Archive 1: January 2007 to January 2010, Archive 2: January 2010 to January 2011, Archive 3: January 2011 to June 2011, Archive 4: June 2011 to November 2011, Archive 5: December 2011 to August 2012, Archive 6: September 2012 to December 2012, Archive 7: December 2012 to May 2013, Archive 8: June 2013 to November 2013, Archive 9: November 2013 to August 2014, Archive 10: September 2014 to February 2015, Archive 11:March 2015 to August 2015, Archive 12: March 2015 to August 2015, Archive 13: September 2015 to May 2016, Archive 14: June 2016 to December 2016, Archive 15: January 2017 to August 2017, September 2017 to March 2018

Thanks again for encouraging me to submit List of women cabinet ministers of the Republic of Ireland as a Featured list candidate. It has just been promoted[1][2] to featured list status.

The FL review process was quite arduous and prolonged; the wikicode of Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of women cabinet ministers of the Republic of Ireland/archive1 is almost as long as the wikicode of the list itself, despite lacking the list's complex table markup. It initially felt v offputting, and at one point I came close to withdrawing the nom, but I am glad I persevered. By about half way it started to feel more constructive, and I think the article was much improved through the review.

I hope it's all some encouragement to others working on lists of women in politics. I was sad to see that the Irish women cabinet ministers are the only women in Category:FL-Class Ireland articles, and the only one in Category:FL-Class biography (politics and government) articles apart from the US first ladies. It's also the only list of politicians in Category:FL-Class WikiProject Women articles. It'd be nice to see it lose its rarity value.

Thanks again. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:21, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

BrownHairedGirl: Well done! I was pretty sure you would make it. Let's now hope that others will be encouraged to develop lists of women up to FL standard.--Ipigott (talk) 08:30, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay on joining in the wikiproject and answering you haha . I've recently created Alicia Daneri, from the list of archaeologists. Ok, any doubt I'll ask you or I'll post it on the WiR talk page. Thanks for inviting me to the wikiproject. Greetings. Tajotep (talk) 10:23, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I created the Lanre da Silva page as part of the Red Women project, however the article is being proposed for deletion. The designer does appear to be known in Nigeria but I can't find any other sources so maybe you have a suggestion? Abonzz (talk) 11:58, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi again, I saw your changes, however the article has been re-nominated for deletion : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Lanre_da_Silva Abonzz (talk) 16:21, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind welcome message on my talk page! I joined because a couple of stubs that I spent a lot of time improving were initially created during WiR editathons. The project does great work, and I'm excited to be part of it! I'll be sure to let you know if I have any trouble.Mcampany (talk) 06:22, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi, After finding the red link, I created the Sonia Jam page for the Women in Red project. It has been moved to drafts due to a lack of sources. I couldn't find anymore references so if anyone is free to help, here is the page : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sonia_Jam Thanks Abonzz (talk) 14:06, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

There's this from Le Devoir. And this is just one of many images from Getty. Her notability seems to be borderline. You might be able to justify the article as a translation of the French wiki version.--Ipigott (talk) 14:30, 13 April 2018 (UTC) Abonzz: Forgot to ping you.--Ipigott (talk) 14:33, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the references which I've added to the article. The text is ready to be used as a translation for the French wiki. Who can take care of that? Also, is the normal to have non-notable links listed in the Women in Red project? Abonzz (talk) 21:24, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Abonzz: I think your question could be related to the red link on Sonia Jam you found on one of the WiR red lists. You probably found it either on Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Photographers or Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by nationality/Canada. These lists are compiled automatically from Wikidata and simply indicate there are articles in other language versions of Wikipedia about those who are listed. Sometimes the rules for inclusion in the other languages are less strict than in English but in most cases an article in another language is a reasonable basis for creating one in English. As for the French version of Sonia Jam, the sources used both look as if they are primary. The Fondation Maternité was established by Jam herself and dissolved in 2011. The site is no longer accessible. The other link is to Jam's own website. Unless the information contained in the article can be verified from other sources, it is probably not worth including it in the English version. If you move the English version back to the mainspace, it might nevertheless help to include a translation tag on the talk page: {{translated|fr|Sonia Jam}}. I'll leave it up to you to decide whether or not the article should be moved back. As I said earlier, it looks to me like a borderline case. It might be more useful for you to spend your time creating articles for which several secondary sources exist.--Ipigott (talk) 06:17, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

I've added the translation tag and agree with you that there aren't enough sources. I had assumed that any red link meant it was a viable article. The text can be used as translation as is. I'll leave it up to the administrators to decide what to do with the page. As for the Women in Red Project, are there any lists that are not automatically compiled which I could refer to? Abonzz (talk) 13:16, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Abonzz: Yes, in particular all those By occupation (crowd-sourced). It might be useful for you to go through all the different components of our Redlist index. Many of the items by geographical region have been specifically added by our participants. Others come from reliable biographical dictionaries, etc. However, that does not mean that all the names listed are sufficiently notable for Wikipedia. That is something you should investigate yourself as you gain more experience. One friendly administrator who is always ready to assist in finding sources and giving an opinion on notability is Megalibrarygirl. Perhaps she would like to comment here?--Ipigott (talk) 13:43, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Abonzz looking at our crowdsourced lists, a lot of names have references listed next to them. That gives you an idea about how notable the person might be at a quick glance. Whenever I want to write about someone, I try to find at least 3 really good, solid sources to start from. If I can't find three, I put the article on the back-burner and wait till I can collect more. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:52, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Ipigott and Megalibrarygirl Thanks for the tips. I'll also check out the Canadian Encyclopedia when it's someone from Canada.Abonzz (talk) 16:57, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi Ian! Thanks for your welcome message to Women In Red.

I'm helping to organize a feminist edit-a-thon in a few weeks (early May). The goal is to introduce more women to editing, and to work on supporting feminist topics. I'm wondering if WiR has any particular approaches that you think are good first projects for new editors. I don't think a three hour event with new editors is a good format for writing new articles, but I wonder if there are other ways we can be of service in that time. Also, if we'd like to formally partner with WiR is some way, how might we start going about that. Any ideas? Thanks! -Kenirwin/(talk) 17:10, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the edit-a-thon list; the 'thon we're doing doesn't quite line up with any of those, but is focusing on women-oriented topics. Is there a way to align our project with WiR without adhering specifically to one of the topics listed there? Thanks - Kenirwin/(talk) 00:18, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Kenirwin: I'm glad to hear that once again you are arranging an editathon to encourage more women to edit on Wikipedia. One way in which we can perhaps help is to announce your meetup on our main WiR page. Just provide us with the basic details and a link to your meetup page. We would also be delighted to welcome new editors as members of WiR and help them along as they gain experience. Our main aim is however to encourage editors to create more articles about women and their works. For this reason we have put together Ten Simple Rules for creating women's biographies which should help both existing editors and new ones. As for the priorities for April, while we try to focus on areas needing attention each month, we always welcome articles on women in any area of interest under #1day1woman which always remains open. Let me know if I can help you further.--Ipigott (talk) 06:32, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. And a specific question about the WiR list functionality: I've been looking at the [[]] -- I notice that Bebe Barron is red in the list despite having an article/redirect; she's red because the list wants to make her article include her WikiData id: Bebe Barron (Q276413). Why does it try to add her ID to the link that it's looking for? I've seen this on a few other links too, but not most of them. How can we remove her from the red list? My understanding is that I could edit the list directly, but that it would re-assert itself next time the bot runs. What's the best way to get help with this? Thank you. for all your help

Kenirwin: Don't worry too much about the links to the Wikidata lists. Once a new article is created, the name disappears from the list within 24 hours. On the other hand, if you create an article from an item on our crowd-sourced lists, you will see the link turn blue. The reason Bebe Barron is still redlinked is that the article which covers her is Bebe and Louis Barron. Many of our new articles on WiR are based on names that were formerly redirects. If you think Bebe Barron deserves an article in her own right, you can of course go ahead and create it.--Ipigott (talk) 09:44, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

I and a few others have made some improvements to Antonia Bernath, who's on the WiR article alerts for articles that might get deleted. If you have a chance, would you please have a look and weigh in on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antonia Bernath -- it's been re-listed looking for more votes. Thanks! -Kenirwin/(talk) 15:37, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Precious

Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:05, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt: Time flies! But your support is preciously appreciated.--Ipigott (talk) 09:30, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your welcome message and inviting me to join the group of Women in Red! Of course, I will do my best to reduce the list of red links by creating new articles about women artists. Also, I am happy to add information in English wikis so that other people can find out more about Latvian art. Kriptekss (talk) 13:24, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

All due respect, people do use/read Wikisource. Perhaps not in the same numbers as WP. It is a library. A repository of knowledge. Its purpose is similar to that of WP—to share that knowledge with everyone. WS often supports WP with original source information. Without that history contained within libraries—"hyper" or otherwise, Wikipedia would have no credibility. So, your rationale for not linking (in a more visible/accessible way for mobile users) to relevant/fact-supporting sister sites is because "people don't use" them? I am reminded of a quotation by Boris Pasternak: "What do they mean by saying that my silence is courageous? ... I am silent because I am not printed." Londonjackbooks (talk) 10:27, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Londonjackbooks: I agree my comment may have sounded rather aggressive but I thought we were originally discussing mobile access to Wikipedia. It was in this context that I supported your original call for more attention to be given to the mobile version. Wikisource is not an enyclopaedia and most people looking for information are unlikely to use it for general use although it obviously serves a useful purpose for librarians and related specialists investigating background on authors and their works. I think it could be rather confusing to try to sort out Wikipedia problems by suggesting they could be covered by data from another Wikimedia project. It could also be argued that Wikidata would also provide useful basic information on the individuals we cover but it seems to me that in our discussions here we should be concerned first and foremost with the workings of Wikipedia. I'm sorry if my comment upset you and hope we can continue constructive discussions on how Women in Red can help to increase the number of articles relating to women on the English Wikipedia. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 12:19, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Not at all! Your comment did not come across as aggressive, but perhaps unhelpful. But I understand how it may have stemmed from a misunderstanding. I have to run, but I will think on this further. Thanks for your response! Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:37, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

My original concern was with regard to the removal of a {{wikisource author-inline}} (external) link to a related Wikisource author page on the grounds that it was a "duplicate" link being that that a sister project link already exists in the left-hand-side Wikipedia article navigation panel. My argument is that it is not actually a "duplicate" link when one considers mobile device usage, as the project link located to the left when in desktop view does not appear when in mobile view. Your statement that "there are now substantially more mobile page views (8.2B) than from desktops (7.3B)" may actually support my argument. I brought up the fact that Wikisource places sister project links where they are visible in mobile mode, and that it would be useful (if the end is actually the dissemination of knowledge) for Wikipedia to place sister project links likewise.

Again, I did not feel your comment was aggressive. If it were, I would have likely ignored the aggression and addressed any substance. Aggressive words to not bother me. They only harm you if you let them. In other matters, Pasternak's statement that I am silent because I am not printed can be applied as well to the many "women in red" that WIR seeks to shed light upon. They are silent because they are not printed. To add, it is my opinion that libraries—Wikisource included—do not primarily exist for "librarians and related specialists" as you state, for they provide much more information than "background on authors and their works." Libraries include the works themselves—which speak volumes more about specific subjects and subject matter than any encyclopedic article. Better yet, they speak for themselves :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:13, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Londonjackbooks: I certainly agree with you that it is a backward step to remove links to sister projects from the mobile versions of Wikipedia. I also agree with you that Wikisource is not primarily intended to be used by librarians but rather by those librarians serve. The problem is that at the moment only a relatively small number of people with biographies on Wikipedia are covered by Wikisource. I think we both agree there is a problem which needs attention. Maybe you can liaise with other interested parties on this as I'm not at all sure what we can do about it at Women in Red.--Ipigott (talk) 16:29, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

A "smaller number" perhaps simply because most Wikisource author pages/works are limited to authors whose works are in the public domain. I do know that there is an effort by specific Wikisource editors to help the WIR cause at Wikipedia by proofreading/adding text by and about women from various biographical encyclopedias and other texts. Perhaps it can be a cooperative Wikimedia effort for sister projects to work in concert—to help a sister out ;) Thanks for your time! Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:50, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

		Welcome to Women in Red's May 2018 worldwide online editathons. New: "Women of the Sea" New: "Villains" New: "Women in Sports" New: "Central Eastern European women" Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 23:11, 29 April 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi Ipigott, thank you for welcoming me to Women in Red; I have put up some articles but always seem to have a major problem initially. I have enjoyed the wikipedia experience though. I will try to get the basics right next time , for example not copying text but putting content in my own words first time around. Thank you, Passionfruitvine. Passionfruitvine (talk) 05:41, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello! After the successful pilot program by Wikimedia India in 2015, Wiki Loves Food (WLF) is happening again in 2018 and this year, it's going International. To make this event a grand success, your direction is key. Please sign up here as a volunteer to bring all the world's food to Wikimedia. Danidamiobi (talk) 09:05, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Ian: Just wanted to send a quick note of thanks for inviting me to join the Women in Red project. I began my involvement with the April Milhist Backlog Drive, and had so much fun researching and writing about unsung women heroes that I'm now working on Women of the Sea for May. Fixing Wikipedia's massive gender imbalance is a bit daunting, but so very important. I'm grateful to have the chance to help in my own small way. Wishing you continued success with your own research, writing and editing. Kind Regards. 47thPennVols (talk) 17:35, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

47thPennVols: Glad to see you're enjoying it. Keep up the good work.--Ipigott (talk) 06:18, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

It has taken me five days to weed through all the chaff on this. It was extremely difficult to balance what was obviously salacious gossip from the possible and probable. I think, though I may be mistaken, that it has reached GA criteria, (though the notes section is much longer than I would have wished, but necessary, IMO). If you have time, could you give it a critical overview and edit and let me know what you think? Thank you! SusunW (talk) 17:39, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

SusunW: You've done a really good job on this in a very short time. I had never heard of her before but I see she was an outstanding 18th-century figure. It looks to me as if the article is close to GA but it could be improved by adding more illustrations. Perhaps you can find something on her husbands, ships, etc. There seem to be illustrations of the Delaware here. The portrait of Hayley in A Radical Shrew in America looks slightly better than the one you have included in the article. Let me know if I can be of any further assistance. I've been pretty busy lately but have not forgotten about further coverage of Women's Liberation.--Ipigott (talk) 06:56, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you! I had never heard of her either and was astounded at her pluck and acumen and frustrated by all the misinformation and mischaracterization of more modern sources. Going back to original sourcing, it was far more obvious that she was admired and not seen as a shrewish vamp. I see that the common-place archive says it is in the national portrait gallery. I'll try there. I know there is a photograph of her daughter in the same source I found hers. Let me see what I can do. SusunW (talk) 12:22, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

SusunW: OK, see what you can do. I've added a short piece on women's lib in West Germany but have decided not to include anything on Austria or Switzerland and there was really nothing of note there.--Ipigott (talk) 12:29, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I thought I would whip out Hayley and go back to the WLM. It didn't work out like that, but I will get back to it later today ;) The portrait in the National Portrait Gallery is better [3] and here is Dinah [4]. Great link on the USS Delaware (1776), but the photograph is of a different ship named the Delaware. Now I am totally confused about her ship. The note in the article says Rotch took the ship in 1787 from Dunkirk and renamed it the Dauphin. How could that be if 1) Rotch didn't own it and 2) it was in the Falklands until 1788 gathering seal skins and whale oil which it delivered to Dover? The source is a French one, so I am unlikely to figure it out...Dunkirk [5], but I think yet another case of hiding the woman. SusunW (talk) 13:20, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Okay, I found a source. She sold the boat in 1788 per the Smithsonian history to the French South Sea whaling partnership...probably Rotch, given the previous information known about his relationship to Dunkirk and his ship Maria. SusunW (talk) 14:40, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

It's nice to get some. Thank you. I don't deserve it, but never-the-less, thank you. On-the-other-hand, what you've achieved is to make me more mindful. (And that can't be all bad!) Best wishes, Pdfpdf (talk) 10:27, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I'm pleasantly surprised to see that you created an article for Irma Jaunzem, a well known singer in Latvia, too. May I suggest you a correction of her name? It seems to me that the last name Jaunzem is directly transliterated from Russian, although, the surname Jaunzeme is of Latvian origin, with the end of [e], as it appears in Latvian and English sources. Her Latvian father's name is Pēteris Jaunzems (in Latvian, with the end of [s]) but Pyotr Ivanovich Jaunsem, as you already transliterated it in the article, comes from Russian naming custom where the middle Ivanovich refers to his father's name (patronymic). As the article title already suggests, Irma Jaunzeme is the name of Latvian origin and, I think, should not be confused with translations from other languages. Sorry for bothering you with this. Regards, Kriptekss (talk) 20:30, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Kriptekss: Thank you for these informative observations. I have added "Jaunzeme" as a variant and have also created a redirect from Irma Jaunzeme. I think we should nevertheless maintain "Jaunzem" as the main title as she was born in Belarus and most international sources use this spelling. I've also added Pēteris Jaunzems as you suggest. I see there are many Latvian sources on Irma Jaunzeme. By all means feel free to make any additions you think would be useful. Maybe you could also write a biography in Latvian as I see there is absolutely nothing about her in the Latvian Wikipedia.--Ipigott (talk) 06:32, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

It’s a pity that most international sources keep translating her surname back to Latin characters without the original spelling. However, as you explained it before, wikipedia guidelines prefer to use the name that is most frequently used, and the use of variant sounds great for me. I really don’t like to edit others work so I will just keep leaving messages on talk pages and let people decide what to do with that information. :) Thanks for idea, I will work on her biography in Latvian when I finish other article I have in process. There is another thing I would like to find out from you, did you mean Jāzeps Vītols when you wrote Lavian composer Vitol Yazep? Kriptekss (talk) 18:33, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Kriptekss: Thanks for providing the correct name of the composer. I've made the change.--Ipigott (talk) 06:07, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your responses! Kriptekss (talk) 12:46, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Ian,

I really enjoy contributing to Wikipedia, but its always nice to be appreciated! MauraWen (talk) 18:32, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

		Welcome to Women in Red's June 2018 worldwide online editathons. New: WiR Loves Pride New: Singers and Songwriters New: Women in GLAM New: Geofocus: Russia/USSR Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:15, 29 May 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Can you please look over the draft available for the article on Draft:Caillou Pettis and see if it is good to submit for actual publication? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SimplyBatman22 (talk • contribs) 13:29, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

SimplyBatman22: Although you have lots of references, they nearly all come from social media. These are not acceptable for notability. You need to find some from recognized newspapers, journals or books.--Ipigott (talk) 13:39, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

If you have time, can you check my work on her? I ran it through multiple translators, but want to ensure I did not misrepresent any of the text. Thanks! If you don't have the time, not to worry. SusunW (talk) 20:32, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

I can certainly look it through but Finnish is not one of my languages. Like Hungarian and Estonian, it is completely different from the other European languages. When I am working on Finns, I usually try to find material in Swedish. It used to be widely used in Finland but today Finnish is dominant. At first sight, the biography looks interesting. I'll try to get back to it later.--Ipigott (talk) 08:27, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you so much, Ian. Never occurred to me to look for Swedish—that's why I have you ;). I was fascinated by her, just wanted to be sure I made no glaring errors. SusunW (talk) 15:02, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Why is there a list of Icelandic women writers in addition to the List of Icelandic writers? I have included men writers and women writers on the main list and it is not too long. I am not entirely sure why it is gender listed. I also do not know if there should also be a list of Icelandic men writers since there is a list of women writers? I see there are categories for both men and women but these are "non-diffusing" so I guess gender lists are also non-diffusing also, so should I just add women writers to the list from the main list? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frayae (talk • contribs) 12:58, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Frayae: It is not always easy to identify the contributions women have made in the more important fields of interest. That is why we have compiled lists of women in many fields, including all the nationality-based contributions of women writers. While you have indeed been contributing to a good List of Icelandic writers, it is not always easy for English speakers to identify which ones are women. All the women in the women's list should in fact also appear on the main list. Personally, I don't think it is necessary to compile a list of male Icelandic writers but not everyone agrees. I see you are a very recent member of Wikipedia. If you are interested in expanding coverage of Icelandic women, you might like to join Wikipedia:Women in Red. Thanks for you interesting comments.--Ipigott (talk) 20:44, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

I see. Thank you for explaining, I will improve the womens list also. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frayae (talk • contribs) 09:33, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

I have added a column to the List of Icelandic writers to make it easy for everyone to see the gender. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frayae (talk • contribs) 10:36, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Frayae: Thank you for this and for all the other improvements you have made to the table. It's coming on very well. Thanks also for expanding the List of Icelandic women writers.--Ipigott (talk) 07:23, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi! Hoping your can help me. How do you add that little descriptor that shows up under the person's name when you search for them from https://www.wikipedia.org/ globe page? For example, I created a page for Lisa Tauxe the geophysicist, but I don't know how to enter the descriptor "Geophysicist". Thanks! SJTatsu (talk) 22:56, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

@SJTatsu:. The description can be added on Wikidata or by the use of {{Short description}}. Eg. {{Short description|American geophysicist and professor}}. 109.146.136.16 (talk) 23:06, 5 June 2018 (UTC) Perfect. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by SJTatsu (talk • contribs) 06:04, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation! I just joined up :) Kramler (talk) 22:12, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, while sifting through AfC submissions, I've come across new users that may be interested in the WIR project. Is there a quick/relatively easy way to post an invite to the project/the current events on their talk pages? Cheers! Thsmi002 (talk) 21:42, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Thsmi002: This looks like a useful suggestion. Thanks to the efforts of Bobo.03, we do in fact have a system for identifying users who have written articles about women. I have adapted the invitation we use in this connection. Feel free to send it out to those who might be interested in WiR. I'll let you know if any become members.--Ipigott (talk) 06:30, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

		Thank you for preparing articles on women and their works over the past few weeks. I have noticed your interest while reviewing submissions to AfC. You might be interested in becoming a member of our WikiProject Women in Red where we are actively trying to reduce Wikipedia's content gender gap. You can join by using the box at the top of the WiR page. But if you would like to receive news of our activities without becoming a member, you can simply add your name to our mailing list. In any case, thank you for actively contributing to the coverage of women (currently, 17.65% of English Wikipedia's biographies). Our priorities this month: WiR Loves Pride Singers and Songwriters Women in GLAM Geofocus: Russia/USSR #1day1woman Global Initiative
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--

Hi Ian, Here follows a polite request...

I notice that you have been the editor responsible for updating the above page recently. May I ask that next time you move the May Meetups to the Show/Hide section for Previous Events rather than deleting them? I have just re-entered the missing April Meetups so that the record is complete. No big deal really.--Oronsay (talk) 08:10, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Oronsay: I'm sorry if I inadvertently failed to copy the April events to Previous Events. Thanks for taking care of it. The best place to find links to previous meetups in on Template:Women in Red which you can probably find more easily at the bottom of the main Women in Red page. Thanks, btw, for your recent contributions on Australian women.--Ipigott (talk) 13:52, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Ipigott. I noticed that you periodically update certain pages to reflect the current percent of women’s biographies on English Wikipedia as found by WHGI. Your effort inspired me to create {{WHGI}}, so that you (ideally) can update only one page (that one) each week, and it will take care of the others. It’s transcluded now on Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red and {{Women in Red header}}. I also included it in {{WIR-purpose}}, which is embedded in {{WIR-side}}. I put that last one on the four June meetup pages as well as Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00/2018.

Of course, use it on any other pages you want to. I didn’t update any of the past meetups, thinking maybe those should be left to history. I’m brand new to templates, and getting my feet wet with these and two others: {{WiR-HeaderBox}} and {{WiR-SubheaderBox}}. I’ve left a note on Headbomb’s talk, asking him to check these over, in case I’ve made some errors.

Anyway, I hope to make project participants’ lives a little easier. NotARabbit (talk) 01:03, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

NotARabbit: Thanks for your interest and you efforts to simplify things. The WiR update actually needs more than just the percentage and as far as I can see, the meetup pages will still need individual attention. But I'll try you template out on Monday and see how it works.--Ipigott (talk) 18:09, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

You can change the date in the template, too, even if the percentage doesn’t change. NotARabbit (talk) 16:35, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

I have been wondering if you would be interested in covering the Saxbo ceramics company, considering that a number of women played central roles in it (especially of course its founder Nathalie Krebs, unfortunately already stubbed, but also Eva Stæhr-Hansen and others). A very informative video is available here. See also this source. Just checking, otherwise I wil just cover it myself (but I think it deserves a more well-written article).13:35, 25 June 2018 (UTC)Ramblersen (talk)

(talk page watcher)@Ramblersen: I'm puzzled: what do you mean by "unfortunately already stubbed"? Is it that you don't like working to expand or improve existing articles because you can't score them as "articles created"? I can't see any other reason why it's less good to have a short article on her, complete with image, than to have nothing at all. Am I missing something? PamD 13:52, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't mind expanding stubs at all (and have expanded many of them since it is one of my goals here on Wikipedia to keep by main areas of interest stub-free) but, empirically, many of them, even of very notable persona, tend to remain stubs for ages while far less notable ones that have no stubs get much more detailed articles. That is at least my observation.Ramblersen (talk) 15:04, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

For the moment I've made a redirect from Saxbo to Nathalie Krebs though of course it would be good if someone would over-write that redirect by creating a proper article on the company: the redirect seems better than nothing, for the reader. PamD 13:55, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello,

I am E. Whittaker, an intern at Wikimedia with the Scoring Team to create a labeled dataset, and potentially a tool, to help editors deal with incivility when they encounter it on talk pages. A full write-up of the study can be found here: m:Research:Civil_Behavior_Interviews. We are currently recruiting editors to be interviewed about their experiences with incivility on talk pages. Would you be interested in being interviewed? I am contacting you because of your involvement in Wikipedia’s Women in Red project. The interviews should take ~1 hour, and will be conducted over BlueJeans (which does allow interviews to be recorded). If, so, please email me at ewhit@umich.edu in order to schedule an interview.

Thank you Ewitch51 (talk) 20:43, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Ewitch51: Thanks for your invitation. I do not see incivility as the major issue. Much more important is outright bullying which has driven a number of competent editors off the English version of Wikipedia and by extension has curtailed their participation in Women in Red. I'm afraid I'm not a proponent of oral interviews. My own experience clearly indicates the advantages of written communication which allows careful monitoring of questions and answers. That said, I wish you every success with your efforts to diminish incivility.--Ipigott (talk) 07:55, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your response! Your point of view definitely makes sense. Hope you have a nice res of your day Ewitch51 (talk) 14:47, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

		Hello again from Women in Red! July 2018 worldwide online editathons: New: Sub-Saharan Africa Film + stage 20th-century Women Rock Continuing: Notable women, broadly-construed! Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): Are we losing momentum? London calling (the Mayor of London!) Publication about Wikipedia's coverage of women mathematicians Women in Red is featured in Toolhub
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 14:04, 28 June 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Alex Shih (talk) 00:01, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Ipigott. It gets kind of discouraging when the percentage gets stalled, doesn’t it? I guess it’s what is called “gradual change”. I’m puzzled by your edit summary here, though. If you edit the template itself ({{WHGI}}), which I’ve done now, it shows “20.01% as of 23 December 2024”, and the percent symbol is definitely there. Were you by chance looking only at the edit screen, and seeing just the template code and not what a reader would see? I’d like to put the template back in.

You’ll still have to edit that page every week, to put in the raw biography numbers. No template for that, I’m afraid. ;-) NotARabbit (talk) 22:44, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

NotARabbit: I think you must have added http://www.julietemckenna.com/?p=2945 by mistake. I did not edit it. I think you must be referring to the WiR main page. I spent about ten minutes playing around with the edit there which usually takes about 30 seconds. I could not see where the pertinent text came from until I found there was a template. I tried to add the correct date to the template but it did not work. I finally added the new text in the traditional way. While templates can be useful if they save time and trouble, in this case I think it is easier to keep things as they are. I certainly appreciate all the work you have been doing to improve our redlinks, etc., and hope you will be around to assist with the monthly challenge I am preparing for August. I hope this will help to restore interest in WiR and lead to proportionately more new articles about women.--Ipigott (talk) 07:30, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant to get back on this sooner. I did add the wrong link by mistake. Serves me right for not previewing because I was in a hurry! :-P

I’m wondering if you were inadvertently editing the documentation of the template, instead of the template itself. You need to edit the whole page, from the link at the top. If you do that, the entire editing window would look like this:

'''17.65'''% {{#if:{{{date|}}} |as of July 2|}}<noinclude>

{{documentation}}
</noinclude>

That’s it—there should be nothing else in that window.

The two places to be updated are “17.65” and “as of July 2”. Please, I beg you, give it one more try this Monday! If it still doesn’t work for you, I promise not to bring it up again. ;-)

NotARabbit: We're now up to 17.66% as of 9 July. I've made the change in the normal way on the main WiR page as I really can't see how a template would be of much help. If you wish to update all the other relevant pages with a template you are free to do so though I can't see any real time saving.--Ipigott (talk) 13:06, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

I like your idea. Its fun for me to watch my own progress and I do like the flags. You had my name associated with Ana Maria Noe and I had created Bettina Gilois, so I fixed that. I hope that is ok.

Neither of those articles have been assigned a class. Does that automatically make them stubs? I can add "stubs", I put "no class" next to those biographies until I hear back from you. Thanks for starting this. I hope other editors are interested in participating. And thanks again for your encouragement and support. MauraWen (talk) 17:47, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

MauraWen yes you cannot get away. LOL Actually I watch Ian's page ;) Ores says it is C class. You can use this software to evaluate a probable class for you by changing the last digits to your article version number. Go to history and click on the most recent time/date stamp link. It will look like this [6] and in the address line is the id#. If your article shows as GA (Good Article) or FA (Featured Article) insert B (I use this if all critical dates are known) or C (I use this if critical dates are missing) unless it has been actually reviewed in the GA/FA processes. SusunW (talk) 18:58, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

@SusunW: Thx. cool tool! MauraWen (talk) 21:17, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

MauraWen: Sorry for mixing up the articles. Glad to see you've correct them. As for the classes, in the instructions for the scheme, I will try to encourage participants to assign classes to their articles and to add WiR templates to their talk pages. If these have not been added, we'll try to add those that are appropriate. I'm happy to hear you like the general approach.--Ipigott (talk) 07:16, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

When I started her, I had no idea that I would find so much information or that she would turn out to be such an iconic figure. But, now that I have finished writing her, I think she probably meets GA criteria. If you have time, could you give her a copyedit? Thank you! SusunW (talk) 19:05, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

I was going to say the same thing about GA status after reading it! Cheers, Thsmi002 (talk) 22:10, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Looks good. How about the dates? Don't they need to be transformed into the American MDY? It would be good if further images could be added.--Ipigott (talk) 08:46, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you so much, Ipigott I have never used American style dates; maybe because I have always had wide acquaintance with people globally. She lived far more of her life outside the US than in it, and she was born in Cuba. Hopefully that sways in favor of international dating ;). I so wanted to use that picture of her getting the best actress prize, but it is tiny and I can only have one fair use. I wanted a photo of Santiago, but all of them appear to be modern, except this one. [7] which seems pretty grainy to me. I think that I prefer either this or this. What do you think? I'll try to find some other images. SusunW (talk) 14:44, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

I think this one would be fine.--Ipigott (talk) 07:52, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Although this was sent out yesterday by mass messaging, very few people received it. Apparently there is some kind of technical problem which should be resolved soom.

		An exciting new month for Women in Red! August 2018 worldwide online editathons: New: Indigenous women Women of marginalized populations Women writers Geofocus: Bottom 10 Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative Notable women, broadly-construed! For the first time, this month we are trying out our Monthly achievement initiative All creators of new biographies can keep track of their progress and earn virtual awards. It can be used in conjunction with the above editathons or for any women's biography created in August. Try it out when you create your first biography of the month.
		Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): Call for members for the Gender Diversity Visibility Community User Group (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Ipigott (talk) 08:22, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

		An exciting new month for Women in Red! August 2018 worldwide online editathons: New: Indigenous women Women of marginalized populations Women writers Geofocus: Bottom 10 Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative Notable women, broadly-construed! For the first time, this month we are trying out our Monthly achievement initiative All creators of new biographies can keep track of their progress and earn virtual awards. It can be used in conjunction with the above editathons or for any women's biography created in August. Try it out when you create your first biography of the month.
		Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): Call for members for the Gender Diversity Visibility Community User Group (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 11:22, 23 July 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Hello, as discussed, and a bit late, we're running an event at the Bush Theatre focusing on Women in Theatre, primarily ethnic minorities. I set the organiser up to add some people to the above list but I think they might have compiled things offline. If you have any suggestions for articles to add to this page that would be great. It's at 7:30pm 25/7/2018, there will be new editors attempting to create bios and pages about plays and works themselves. Any support from your end in stewarding any new content would be welcome! Battleofalma (talk) 11:33, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Battleofalma: I'm really tied up today and tomorrow. Perhaps Megalibrarygirl, SusunW or Ser Amantio di Nicolao can come up with some suggestions. Good luck with your event.--Ipigott (talk) 13:35, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for the referrals. Battleofalma (talk) 16:27, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

@Battleofalma: I can take a look. You just need a list of people who are most likely notable, correct? Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:50, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

for your reply to my signing up in the Women in Red project. I had supposed that I had signed up for it long ago, but that turned out to be just an opinion, unsupported by the references. I enjoyed wandering over your user page, I have (sort of) Iceland as myversion of your Denmark and although I have not been as prolific as you in producing both quality & quantity in articles, I discovered a devise that showed me all the articles i had started over the years and was a bit surprised to find exactly 100 articles about women there. This might seem like bragging except you've done twice that many and as you know we wikipedians need to brag about our work here because no one outside wikipedia really cares. Nice meeting you, Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 17:54, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Einar: I enjoyed browsing through your user page too. A bit of bragging from time to time is obviously called for. If you enjoy recognition, you might like to participate in our upcoming Monthly achievement initiative. It is intended to officialize organized bragging.--Ipigott (talk) 09:23, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

I don't know for sure what August will bring but I certainly will keep Monthly achievement initiative in mind. Officialized bragging has a certain charm to it . . ...... for some folks. Carptrash (talk) 16:12, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Ian. I took a short break from WIR, but am now back to researching, writing and editing. I posted my first article for WIR, Ruth E. Hodge, the other day. And just posted a new one for Mary Lowe Dickinson. Unfortunately, I didn't realize that there was a typo in the WIR redlink for her middle name until after I hit "Publish." (The redlink should have used the spelling of "Lowe" instead of "Low.") Being a relative newbie, I'm not sure to fix this. Do you have the editorial power to make the change and, if so, could you please correct the title for me? If not, can you please advise me how to get the title changed? Thank you in advance for your guidance. (P.S. Her middle name was acutally "Caroline." The name "Lowe" was the surname she took for her first marriage. Dickinson was the surname resulting from her second marriage. So, if there's anything else we need to do to clarify her naming convention, please advise.) Hope all is well in your world. Kind Regards. 47thPennVols (talk) 03:56, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Done. Will have a look at what incoming redirects we need when not editing on phone. PamD 04:56, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

@47thPennVols: Right, I've now created a set of incoming redirects, and a disambiguation page at Mary Dickinson, and having redirected Mary Underwood here I've disambiguated the lady bowler of that name at 1973 World Outdoor Bowls Championship who showed up on the "What links here" but seems (to me) not to be the Primary Topic for that name as she's unlikely ever to have an article written on her. PamD 08:50, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Please bear with me, can I add the biographies I create in Arabic? --Mervat (talk) 19:21, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Mervat: Not this time, I'm afraid. Maybe we'll try to expand in the future but for now we're just covering the English Wikipedia. But please continue to write biographies in Arabic. We'll probably pick them up from our Wikidata redilinks. Happy editing! --Ipigott (talk) 20:37, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

I will be adding the code you mentioned to the articles I have been creating! Thanks for your time! cbratbyrudd (talk) 20:37, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Actually, I reread the helpful post you Ipigott made and I realized I do not understand the default sort bit. Can you explain to me how I add that to my articles? cbratbyrudd (talk) 20:37, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

@Cbratbyrudd:: When you are editing an article, you should be able to see Wiki markup at the foot of the page. If you see Insert, Symbols or something else, click on the inverted arrow and select Wiki markup. If you now click on {{DEFAULTSORT:}}, it will be copied to your article at the point where you have positioned your cursor. If you have created the article Anne Smith, for example, you can put the family name first and the given name second in order to obtain {{DEFAULTSORT:Smith, Anne}}. This will mean the article will be listed under Smith rather than Anne in category listings, etc. If you look at the articles you have created since the beginning of August, you'll see I have added DEFAULTSORT just before the categories, i.e. after References or External links. Try it our on your next article. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 08:13, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

		September is an exciting new month for Women in Red's worldwide online editathons! New: Women currently in academics Women + Law Geofocus: Hispanic countries Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative Check it out: Monthly achievement initiative All creators of new biographies can keep track of their progress and earn virtual awards. It can be used in conjunction with the above editathons or for any women's biography created in September. Try it out when you create your first biography of the month.
		Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): Call for members for the Gender Diversity Visibility Community User Group Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red#The Endless Night of Wikipedia’s Notable Woman Problem (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 01:55, 26 August 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Thanks for your great idea, Ian. Your Monthly Achievement Initiative for Women in Red has done really well, as evidenced by the participation of a lot of editors in the first month. Well done!

Rosiestep (talk) 06:05, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Rosie. I'm glad you think it is doing well. It might be interesting to see how many countries have been covered, how many articles in Start, C and B classes, and how many new participants. Let's see what it has achieved at the end of the month. Thanks also for your own support.--Ipigott (talk) 08:24, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for your message and the one you left on Women in Red. Yes, we had a good day - the main event as you probably know was in London, where I was, where we had about 50 people over the course of the day, and then satellite events turned up in Phoenix, Chicago, Amsterdam and Melbourne as well. I was using the Outreach Dashboard to track everything (which didn't seem to work perfectly? maybe there's something better out there?) and we had 116 editors in total, and about 148 different articles got added/edited - though MOSTLY they were all totally new to Wikipedia, so we'll see how it goes. Southbank Centre in London, who gave us the room, are keen to do it again in 6 months or a year! Hroche83 (talk) 16:00, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Hroche83: I'm glad to hear that everything went so well. Your stats are really impressive. Let's hope some of the newcomers stick with Wikipedia. If you think I can help any of them along, please let me know. You could also try to encourage them to join Women in Red. Rosiestep, Victuallers: Can you suggest anything which would avoid the difficulties of Outreach Dashboard or provide any additional tips on how to organize global editathon events?--Ipigott (talk) 17:57, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Hroche83: What an awesome event for you to organize! I'm impressed that editors in so many cities participated. Unfortunately, there is currently no better tool for organizing in-person events that the Outreach Dashboard, though the WMF is aware that it has flaws and is working on developing something new. I'll take a look at all the newly-created articles later today. Thanks for what you are doing, and happy editing! --Rosiestep (talk) 18:32, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Ipigott! Are we doing the monthly initiative next month? Do you need any help with this month's? Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:19, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Megalibrarygirl: As you can see, there has been far less interest in participation this month. I think we should wait at least another couple of months before we revive it or go for another type of challenge to encourage new participants. In the meantime, why don't we allow participants in the other editathons to provide details of their new creations along the same lines as for the monthly achievements, i.e. with country flag, occupation, article class and date of creation? In this way, we would have the best of both worlds.--Ipigott (talk) 06:34, 23 September 2018 (UTC) @Rosiestep, Victuallers, and SusunW: What do you think about this?--Ipigott (talk) 08:35, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

We could perhaps make it a quarterly initiative. For example, this month's was "fall themed." We could do one in January that's "winter themed." Of course there's the caveat that the global south has opposite seasons.... Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:31, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

@Megalibrarygirl: I think if we do it again, we should do it differently. We could for example start by inviting participants to aim to create a pre-specified number of articles during the month. If it's in winter, they could sign up as WiR snowflakes (participants box). They could then be awarded the WiR icicle for five new bios, the snowman for 10, the igloo for 25 and the iceberg for 50. Now there's a challenge for you to create some picture-perfect awards! Perhaps we should do it in January. We could perhaps relate it to a geofocus on wintry countries: Greenland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Russia, Mongolia, Canada, etc. Perhaps even Austria and Switzerland. Winter sports could of course be included.--Ipigott (talk) 13:57, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Hmm, don't forget our antipodean friends who spend December basking on the beach! Don't want to make Wikipedia too cosily northern-hemisphere-centric. Ah, reading more carefully, just noted that Megalibrarygirl has just said the same thing. Ah well. PamD 14:22, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

@PamD:: Have you ever been in the southern hemisphere at Christmas? They have Christmas trees (usually plastic), snowmen (e.g. made of sand), icicle lights, reindeer decorations, etc., etc. And of course, if we choose the "winter" theme, we could always include Antarctica, as well as the summer ski resorts in the Andes (quite a few in Argentina and Chile), Australia's Snowy Mountains, Afriski in southern Africa, and of course the Southern Alps of New Zealand. In any case, to put things in perspective, only about 11% of the world's population live in the southern hemisphere, although about 40% live in the tropics where they never experience winter. But that doesn't mean they are not interested in earning wintry awards. I'm joking of course, and some time soon we should also target the southern hemisphere.--Ipigott (talk) 15:00, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

@PamD: and Ipigott, I love the snowflakey idea! We could totally do that! And if we want to be more inclusionary, we can maybe find a less seasonal theme... We should canvass some Australian editors, like Casliber. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:37, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Have y'all had a destubathon? Much like the Stub Contest? Maybe a hybrid where folks could either destub an article or make it GA. And the scope could be not only notable women, but (say) media written or directed by women, or with central female characters/actors. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:35, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I came across P. S. Krøyer's paintings of Marie today and just wanted to say that I think its an example of Wikipedia at its best. The prefect length and level of detail for a general encyclopedia and – for once – a nice read, the way you could read some older encyclopedias just for pleasure of it. Thank you for your work on that article. /Julle (talk) 23:48, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Julle: What a nice message to greet me on a Sunday morning. I'm glad you liked the article. It was a real pleasure writing articles on the Skagen Painters, particularly as their work provides opportunities for adding captivating illustrations.--Ipigott (talk) 08:38, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

There appears to be data in this book [8] about the pI don't thinkeriod from 1921-1923 when she was in the U.S. Short of typing the info into a translation machine, I cannot figure out how to access the data. Can you add the info to her article? SusunW (talk) 17:39, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

@SusunW: As you can see, I've added a couple of snippets. There are also references to the articles she wrote after returning from New York but I think you have already mentioned them, There there are more names of those involved in the Liga - but you can see who there are yourself. I think. Let me know if you want me to go any further.--Ipigott (talk) 15:03, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you Ian. I wasn't able to find material on that gap in her history, except in that book. Please add anything that you like. There are other books that may well have more info, but translating them is always an issue. I was happy to find the piece by Truque done to celebrate the anniversary of her baccalauréat. It is the only article I have found giving her parent's, husband and child's names and such specific detail of her private life. Hope to wrap it up in a couple of days and then will ask you to copyedit. :) SusunW (talk) 15:47, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

I think I am done with what I have access to. If you want to add information please feel free to improve it. I think it is ready for a final copyedit. SusunW (talk) 23:41, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

@SusunW: As I've edited this quite a bit, you better make sure I have not altered your intended meaning. It seems to me that at this stage the coverage is quite sufficient for a GA article. It can always be added to later.--Ipigott (talk) 11:14, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

As always, you rock! Thank you. I get that it doesn't have many photos, but other than the 1939 one, I didn't find others to use. SusunW (talk) 17:06, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Dear Ian,

Thanks for the welcome to Women in Red. You offered to give me advice if I needed it and I do have one issue. I've nominated one of my new bios of women scientists for Good Article status and I'd like to find out how it's best to try to inform the women in red/women in science editors that it needs a review? Thank you.LLMHoopes (talk) 14:22, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

@LLMHoopes:: Yes, I looked at Bette Korber a few days ago and noticed you had nominated it for GA. While you have included basic details with sources, I really don't think the article is yet up to GA standard. Compared with other women's biographies which have recently reached GA status (see here), it is still pretty short. It also lacks the usual longer listing of sources. I would suggest you aim for at least 40,000 B (it's now less that 13,000) and include perhaps twice as many sources. You also need to provide much more detail on her life, her career, her achievements and how people have reacted to them. I think the best advice I can give you is to look at some of those which are already GA. Of course, now you have nominated the article for GA, someone will no doubt turn up and review it. But don't be discouraged. First try to improve the article yourself. Then call on other editors to assist you if you run into problems. Keep me posted on further progress. You are already doing very well for someone with so little Wikipedia experience. You should also look at our essays, especially Primer for creating women's biographies. You can find others in the template at the bottom of the main WiR page. Hope this helps.--Ipigott (talk) 15:34, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

		Please join us... We have four new topics for Women in Red's worldwide online editathons in October! New: Clubs Science fiction + fantasy STEM The Mediterranean Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 14:46, 28 September 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Alex Shih (talk) 00:02, 30 September 2018 (UTC)