suggestions as to how we could do more? Thanks for the seven short articles you have contributed on South African scientists since October.--Ipigott (talk) 20:53, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Ipigott. If you get a chance please help with Under-representation of science and women in Africa: Wikimania 2018 an opportunity to bridge the gap. Ear-phone (talk) 22:45, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello Ipigott! Do you think you could help me come up with a DYK blurb for Celia Cooney?Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 01:55, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

@Eddie891: I'm no expert at DYK but how about: "...that Celia Cooney gained fame in 1924 for repeatedly defying the New York police with 10 successful robberies?"--Ipigott (talk) 10:21, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Thank you very much, Eddie, and the same to you.--Ipigott (talk) 08:16, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Swiss women red links, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:32, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Have tagged the draft for deletion.--Ipigott (talk) 15:06, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert_C._Seacord until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rogerthat94 (talk) 23:30, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Rosiestep: Thanks. Quick work.--Ipigott (talk) 14:54, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

That's a lot to focus on!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:31, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

All you need to do is to start writing bios on all those female mathematicians from Madagascar. Then you'll hit all three. Triple focus!--Ipigott (talk) 12:49, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Haha, nice one!♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:00, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi. @Rosiestep: and @Victuallers: I've made Wikipedia:Contests/Toolkit. The template to create contests is at Wikipedia:Contests/Toolkit/Template. Have a look at them and if you have any further suggestions for improvement let me know.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:20, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Looks like you cover a lot of things here, Dr. Blofeld, which demystifies the process. I will look more closely later today. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:46, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

I added some points on the talk page. Since then Ive thought you might add something like 10. You can just sit back and wait for the articles to arrive, but then the work begins. You and prefereably several people need to be checking, fixing, tweeting and thanking editors for the articles. You need to smooth over disputes and answer queries about the rules. You also need to keep publicly track the aspiring winners etc. Victuallers (talk) 21:22, 31 January 2018 (UTC) Oh I see this bit is in the second doc. ..... You might want to move it to the first but its just my understanding. Victuallers (talk) 21:44, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld: Thanks for all the preparatory work. It looks like a good model and should be fairly easy to customize. The only doubts I have are related to the all important bot. Are there any bot routines which can be directly applied to new contests or will we again have to rely on human maintenance by the bot creator? A fully automatic, reliable bot would be a huge asset to any contest.--Ipigott (talk) 08:02, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Ian, I think wider discussion about when would be prudent, especially involving Emir if he needs to be available during the time the contest is running.

Dr. Blofeld, I've had a chance to look at the toolkit more closely and I think the sections on "APPLYING FOR A GRANT" and "PRIZE FUND DISTRIBUTION" might benefit from more information. Where the potential grantee lives (e.g. Mexico, India, Egypt) makes a difference in whether they can receive a grant (you can't receive a WMF grant in China) and what they can do with it (use it themselves vs. pay it out to others). Where the contest winner lives makes a difference (if they can receive an Amazon voucher vs. getting paid in their local currency). If the contest winner is a minor? Any possible tax consequences of being a grantee? How to write a Grant Final Report? While I'm not suggesting that you write out answers to all of these points, addressing them as points of consideration will help an editor understand what they need to sort out plus whom to turn to for guidance (Grant Officer?). --Rosiestep (talk) 18:21, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld, regarding "PUBLICIZING YOUR CONTEST", perhaps mention social media? Also, consider adding a section regarding what to do after the contest is over. Things like Final Grant Report would be part of that, but what else? For example, I remember barnstars were mentioned somewhere. Also, maybe a section on BRANDING, e.g. creating a logo, barnstar, mainpage color/style, etc. Yes, Business School 101 sort of things, but mentioning it for your consideration. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:36, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Good points, thanks. II'll try to add a bit more on those but I don't think I need to go as far as explaining how to write a final grant report, I've not even done one myself yet! But if WMF want it added to the toolkit I'll do it. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:58, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld, another one I thought of is an FAQ section, and then maybe link to the WiR contest FAQ page as an example. Also, maybe re-arrange the section, e.g. Promotion to be higher up on the page. P.S. Love the image of a toolkit. :) --Rosiestep (talk) 23:59, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld, with conference grants, we have to do pre-grant editor surveys x2, plus post conference survey x1 or x2. Did you have to do a survey (formal, informal) before the contest? Maybe the toolkit should mention how to have conversations (informal surveys) with possible contest participants to determine contest objectives, scope, time period, etc. User:Rosiestep|Rosiestep]] (talk) 02:22, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Following Rosiestep's suggestion, I have tried to collect items on a first contest below--Ipigott (talk) 17:40, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Rosiestep and Victuallers: Dr. Blofeld and I have been wondering if we should launch a Nordic Women contest (i.e. all the Scandinavian countries plus Finland}} in the not too distant future. It would help us to pave the way for more ambitious contests in the future. If you agree to this, perhaps you would like to suggest a suitable month. While I would be happy to monitor the progress of the contest as far as I am able, I would prefer not to be involved in applying for the grant or awarding prizes. Would either of you like to take that on?--Ipigott (talk) 08:02, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

I might be interested. Maybe we could approach Wikimedia Sweden who might fund us directly. Particularly if we can mention you Ian as you are a European just as much as you are a brit. Victuallers (talk) 08:30, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

It will depend on what Emir can offer I think regarding bots. A Nordic contest would be great but I'd love to see a general contest like Dragon for it but gives the biggest prizes for women bios. That way we'd see a host of other missing articles too. Applying for a rapid Grant is very easy, somebody other than me would have to apply but I'd be happy to be involved.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:58, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld: Maybe we could do both, but separately in different months. A more general contest would best be coordinated in collaboration with the WikiProjects for Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden, etc. But I also think we should really try to improve coverage of Nordic women in a WiR-based contest. After all, the Scandinavian countries have been world leaders in promoting the status of women at all levels. As for bot support, it will be important to see if emijrp is willing to participate.--Ipigott (talk) 10:13, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

I dunno, I think sometimes one general contest will attract more editors and you can sometimes get people to do more women bios than they might not usually do if you give the best prizes for women bios. If you had one general contest for Nordic countries and gave the biggest prizes for editors who do more women bios you'd kill two birds with one stone.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:36, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

If it were to be based on the Dragon model, then it would not be so much a matter of writing new biographies as improving existing articles. It would therefore be better to associate it with WikiProject Women. We would need to draw up lists of all the Scandinavian articles requiring attention. Not really the scope of Women in Red.--Ipigott (talk) 13:26, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Could be an article creation contest for the Nordic countries then and give the biggest prizes to those who create women bios? I'd like to see a contest where people create articles on Swedish churches, Danish architects, Faroese cheese etc as well as women bios.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:43, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Let's see what the others think about this. I think it would be much easier to monitor if we had one contest devoted simply to creating women's biographies. I also think it would be easier to have it funded than on something more general.--Ipigott (talk) 13:50, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

A Nordic women contest sounds good. When do you think an ideal time would be to run it?♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:04, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Perhaps August or September. That would give us plenty of time for planning. August seems to be a good month for our editors. But I'm still waiting for reactions from Rosiestep and Victuallers -- and of course anyone else reading this page and interested in joining the contest. When we have a general idea of what we want to do, we could also start a discussion on the main WiR talk page.--Ipigott (talk) 14:15, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

I certainly agree, Rosie, that we should widen the consultation but maybe we should first work out a basic proposal here. As far as I can see there are three main questions to be answered: 1) The scope of the contest: should we have an initial contest on Nordic Women or are there other suggestions? 2) The date: I have suggested August but September or October would be fine too. 3) Who will take care of the grant? I thought Roger's suggestion sounded very interesting but maybe Rosie also has ideas. Once these have been sorted out, we can check on the availability and willingness of emijrp and then widen the discussion on the WiR talk page. I am also happy to see that Dr. Blofeld has agreed to lend a helping hand.--Ipigott (talk) 09:25, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Maybe split this section in two between Dr. B's toolkit and a potential future contest as it's getting hard to follow? That said... 1) The person applying for the grant might need to explain to the Grants Officer how a Nordic women contest with prizes would differ from our October 2017 Nordic women event which didn't have a grant. An alternative approach would be Roger's suggestion of approaching an Affiliate directly for funding. 2) I'm not aware of anyone else doing a contest in the months you suggested. 3) Not me, as I have other 2018 wiki $ responsibilities: Wikimania scholarship committee, co-lead on Wiki Bootcamp, and co-lead on WikiConference North America. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:01, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

As Rosie is not in a position to handle the grant(s), would you Victuallers be prepared to take it on? Otherwise it looks as if we'll have to find another interested party.--Ipigott (talk) 17:43, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the warm welcome to Women in Red! I'll take a look at starting the Ros Bandt article this week, from the music list. Pretty sure I can find info on her. cheers Kathodonnell (talk) 07:46, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Kathodonnell: Ros Bandt looks like a good choice. You could start by looking at the following sources: [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15] and [16]. If you can also find press articles, so much the better. As you probably know, when writing BLPs (biographies of living people), it is important to include a variety of reliable secondary sources. You can also use her CV for guidance but you should try to find secondary sources for anything you find of particular interest there. (You can of course include her website and CV under External links.) Let me know if you need further assistance. I recommend you start the article in your user space as user:Kathodonnell/Ros Bandt. You can then ping me when you think the article is ready for mainspace and we can make sure there are no major problems.--Ipigott (talk) 11:09, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for this. I've got one book here that mentions her, will see if any of the others do too & take a look through your links, then let you know once it's ready to go live. cheers Kathodonnell (talk) 11:25, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the Women in Red invite! I've been involved in Association for Women in Mathematics efforts to increase coverage of women in math on Wikipedia (we had a Wikimedia grant to work on this at last spring's AWM symposium, and I added a bunch of names to the Women in Red list of mathematicians in conjunction with that project). Do you know if Women in Red has talked to anyone else at the AWM about this month's priority for women in math & stats? I can talk to our social media people about promoting the project, but it would be silly to duplicate effort. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ursulageorges (talk • contribs) 15:37, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Yes, Ursula, I remember your successful event. This editathon was inspired by Marie Vitulli's paper Writing Women in Mathematics into Wikipedia. I pinged her in our discussions but she does not appear to have been active on Wikipedia recently. Anything you can do to sensitize interested parties would be appreciated. You can see from the history of our List of women in mathematics, apart from David Eppstein's excellent work, very few have contributed recently. Up to now, we have only nine new articles listed for the editathon. To the best of my knowledge, we have had no direct contacts with AWM.--Ipigott (talk) 16:05, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your Women in Red invitation. I will try to create more articles about women and improve existing articles on women. Vanguard10 (talk) 03:25, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

I received the heads up about the Women in Red event from Ursulageorges. I will publicize it on the Association for Women in Mathematics Facebook page and this will cause the event to be mentioned on Twitter and the AWM home page. Mvitulli. —Preceding undated comment added 19:12, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

@Mvitulli and Ursulageorges: Thank you both for publicizing our efforts to increase coverage of women mathematicians and statisticians. We will be carefully monitoring all relevant new articles. If you or your participants need any assistance, please let us know. May I remind you that although we have a special focus on women in mathematics this February, you may add new articles at any time under our popular #1day1woman initiative. Please also keep us informed of any further physical editathons you or your colleagues are planning.--Ipigott (talk) 10:08, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Victuallers: Thanks very much, Roger. I do try to keep things moving forward as much as I can but I think this jump is mainly a result of Wikidata catching up with all the recent women's biographies which were not automatically coded human and female. Wikidata came up with 1,445 new women's bios last week but both AlexNewBot and our standard metrics showed less than 600. One of these days, I think we should really look into Wikidata more carefully. I keep coming across women's bios which were created years ago and are still not coded female. (I actually spend quite a bit of time updating them myself.) It's quite a problem because we don't compare the number of women's bios with those coded male (as perhaps we should) but simply as a proportion of all the bios on the EN wiki. What we really need are three aditional sets of stats: the number of Wikidata bios coded human but neither male nor female; those coded human and male; and if possible bios not even coded human. (The latter could no doubt be identified from entries with dates of birth and/or death, or occupation.) If we could get these figures, I think we would be able to demonstrate the ratio of female to male biographies is substantially higher than 17.48%. Unfortunately, I don't know anyone who is able to obtain them. Perhaps Rosiestep who was at a recent Wikidata get-together in Germany can put us in touch with someone who can help us out.--Ipigott (talk) 15:13, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Like you, Ian, I've shifted some of my wiki attention to Wikidata (almost 11,000 edits now) as I firmly believe it is the mothership of the wiki movement. Jane023 established the Women WikiProject on Wikidata, and she, too, was an attendee of Wikidatacon, so she might have some thoughts on your comments. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:52, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Looks like our method of counting the %age may well effect the answer as it includes any bias towards a) adding gender to women entries and b) just having lots of missing data. Like to know the proportion of biogs that have a gender entry as we could be seriously out. Victuallers (talk) 17:23, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

The biggest challenge is the sheer number of biographies on enwiki. It's really hard to use the Wikidata query service in any meaningful way with such large numbers because almost any qualifier will make a query timeout. All I can say is, is that everyone is doing great work no matter what the queries say, and with a little luck the timeout problems will start to go away as the query service is further optimized and improved. Basically the measurements you want are available for other languages, just not for English. Jane (talk) 17:40, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Well Maximilianklein manages to process the huge amount of data for English too on his WHGI stats. I keep bothering him with WHGI problems but I don't know if it would be fair to ask him to look into these matters. He hasn't been active on Wikipedia for some time.--Ipigott (talk) 17:55, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Well maybe we need a Google summer of code intern to set up some reports for Women in Red. Jane (talk) 18:08, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

I was wondering, Jane and Rosie, whether you met anyone in Germany who would be capable of working on these problems. It looks to me that if we can obtain WHGI stats once a week on all the language versions of Wikipedia, it must certainly be possible to process the data for entries with an EN article in more detail. From my discussions with Max Klein, Wikidata apparently downloads data once a week. With all the programming expertise we have on Wikipedia and Wikidata, it must surely be possible to find someone up to the task. Perhaps emijrp, who has already worked wonders for us, can help us out with all this or put us in touch with someone who can.--Ipigott (talk) 16:53, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I do think there are several people who would be capable of working on some of these issues, but, of course, they have their own priorities. I'll respond again on this when I have an update. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:32, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Rosie. I fully understand people have their own priorities but I must say I'm impressed with all those who have come along to help us out with Women in Red, even editors who have never written biographies about women. I have a feeling that if we made it clear what we want to achieve, there might indeed be experts ready to devote an hour or two to these matters.--Ipigott (talk) 17:48, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

I've been busy in real life but I've been tossing & turning at night worrying away at this debate. Women in Red owns the figure of 17%. This figure emerges from a calculation emerged after proposed the idea of WiR in 2015. That figure and the idea of ignoring the gender of our volunteers, was I believe, our USP. It has moved up typically from say 17.11 to 17.12% and I got used to it increasing by about ~0.01% about every week as Ian revealed the figures. It jumped when we had Dr B's competition and that's what we intended, expected and celebrated. I boast about it on #WikiWomenInRed every time it jumps and our followers clap (RT) a lot. However the figure has recently jumped from 17.41 to 17.48% and happened whilst the Wikidata people were meeting. This feels "wrong". I think this worries Ian too as he says that actually the 17% figure is actually 17% of the biographies that are identified as women. (This could be very wrong as we ignoring biogs that ). How did it jump recently? What I suspect has happened is that some keen volunteer has written a program to search through wikidata and pick up clues like "actress" to define biographies as gender=female. GREAT! but how do we explain that although this jump is good, its nothing compared with out volunteers working very hard to create 100s of real new biogs. As that work of creating new biographies really effects the way that people see the gendergap on Wikipedia (which is what are really trying to fix).

So, how could we fix this if I'm right. We could improve the method of calculating the figure of 17% which is a lot of work for someone, so I don't want to suggest that. I think I have a better solution. As I understand it 17.48% is the percentage of en:wiki articles that have a gender defined on Wikidata as female. What we need to do is to modify the program to find out the percentage of en:wiki articles that have a gender defined on Wikidata as male. There are two embarrassing possibilities, the first would be that the figure was 83% which would mean that I've been worrying about nothing. The other embarrassing figure and theoretically possible is that the percentage of males is 17.48%. This would mean that Women in Red can stop as we've achieved our aim. More likely is that the figure turns out to be between 17% and 83%. I'm not going to go into the maths but if the figure for males turned out to be 51% then "our" figure needs to be changed to be 25% (i.e. 25% = 17 / (51 + 17) ). I think we need to change to this figure as its a much better measure of what real users see. It would be great if we reveal this new agreed figure on IWD. Can someone explain what I've got wrong?. (We should also report the percentage of biogs that have a defined gender as this figure should be part of the caveat on our calculations.). Thanks for listening. Roger aka Victuallers (talk) 10:55, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

You might be interested in joining the Wikidata-l mailing list and/or reviewing its archives as I know DPpedia has been mentioned there before. This would also give you an opportunity of becoming acquainted with some of the employees/contractors and others (e.g. Google Summer of Code intern) who are involved in the Wikidata universe... it's the "wiki mothership", as far as I'm concerned.

One thing I found interesting is that I've received notifications over the last couple of weeks regarding many articles (not necessarily biographies) which I created months and even years(!) ago finally getting an item (Q) number. Perhaps some bot has been deployed to help with a massive backlog or maybe it's just a person. But even if a large number of biographies have finally become accounted for, it's not clear if gender is addressed at that moment, and if it is, accuracy.

I've been tackling the women writers intersection issue for the last few weeks, and this involves thousands(!) of articles. There's no bot for it; it's grunt work. Is that the same process for gender-tagging biogs? I bring this up as it directly addresses Roger's points regarding statistical reliability. We don't know if all Wikipedia biogs are accounted for; and we don't know if the ones that do have a Q number have a statement regarding gender; and if there is a gender statement, if it is accurate. So we make a lot of assumptions when we say 17.48%. It's all we have, so we use it, but when we address it in a slidedeck, we should probably include an asterisk. --Rosiestep (talk) 08:57, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for all this, Rosie. I'm still hoping Max Klein can help us out. I've written to him but have not yet received a reply.--Ipigott (talk) 09:03, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Rosie, Ipigott, Jane and Victuallers.I'm at an art+feminism editathon now. Sorry for the long radio silence. A PhD program and herniated disc later, I'm ready to get back to the Wiki world. I think I answered this question privately over email, but the result was that from what I can see currently there are only about 10,000 bios which are Wikidata-code-as-human-but-genderless in enwiki. On another topic, and tell me if I should move this to WiR Metrics Talk page, I am thinking about what features and figures might be a good refresh for WHGI? Here are the main one's I can think of:

1. History visualized. Instead of looking at just the changes of the previous week's change, a chart that shows the history of the %age as a line graph over time (since I started counting in 2014).
2. Anomaly detection. Use machine-learning techniques to send out alerts and highlight the languages which made unusual gains or losses in the previous weeks.
3. Links to recent bios. Surface the actual bios that were being added or subtracted recently (and highlight translation opportunities).
4. Misc stats. Keep track of humans-not-gendered, the genders being used (beyond male and female).

However they all come from a technology-first perspective, and I'm not the user, so knowing what you think is useful might be a better first start? Maximilianklein (talk)

I @Max - Always nice to hear from you. I think it would be useful to move this conversation to the Women in Red talkpage so that more people can participate vs just the perspectives of a few. That said, I like all 4 of your ideas as add-ons to what we currently view, e.g. don't take away any of the current functionality, but augment with new features. Hope your back gets better soon. --Rosiestep (talk) 04:56, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the thoughtful replies here! First of all Roger, don't worry - I agree with Max that the edge cases (no gender on either Wikidata or Wikipedia) will always be some low number that will get fixed over time. Dont't forget that WiR lost a bunch of articles because of mass deletions of stubs. This happened to many more articles about men of course. So the percentages change over time in relation to the rate at which articles about males are created and this itself is not linear. Does that help? Max, welcome back, good luck with that herniated disc, and yes, any of those ideas would be good. Sadly, we really need to measure the biographies about men, and of course for A+F (and writers Rosie!) we really should start paying more attention to works by women - but I don't know where to put those stats or if anyone wants to pick them up for tracking at all. Jane (talk) 06:43, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the reassurance Jane, Max says that the articles that are of unknown gender is ~10,000 - which is small compared with the total number. So I'm remeasured on that one. We have always included the works of women within our scope but we have never found a way of measuring it. And a key bit of our success was identifying that we need to size the problem so that we could see the success. I know you are close to the move of paintings to Wikidata. Is it possible to ask Wikidata about what percent of these paintings are by women? I'm guessing that this might be possible/soon? It may be a figure we could target. Oh and best wishes. Victuallers (talk) 08:19, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Tnx fr yr msg regarding registering as a WiR member. According to the member list at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Members, I've been a member since 19:21, 19 January 2016 (UTC). Not sure what may be amiss here.... jxm (talk) 17:09, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Jxm: Sorry, my mistake - or at least partly so. The problem was that for some reason you were not on our mailing list (and I therefore assumed, wrongly, that you had not joined up as a member. I've added your name to the mailing list but feel free to remove it if you don't want to be bothered with our announcements.--Ipigott (talk) 21:12, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi

Nice work on changing things on the Women in Red front page, I think you might have made a mistake because the section heading buttons have disappeared, not sure how to fix it though....

John Cummings (talk) 09:40, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Ah, I just saw the message on the talk page, sorry for the confusion. John Cummings (talk) 09:54, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Fine, had just started a message to explain this to you.--Ipigott (talk) 09:57, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Ipigott - I'm taking you up on your offer of advice regarding the Wikiproject Women in Red. As you know, I'm focusing on content related to women's suffrage in the UK. I started drafting an article about suffragist posters, which were an important phenomenon in the movement. However, I've also noticed that there is little to no coverage of other aspects of suffragist propaganda, such as postcards, newspapers/newsletters, and fashion, which was a particularly important and ground-breaking aspect of the movement in the UK. My jewelry article needs company! In your opinion, would it be best to create a new article that encompasses 'suffrage propaganda' or 'suffrage art and design' (or something - which?) and includes all of these areas as subheadings? Certainly, each of these could be an article in its own rite with enough work; I'm not sure what to do in the short term. Thanks! Dma132 (talk) 20:12, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Dma132: Thanks for responding so soon. I'm always happy to help, particularly when people come up with such enterprising ideas. I think the best approach here would be to write a general article covering the essentials of Suffragist art and design in which you cover all the aspects you mention, as well as the influence these developments had on the success of the movement as a whole. If you want to concentrate on the UK, that would be fine, but it might be useful to cover art and design in other suffragist movements around the world (as far as they existed). Once you are happy with the general article, you could then go on to develop separate articles giving more details of painting, posters, postcards, badges, embroidery, fashion, interior design, propaganda, etc. (It might of course be possible to combine some of these but others probably deserve a place of their own.) I'm sure there must be lots of illustrations which you could find or include in Commons and add to the articles. In addition to the sources you are already using, you might find some interesting information here. All these topics seem particularly pertinent to our focus on Women's History Month in March although you can of course continue to address them whenever you have time. You might be able to identify other editors who are sufficiently interested in the topic to help you along once you have created the basics of each article. I look forward to seeing how all this develops.--Ipigott (talk) 10:33, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Ipigott: Thanks - this approach makes a lot of sense. And thank you for the Bloomsbury link. I will rework my draft to be inclusive of all suffrage art and design as a starting point for this work. Slightly related question: I believe you are located in the UK? We are looking for a Wikipedia expert to be available online to answer questions during our edit-a-thon this Saturday. Any chance you could be a resource to us for any part of the day? Last minute request, but I thought it couldn't hurt to ask! I'm glad to see so many UK-based groups doing edit-a-thons in honour of International Women's Day this year. We are in Gloucestershire.... All my best, Deborah Dma132 (talk) 12:12, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Dma132: Sorry, I'm not in the UK but in Luxembourg. Thanks for the invitation but I no longer travel around to meetings. In any case, I find my time is better spent helping people on-line. If you are really short of experienced Wikipedians, Victuallers may be able to suggest someone who can help. Where exactly is your edithathon being held? I have not been able to find you at Category:Wikipedia meetups in March 2018. If you have a meetup page, you should add that category to it.--Ipigott (talk) 12:33, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Ipigott: I should have been clearer - I'm looking for someone who would be available online (video or text chat). I'll have a look around. Since our edit-a-thon is associated with Art+Feminism, they've told us to do a dashboard (https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/WAAS_and_Atelier_Stroud/Stroud_Wikipedia_Edit-a-thon/home) instead of a meetup page. I'll look at that link, though, and see if I should add it there. Thanks!

Dma132: Yes, I can see you are one of the 248 editathons here. But you might in any case like to have a Wikipedia page where you can include participants, red links, new articles, etc. Just look at some of the others for inspiration. I'm afraid I'm not keen on video or chat but you can always contact me here on my talk page.--Ipigott (talk) 14:02, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

The closest in person Wikipedians I know are members of Wikiproject Somerset which has some v.keen members. A post of their project page may find a lot who are interested. I keep saying that I'm moving to Scotland so legal stuff may take priority on Saturday. If I was free then as Ian suggests then hanging around a project page is more fun than waiting for the phone to call. If you email me then I would give you my tel. number Victuallers (talk) 17:13, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Ipigott: Thanks - I will send an email. Another question for you! Some attendees tomorrow want to work on a new article about a local suffragist who was called Margaret Robertson (maiden name) during the time of her suffragist activities but then married and became known as Margaret Hills for the rest of her life. Can you please advise on best practice for naming her, particularly in terms of article title? I found the guidance that says to use "Margaret Hills (née Robertson)" but I wasn't clear as to whether that's just for the body of the article or also the title. Thanks! Dma132 (talk) 20:28, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Dma132: In this particular case, I would name the article Margaret Robertson as it was under this name that she was (and probably still is) known for her activities as a suffragist. I would also make redirects from Margaret Hills and Margaret Robertson Hills. I would begin the article as you suggest Margaret Hills née Robertson but would then refer to her in the text as Margaret Robertson, or just Robertson, until her marriage, and thereafter as Margaret Hills or just Hills. It looks as if it could be an interesting article if adequate sources are available.--Ipigott (talk) 07:59, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Would you like to take a moment and describe your views on the topic of quality articles vs. quantity articles at User:Eddie891/sandbox/Quality v. Quantity for a Wikipedia Signpost Report? Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 18:23, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks very much, Peabodybore. It's always rewarding to know these articles are appreciated. I'm trying to cover some of the forgotten women who contributed so much to art in Scandinavia in the 19th and early 20th century. It is strange that so little attention has been devoted to them, in contrast to their fathers, husbands and brothers. You have also written a couple of interesting women's biographies, including Marianne Plehn. I look forward to more along the same lines.--Ipigott (talk) 08:22, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

In connection with your coverage of Danish embroiderers, you (or perhaps one of your collaborators) may want to stub Hedebo embroidery, although I do of course realize that it is rather the women biographies side to it than the actual embroidery that has your interest. There is a review of a book in English here and an article on Danish wikiepdia here.Ramblersen (talk) 00:51, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for this useful suggestion, Ramblersen. I see there's a well-presented article in Danish on Hedebosyning with a variety of sources. I'll start an article in English when I have finished covering the textile artists. Thanks for creating the embroidery categories and also for your nicely illustrated Sophie Thalbitzer.--Ipigott (talk) 07:27, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Any chance you can add anything to the article I wrote on Reese from this clipping? [17] I have no idea what it says and cannot make the link work in a translator program. I have no skill with Norwegian, so am hoping you can advise or just add info to the article. Thank you for your help. SusunW (talk) 23:31, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

SusunW: At first sight, it looks as if there is quite a bit of additional detail there. I'm afraid my to-do list is quite long at the moment but I'll get to it as soon as I can. It's always fun helping to expand your articles. It looks as if you've already made a good start on it. Happy Women's Day!--Ipigott (talk) 07:35, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you Ian. Whenever you can do it would be great. It just seemed like a fairly long article and could have more information. Glad to know that it did :) SusunW (talk) 13:19, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

SusunW: It's done! At least I added a couple of bits based on your press article. I'm not sure how pertinent they are. Up to you to revert if you wish.--Ipigott (talk) 13:23, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

You rock! Thank you! SusunW (talk) 14:00, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello (again)! I've been roped into carrying on the contest legacy, trying to live up the the Women in Red contest's legacy. I was prompted by Dr. Blofeld sort of right as he left to start working on User:Eddie891/contest <-this project. I was wondering if Women in Red would be interested in helping out. It is intended to be a broader article creation contest, but perhaps an additional prize for most Women articles created? Do you see there being enough interest for this contest at all? Thanks --Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 00:09, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Eddie. Glad to hear you are interested in going forward with this. From the very start, I have always made it clear that as with the World Contest, I am personally ready to do all I can to make future contests a success. The only aspect I wished to avoid was applying for grants and distributing prizes. I see from your talk page that you are interested in covering somewhere in the United States, possibly New England. If prizes were also to be available for creating articles on women, I'm certain Women in Red would be interested too. As you may know, I had suggested earlier running a contest on Nordic Women along the lines established by Dr. Blofeld. If the U.S. contest is a success, we could perhaps collaborate on that later. Please keep me informed of any developments and let me know if there's anything specific you would like me to do.--Ipigott (talk) 06:43, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Maybe you can help with my draft on Ana Kras? The article has been rejected for notability issues even though the designer has her own photo book out, has collaborated with other designers and even been referred to as new talent in magazines such as Vogue and Wmagazine. I've provided all of the references I could find so I'm not sure what else can be done. Here is the link if you are interested :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ana_Kras Thanks! Abonzz (talk) 21:56, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Abonzz: I've had a quick look at the article and agree that Kras is notable enough. I also see she has been covered by AnOther in some detail. The New York Times sources are worthwhile too. Nevertheless, I have to agree with the reviewer that the level of language in the article is too promotional. I'm tied up with other things at the moment but I'll try to improve the article later.--Ipigott (talk) 07:42, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Abonzz:I've tidied it up and moved it to mainspace. There's still room for expansion if you wish to improve it.--Ipigott (talk) 15:38, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Ipigott: Thanks for your help! I corrected a tiny error and added some more info.Abonzz (talk) 16:42, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Abonzz: I'm not sure your last edit reflects the account given here. The sets for the Copenhagen show were decorated with her photographs.--Ipigott (talk) 16:50, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Ipigott: I see what you mean (hadn't seen the new article). I've changed it back for clarity. Sorry for the inconvenience. Abonzz (talk) 21:08, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome, but you're a little late. I joined the project in 2016. TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction•Creation} 12:57, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

TheCatalyst31: Sorry, my mistake. I was looking for registrations on 14 March and your name came up. I see it was in fact 14 March 2016 not 2018, exactly two years ago. I'll have to be more careful... I hope you've enjoyed being a member of the project. Now that it's once again Women's History Month, perhaps you can create some more women's biographies. We have a wide selection of red lists.--Ipigott (talk) 13:12, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Maybe you can help with the Pavlovich page. It was deleted because of notability issues yet the actress has appeared in about fifty roles as a character actress, in notable American TV shows/films and with well known Hollywood actors. She also had a recurring role in the series "Pride and Joy" with Jeremy Piven. Furthermore, she was in the Miss Universe pageant, and I've noticed that many contestants have Wikipedia pages just for participating in this pageant. She also has a page in the Serbian Wikipedia, so can an English translation be justified in this case? Another interesting tidbit, she co-piloted a MiG 25 in 2004, something most women haven't had the chance to do. For additional info, several links are found below, in case you're interested:

Here is her filmography :

• http://www.tcm.com/tcmdb/person/1310276%7C0/Natasha-Pavlovich/
• http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0667874/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1

Her filmography can also be found on Serbian Wikipedia, already translated in English (scroll down the page):

• https://sr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D0%9D%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%88%D0%B0_%D0%9F%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%9B&oldid=12338457

Here are examples of contestants who participated in the Miss Universe pageant and already have a Wikipedia page: eg. Miss Venezuela, Miss Panama 1991, Miss India, as well as Miss Japan 2010.

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackeline_Rodr%C3%ADguez
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christabelle_Howie
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liz_De_Le%C3%B3n
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maiko_Itai

Also, don't know if this helps but here are other character actresses with Wikipedia pages and a similar filmography, eg. Eileen Yeow, Faune A. Chambers, Annette Charles and Erin Cummings.

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eileen_Yeow
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faune_A._Chambers
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annette_Charles
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erin_Cummings

Thanks for your time. Abonzz (talk) 23:33, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Abonzz: I'm not really much good at modern actresses and models but as far as I can see from the discussion, the reason the article was deleted is that it was not supported by sufficient secondary sources, for example articles in newspapers, journals and published books. If she is well known in Serbia, you can also include Serbian sources. It is not sufficient to say that people with similar backgrounds have articles on Wikipedia. Every biography should start by drawing on secondary sources to demonstrate notability. If you think it is important to include Pavlovich on the English Wikipedia, I suggest you try to begin a draft in your user space (e.g. user:Abonzz/Natasha Pavlovich) drawing on acceptable secondary sources. Once you think it has been sufficiently well developed, you can let me know and I'll have a look at it. I will then perhaps be able to help you further. If it can be developed to an acceptable standard, it should then be possible to move it into the mainspace without the risk of further deletions.--Ipigott (talk) 07:51, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

• • Ipigott: Is there any way to recover the text from the deleted article so I don't have to start all over again? Abonzz (talk) 14:10, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Abonzz: An administrator might be willing to send you the text: perhaps Megalibrarygirl, who may well also be able to help you with finding additional sources. But you should be careful to include only the information clearly supported by secondary sources or the artilce may well be deleted again. In future, it might be a good idea for you to keep a copy of your new articles in your user space so that you can go back to them if there are problems.--Ipigott (talk) 15:22, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Abonzz if you want, I'll retrieve the article and move it to your Userspace to work on. Let me know. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:30, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Megalibrarygirl Yes, that would be great! And can I contact you later with the article? Abonzz (talk) 19:47, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

You can definitely contact me afterwards, Abonzz. I've moved the page here: User:Abonzz/Natasha Pavlovich. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:55, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Megalibrarygirl Hi, Here's the new draft version :User:Abonzz/Natasha Pavlovich Let me know if there's anything missing. Thanks again for you help. Abonzz (talk) 17:24, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello, quick question, is [18] an ok source to use? Seeing that it says COPYRIGHT 2002 Gale Research Inc. I am thinking yes. Thanks! Thsmi002 (talk) 18:40, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

(page stalker) Thsmi002, it looks OK to me. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:57, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you! Thsmi002 (talk) 21:11, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello. Help to expand the article Maureen Wroblewitz. Thanks you very much.27.68.13.76 (talk) 09:21, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, but I'm no expert on models.--Ipigott (talk) 10:11, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

FYI, this is Haiyenslna. — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:23, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Hallo Ian

Can you remember what source you used for this edit? There seem to be several versions of her dates! PamD 13:14, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello Pam: I probably just took the dates from an old version of the Amalie Kaercher article when compiling the list, although I can see from here that the dates are incorrect. It looks as if they should be 1819–1887. The RKD source now referenced is based on a number of sources and is usually reliable. The article should probably be moved to Amalie Kärcher but as this is already a redirect, we'll need an administrator to handle it—perhaps Megalibrarygirl?--Ipigott (talk) 13:57, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

No, if a redirect has no history beyond being created, and points from B to A then you can move the article over it from A to B! Done. It's irritating when the redirect-classificationists leap in and assign it a classification, as that then gives it an edit history and means that it needs an admin or WP:RM. I hadn't actually spotted how old the article was - with a fairly poor start of Amalie Kaercher (born 1860 died 1926) was a German paiter. He was prefessinal at Still life and Flower painting.! PamD 15:16, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

{{u|PamD): Thanks for the explanations. I won't have to bother admins for this in future.--Ipigott (talk) 15:32, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

There's never any harm in trying to do a move. If it works, job done; if not, then Plan B. PamD 19:15, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi, The page on the news anchor Natalie Jacobson is being considered for deletion even though she was the first woman to host the evening news in Boston, a major American city. The deletion discussion page can be found here :

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Natalie_Jacobson

Jacobson co-anchored the news with her husband for many years, the two being one of the few married couples to do so. Their split made the NY Times, Variety and the LA Times :

• http://articles.latimes.com/1999/dec/15/news/mn-44065
• http://variety.com/1999/tv/news/married-boston-anchors-make-news-by-separating-1117760036/

Jacobson was a star anchor with huge ratings and millions of viewers, at a time when personalities drove the local news :

• http://archive.boston.com/ae/tv/articles/2011/07/10/curtiss_changing_role_sign_of_times_for_local_news_affiliates/

Well known in Boston, Jacobson was also nationally known for her local news anchor status. She was even mentioned in an episode of the TV sitcom "30 Rock" with Tina Fey. Jacobson is also considered to be part of the Golden Age of Boston TV, one of the top six TV news markets in the US, according to the following book :

• https://www.bostonglobe.com/arts/books/2017/06/15/part-history-part-memoir-look-golden-age-boston/R1Fav2ckvECQHQ0pdV1PIN/story.html

Jacobson has been mentioned in the NY Times several times, her salary being the topic of one article :

• https://www.nytimes.com/1982/08/30/arts/boston-tv-stations-battling-over-news-anchors.html
• https://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/24/business/media/chet-curtis-half-of-married-news-team-dies-at-74.html?mtrref=www.google.ca&gwh=2D6EC1A3B7C34DCDBAA8535DAE4970D5&gwt=pay
• https://www.nytimes.com/1990/11/09/opinion/abroad-at-home-the-limits-to-anger.html

Jacobson is also inducted in Massachusetts Broadcasters Hall of Fame

• http://www.massbroadcastershof.org/hall-of-fame/hall-of-fame-2011/natalie-jacobson/

Chet "and his former wife, Natalie Jacobson, were the most recognizable and trusted names in the Boston television market for decades. They covered the biggest stories, including visits by Queen Elizabeth II and Nelson Mandela." :

• http://www.eagletribune.com/news/longtime-boston-tv-anchor-chet-curtis-dies/article_9b936560-cc8b-5976-87b8-97fa017c0d42.html

Thanks for your time Abonzz (talk) 17:49, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Abonzz: Rather than listing all these additional sources here, your best course of action would be to use them to enhance the article.--Ipigott (talk) 06:37, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi, could you please take a look at the article about Susie Päivärinta as well. Regards.BabbaQ (talk) 17:28, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your input at Susies page. The strange thing is that I see that seven editors have !voted Keep. But only six is registered at the AfD vote counter. And it is your !vote that does not register. Weird. Anyway I guess it does not matter since your rationale is visible.[19]

BabbaQ (talk) 19:27, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

BabbaQ: Maybe I'm using the wrong syntax. Probably better for me not to comment on these discussion in future.--Ipigott (talk) 20:59, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

The weird thing is that your !vote is registered at Lili Päivärintas AfD. No, your assessments are always needed. You are perceptive :)BabbaQ (talk) 21:08, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi, here are two entries for the Women in Red initiative. Do you want me to keep you informed as soon as an article is written? Abonzz (talk) 14:10, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Abonzz: You don't need to inform me unless you run into problems. You can post your new articles on the appropriate WiR editathon page and include the relevant WiR template on the article's talk page.--Ipigott (talk) 14:23, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Ipigott: What does posting on the editathon and template pages mean? Do I simply click on Publish? Abonzz (talk) 14:29, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Abonzz: Each month we select a number of areas on which we encourage our participants to focus their attention. On your talk page, you have just received an invitation for April and about a month ago you received an invitation to join WiR with details for March. On each of these you can click on the areas highlighted and find the relevant editathon or meetup pages. You'll see each one contains a space for new articles (and another for participants). If none of the specific areas of interest applies to your article, you can always use #1day1woman. Spend a few minutes looking through one of the editathon pages to see all the detailed info.--Ipigott (talk) 14:40, 29 March 2018 (UTC)