This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Events
I've been working hard to update the list of upcoming events as well as the ArtAndFeminism|navigation box. Do organizers know of any other events that are missing from the main project page? ---Another Believer (Talk) 02:11, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
ArtAndFeminism & BLPRequestdelete
I've been really impressed with the quality work produced at Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Toronto/ArtAndFeminism 2015. I was sad to notice, however, that of the 20 or so articles created, two have had the subject request deletion. Erin Shirreff has already been deleted, and Shirley Wiitasalo will likely be deleted soon.
I certainly have no problem with the policy of deleting articles if the subject of the article isn't especially famous and wants the article deleted, but it must be discouraging for the editors who spend time creating a new article only to have it deleted within a couple days. I was curious if this is an issue for other ArtAndFeminism participants as well. I wonder if something could be done differently to avoid the deletions. Perhaps someone from ArtAndFeminism could contact the subject requesting the deletion and explain the nature of the project, which might encourage them to leave the bio online? Or maybe this is just a coincidence with the articles created at the Toronto event, and not a larger issue in need of solving? Thoughts? Thanks. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 10:48, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
- We are working on reviewing the articles created at this year's events, but we would appreciate more volunteers to help with this as we don't have the capacity to review all the edits made during the Art+Feminism events, and also, engaging in the Articles for Deletion discussions, and working through article / editing disputes is a good way to learn about editing Wikipedia and how to communicate with other editors. OR drohowa (talk) 17:29, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
- The Shirley Wiitasalo AfD closed as keep and Erin Shirreff appears to have been removed per the artist request, but I'd had !voted keep if it were at AfD. It may be useful to suggest that event organisers consider editing activities which generate lists of likely notable candidates prior to events. By this I mean things like lists of fellowships and award winners; officeholders; and similar. It's very easy to accumulate links about each individual on the list then have a more experienced editor confirm from the links that notability is met. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:52, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Work on this, too? Bearian (talk) 00:44, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks to User:Jooojay and User:WordSeventeen, it looks like a clear keep. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:15, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Community discussion on harassment reporting
There are many current proposals as part of the 2015 Inspire Campaign related to harassment management. I’ve created a page, Meta:Grants:IdeaLab/Community discussion on harassment reporting meant to serve as a central space where the various stakeholders in these proposals and other community members can discuss which methods might serve our community best so that we can unify our ideas into collective action. I encourage you to join the conversation and contribute your ideas! OR drohowa (talk) 02:46, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Does simple criticism or disagreement fall under the definition of 'harassment'?
You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride!
- What? Wiki Loves Pride, a campaign to document and photograph LGBT culture and history, including pride events
- When? June 2015
- How can you help?
- 1.) Create or improve LGBT-related articles and showcase the results of your work here
- 2.) Upload photographs or other media related to LGBT culture and history, including pride events, and add images to relevant Wikipedia articles; feel free to create a subpage with a gallery of your images (see examples from last year)
- 3.) Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)
Or, view or update the current list of Tasks. This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. Visit the group's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome!
If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's main talk page.
Thanks, and happy editing!
- Adding a timestamp for automatic archiving purposes. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:07, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Global Feminist Art class analyzing content gaps
Just thought I'd share this interesting class project: Template:Course link
From the course page:
"Each student will identify a gap in Wikipedia coverage for a course-related topic — such an artist, topic, concept, or movement. The student will then post an entry to the course project page to describe the gap, propose text to fill the gap, and list sources that could be used to fill it."
Student work is being collected here: Education Program talk:University of Washington/Global Feminist Art (Spring 2015)/gap analysis. --Ryan (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:08, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
RFC: 2015 Art+Feminism Grant
Art+Feminism has prepared a combined renewal of our IEG grant and PEG grant. If awarded, these grants will fund: childcare and refreshments for the 2016 international Art+Feminism Edit-a-thons; in-person training sessions for New York-city based volunteers and online training sessions national and international node organizers; the expansion of our outreach to post-secondary institutions and international Wikimedia chapters; building sustainable infrastructure for node organizers; and making our materials more intersectional. We seek community comment to help complete the grant process: here -- Theredproject (talk) 23:55, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
WikiProject X and Art and Feminism
During WikiConference USA, Theredproject and I discussed WikiProject X's role in organizing the online components of Art+Feminism. The idea is that with a worldwide series of productive events, it is important to have as efficient a system for coordination as possible. As such, I have proposed in my grant renewal proposal to spend some time focusing on re-designing the Art+Feminism page to make it easier to find things and make it easier for people around the world to coordinate events and curate a to-do list. You are welcome to comment on the proposal, and I would like to hear from you all on what can be done to improve the online coordination of Art+Feminism. Harej (talk) 20:57, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
March 5, 2016 Edit-a-thon: meetups list
I'd like to "claim our page" for the 2016 global edit-a-thon and link it to the main page. We've been getting an amazing response from our outreach efforts so far, and this would help us point our funders and partners to the right place. I noticed there is no 2016 listing yet on this page. Should I add it? Should I wait? What are others doing? Thanks! Pittsburgh 2016 Edit-a-thon organizer, Aolivex (talk) 20:50, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
A+F Userbox and talk page banner
This user participated in the 2016 ArtAndFeminism edit-a-thon. |
This user participated in the 2015 ArtAndFeminism edit-a-thon. |
For anyone interested, a userbox for this year's event is now up at Template:User ArtAndFeminism 2016.
For those who participated last year and are so inclined, a userbox for 2015 is at Template:User ArtAndFeminism 2015. (I made this one a while back, but neglected to move it into the template space or link to it from anywhere until now). The colors are approximations of those in this logo. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 21:05, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
- Like ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:06, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
On the subject of A+F templates, it's also worth bringing up Template:ArtAndFeminism2016 article, an updated version of 2015's A+F talk page banner for use on articles and drafts created or improved as part of A+F. Last year it was added retroactively for the vast majority of articles (fun fact: 876 total).
I'm not sure what plans there are for tracking outcomes this year, but as this template adds articles to Category:Articles created or improved during ArtAndFeminism 2016, it may simplify campaign-wide tracking. Is it worth encouraging event organizers (or participants) to add it? — Rhododendrites talk \\ 21:38, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Order?
I like that the list is separated by date, but would it make sense to list alphabetically by city within each section? That way people can easily find their city, instead of search by venue. (Some entries list the venue first, others the city.) ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:18, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
- Done I went ahead and simplified the list by removing redundant date information (no need to list "March 5" for all entries under March 5) and sorted by city. Venue details follow city, but this should make it easier for people to find their city. Feel free to revert or edit if you disagree. ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:40, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
- Seems like a good idea to me. Thanks. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 05:58, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Philadelphia
Are there three events in Philly the same weekend? ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:48, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
User talk page template
Is there a user talk page template we'll be using to direct related editors to the event page? Or is each location making its own? czar 07:09, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
- Here's mine: {{ArtAndFeminism Madison invite}} czar 23:52, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
- I'm unwatching this page, but please ping me or leave a talk page message if there is a response czar 16:39, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
Account Creator
Also will someone be verifying that each location has someone with the Account Creator userright? Or how is this being handled? czar 07:10, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
- @Czar: Good question. I am an Account Creator, could be on standby -- especially for the heavy days in March -- if this is something that could be done remotely.... -- Erika aka BrillLyle (talk) 16:55, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Talk Page template?
I was hoping to add to the Talk Pages of all of the A+F events, but wanted to get guidance and feedback before doing so.
Wanted to add something like this to the Talk Pages:
{{WikiProject Feminism}}
{{WikiProject Women}}
{{WikiProject Women artists}}
{{WikiProject Women's History}}
I tried it out here, for what it looks like implemented: A+F 2016 @ MoMA (Talk)
Is this a helpful thing?
- Erika aka BrillLyle (talk) 00:33, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Is this an Art+Feminism event? It is listed on the page, but I don't want to add the link to the navbox and A+F category unless applicable. Thanks. ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:09, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
- Hiya @Another Believer: -- I'm pretty sure it is an A+F event, but it's combined with other programming at FIT.... I was a bit hesitant to add some of the boilerplate info to the page but I am still sweeping through and adding, so I definitely will. -- Erika aka BrillLyle (talk) 01:47, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
This link is used in the Europe section twice, once for a February event and once for a March event. Is this correct? ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:16, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
- Hiya @Another Believer: -- Yeah, I was going to see if maybe they need to peel off two different event pages after they have the first event. It's definitely 2 events. They seem to be using the same page, which is non-ideal. They participated last year so.... But yes, this is correct. -- Erika aka BrillLyle (talk) 01:49, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
Nebraska
I don't want to step on toes, but there may be value in transferring the Lincoln, Nebraska meetup info to a separate meetup page. ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:39, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- @Another Believer: Hey, is the current link still needing to be transferred to a separate meetup page? Please let me know -- I'm from Nebraska and have been helping them with the organization of their namespace. It's similar to what WM NYC and Black Lunch Table are doing, with the permalink redirected to the main page. -- Erika aka BrillLyle (talk) 09:34, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- I would recommend creating a meetup page specific to the event, rather than recycling the main Nebraska meetup page. Not required, just a suggestion. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:51, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- Hey @Another Believer: -- All event pages I work on have their own permanent URL (For this one see: 2016 WikiWarrior). In practice with what we do at WM NYC we set up a redirect to the main page so it is easier for people to find the event. But the link on this A+F event on the main page is the permalink, not the main space link. We do this all the time at WM NYC, so I'm pretty confident this works okay. -- Erika aka BrillLyle (talk) 17:41, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia article?
The A+F campaign has received a significant amount of press coverage. Perhaps enough for a Wikipedia article? ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:43, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- I created a draft stub at Draft:Art+Feminism if anyone wants to collaborate on an article about the project. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:52, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
Update: An article has been created, and subsequently nominated for deletion. Read, or contribute, to the following discussion, if interested: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Art+Feminism. ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Checking open tasks entries for notability
Is anyone checking the list of suggested articles against the general notability guideline? I'm preparing to answer questions on how best to contribute this week, but looking at the list, most of the entries have only one or no sources... not the best scenario for new editors who want to see their work stick (or not get deleted). This isn't common to this edit-a-thon, but I would recommend scrubbing the list to most viable topics for the sake of the participants. czar 23:02, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
- This is relevant, and something we talk about, but also beyond the scope of what we can do ourselves. --Theredproject (talk) 04:25, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Nashville Meetup March 3 at Vanderbilt University, Jean and Alexander Heard Library
Added Nashville event. CatonMA (talk) 15:27, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Hong Kong?
The Hong Kong entry has details related to the Savannah, Georgia event. Is there a connection here, or should this entry be removed? ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:00, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
2016 press
Is there a place for storing press related to A+F? 2016 articles:
- http://www.wweek.com/2016/03/02/ladypedia/
- http://www.dailyemerald.com/2016/03/03/rewriting-wikipedias-gender-gap-uo-feminists-converge-for-edit-a-thon/
---Another Believer (Talk) 21:48, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia Requests system
Hello everyone! Pleased to announce that the new Wikipedia Requests system is live. Wikipedia Requests is a central database of requests for creating and improving Wikipedia articles. Here is a listing of requests pertaining to women artists, based on the Art+Feminism task list. I plan on adding the rest of the entries from that task list later. You can also submit your own requests! My goal is to centralize all of the to-do lists throughout Wikipedia; this way, people working on overlapping projects can work together.
Please let me know if you have any questions. Let's close the gender gap in content together! Harej (talk) 10:19, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Tasks- red links for existing articles
The lists under Tasks are red linked and lead to a draft page, but some of these have existing articles. Is there any reason to not reformat the links? Would hate for anyone to create a duplicate article. aj (talk) 21:23, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Tina Charlie up for deletion
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tina charlie - The article was created today by new editor E.caza. The subject of the article is a Paiute basket maker. I don't have resources to expand the article, or oppose the deletion, but am hoping someone here can join in on the deletion discussion and save this article. — Maile (talk) 22:41, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
There were many problems in Pittsburgh!
...not with the participants, but with over-zealous page patrollers who deleted content while it was being created. The organizers need to come up with a template to prevent this from happening and to have one experienced Wikipedian on hand who knows how to stop the process of speedy deletion and to protest such deletions. There is a way to restore deleted articles, and instructions or help can be provided at future events. There is also an appeals process that will restore deleted content. How discouraging to new editors to have their hard work deleted. These deletions don't have to happen. Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) (talk) 14:47, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
- Addendum: Since I don't know if I will be able to pass on this information personally I will post it here in print so that if someone wants to know of these processes they won't have to contact me personally-that usually doesn't ever happen on WP, so here is the information you need to prevent speedy deletions and deletions in general:
- The trainers at the two events I attended did a good job but did not prepare the participants for the possibility that their work could be deleted if not properly submitted.
- Organizers need to anticipate the problems with new page patrollers and have a plan to counteract this problem in new article creation.
- Organizers need to know that any content added to Wikipedia by a brand new editor is always immediately flagged for review and scrutinized. A high percentage of those who create new user accounts do so to vandalize the encyclopedia. In addition, even those new users who, in good faith, have added or created content are assumed to be inept and need to have their edits scrutinized.
- Instructions need to include the following:
- Do not create a draft page for your new article. New draft pages are meticulously and instantly flagged for review by new page patrollers.
- Instead, create a sandbox page to work on your new article, sandbox pages are not so aggressively patrolled and will probably survive for weeks as an article is worked on in the sandbox.
- Place the template {{underconstruction}} at the top of every sandbox, draft and article page. This slows the process of speedy deletion.
- If an article is marked for speedy deletion, its deletion can happen within minutes. The page creator will need to go immediately to the talk page of the new article to protest the speedy deletion with a message. If efforts are coordinated, other attendees at the event can assist in the prevention of the speedy deletion by also going to the talk page and protesting the speedy deletion. The higher the number of editors who protest the speedy deletion, the more likely that the article won't be deleted.
- An experienced editor should be at the event who knows how to implement the actions needed to prevent speedy deletion and be prepared with pre-written 'boilerplate' that explains that the article is part of a planned editing event for new editors.
- A template should be used that should appear on the talk page of the new article describing the fact that the new article should not be deleted during the event since it is being worked on.
- If a page is speedily deleted, an experienced editor knows how to contact the other editor who deleted the article and request that the article be restored.
- If the editor who deleted the article refuses to restore the deleted article, an experienced editor knows how to file a 'protest' and ask that the article be restored.
- the Articles for Creation process should be avoided by new editors since it slows down the article creation process and editors that review AfCs almost always turn down the requests. If a new editor accidentally submits their newly created article at AfC, an experienced editor knows how to participate in the AfC process and help get the article into mainspace/become live/turn into a real article very quickly.
- Yes, after 21,000 edits, I have learned how to work the system. Those editors who aggressively delete content are acting in good faith but are unaware of what edit-a-thons are really like. Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) (talk) 15:16, 6 March 2016 (UTC) and User:Bfpage (I have two accounts)
- @Barbara (WVS): This is only a partial reply for now, but for the NYC/MoMA event we used a new template called Template:Preloaddraft. Participants click the name of an artist to work on or enter the name into a text box, and if that article already exists it just goes to the article (or is supposed to -- there have been some bugs), and if the article doesn't already exist, it creates a draft preloaded with a subpage of the template. So for example, {{preloaddraft|article name|Artist}} preloads the draft with Template:Preloaddraft/Artist, which includes a notice about it being a work in progress. As I said, there are some bugs, and I think that, at least for now,
/Artist is the only preload subpage(Follow-up: see Special:PrefixIndex/Template:Preloaddraft), but it addresses some of these issues. In general, having people work in a sandbox or draft avoids a lot of the most immediate deletion problems, I think (other than copyvios). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 16:14, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Barbara (WVS): Hi Barabara. Thanks for reaching out. We responded directly on the Pittsburgh meet up page. --Failedprojects (talk) 20:57, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Barbara (WVS): Some members used the Wikipedia:Draft space or sandboxes to create and refine their articles before moving them into the main space. This proved quite effective. We also made use of the template {{new user article}}. Mkdwtalk 21:13, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Barbara (WVS) and Bfpage: It is extremely irresponsible of you to direct users away from draft space and AfC; those tools (and the article wizard) exist precisely because most new editors don't know what is required of a mainspace article. If articles are rejected at AfC, it is because they are not ready to be published; advising new users to publish them anyway, without regard to the inclusion criteria, is terrible advice. They will be deleted anyway sooner or later, your new editors will be even more discouraged than they would have been if they'd used the proper tools, and no one will learn anything from the experience. Please stop spreading this damaging advice. In addition, brigading on talk pages to save others' pages, without any regard for the reason they are inappropriate, is extremely frowned upon behavior; that you would recommend such a thing is reprehensible. Edit-a-thons can be extremely helpful events for recruiting new editors and highlighting underrepresented topics, when those new editors aren't told all the wrong things to do. —swpbT 14:18, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
- Further, I think everyone else is going to take it as hubris to kind of say "look, any other editors, that's fine and all but these new editors, we just told them to go wild in mainspace and so everyone else should just "know" to ignore them." If the concerns are generally that things are being deleted too fast, that's one thing but to expect that everyone else should delay (since you aren't actually "fixing" anything) our notability concerns to encourage new editors. One thing I would suggest is that more pages be moved to draftspace but the template is a much, much better idea. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:28, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, the template is something we were able to implement late in the game this year, we used it at MoMA and some of the larger events but were unable to prepare its use for every location quickly enough, but we will have it more baked-in to the process for all nodes in future.--Pharos (talk) 15:00, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
- Further, I think everyone else is going to take it as hubris to kind of say "look, any other editors, that's fine and all but these new editors, we just told them to go wild in mainspace and so everyone else should just "know" to ignore them." If the concerns are generally that things are being deleted too fast, that's one thing but to expect that everyone else should delay (since you aren't actually "fixing" anything) our notability concerns to encourage new editors. One thing I would suggest is that more pages be moved to draftspace but the template is a much, much better idea. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:28, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Barbara (WVS) and Bfpage: It is extremely irresponsible of you to direct users away from draft space and AfC; those tools (and the article wizard) exist precisely because most new editors don't know what is required of a mainspace article. If articles are rejected at AfC, it is because they are not ready to be published; advising new users to publish them anyway, without regard to the inclusion criteria, is terrible advice. They will be deleted anyway sooner or later, your new editors will be even more discouraged than they would have been if they'd used the proper tools, and no one will learn anything from the experience. Please stop spreading this damaging advice. In addition, brigading on talk pages to save others' pages, without any regard for the reason they are inappropriate, is extremely frowned upon behavior; that you would recommend such a thing is reprehensible. Edit-a-thons can be extremely helpful events for recruiting new editors and highlighting underrepresented topics, when those new editors aren't told all the wrong things to do. —swpbT 14:18, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Way to thank participants
I think it would be a nice gesture for us to have a barnstar to thank those that participated in the 2016 Art+Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-thon. Barnstars are placed on user talk pages and recognize the editor for their good work in a specific area or task. Looking over the event pages, it's clear there were many new editors who participated. This seemed like the most appropriate existing barnstar, but it's specifically fine arts. We could use this one or perhaps someone out there would be interested in making a new Art+Feminism barnstar. Mkdwtalk 21:22, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
- Example
The Barnstar of Fine Arts | ||
Thank you for participating in the 2016 Art+Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-thon. Mkdwtalk 21:22, 6 March 2016 (UTC) |
- Code
{{subst:The Barnstar of Fine Arts|1=Thank you for participating in the [[Wikipedia:Meetup/ArtAndFeminism|2016 Art+Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-thon]]. ~~~~}}
- Hi @Mkdw:. Yup, we have an Art+Feminism barnstar that we're sending out to our participants soon. --Failedprojects (talk) 21:35, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Failedprojects: Are these being organized to be sent out or is it up to each organizer to give them out to their participants? Sometimes waiting too long Mkdwtalk 04:49, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Jac Leirner
I would like to bring the article Jac Leirner to your attention. I ran across this on new page patrol, and found additional sources. I think the article could really do with your collective expertise. Apologies if I am not placing this in the correct area. All the best, 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 05:58, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Categorizing A+F pages by country / U.S. state
I have categorized all 2014, 2015, and 2016 events in Category:ArtAndFeminism 2014, Category:ArtAndFeminism 2015, and Category:ArtAndFeminism 2016 by country or U.S. state. Each country / U.S. state category has been made a subcategory of their respective "Wikipedia meetups" category. For example, Category:ArtAndFeminism in New York is a subcategory of Category:ArtAndFeminism in the United States and Category:Wikipedia meetups in New York. This will group like pages together and allow users to easily identify meetup pages for past and present events in their geographic region. ---Another Believer (Talk) 23:41, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
To the organizers of this edit-a-thon
I support your goals here; certainly Wikipedia needs better coverage of important female figures. But please instruct your participants to make sure their pages are appropriate for an encyclopedia (see our criteria for notability and reliable sources) before they hit save. Numerous pages have been appearing that don't even assert, much less support, the importance of their subjects; these are being deleted under Speedy deletion criterion A7. The Article Wizard and Draft namespace are very useful tools to keep editors who are not familiar with our inclusion criteria from wasting their own time by creating incomplete and inappropriate pages in the main space. I want to see your participants become active editors, not become discouraged because they weren't given guidance before leaping in. Thank you. —swpbT 21:33, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
- Yes. Wikipedia:Meetup/Regina/ArtAndFeminism 2016/University of Regina has resulted in a spate of poor edits and article creations, replete with badly sourced, promotional and copyright violation edits. Some of the articles created as a result of the meetup appear salvageable, but the balance of them suffer from the aforementioned problems, and more than a few blatant copyright violations. Regina's page invites all, with no experience editing on Wikipedia necessary; it would benefit everyone if that invitation were modified to reflect the importance of learning encyclopedic standards and guidelines. Then there would be fewer missteps in the initial editing, and less cleanup for other editors. 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 22:39, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
- I agree with the above posts. On the one hand, as a reviewer, I accepted a few drafts that were developed during the Edit-a-Thon. On the other hand, as a reviewer, I had to decline some drafts. I also noticed that a few posts to the Teahouse and the Help Desk appeared to be from editors who didn't really understand Wikipedia, and were panicking because their drafts hadn't been accepted. It is my judgment (and other editors may disagree) that the participating editors were not given sufficient guidance about Wikipedia policies. I think that it is very important for any future Edit-a-Thons to be sure that the organizers of the Edit-a-Thon ensure that the participants understand how Wikipedia works, in particular as to there is no deadline, and that the review process is backlogged. I do not take issue with the objective of increasing the number of articles on women artists. (I do think that maybe there was a needless focus on feminist artists, when that is a term having multiple meanings.) However, just encouraging editors with little Wikipedia experience to submit drafts was not helpful and was a way to annoy the volunteer reviewers. In the future, I would suggest, at a minimum, that all future invitations to Edit-a-Thons should be reviewed before being posted, to ensure that the invitation does strongly encourage the participants to learn Wikipedia policies and guidelines. The concept of requesting articles on women artists was a good one, but there wasn't sufficient attention to requesting articles that met Wikipedia guidelines. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:29, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
- I was an editor involved with the event who, fortunately it seems, was not a reviewer, but I did stumble across one article , Pansy Stockton, that was up for speedy deletion in which the author (then and still a red link), of the article did not even mention that the woman involved was an artist. I believe that I did manage to salvage the article, and once User:Ser Amantio di Nicolao showed up it was in the bag, but as far as I can tell the original author never returned, likely never even knew about the speedy deletion request.. I would like to state, though, that since the event was titled "Art And Feminism" it is not surprising that there was an emphasis on feminist artists. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 04:30, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
- I don't know how to define feminist artists. It is easier to define female artists (at least if we agree on what is art). Robert McClenon (talk) 19:13, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
- I was an editor involved with the event who, fortunately it seems, was not a reviewer, but I did stumble across one article , Pansy Stockton, that was up for speedy deletion in which the author (then and still a red link), of the article did not even mention that the woman involved was an artist. I believe that I did manage to salvage the article, and once User:Ser Amantio di Nicolao showed up it was in the bag, but as far as I can tell the original author never returned, likely never even knew about the speedy deletion request.. I would like to state, though, that since the event was titled "Art And Feminism" it is not surprising that there was an emphasis on feminist artists. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 04:30, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
- I agree with the above posts. On the one hand, as a reviewer, I accepted a few drafts that were developed during the Edit-a-Thon. On the other hand, as a reviewer, I had to decline some drafts. I also noticed that a few posts to the Teahouse and the Help Desk appeared to be from editors who didn't really understand Wikipedia, and were panicking because their drafts hadn't been accepted. It is my judgment (and other editors may disagree) that the participating editors were not given sufficient guidance about Wikipedia policies. I think that it is very important for any future Edit-a-Thons to be sure that the organizers of the Edit-a-Thon ensure that the participants understand how Wikipedia works, in particular as to there is no deadline, and that the review process is backlogged. I do not take issue with the objective of increasing the number of articles on women artists. (I do think that maybe there was a needless focus on feminist artists, when that is a term having multiple meanings.) However, just encouraging editors with little Wikipedia experience to submit drafts was not helpful and was a way to annoy the volunteer reviewers. In the future, I would suggest, at a minimum, that all future invitations to Edit-a-Thons should be reviewed before being posted, to ensure that the invitation does strongly encourage the participants to learn Wikipedia policies and guidelines. The concept of requesting articles on women artists was a good one, but there wasn't sufficient attention to requesting articles that met Wikipedia guidelines. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:29, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you @Swpb:, @Carptrash:, @2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63:, @Robert McClenon: for your attention and care to the pages patrol, and ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia. Art+Feminism is rhizomatic, which means we can't control what any of the nodes do. We can offer them guidance, and we we provide them with solid training materials that emphasize notability and encourage new editors to start by working in sandbox and improving pages, rather than creating new pages. We encouraged them to create drafts, and only shortly before the event did we figure out a way to create/use the preload draft template. The draft template was very effective, and we will implement across the board going forward. But we can't control individual editors, and we can't prevent them from creating new pages.
We have well over 125 events around the world, with several thousand participants (we haven't even generated a full count yet.) Last year almost 1000 pages were created or improved. As such, there are bound to be pages that are deleted, or edits that are reverted. At present, we have counted about 15 which were nominated, many of which have been improved and kept. If you find others, we would appreciate you adding them here: Wikipedia:Meetup/ArtAndFeminism/Outcomes2016#Articles_proposed_for_deletion But that said, I want to encourage everyone to consider that a couple dozen out of well over 1000 articles is pretty good.
It is good to know that there are specific nodes that have produced more articles that were deleted than others. I noticed some shoddy articles coming out of the event in Amherst, MA. Knowing that allows us to investigate further in order to prevent that taking place in the future.
And again, I want to thank you all for your attention to this, and your careful good faith efforts to help this initiative move forward.Theredproject (talk) 04:18, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- It was a total Mons, and we all do know it. 08:47, 10 March 2016 (UTC)08:47, 10 March 2016 (UTC)08:47, 10 March 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.230.65.134 (talk)
- Thanks! Yes, a few dozen out of 1000 is not bad. Identifying problematic nodes is great; from what I saw over part of an afternoon, Regina, Saskatchewan seemed to be producing the most junk. —swpbT 16:34, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks @Swpb: for your help with that. Agreed that specific outliers (good and bad) are very helpful for us to analyze.Theredproject (talk) 02:09, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
This is a real mess as most of the people present seem not to have continued to make contributions, so they might not know that their articles have been deleted - only one of them made edits as late as the 11th. I have contacted that person, User:GGWuregina, in case they are able to notify other participants. Incidentally, what makes it worse is that it's been credibly suggested that participants started to write articles on each other, which I find understandable but goes somewhat against the spirit of these things. Blythwood (talk) 06:57, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
To all the Wikipedians and Commonists who haven't tried out Wikidata yet, dip your toe in the water with "Self-portraits of women"
User:Spinster and I have created an auto-generated list in a Commons gallery of all the self-portraits by women that are in Wikidata. Note this also lists the portraits that are under copyright if we have data for them and no image: c:Self-portraits of women. If you can think of any that aren't already in there, try adding one to Wikidata. The page is constantly being refreshed with new additions. You get a great view of women's art this way (up to around 1920, then the copyright problem kicks in). Enjoy! Jane (talk) 11:24, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
Articles to Create Please Help
Erika Ordosgoitti [http://artnexus.com/Notice_View.aspx?DocumentID=24647 Here is an article about her --Aponteart (talk) 01:50, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
Drafts that need help
These are the drafts that remain from the March Events. All help is welcomed in moving these forward, and/or checking in with the authors to encourage them to do so.
The ones in the best shape
Seems good to go. Probably should get a once over.
- Draft:Lili Réthi -- Condellc (talk)
- Draft:Renée Radell -- OtterNYC (talk) - CE for NPOV given declared COI
Submitted and waiting review
Needs Sources (likely strong case for notability)
- Draft:Jenny Marketou
- Daria Dorosh
- Draft:Umme Imam
- Draft:Ghitta_Caiserman-Roth
- Draft:Diana Burgoyne
- Draft:Nina Chanel Abney - in 30 Americans, major show. Rubell collection
- Draft:Jessica Lagunas -- Adriobi (talk) (many biennial exhibitions)
- Draft:Mary Patten -- CaptainJae (talk)
- Draft:Gertrude Fisk - needs CE for WP style
- Draft:Batia Kolton -- Haworthk92 (talk)
- Draft:Cynthia Bond -- Abnerflan (talk) - slam dunk for notability, all sources are non-independent
- Draft:Jane Livingston -- Rhinegraves2K (talk) - also needs nonindepent, but should be notability slam dunk
- Draft:Tina Williams Brewer -- Rhinegraves2K (talk) Start research here
- Draft:Sylvia Wald -- Kduncw (talk) - notability slam dunk. just needs citations formatted correctly
- Draft:Deborah Grant (artist) - needs list of exhibitions. clear notability
- Draft:Alisa Wells -- Gkuriger (talk), Cmyok (talk) -- all coming from one source.
- Draft:Lucy Kim - needs some better sources to establish clear notability. start here. Artforum review Artnews Review
Sources and Notability WP:PROF
- Simi Ali - DRAFT (probably pass PROF as Full Professor, which in the UK is equivalent to Distinguished)
- Gwendolyn DuBois Shaw -- Ashergray (talk), Echo Rococo (talk), Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) - do note that this is a PROF, and is only Assoc, so may be TOSOON, and lets avoid another AfD battle.
- Draft:Christina Thürmer-Rohr -- created new article from German sources! -- Triciaburmeister (talk)
Notable, but COPYVIO
Orphan
- Sneha Solanki - DRAFT
- Draft:Amanda Phelan -- Kellyjeanne9 (talk)
Probably should be integrated into a separate article
- Draft:Pilot TV -- Infinite.tabs (talk) (should be integrated into an article on Wu Tsang, which it is suprising doesn't exist, or Emily Forman)
These ones need more work and are unclear re: notability
Needs Sources and Notability (unclear notability)
- Draft:Yvonne Drewry -- grammar and citation edits -- Powelsar (talk) -- needs an experienced editor
- Draft:Jan Crawford Winton
- Draft:Eleanor King
- Draft: Naghmeh Farahmand
- Draft:The Mother Load -- Messitt (talk)
- Draft:Yun Bai -- created page -- Romachic (talk) Probably notable, but there is a lot of junk in the CV that is really not helpful
- Draft:Tabita Rezaire -- probably notable, given forthcoming Berlin Biennale exhibition, but as is, there isn't much there.
Notability (probably not strong case)
- Siddiqua Mazhar - DRAFT
- Draft:Hazel Meyer
- Draft:Jennifer Grimyser -- Innotata (talk) TOOSOON
These are barely started
- Draft:Anne Poor -- Grumpypie (talk) -- NYT Obitiuariy - so clear notability!!!
- Delia Cancela -- Rbsieber (talk), Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk)
- TigerCatMeow (talk), Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) --
- Simi Ali - DRAFT
- Draft:Thelma van Alstyne
- Draft:Karen Tam
- Draft:Rebecca Padgett
- Draft:Natalie Majala Waldburger
- Draft:Katherine Rinne
- Draft:Daniela Salvioni -- Karinanw (talk) -- Declined
- Draft:Marion Wilson (Artist)
- Draft:Ada Wolfe -- Ellyvortex (talk)
- Draft:Judith Barry -- DanielleLongue (talk)
- Draft:Paola Prestini -- Innotata (talk)
- Draft:Lucinda Luvaas
- Draft:Britt Bass -- Sdeloach5 (talk)
- Draft:Barbara Hanger -- Vrclibrarian (talk)
- Draft:Connie Lucas Alexander -- Vrclibrarian (talk)
- Draft:Lucina Bunnen -- Vrclibrarian (talk)
- Draft:Olga Alexander -- Mmmitc2 (talk)
- Draft:Tina Maria Dunkley -- Vrclibrarian (talk)
These are userspace drafts
- User:Sheilalalalalalala/Napachie_Pootoogook
- In the sandbox - Katrina Palmer
- In the sandbox - Charlotte Prodger
- In the sandbox - Jessica Warboys
- Constance Coleman Richardson – DRAFT -- Kimles (talk)
- Elsie Das -- Hippolyta in CA (talk)
- Ina Iris Eichenberg -- created page in my sandbox -- Rebekah.frank (talk)
- Rebel Girls: A Survey of Canadian Feminist Videotapes 1974-1988 (Exhibition) - Draft denied - needs more sources! Hillarywebb (talk) 23:40, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
- User:Ayanami elena/Paige Williams -- Ayanami elena (talk)
- User:Toulatoula/Geanna Merola -- Toulatoula (talk)
Thanks all --Theredproject (talk) 16:57, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
2016 Just For The Record IEG & PEG Grants notification — intersectional & gender diversity on Wikipedia!
Just For The Record has prepared a combined IEG grant and PEG grant application to work on the promotion of more gender diversity on Wikipedia with an intersectional perspective. These grant applications build upon the exciting results of our 2015-2016 Brussels-based series of events addressing the gender gap on Wikipedia. Just For The Record has created a network in which expertise on these questions is created and shared. With our new applications, we want to expand this knowledge and network beyond the context of the edit-a-thon!
If awarded, the PEG grant will fund: location and refreshments for the 2016-2017 Just For The Record edit-a-thons. If awarded, the IEG grant will fund: research and analysis into the representation of gender on Wikipedia, combined with the construction of a research/ambassador network, leading to an intersectional non-sexist guide on how knowledge and history can be written in a more diverse way. We seek community comment, discussions and endorsement signatures (section at the bottom of the pages) to help complete the grant process: here and here! Many thanks, Lfurter (talk) 09:31, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Data on editor retention
Hi! I was looking at this project and wondered if there is any data on editor retention. I'm curious to know the percentage of editors who continue contributing after having first contributed an article in an edit-a-thon. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 04:54, 12 May 2016 (UTC)