Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Ideas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Women in RedAbout us

Hello! and welcome to WikiProject Women in Red (WiR), whose objective is to turn red links into blue ones. Our project's scope is women's biographies and women's works, broadly construed. Did you know that, according to WHGI, only 17.75% of the English Wikipedia's biographies are about women? Not impressed? Content gender gap is a form of systemic bias, and this is what WiR addresses. We invite you to participate, whenever you like, in whatever way suits you and your schedule.
Women in Red warmly welcomes you!

Women in Red logo
Wikipedia - filled with knowledge.jpg
Welcome to the Ideas Cafe where we serve up ideas for Women in Red's virtual editathons! The Ideas Cafe is our planning page, where your ideas become WiR events. Here, we discuss, organize, plan, and coordinate our activities. Please join the discussion here or on our project talkpage.
Use social media to promote our work!
Facebook Wiki Women in Red
Twitter @wikiwomeninred
Pinterest Our WikiProject's board
Hashtag #wikiwoimeninred
Common tasks for each event.
This list is incomplete. Please add to it
  • identify sponsors and/or WikiProject hosts
  • create list of potential participants, including active editors from the area(s) to be covered
  • create editathon banner
  • create/find editathon icon
  • develop the WiR redlist, find related redlink lists
  • create meetup page, completing sections on
  • "Add these to articles" (stub templates, applicable categories, useful lists)
  • "Add these to article talkpages" (WikiProject banners, editathon banner for the event)
  • create the invite
  • distribute the invite
  • develop social media campaign (FB, Twitter)
  • We haven't been doing this but it would be great if we had a social media volunteer
  • add Authority Control if missing to all the articles created during the event
  • double-check each article for categories
  • double-check each article for talkpage banners
  • create the thank you and/or barnstar
  • develop a list of contributors (overlaps to some degree with registered participants)
  • distribute the thank you and/or barnstar after the event to the contributors
  • create Wikidata entry if none exists

December 2018


Geofocus: Ireland

Geofocus: Caucasus?

I am seeing that there is a proposal that the geofocus of the month of November be about Ireland. I think it is not entirely correct because it is not good to focus only on one country and, being an English speaking country, has many biographies in this Wikipedia. What do you think if we focus on the three countries of the Caucasus and the territories with sovereignty discussed? I apologize if it seems I'm insisting, but I like to treat less popular countries. A tender greeting. Alsoriano97 (talk) 17:40, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

  • Support Those countries are still underrepresented on the English Wikipedia. @Alsoriano97: Excellent suggestion. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  18:46, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Women laureates

I'm not sure how easy it would be to create redlists for this, but this event could cover woman recipients of awards, prizes, honors of all sorts, plus women's awards which don't have an article yet. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:50, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

@Rosiestep: Highly support. This could help tackle my Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Awards list I made ;) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 21:00, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
@Rosiestep: What is your definition of laureates? Would hall of famers count as well? --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:04, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
For me, MrLinkinPark333, it would be anyone who got an award of any kind... broadly construed. Famers, of course! --Rosiestep (talk) 20:32, 22 November 2018 (UTC)


I'm being bold and putting this here, based on this [1] conversation about The Royal Photographic Society focus on influential female photographers. SusunW (talk) 13:00, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Entries should also be added to List of women photographers and the sister pages listed there.WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 03:58, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Stub Fest

I'm being bold, too. Without a contest on the horizon, I think the only we could –maybe– get to 18% in 2018 is a stub fest. I know stubs aren't everyone's thing, but there is something to be said for the fact that there are a lot of notable women who are missing an article and we could being honoring them in December with at least a stub. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:33, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

@Rosiestep: For me, I try to have any article I make at least 1500 bytes. If we make stubs, there's a chance they get deleted based on the size of the article, even if we believe these women are notable. It also depends on what your definition of stub is as well. Finally, there was the Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/The 1% Contest planned but put on hold due to Dr. Blofeld's retirement. What are your ideas? --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:36, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
MrLinkinPark333 - My idea was pretty broad: create stubs that stick (meet WP:N). If the idea seemed worthwhile to others, the details could be sorted out through consensus. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:40, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Rosiestep Ah okay. So if they pass GNG or are presumed notable per specific criteria, then I think that would be okay. I'd also would like others to chime in on how large the articles should be. I personally would aim 1500 bytes above to prevent my articles from being tagged as stubs, as it'd only create an increase number of stubs that need destubbing. What are other peoples thoughts? --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:46, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
What if we focus on the list of declined drafts at AfC now that we have a list? Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Drafts SusunW (talk) 13:44, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
@SusunW: That could be useful. Two birds/one stone. I'm also making lists of women that are presumed notable per specific criteria provided they pass GNG as well. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:42, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
For the October Women in STEM, I added a section Works in progress (Drafts, AfCs, AfDs,…) late in the event. Haven't checked if anyone other than me worked on them. I tried to pick a few that were likely to pass GNG or PROF. For Drafts, I listed some that seemed abandoned (not edited for several months). Also, what is the latest on using Quicksilver or something like it? There was this discussion a few months ago.[2] StrayBolt (talk) 23:13, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Firming up for December

As you can all see, there have been quite a few suggestions for December. Would anyone like to suggest how we go forward?--Ipigott (talk) 14:04, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

I think we have sufficient lists for laureates and photographers. Not sure whether there was support for doing the drafts/stubs, as not many people weighed in and our focus is typically creation, not improvement. As for the geofocus, I am fine with either, but as the Caucuses are in western Asia and we just did an entire month of Asia, maybe it is overkill? Or maybe the reverse, Asia focus spurs more creation via continuance? Ireland's official language is Gaelic, not English and typically articles of the British Isles focus on English subjects. However, that being said, we also did Great Britain and Ireland in January 2018, so I am undecided. Maybe @Rosiestep, Megalibrarygirl, Antiqueight, and Alsoriano97: can weigh in? SusunW (talk) 15:05, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
I'm fine with either -or both!- for Geofocus. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:48, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
I'm fine with any of those. Ping me today or tomorrow and I can make the pages. I'm just chilling on my days off here. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:37, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Just an FYI it's Irish, not Gaelic. And both it and English are official. But as for the geofocus I'm easy. ☕ Antiqueight chatter 00:26, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
Why not Ireland for December and the Caucuses for January? As for the stubs, I'm not too sure how committed Dr. Blofeld was to helping with this. Perhaps we should wait until we have further clarification. As for improvement rather than creation, I had assumed the emphasis for WiR would be on the creation of short but informative biographies. They could of course be pinpointed for a later destubbing exercise.
I must say I am rather disappointed with the response to religion and deceased politicians in November, although perhaps many have been distracted by WAM. When we focused on religion in 2015, we had 131 new articles. This November, up to now we have only 38 (and it looks as if I have contributed about half of them). Although we haven't specifically covered politicians, we had 183 on leadership in 2015. Up to now, on deceased politicians we have only 54. In May 2016, we created 121 new articles on photography. Is there any way in which we could encourage just as much enthusiasm this time around? Perhaps it would help if contributors could add their user names to the lists of articles created, as in the monthly achievements.
It would indeed be great if Sue could make a start on the preparations.--Ipigott (talk) 08:46, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
Well, I understand your position. I think that only one country will give for a little. Surely making entire continents or very large regions limits future proposals. If I'm honest, I think there are not many options that are not similar to what has already been done so I'm not against Ireland's proposal. Regarding what @Ipigott: expresses, I am a student so this month it has been impossible for me to focus on Wikipedia, I have only been able to do three. I also take advantage of this to express my disappointment when I see that, in general, a lot of articles about women in the US are being created. It's not a bad thing, but I try to focus on other countries, especially those similar to mine, and sometimes I do not get to do many articles, as happened in the Geofocus: Hispanic countries. A greeting and nice to help you!--Alsoriano97 (talk) 22:26, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
Alsoriano97, I also try to spread my creation efforts around. Pointedly, I write few articles on UK or US subjects, as I figure others will cover them. For Asia month, I avoided China and Japan and mostly worked on Central Asia, which is a really neglected area on the encyclopedia. Your efforts (and continued input with ideas) are very much appreciated. SusunW (talk) 00:49, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
@Ipigott: I have many politicians on my lists to do - but only a handful of them are deceased. If it was politicians as a whole, I'd be making much more women articles this month (still working on mines). But it is what it is. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:28, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
MrLinkinPark333 I must admit that I added two not deceased politicians to the list because they are retired. The purpose of deceased was to prevent bios being written on those just entering the field via recent elections, as those are always targeted as being too soon. SusunW (talk) 19:54, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
@SusunW: Ah. Makes sense. Some people on my list are not in politics anymore but still alive. In any case, this month's theme allowed me to find someone who was not on my list already :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:00, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
I did have some plans but I went and broke my wrist. It's rather put me out of the running.... ☕ Antiqueight chatter 21:04, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
Antiqueight so sorry to hear this. Been there, done that. I hope you heal quickly. SusunW (talk) 00:49, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
SusunW, Last time I did this it was much worse. I'm regaining a lot of movement. I managed to write a bio today. Short but a start to getting back on the horse, though it doesn't fit any of my usual set! Edited to add the THANK YOU I came to actually say! ☕ Antiqueight chatter 00:54, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
Some of my religion ones ended up in the Asia Month list because they were Asian women missionaries; I guess I should add them to WIR-98 too, just haven't done. Penny Richards (talk) 21:40, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Ireland sounds good, though could also do with general content expansion as well.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:03, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

How about Geofocus "countries starting with I"? Ireland, India, Iran, Iraq, Indonesia... ? Ireland on its own seems a very narrow focus. PamD 14:11, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
I agree Ireland is very narrow focused. And Irish coverage isn't so bad anyway. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:17, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
Countries starting with I sounds good. Or countries with populations under 5 million? Or Island nations? Small island nations (ie both)? ☕ Antiqueight chatter 02:42, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
@Antiqueight: @PamD: That reminds me of @SusunW:'s idea way at the bottom of the page - doing countries that start with a specific letter. I'm glad you brought it up again :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 04:40, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
  • There seems to be so much confusion and so little attention to the priorities we should be putting forward for December that the best solution may well be to leave everyone to their own preferences, just encouraging them to contribute to #1day1woman. (See also the lack of constructive responses on our main WiR talk page.) So let's just see how things develop with a free for all. If there are no further reactions by this time tomorrow, I'll prepare the invitations.--Ipigott (talk) 18:56, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
I would have been pushier but with a broken hand my editing capability is limited so it feels wrong to push my personal agendas.. ☕ Antiqueight chatter 19:07, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
I guess my issue is that we have to figure out a better way to be flexible but at the same time move the work ahead. Things are placed on the calendar months in advance. If people don't object for substantial periods of time, or even bother to check and see what is on the calendar, it seems somewhat dismissive to continuously make changes at the 9th hour. Repeatedly doing this bumps things off the calendar that may never find a way to get back on. I don't think that we should rigidly hold that once something is on the calendar it cannot be moved, but we have to be more respectful of those whose proposals have been scheduled for months. I also think we have to be more proactive in visiting the calendar regularly and participating in dialogue. It just seems to me if there is no clear consensus, that we move newer proposals to another month, rather than trying to accommodate every suggestion. But again, that is just me. I am doing photographers, I already have several picked out. I also am doing laureates and am glad to focus on "I" countries. SusunW (talk) 19:30, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
I'm definitely doing laureates for sure. If "I" countries are done this month or months later I'm up for it. :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:46, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
It would be interesting to see how many articles we could get written and recorded under the #1Day1Woman project in a single month. My record for the year is that I've added only six names to monthly projects of the 25 articles I've created on women in 2018. I've listed the other 19 in the #1Day1Woman event. Oronsay (talk) 20:25, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
I will be doing Ireland - I have plenty of time though I'm limited for now...I hope to become less so as the month progresses.. ☕ Antiqueight chatter 21:25, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

January 2019

Focus of Suffrage

We talked about suffrage on our main talkpage and I wonder if there's any enthusiasm for having a "year of suffrage" just like we did a "year of science" a couple of years ago? Different organizations will be doing different events in 2019 and we could be supportive of all of that. Also, maybe we could really make an impact on all things suffrage if we have a year to do it. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:47, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Definitely interested in it! SusunW (talk) 16:52, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Changing name to reflect what was agreed upon on WiR talkpage. Note this event will last all year. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:46, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Geofocus: Caucasus

I am seeing that there is a proposal that the geofocus of the month of November be about Ireland. I think it is not entirely correct because it is not good to focus only on one country and, being an English speaking country, has many biographies in this Wikipedia. What do you think if we focus on the three countries of the Caucasus and the territories with sovereignty discussed? I apologize if it seems I'm insisting, but I like to treat less popular countries. A tender greeting. Alsoriano97 (talk) 17:40, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

  • Support Those countries are still underrepresented on the English Wikipedia. @Alsoriano97: Excellent suggestion. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  18:46, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
As per the discussion in December, am moving this here. SusunW (talk) 21:13, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Women of War & Peace

Women of War & Peace using "Category/People associated with war". Also, January is National Holocaust Month, so it ties in with this theme. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:37, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Military is still reasonably well stocked from the April 2018 event. If we go with this option I will try to add some more - Dumelow (talk) 19:13, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
Plus we'd need more Wikidata lists such Anti-war activists (Q7044167), to include all the subcategories of Category:Anti-war activists. BTW, Gamaliel knows how to append the SPARQL query to include subcategories.
The WW1 activists for peace were just finding their own end to war 100 years ago next year. Nice theme. Victuallers (talk) 10:13, 5 December 2018 (UTC)


I just saw this on FB: "The Wiki Loves Africa 2019 theme is PLAY! This theme encompasses a host of approaches and is intentionally open to interpretation. The theme Play! encourages the submission of visual representations of joyful and serious games, sport, and recreation in the form of board or mental games, physical fun or contests, playful interactions, theatrical and musical performances, etc." I like the idea as it can be a "play on words" (pardon the pun). We could have our more technically-abled members create some additional Wikidata redlists, e.g. we have playwrights, but could add lists such as Game artists (Q7411467), People in the games industry (Q8755689), Game designers (Q12015651), and maybe all the ball sportswomen (baseball, softball, etc.). I'm sure there are additional depictions of Play! that others could suggest. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:43, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

@Rosiestep: I like the theme! Play can also work as playing an instrument ;) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 21:45, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
Yes please! I'm thinking of the urban reform-minded women who worked to build public playgrounds, municipal orchestras, amateur sports leagues... Penny Richards (talk) 02:45, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
I wonder if WikiLovesWomen would join us - given the Africa/Women theme? I'll tweet them Victuallers (talk) 10:14, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi there ! Saw the tweet :) So yes, given that I am involved in both projects (Wiki Loves Women and Wiki Loves Africa), I think it would be great to do something all together in Feb. This said, I am participate in les sans pagEs Mediterranée and I started a little brainstorming on how I would make the goals of those coincide in Jan-Feb during the photo contest. I was thinking initially of having a photowalk that could be both related to women and to play. But so far, I have not seen an obvious goal... for a photowalk in Marseille on that topic. Need to explore more. If so, I would propose a photo walk in January and an upload meet in February. But I first need to find the right spot to document.
On the other hand, I think Rosie proposition is brilliant. And this for two reasons. First I have this first Wikipedia:WikiProject Wiki Loves Women/Occupations which was on the Cinema topic. It has not proved hugely successful, but it worked with some communities. The set-up is already built up. It can be reused for other professional categories. The main "work" to do for that to happen is to identify a list of professional activities related to play. The way I did it for cinema was to ... well... do a query to download all professional entries and then go through the entire list (it is actually not hugely long...) and keep only those entries that were cinema related. Then collect all Q codes and there you go. I could very well imagine a similar list related to Game. It would be the opportunity to expand the translation of items in WikiData related to that theme. Additional RedList related to those themes would be awesome additions to fuel ideas of what to translate and expand.
The second idea it brings to my mind is that talk with Sandra, from the structured data WMF team. We are thinking of building up a pilot game-like tool to help 1) add structured data description to photos uploaded during WLA past and current editions 2) add structured data "identifiers" (such as "People in the games industry", or "game designers", or "sportswomen" or "video game" etc.) and 3) provides a feedback that helps to quickly identify the best images in say WLA 2019 in Mali. This would also be greatly improved by a better understanding of Wikidata categories related to our themes, which can be used as initial documentation. Well, I am really not sure I am clear here... if someone is interested, do not hesitate to ping me so that we can further discuss on skype maybe.
I'd love to see more redlists related to play... Anthere (talk)

February 2019

  • Do we want to do something for International Day of Women and Girls in Science 11 February 2019?

Black women

Social Workers

From this discussion: [3] SusunW (talk) 22:13, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

@Ser Amantio di Nicolao, SusunW, GreenMeansGo, and Megalibrarygirl (you all contributed to the conversation SusunW links to), Will we be focusing on "social workers" in particular vs. "women + social work" in general? The category, Category:Social work includes "social workers" (Category:Social workers), and "social justice" people (Category:Social justice). Social justice could include reformers, activists, etc. Is "social work" too broad? --Rosiestep (talk) 16:02, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Seems likely Category:Social justice is simply misplaced within Category:Social work. Social work isn't uniquely central to issues surrounding things hunger or unemployment, any more (perhaps somewhat less) than something like economics is, even though the work of social workers may be related to these issues more-or-less depending on practice area. Besides that, the difference between social work and women+social work is likely to be minor. It is a highly gendered field, and even more so historically. GMGtalk 16:09, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Social workers are people we haven't specifically covered in the past, whereas clearly activists we have. But, I think it can encompass all of them. Anyone likely to have contributed to social development. SusunW (talk) 16:17, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
I like the idea of doing social workers. There's quite a few we can work on. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:20, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
As this wasn't included in the November invitation, shall we move it to another month? It still seems like a good topic. :) --Rosiestep (talk) 23:41, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
Maybe we move it to January? SusunW (talk) 17:04, 16 October 2018 (UTC)


Given the discussions on the main WiR page, can we fit this in in February, perhaps as a geofocus on the "Ancient World" targeting female figures from ancient history as well as classicists, sinologists and orientalists.--Ipigott (talk) 16:15, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Ipigott, Thumbs up. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:11, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

March 2019


  • Our annual Art+Feminism event, to include:

Dug up a couple of sources, although one doesn't quite exist just yet: "A New Illustrated Database for Women Artists Spans the 15th to 19th Centuries" talks about A Space of Their Own, from Indiana University Bloomington. Don't have a link to it yet, but it's a good space to keep an eye on; hopefully there will be something available come March.

The same article mentions a couple of other databases, which in the interests of completeness I'll add here:

  • CLARA, from the National Museum of Women in the Arts. No longer being updated, I understand.
  • Canadian Women Artists History Initiative
  • AWARE database (in French: contains biographies based on excerpts from the Dictionnaire universel des créatrices

Definitely some useful material to pursue. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:35, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

There is also the Wikisource, Women in the Fine Arts: From the Seventh Century B.C. to the Twentieth Century A.D. - Heavy on the 19th century. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 03:55, 20 November 2018 (UTC)


I don't think we have ever done a Francophone focus, but March is when French cultures celebrate their language/culture. Lots of countries globally to choose from, which hopefully will have broad appeal, i.e. Algeria, Belgium, Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Côte, d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, France, French Guiana, French Polynesia, Gabon, Guadeloupe, Guinea, Haiti, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Mali, Martinique, Mauritius, Monaco, Morocco, New Caledonia, Niger, Quebec (Canada), Republic of the Congo, Réunion, Rwanda, Senegal, Seychelles, Switzerland, Togo, Tunisia, and Vanuatu. SusunW (talk) 15:22, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

@LesSansPages are one of our besties. I'll ask them to comment. Finding sources in English are tricky in Francophone countries (Obvs) so translation would be a resource. Victuallers (talk) 10:20, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
For I... I have agreed to host an LSP edit-a-thon in my city university library on March 8th. But we have not chosen the angle of action yet. Open to propositions. We will have the books of the library obviously. But our community is tiny in Marseille so a good part of the potential participants will be newbies. It may be that the best approach is translations of already existing articles and perhaps working on citations.
You should probably also raise the issue with WikiFranca. This is a telegram channel. I'll drop a note there. Anthere (talk)
I really like the idea of a Francophone focus! Sounds like a good choice for March. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:54, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

April 2019

I know that in the past we have done edit-a-thons on academics in STEM, and academics in general, but I'd like to propose that we do one that focuses on the pioneers of Women's and Gender Studies. These were the women that brought our history forward to balance the historic record and I think they tend to be overlooked. Women like Michèle Aina Barale,[4][5][6][7] Cho Hyoung,[8] Aurora Javate de Dios,[9][10] Gunhild Kyle,[11] Elizabeth Minnich,[12] Patricia Mohammed,[13], [14] Shulamit Reinharz is a redirect to her husband :(,[15][16] Päivi Setälä,[17], Aline Wong,[18] Well you get the idea, there are lots of them that have no articles. SusunW (talk) 19:23, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

More: Akosua Adomako Ampofo/Josephine Akosua Adomako Ampofo,[19][20][21] Winifred Hoernle/Agnes Winifred Hoernlé,[22] AnnMarie Wolpe,[23][24]
Just found Australian Women's Gender Studies Association where I should be able to find some Australian names to add. Also, there's a links page with further leads in Australia and internationally. Let me know if/when you want me to add individual names as redlinks. Oronsay (talk) 20:13, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
Yay, Oronsay! Please feel free to add anyone. I'm hoping someone who knows how to create a list (hint, hint @Megalibrarygirl and Tagishsimon:) will come along and wave a magic wand. If we can get the list started, then we can all add to it. ;) SusunW (talk) 20:31, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
@SusunW: Wikidata does not have an occupation of "Gender Studyist" (major omission, IMO) and so the people you seek will be lumped amongst the anthropologists, sociologists, &c. We do have a "field of work" property, but I think relatively few academics have a value for that. I've populated said property for 54 candidates found via searches, now in Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Gender Studies. hth --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:59, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
Oronsay Might as well combine the by-hand list and the wikidata list on a single page. I've added all of the above-listed suggestions to Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Gender Studies. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:04, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
Thank you so much Tagishsimon and yes, most of the creators of these fields of study came out of sociology and anthropology, though there were a few historians that I am aware of. It gives us a start. Now if we can combine a crowd sourced list, we can begin to add the above to it. Truly appreciate your help, as we are all aware of my technical limitations ;) SusunW (talk) 21:11, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for creating the list, Tagishsimon! Sorry I got to the discussion late, SusunW. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:17, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
No problems, Sue. I think I can add a few of these per day to flesh out the list. Would that I had the energy to e-mail all those universities on the list and ask them to provide names, but I think that is more time than my schedule will allow at present :) SusunW (talk) 21:22, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
The wikidata list is up to 234 people, having scraped the gender studies categories for various non-EN language wikipedias. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:38, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

May 2019

May Mays?

Had a different theme idea: May Mays, or women named May, Mae, Mei, Mai, Maj, Maya, etc. We don't have anything penciled in for May 2019 yet, and I assume it would be easy to assemble a redlist of Mays from Wikidata. It's a name that cuts across a lot of times and places in its variations. Can even include Mabels and Maymes and Maisies. Penny Richards (talk) 01:51, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

It's unique, and I like it, Penny Richards. I bet Wikidata could also give us May (+ variants: Maye, Mayes, Mays, Meir, Meier, Meyer) surnames. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:57, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
Oooh- an interesting way of looking at the world!! ☕ Antiqueight chatter 19:03, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
Certainly something to play with. Then there's April; June; July, with Julie and Julia; August, with Augusta; and, cheekily, January, with Jan, Janette, Janice and so forth! Oronsay (talk) 00:26, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Indeed! May seems to have the most potential, but a July full of Julies, Julias, Julianas, and Juliets would be a good followup, if May Mays goes well. Penny Richards (talk) 00:31, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Hmm..?suggestion to go with it? Margaret has 8 letters, and all the variations added on, so skipping August (for Augusta), that would go in October. Katherine has 9 letters- so, that and all the variations on that name (of which there are millions) could go in either September (9th month) or November (month name the 9th).....though both those names tend towards the western names variations do appear in almost all western languages. ☕ Antiqueight chatter 09:10, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Or even people born in May? That'd help open up the amount of people as it might be difficult to find redlinks with a specific name (then again dates may not help - no pun intended). --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 02:52, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Women called May. Ping me if you want any more May name variants adding to the report. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:37, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
Wow that's a lot of Mays! @Tagishsimon: Annie May Moore (Q24044939) redirects to May and Mina Moore. I tried to adjust her wikidata page but I can't update it as both May and Mina have separate wikidata pages plus one on both of them. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 21:53, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
Yup, not useful redirect; now deleted. Forgetting that, the issue here is that Listeria cannot provide a link to Annie May Moore because that is already taken as a redirect to May and Mina Moore; so it makes up a link based on name plus QId, hence Annie May Moore (Q24044939). There's nothing wrong with any of the wikidata records; it's just a trap for the unwary arising out of Listeria doing the best it can under the circumstances. The business with three wikidata items is also normal - a solution to the so-called Bonnie & Clyde problem, where a language wikipedia has an article for a duo ... wikidata has a corresponding item for the duo, and ideally discrete items for the two individuals. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:17, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Geofocus: Portuguese-speaking countries

I like the idea and would support it. Does that extend to Papiamento speakers as well? SusunW (talk) 18:11, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
I wouldn't oppose. Other Portuguese-based creole speakers like Cape Verdean Creole (Kabuverdianu), Macanese Patois, or Malacca Kristang could be added. Relic Keeper (talk) 00:39, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
Sounds good. ☕ Antiqueight chatter 19:03, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

June 2019

August 2019

  • Indigenous Women
  • Women in Science Fiction and Fantasy (-Or Women in Genre fiction, Women in Comics, or other such group identifiers. Aka Women writers, women illustrators, women in STEM etc) - To tie in with the Worldcon event in August? ☕ Antiqueight chatter 12:35, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

September 2019

  • Women's suffrage in Europe: see [25]--Ipigott (talk) 10:55, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
I'd like to make this a year-long campaign. (Kind of like 1 day 1 woman, but each month focus on the different countries and the women involved). It wasn't limited to Europe, as also changes happened in Asia and Africa. SusunW (talk) 17:19, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

October 2019

  • STEM to honor Ada Lovelace Day
I noticed the "May" theme. I challenged myself last year to do all the "Ada"s ... are there any left I wonder? I have been working away to myself in the last few years to do all the notable women in the ODNB whose first names begin with "A" (you have to start somewhere). Would this be ["A" good theme (pun intended)] to do irrespective of country? Wikidata could find them easily I guess. (Non Latin names would qualify if first letter in their alphabet)? (pun intended) Victuallers (talk) 11:01, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Just 146 of them, Victuallers

November 2019

  • May: November: Asian Heritage Month. Mkdw talk 19:03, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
  • moved to November as in the wiki movement, WikiAsiaMonth is historically celebrated in November. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:39, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Discuss other ideas here

Twitter mates

We have monthly editathons now running in Edinburgh which are mainly in person. Ewan is one of the Wikimedians in Residence and they are very successful - They are badges as WiR - great!. A similar series is starting in Swansea. Last month they did nurses and this month business people. They want to be a "women in red" event. I will see if we can harmonise subjects. This is for info only I guess but is there a good place to log in-house events ? Victuallers (talk) 14:01, 19 January 2018 (UTC) p.s. I see WiR is getting mentioned by name in French! Femmes Rouge Wikipedia Victuallers (talk) 14:01, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Victuallers - I think it would be great to include in-person Women in Red events in our list here: [[Template:Women in Red]]. To that end, I just added a line for in-person events in the 2018 section. Please add whatever events you're aware of... and 2017 events, too. After you get the ball rolling, we should mention it on the main WiR talkpage so that others know to do so, too. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:21, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Update - still running. The next one is on August 16th at Edinburgh Uni Library. Victuallers (talk) 09:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Femicon Museum

See this tweet conversation Victuallers (talk) 09:22, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

This seems cool, Victuallers, and we haven't touched this focus area before; did you reply to her? Maybe we could start an email convo with a few of us? Hey, Megalibrarygirl, I looked over the website, and wondered how easy it might be to create a redlist for this focus area, "femininity, girlhood, and the aesthetics of cute within twentieth-century video games, computing, and electronic toys"? --Rosiestep (talk) 18:55, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
I think I could try to create a redlist based on the Femicom collection. Will start. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:09, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
@Victuallers and Rosiestep: Here's a start-up redlist: Femicom Museum Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:13, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Megalibrarygirl; mega cool... mega thanks! --Rosiestep (talk) 23:38, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
I invited her to post here. I'm not sure how big the museum is and we would need her or one of us to take the lead. Its not a subject I know anything about - but I can see that its an important area. Big thanks to MLG - do feel free to tweet her. Victuallers (talk) 06:52, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Trading article ideas

I was wondering if anyone would be interested in trading names of women with others who are interested in creating articles on specific topics. For example, I have many names of American women who have won prizes or been inducted into hall of fames. That way, our lists on Wikipedia and our personal lists could hopefully be reduced and we get to work on articles that are in our interests that we might not have come across already. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 05:50, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

I'd be interested in adding lists that others have created (such as yours) into the Women in Red redlist collection. Let me know if this interests you? This is because it is my hope that Women in Red is as well known for its redlists as for its created articles. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:26, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
@Rosiestep: That would be perfect. It'd help reduce the amount of people on my to-do lists and give them out to others who want to work on them. I already moved my first one here but I'm thinking on making another one on women who were/are United Nations Special Rapporteurs as that list is huge. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:29, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
That's awesome, MrLinkinPark333. Also pinging Megalibrarygirl who is really good with to-do list ideas! --Rosiestep (talk) 21:52, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
Just finished Rosiestep Megalibrarygirl. See here for the United Nations redlist. There are also women in United Nations working groups but I haven't included them in this list. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:20, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
Sweet! Thanks for taking the iniative, MrLinkinPark333! I hope everyone feels comfortable adding to our lists, but if you don't, ping me. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 01:03, 12 May 2018 (UTC)


Seems to me that we tend to focus on the same areas over and over and I am wondering if we just did a straight alphabetical list of countries each month, if that would get more coverage of women worldwide. So for example "A" would have lists from: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, American Samoa, Andorra, Angola, Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Aruba, Australia, Austria, and Azerbaijan; "B" would have Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bermuda, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso and Burundi; and so forth. SusunW (talk) 20:09, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

@SusunW: That would be interesting. The geofocus would be filled for almost 2 years before the list would be repeated :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 03:54, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Filling out lists

A suggestion of something a little different, maybe? We have a whole lot of lists that are partially filled out with articles - various women's halls of fame, for instance, or the list of National Heritage Fellowship recipients. Many of the by-year lists of Guggenheim Fellows as well. What about a month where we pick one or two of these lists and look at filling in all the redlinks? That would give us a nice filled-out list at the end of the month. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:05, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: Funnily, I was thinking of creating a list of Guggenheim Fellows names as the recipents are automatically notable as per WP:NACADEMIC Criteria #2. That'd help boost up the percentage without worrying about notability :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:39, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
@MrLinkinPark333: As would the National Heritage Fellows...and those have the advantage of being sourceable to the NEA's website. Which means that their biographies there are in the public domain...if we wanted to we could crank out the articles pretty quickly thanks to that. :-) --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:48, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: In that case, I think the National Heritage Fellows would be easier to complete as the Guggenheim Fellows does not have a lot of info on each recipient, just the notability. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:51, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
@MrLinkinPark333: No reason we couldn't suggest both for different months. :-) I'm not sure this would be a monthly challenge, necessarily...but bimonthly or trimonthly, perhaps. Besides, getting all of the Guggenheim Fellows in one go would be a bit of a tall order. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:59, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: Yep, that's why I didn't press on having them done first, because there is so many of them :/ However, I'm making a different list of names that are presumed notable based on individual criterias instead. ;) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:05, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
@MrLinkinPark333: What about other fellowships/awards? How about the Rome Prize, for instance - does that convey automatic notability? --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 18:45, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: That specific prize I do not know if it passes WP:ARTIST or WP:ANYBIO. As for other fellowships, Criteria 1-3 and their respective notes of WP:NACADEMIC are the ones I see for fellowhips. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:51, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Variations on Monthly Achievement Initiative

Given the current interest in this initiative (around 575 articles added by 29 August), it might be interesting to change the targets for the coming months. For October, we might for example call for articles on women from 31 predefined countries, one for each day of the month. We could list the countries beforehand, drawing on our redlists (but perhaps leaving out those without at least 20 redlinks). We could allow a maximum of three days for each country, e.g. 1 to 3 October: Albania, 2 to 4 October: Algeria, 3 to 5 October: Angola, 4 to 6 October: Argentina, etc. Participants could list their articles both under the countries and under their own user names, giving a clearer view of achievements. Then in November, we could do something similar with occupations. Would this be worthwhile or should we just continue using the August/September model? Personally, I think variations might attract additional interest. Other suggestions for variations would of course be welcome.--Ipigott (talk) 08:57, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Pinging Rosiestep, Victuallers, Megalibrarygirl, SusunW, Antiqueight, Abishe, Nick Number, cbratbyrudd, Stuartyeates, Alanna the Brave for reactions or other suggestions.--Ipigott (talk) 17:39, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
Glad to hear there's been lots of interest, Ipigott. My thoughts: I like the idea of variations on topics each month (either nationality or occupation), but I'd be wary of making it too complicated for participants. I usually have to do some preparatory research before creating an article (which may take several days depending on how busy I am), and I don't want to have to try to remember whether I can submit an article about an Algerian woman on October 4th or an Argentinian woman on October 6th. On the other hand, I might be open to having broader weekly themes: during week 1, we write about women from western European countries, then for week 2 we write about women from Middle Eastern countries (or it could be women scientists or artists, etc.). Alanna the Brave (talk) 18:00, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
I kind of feel I should recuse myself from giving suggestions, as both this month and next my real world life is impacting my editing time. That being said, I like the idea of variations, but agree with Alanna the Brave that it needs to be simple to follow or we will end up discouraging editing. Congrats on the success. 575 articles is awesome! SusunW (talk) 18:08, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
@Ipigott: I think having a broad area of occupations/countries would work better (in my personal case). Maybe have special awards that says, for example Wikipedian who created the most (specific occupation) this month, or the most articles from (specific country, area). That way if people want the special awards, they can go for it while keeping the broad range of coverage for others who just want the 5, 10, 15 articles etc. barnstars. This monthly imitative helped me clear through some articles that I wanted to do, but didn't get around to start/finish them :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:53, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
As a relative newcomer to WiR I feel that the new monthly initiative is a great place to record and celebrate all the WiR articles written in a given month, i.e. from the monthly meetups and the #1day1woman ongoing. I find that most of my articles end up in #1day1woman as I don't want to hold them up waiting for a specific meetup to come along. My preference is that the whole recording system not become over-complicated. Oronsay (talk) 02:26, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
My thirty-ish contributions only accidentally in the list, it was work I was doing anyway, but this stretch got done quicker with this extra motivation. Stuartyeates (talk) 07:04, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the comments so far. I can see the simplicity of the current approach is appealing. It therefore looks as if any variations should be "additional extras" rather than a complete revamp. Let's see how we do in September.--Ipigott (talk) 14:58, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
I echo those who suggest we keep it simple. There are many contributions to the #1day1woman page which are currently also eligible for the Monthly Achievement Initiative, meaning articles from any country and any occupation. Requiring articles fit a certain geographical or occupational category during a short window of time will limit participation in the initiative, and might be discouraging to our membership base who will see it as more of a competition. If the initiative is all about increasing participation and increasing metrics, I'd vote to not change the current model. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:27, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
Ipigott I'm not very creative in brainstorming ways to get people to participate, but I do want to help you keep the work load at something you can handle. If that means wikignoming a lot, that's fine. Just keep me posted. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:26, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

International Women’s Day names

I've been clearing out old bookmarks and I found two links that have a list of people related to International Women’s Day with a focus on technology (not all of these women are in STEM, but technology plays a part). I was wondering if we should make a list of names that were featured in International Women's Day news stories but don't have an article yet. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:56, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

United Nations

Hello. I was wondering if we could have a theme on the United Nations. I've made a list of women who are/were worked for the United Nations. There are over 20 names the my list who've held the role of Special Rapporteur/Independent Expert with a variety of countries. I think it'd be interesting as it's not focusing on one country. Let me know what you think :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:36, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from ""
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia :
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Ideas"; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA