I don't worry too much about the content of the quote, but it would be better if the content would be related to women. Also there were two pictures of Malala and one should be enough. --ო ~ SheSaid21:50, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
An image that completely disapeared from all wmf-wikis?[edit]
A couple of years ago there was an image I really liked, which showed a caricature of a woman in a headdress flexing muscles. I wonder why this image is no longer around. Anyone? Ottawahitech (talk) 18:45, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
While I understand the point - which is to illustrate that both women and men are scientists, this image takes away any relationship to the topic of scientist. What about having an image of a woman scientist (like one for a woman chemist or one of Marie Curie as shown to the right)? or ~ UDScott (talk) 20:53, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure why - it is meant to be a unisex image that does not contain any traditional gender markers. That being said, if anyone can find something that is better, feel free to replace. The one that I found for businesspeople (see above) is one that seems to work better for this purpose, but I haven't yet found anything comparable for scientists. ~ UDScott (talk) 15:13, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I changed it because... the SheSaid was a Wiki Loves Women initiative and not a Women in Red one. Eh ! And what do you think of the barnstar. I found it by chance whilst wandering on other languages :))) I think it is quite good. Anthere (talk) 12:42, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Launched in October 2020, the #SheSaid campaign on Wikiquote has been an amazing success! Across 7 languages, by the 5th January, it resulted overall in 867 new or improved articles (the majority new). Italian Wikiquote was the clear language winner (405 articles) with Ukraine (187) and French (106) coming not so close behind. And let's not forget the great work done on the Spanish, English, Serbian etc. wikiquotes. Congrats to us all ! All results on the #SheSaid meta page.
Please consider the campaign is on-going (there is still much work to do...) :) Please keep contributing quotes from women !
Invitation to participate in the #SheSaid Campaign 2021[edit]
We are delighted to share with you that the #SheSaid Campaign will be running again this year and you are invited to participate in Oct/Nov 2021.The goal is to celebrate notable women and add more entries on Wikiquote. Please have a look at some of the cool bookmarks we have completed and ready for you to print if you wish to do so. If you would like to have the editable version of the bookmark please contact me at Shoodho , visit some sample of bookmarks here:SheSaid Bookmarks on Metawiki.For more information, please visit the campaign page here:SheSaid Metawiki page. If you have any questions or query please feel free to contact Islahaddow (Isla), Anthere (Florence), or Shoodho ( Candy).
It is great to see the #SheSaid Campaign come to life at en-WQ It's taken a long time since the idea was floated at our Village pump by Anthere last year.
Would it be possible to move discussions that concern en-WQ from Meta to this wiki? Some of the active participants here will not or cannot participate on Meta because they are blocked on that wiki. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 16:52, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Shoodho: I guess you must be one of the organizers of the shesaid campaign? It's been so busy this year at the English Wikiquote, I cannot keep a picture in my small head about who the participants are and who organizes them. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 15:14, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. To track articles created, please add them here or add the #shesaid hashtag in the comment box (the tool does not update live, there are a few days delay). If you do not list them, we can not know what’s going on... thanks Anthere (talk) 18:36, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You are raising an issue I am aware of, and which is very annoying. Bottom line... the hashtag tool is no more working. At all. Zero. I have submitted a bug report on GitHub [2] where the tool is posted, as well as on Phabricator [3]. I have met but an heavy silence.
So... the only way to actually seriously track is by going to Recent Changes and digging... or check all the contributions of those involved... check red lists etc.
On the French Wikipedia, I have done this from the start. About every two weeks, I go to Recent Changes and I grab all what is missing in the list of done articles on the page and I manually add them.
Now the problem is that Candy was supposed to do that. But did not. The only thing she did was to check Recent Changes and counted all articles created about women. So not only did she not track the right articles, but she did not report them on the page as she was supposed to. The problem of the English version is that it is significantly higher traffic than the other languages. So the digging in Recent Changes is tough. But the biggest issue right now is that Recent Changes do not go further 30 days. So every day without checking and tracking 30 days in the past... is likely to be lost information.
We can also use the dashboard when dashboard was created (we have a few) or some meta pages where people listed their additions (there, but not here...)
But in short, we are a little bit in a mess because the hashtag tool is not working as it was working in the past, because some participants do not add the articles on the page themselves and because no one did the manual tracking in the Recent Changes. I am trying to see if I can find someone who would know how to run queries to dig that info....
Hello there,
I let you girls and guys that I've just deleted two articles linked from Redlist of this wiki project, regretfully. Both articles look almost fine but lack sources completely, so have been proposed for deletion for a week (see also WQ:PROD), and no improvement has come. As same as our sister projects, living people quotes are highly sensible themes in regard of rights of original authors. Please keep it in your mind that fair use clause is only applicable when quotes are rightly citing sources, not only the person who said it, but also the publication or venue where it has appeared firstly. Cheers, --Aphaia (talk) 03:26, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nice to see more en-WQ admins (see: {{List of admins}}) participating here. I have been around en-WQ for about a year and a half and consider myself a newbie here, even though I have experience editing other wmf wikis.
I assume you meant the deletion of Deola Sagoe and Ola Brown? Could you tell us more about the procedures around en-WQ deletions. I know at en-wiki if you create a new page and someone wants to have the page deleted, it is customary to notify the page creator of the proposed deletion and to give the crreator an opportunity to fix the concern. Is it not the same here?
I would also like to bring to your attention the fact that some of the participants at #SheSaid may identify as neither a girl nor a guy. Thanks in advance for any feedback Ottawahitech (talk) 18:49, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Just wondering if anyone here ever looks at the statistics provided by the wmf volunteers? For example did you know that Marianne Williamson is currently in sixth place in terms of pageviews on EnWQ (English Wikiquote) with about 20 thousand monthly pageviews? I did not until a few minutes ago...
never mind, when I refreshed I got a totally different view for October 2022 with no pages about women in the top 50. Are we going backwards? Anyone reading here? Ottawahitech (talk) 14:08, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have been battling the TOC limit template for more than a week, but did not do the obvious until today, when I finally decided to click and follow the chain that started at What links here on the template page.
To make a long story short:
looks like the template TOC limit does not (and probably never) work(ed) on WQ.
Admin User:Ningauble is the expert around here for template stuff
Archiving talkpages has a ways to go
Anything else?
I hope I am making sense, at least to those who are interested in learning more about wiki-technology. Thanks in advance for your thoughts on this matter, Ottawahitech (talk) 17:08, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for popping in @Ningauble: it is getting awefully lonely here. Can you please explain your messgage above, I have no clue what page you are referring to. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 21:57, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for all your efforts User:Anthere. This project would not have gotten off the ground without your tireless efforts.
I am concerned though when wmfers are sent off to "foreign" websites. Is there no wmf-approved method of providing tracking information? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 17:10, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For your reference, the Hashtag tool we previously used was on ToolForge. Same thing. Not a foreign website. I understand your concern. But this is home :) Anthere (talk)
So... yes, we know that articles that are related to SheSaid will slip through the cracks if 1) people do not list them on the page 2) and do not add the hashtag. But I also assume that some women biographies are created completely aside from the campaign, with no intent of participation from their authors. So here is the strategy I follow...<bt>
I will assume the un-taggued and un-listed article is shesaid, if I see it was created by
someone I know for a fact is participating to the she said campaign (typically was a participant to a she said training session and edit-a-thon)
someone who did not tag that article, but tagged other articles shesaid
a friend I know well (such as someone from LSP for example)
I will assume the un-taggued and un-listed article is NOT shesaid, if I see it was created by someone who I never interacted with, never ever put shesaid in content etc.
The other thing I do is... once I identified that someone participated once to SheSaid, then I add them to the list of participants. This will allow to search for their untagged edits at the end.
Some of you know that the hashtag tool has stopped working at some point and this is making our lives a bit more complicated for tracking.
I reported the issue on Phabricator and got some news !
Sorry for the delay in looking into this - the tool isn't officially maintained and I missed this. It looks like the last data we have is September 30th. I'm trying to fix this today; the problem appears to be an SSL error in the collection script container - it can't connect to the eventstream. Suspect this has to do with us using an old VM so I'm going to aim to hit two birds with one stone and upgrade production to Debian Stretch. Once this gets up and running again we'll be able to collect historical data from up to 30 days ago, but unfortunately will have lost anything between then and September 30th.
The SheSaid drive is over ! All results may be found here.
For 2021, nine different language communities contributed – Italian, Ukrainian, English, Tagalog, Igbo, Spanish, French, Central Bikol, and Catalan. In addition to the global drive, 12 members of Wiki Loves Women’s Focus Group held local training and participation drives with their communities.
Across the 9 language Wikiquotes a collective of 1,514 articles were created. This ensures that 1,514 notable women whose voices and wisdom had previously not been featured, can now be easily accessed. Articles for a further 309 women were improved. In addition, 638 articles featuring notable women were created on Kinyarwanda Wikipedia (Wikipediya mu Kinyarwanda) by the activities of the Wiki Loves Women Focus Group member in Rwanda in collaboration with Wikimedia Rwanda Usergroup.
The Italian language community through the enthusiasm of the Wiki Donne user group was again the most outstanding contributor to the SheSaid Campaign. This community created articles about 609 women and improved a further 227 articles. The next prolific contender, the Tagalog language community (currently in incubator status) created 308 new articles. The third highest contributing language community was to the English Ukrainian language Wikiquote by creating 169 articles and improving a further 55 articles.
Below are the stats impact for the SheSaid Campaign across 9 different languages that participated in 2021;
The lack of women’s voices in the digital domain is a global issue, one that we can collective work on in order to change how women are viewed.
Wiki Loves Women is awed by the response and enthusiasm to the second edition of this drive, and looks forward to the third version in 2022! We urge that anyone can join this initiative and continue to make an impact by adding more articles about women !
I checked the official wikimedia stats today and and saw a large increase in the number of new articles on the English WQ in October of 2021. The number of new pages remained elevated for the following 3 months. Congratulations to all participants. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:15, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The #SheSaid campaign will return in October 2022. To better organize this edition, we would like to know whether you plan participating to it or not :)
There is still time. But in case you need funding, please be aware that the application for a small grant to the Wikimedia Foundation needs to be done before the 1st September 2022!
We plan to organise an office hour dedicated to the @SheSaid campaign in July.
If you are interested (even if not sure to join #SheSaid because it will depend on a thousand of things), please check out that page on meta and drop your name on the talk page so that we make sure to inform you ! m:Wiki Loves Women/SheSaid
Thanks @Anthere for your tireless contributions to women on wiki.
Is this a good place to discuss issues in regard to blocking of users who have been helpful to this campaign in the past (this goes back to 2021). Ottawahitech (talk) 13:44, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the pages under the biographies section are historical events, countries or scientific achievements: not people[edit]
If the only requirement to add an entry to this biography section is that there is a woman's quotation featured on that Wikiquote page, than shouldn't this list ideally include every single Wikiquote page? Or do you honestly believe that there is a subject that no notable woman has ever commented on and never will? CensoredScribe (talk) 19:11, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Query to track the hashtag returns old results[edit]
As far as I can tell the Query to track the hashtag is delivering a cached result from Tue, 18 Oct 2022 10:28:57 UTC and not the recent additions. Copy the query to quarry and executing it as a new query returns a more up-to-date result and I cannot resist commenting enables Charlotte Stoker to be resurrected from the dead and appear in the result set (I confess to having a vested interest in that one). For example compare to same query but executed Fri, 28 Oct 2022 16:00:54 UTC. Comments? Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk16:13, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for posting @Djm-leighpark. I am afraid what u posted above is all Greek to me. Can you please explain to some of the less technically-oriented participants what you are trying to accomplish? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 22:19, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am a bit confused here. It can only appear on [5] if YOU or another human being actually add the article to the list... the reason I made the query is that some people create entries but do not add them manually to the list. So if they added the hashtag, I can at least see the article in the query and I will come to manually add it to the wiki page... This is not automatic... Anthere (talk) 10:08, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ah and of course, if the person did not list the article manually on the wiki page and did not either put the hashtag in the comment... then the only solution to retrieve those is to track recent changes and guess who are part of the SheSaid team :) Anthere (talk) 10:09, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Anthere: I can see it looks as if you republished this morning at 10:00am ish UTC and Stoker is in your new query snapshot. Forever I have just twigged by following where the button goes that replacing '/query/' with '/fork/' in the url brings one directly to a screen where it is only necessary to press 'Submit' to execute the query to get an up to date snapshot. i.e. Going direct screen ready to submit an up-to-date snapshot. So I'm inclined to suggest you consider repointing to the 'fork' url or to republish a new snapshot of your query say every day. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk14:36, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was playing with the query today on Quarry and realised I was dealing with MariaDB/SQL and not SparQL what is used on wikidata. I had (what I thought) was a real neat improvement of the query but it did not complete in time. My guess is it should have but I might need to re-write to lead the optimizer to a better execution path or give it the old hint. Anyway please ignore any references I made to Quarry/SparSQL above, and if you haven't a clue what I'm talking about simply ignore this statement. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk01:00, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Re: "and if you haven't a clue what I'm talking about simply ignore this statement. Thankyou."
I did not have a clue when this thread started more than 2 weeks ago, but I am slowly, and with a great amount of effort starting to understand (I think?). I think you are using some high-powered software to see how many edits are being made to women's pages, and by whom, during the 2022 campaign?
If so I wonder if you have considered simply following [Related changes for all the women categories during the campaign? If you really must have software do this, you can have something that will show you the results for all categories instead of paging through one by one. Am I making sense? Ottawahitech (talk) 20:25, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ottawahitech. Oh sorry. Not such a detailed track at all. Its just that under "New articles" "Query to track the hashtag" "quarry.wmcloud.org/query/68553" doesn't simply give the articles that have been created since the start of the #SheSaid campaign, as it also returns lot of other rows as well. So I'm basically looking to limit that query to page_namespace=0 (main article space) and where there is no revision for the page title where the rev_timestamp is earlier than 20221001000000. I'm more interested in having fun playing looking and and playing with the SQL query than with the actual results. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk21:03, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've fiddled about and I've come up with: this query, which might be good or it might be rubbish but I'd hate to try to debug it in two days time if it has a bug! Seems to be fairly efficient but I'd need to let the database cool down to be a little more certain. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk23:28, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ottawahitech: Per Special:Diff/3190747 which has no older revision the create date was 21:59, 9 November 2022. I'm used a YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS format as that relates well to en:ISO 8601##Calendar dates without going the whole hog with "T"s and "Z"'s and things. Years in the form YYYYMMDD naturally sort perfectly for the nearly next 8000 years ot so and I don't think anyone would use YYYYDDMM (well I hope not.). I could have use a DD-MMM-YYYY or DD-MON-YYYY (09-NOV-2022/09-NOVEMBER-2022) type format but that would have left things unsortable naturally. Could have left the year off completely. I have also just changed the class from class="wikitable" class="wikitable sortable" as this is a good candidate for a sortable table. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 16:29, 15 November 2022 (UTC) I've also updated the result to include a link to the wikidata item if one has been linked. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk11:23, 20 November 2022 (UTC).[reply]
I just noticed Susette La Flesche has been added but without a #SheSaid comment so was not on this list. I added the comment at Special:Diff/3195652 and re-ran the query and updated the output because I was also aware it did not have a wikiquote link at wikidata, and that successfully shows as a blank (well None!) in the query output table here so that was a good test of the amended script. Following that From her English Wikipedia article I can easily see her wikidata item is d:Q533721 so now I've added the required link at Wikidata per d:Special:Diff/1775598137 and checked Wikidata item is now appearing on left page menu of the desktop enWikequote site (at the bottom of the tools section). -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk13:42, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Follow on query to show campaign updated articles[edit]
WikiQuote updated articles in #SheSaid 2022 is an attempt to get a list of existing articles improved in the campaign. It also shows a size increase metric which is both useful but ultimtately no substitute for article quality as length does not alway equate to quality, and I suspect sometimes the opposite is very possible. Anyway I've put the (current) output below if anyone's interested. Be warned this isn't fully tested, in fact I've guessing it seem about right so egg in the face is quite possible. I need to do a detailed check and refinement over a couple of days before a publish. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk14:47, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Is this campaign encouraged by the establishment?[edit]
Is this campaign getting help from the English Wikiquote establishment? How many of enWQ's Admins are even aware that this year's campaign is in progress? Just wondering after I saw Philda kereng proposed for deletion a couple of hours after it was created. The article creator was not even notified on their user talk-page-about this proposed deletion.
As I put in the PROD tag, this person does not appear to be notable enough to merit a page here. Admirable as they may be (and certainly well known in Botswana), it doe snot seem that this person WQ is a collection of quotes from notable people. And while I know the goal is to boost the number of pages for women, flooding the site with pages for less notable people is not encouraged. As to your first question, yes I do happen to support the SheSaid campaign and have expended great effort to ensure that the many pages that have been added within this campaign are properly formatted (if the people are notable and the quotes are memorable and sourced), as needed. ~ UDScott (talk) 18:13, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict and UDScott has answered here in the interim and this contribution does not take their contribution into account): :@Ottawahitech, UDScott:: I'm indef blocked on the English Wikipedia for Battleground and CIR so I don't want to get massively involved. However the start point is to AGF for a newbie and so I've put standard welcome template on the creator's talk page. I think UDScott has proposed several of there articles for deletion so at a quick glance there's no indicator to me of Gender discrimination. #SheSaid content also has to meet the criteria of any other content. In the case of the Kereng article there appears (unless I've missed it), no English Wiki article, no Setswana article, and no Wikidata article. Actually I've just found Wikidata:Q110210165. And my understanding it is important from a notability viewpoint those exist or are viable. The key point (which is not in the WikiQuote article prose) is that Kereng is Minister of Environment, Natural Resources Conservation & Tourism of Botswana; and thus almost certainly satisfies en:WP:POLITICIAN. As that was not in the prose not obvious from link to another wiki the proposed deletion was perhaps not reasonable. The article name here fails MOS with the surname not capitalised and needs a move, but the name in Wikidata is Phildah Kereng; so one point is to have a stab at deciding on a move here before linking up the Wikidata item. Phew. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk19:18, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And just chiming in again: this is a well reasoned discussion of the issue - and I would agree that if this person is indeed a government minister, that seems to be sufficient to establish notability. I definitely did not place the PROD tag because the person was a woman. I suggest the page be moved to the proper name and then have its formatting cleaned up a bit. Thanks. ~ UDScott (talk) 19:37, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've taken the liberty of moving the page to the proper name, revising/trimming the intro, cleaning up formatting, and adding categories. ~ UDScott (talk) 19:44, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@UDScott: I just wanted to point out that it never even entered my mind that you proposed the article for deletion because the subject was a woman. I am well aware of all the work you do around the site to help all newbies, women included. The comment about the establishment is aimed at some other admins who visit this site only sporadically, Stewards and other wmf(volunteer)-functionaries, who are too busy to notice, and other prolific content-contributors at WQ, those who dhave no time to read the wq:Village pump regularly.
With regards to this - yes, I agree that this is the case. But IMHO, I believe it is because many of the pages introduced by these members of the campaign are lacking in the necessary level of notability to be included. Yes, we want to increase the visibility and exposure of significant women, but not at the expense of the quality of what appears on WQ. If we allow non-notable pages just to increase the number of women pages, I fear that we are diluting the product too much. We should strive to maintain the standards that separate us from other quote sites that are less careful about that, while bringing forth notable women to have pages. ~ UDScott (talk) 13:19, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I like a lot of other people came here by banner across a lot of Wiki's and I was interested as I had just done the Charlotte Stoker article on :ga and :Simple English wikipedias and felt I could get a quote article for her here. I then got interested on why she did not get put on the list of new SheSaid articles and also began playing with Quarry and then got attracted to this thread. I got involved with some of the reasoning for retention of that article. UDScott has deleted some of my work here previously and sometimes in my view fails to demonstrate best practice, e.g. Special:Diff/3196100 which may be totally correct technically but is also an explained content removal. That said UDScott is doing shouldering a massive amount of the admin load in this place and having to triage most of the new stuff by themself. I also see Ottawahitech and a few others doing cleanup and triage from a differnent angle. I've spent a couple of days wathcing people and trying to establish in my mind what is the practice in this place. I obviously began to scrutinise one user's work, going through there 20 or so articles where they seemed to have developed a habit of creating problem articles, and while I think I've helped one or two of those towards survivable and demonstratable notability. It might be said I've been very assertive even to the event of bullying on that user (and that bullying allegation was part of the reason I was being blocked on the English Wikipedia and I was censored from any on page reply). But I'd say only about 105 or maybe 20% of the articles they produced are safe notable and the rest probably should be deleted, but that's my opinion. In the SheSaid campaign period about 360 new articles have been produced, at a guess at least 100 of those are about women but only about 28 have a #SheSaid comment tag and about 5 of those are because I put it there with a small or dummy edit. Of the 360 produced about a third don't have a linked item which is an indicator there might be a notability problem. {{Wikipedia}} is sometimes (deceptively put on a new article with a claim there is an English Wikipedia Article when there isn't. I could go on. But in summary I think it might have been helpful if the #SheSaid campaign had emphasised that articles without an English Wikipedia when often likely not to be accepted. @Anthere: any comments - thanks -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk11:35, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What is the necessary level of notability other than having an existing article on the English Wikipedia (enwp)? Yes, enwp has tons more eyes watching every article there, but it is not perfect. Try to add a new article about a blackwoman from Africa and you will see what I mean. Deleting non-perfect articles on sight is not the way to go IMIO.
It does feel like I have emphasized this point in every single training session / office hour. I consider myself that it is mandatory on the English wikiquote, whilst it is not mandatory but very advised on the French one. Let me look where I can boldly highlight this on the wiki page... Anthere (talk) 15:29, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What we need at the English Wikiquote (enwq) are A LOT of new Users to take some of the burden off the existing tired ones. And we need admins who see their function as helping other contributors instead of admins who are only concerned with keeping enwq spotless clean (removing every vandal and any hint of no-notablility) Ottawahitech (talk) 15:26, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ottawahitech: While I respect your opinion I have been alarmed and some of the articles being created here which look more like SEO promotional spam for of non-notable business people, and I suspect I am probably closer to Anthere's and UDScott's view of your's, albeit I would be be more inclined to VFD some of UDScott's cleanup attempts. Obviously if we adopt Anthere's requirement for an English Wikipedia article my articles here on Charlotte Stoker and Emilie Pine could not remain. I've never attended one of Anthere's workshops but I might be prepared to, or perhaps a closed group zoom. I have some serious concerns about this place.-- 01:28, 23 November 2022 (UTC) —This unsigned comment is by Djm-leighpark (talk • contribs) .
Hi all. I would like to add my 2c to this discussion. I tend to agree with Ottawahitech in relation to this issue. The bias on the English Wikipedia and any Wikipedia against the women of colour already exists. The purpose of this campaign is to try to lower that bias and to bridge the gap. New users are invited to add articles about women. I think that some (if not all) of these women are notable in their own rights and in their own communities, and the fact that they do not have an article on English Wikipedia should not be taken as a criterion for notability or the lack of it. Inviting the new users to write new articles about the already excluded women and then blankly deleting most of these new articles defeats the purpose in my opinion. I agree that Wikiquote should not be clogged with the entries about the non-notable people, and that is true. But maybe some solution can be found. For example, there is an article from the above-mentioned new user about the notable person Ruth Williams Khama. The article needs cleanup; on the other hand, Ottawahitech and I tried to help, and the user overwrote our changes. The new users need help. Someone should let them know the procedures. Just deleting articles/reverting changes is not a right solution in my opinion. Maybe the problem articles could be moved in some (draft) space, so that the work is not lost? Thank you. - Emilija Knezevic (talk) 00:32, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A few points: yes, in an ideal world there would be the chance to educate users to create better pages (or to fix the issues themselves), but as has been pointed out before, there is barely enough time to keep up with the other work that is needed on the site. Whenever possible, I do not merely tag a page for deletion (PROD or VFD), but rather try to make necessary improvements or tag it for cleanup if I just don't have the time at that moment. Moving problem pages to another workspace or to a draft space will not really help if the issue is one of notability. Saying that a person is notable in their own communities is not really the test to use - if there was a local Wikiquote for their community, then perhaps. But this is English Wikiquote - and therefore the people should be notable in English-speaking communities. Other sites that are less strict can certainly host all manner of pages for people, but we have always been a site that is for truly notable people, not for every person under the sun. On the other hand, I do not personally believe that having a Wikipedia page is the only test either. There are plenty of pages for people without a WP page that I would not recommend be deleted. It is certainly a good starting point and initial filter (if there is a WP page, they are certainly notable enough), but is not the end all, be all of criteria.
As for Ottawahitech's view on how admins should behave, I do not disagree that admins can be a great source of help to new users - but that is not their only function (and in fact ANY user can help new users as well) and the maintenance of the site, including cleaning up pages and combating vandalism, is a primary purpose of their existence and the reason they have additional editing tools. And there's just not enough help these days in this pursuit to allow the luxury of spending a lot of time trying to educate other users, despite the best intentions of admins. The placement of cleanup tags and deletion notices in fact serves that purpose too - as these tags direct users to templates and other pages that can help educate them. And sometimes there's also the problem that some people do not wish to learn. I can't tell you how many pages I have had to fix from the same set of users, who would rather rely on my cleanup efforts than learn themselves the right ways to create pages. All of this rambling post is to say that I get it, there are issues of course, but if the site is to remain a relevant one (and not another inaccurate and irrelevant place for non-notable pages), we need to maintain our structure and guidelines for inclusion on it. I for one will always try to keep pages if it makes sense to do so - and to clean up pages needing it where I can. But I have been spending a lot more of my time lately cleaning up than adding content (which is what I certainly prefer). Having a campaign like SheSaid is a good thing, and I wish to see more pages for notable women - but that should not cause us to be overrun by non-notable people just to increase the number of our women pages. ~ UDScott (talk) 01:44, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Identification, tagging, and handling of new She Said articles[edit]
I'm not normally on this Wiki. I came here to do a quote article for bio subject I'd recently created an article for on :simple+:ga. I (& my alt Deirge) generally do :simple, :ga, :wikidata, and :commons. I'm indef blocked on the English Wikipedia but I still monitor it. I've been involved in some heavy AFD's and DRV's there and have pulled articles from draft to mainspace and I think I've got a fairly good feel for what would be accepted as notable on the English Wikipedia. Broadly speaking I go interested becuase my new '#SheSaid' article didn't appear in a timely manner at Wikiquote:SheSaid#New articles. In the process I started to examine Query to track the hashtag and felt it wasn't giving the best information. I started playing with my own variations and feel I've made some progress towards improvements. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk02:29, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
These tools simply don't work unless the article has a #SheSaid tag on the comment summary line of an edit. This isn't happening, and Anthere herself doesn't do anything about it. You can fail to notice I'd been adding those own tag's myself with dummy edits for all #SheSaud -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk02:29, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I did noticed you did the dummy additions...
It is a bit unfair to say I do nothing about it... I have mentioned everywhere I could that it was important to EITHER add at least one #shesaid hashtag to the comment box OR to manually add the article to the list. I have written that on the wiki page. I have said it MANY times during training sessions and office hours (which I do during my evenings or my week-ends). I have left private comments to some participants. It is also pointed to in the communication. But bottom line is... that in some languages (such as Igbo, or Italian, or Ukrainian) people are serious about it and do proper tracking. English Wikiquote... does not. That’s it. I spent quite a bit of time trying to track articles because others do not add the hashtag nor list their articles. But ultimately, I am not everyone’s babysitter. This is very uncool to point to me as not doing « anything » about it. Really. Anthere (talk) 02:41, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
General problem of lacking tools... we also used to have an operating hashtag tool... it was not great, but it existed. Then it stopped working... I contacted the owner. He fixed it a first time. It broke again... well, the rest is history :) Anthere (talk)
You could probably nap a javascript jockey at Chantilly to do some common.js riding. My javascript's about as good as my French (though by French Algol 60 is better but that doen't help) and there's a lot of parallel's but following some cross interactions recently and there's an explosion of politically incorrect thoughts spinning in my head. In Simple English I was mulling if I might be able to reverse engineer e.g. OWA to get an appropriate tool to do that quickly. Albeit its really important not to given people inappropriate gender reassignments, even if accidental in these LGBT+ days, and I'd have to check scripts against REVDEL examples, or at least fully understand the MediaWiki MariaDB schema stuff a little better. I'm also be keen for some automation in a couple of areas in getting Category:Articles with no corresponding English Wikipedia article more automatically and getting wikidata linked back to Wikiquote (Getting that the Wikidata items) when there is a enWikipedia to Wikidata link as I'm spending a lot of time doing that and that may be doable by bot (or it might risk errors). Thanks. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk14:38, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have been thinking it over... Here is the link to the hashtag tool I used during WPWP contest and in the first year of SheSaid. https://hashtags.wmcloud.org. It was... helpful... but pretty crude (for example it is a log, not merging edits to count an article only once; or it can not be ordered. Oh well, we could download the data and sort out things in a table of course, but to do live tracking of events... it is not great). When the tool broke in summer 2021, it took months and many emails to get help for repair. So you think there is a path to either get that tool improved according to our needs, or to do a new tool (if this one reveals problematic to improve). Is this in any way something you would be able to help with ? Or do you know who could help ? See also https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Hashtags. Anthere (talk) 14:54, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Anthere. Hi I'm Bigdelboy. I'm an alt. voice of Djm-leighpark and I'm a very sensible non-CIR & battleground voice. I intend to look at the possibility of developing a lightweight javascript function in common.js & skin at common.css linked to a menu option on the User Interface that can be used to add a dummy edit with a "SheSaid" comment with a couple of mouseclicks over the next week, (Please be ae I am extrapolating my knowledge here into areas I've not explored so I may be talking balderdash). The advantage of doing this is that tests with this account for that purpose can be monitored carefully and the common.js/.css removed by an admin in the event of a self-lockout etc., and account Djm-leighpark left to do whatever Djm-leighpark does. In terms of overall tools my alt. Deirge Ó Dhaoinebeaga is expected to at some point engage with tools relating to book edition Wikidata loading and associated SqparQL reporting possibly at toolforge/wncloud; though Deirge has to mop up the French photo w:commons:File:Sweet Bunree.jpg which contributed to a Flickr Explorer event. Overall I'm not likely to be able to easily allocate enough effort to assist in the more heavyweight dashboards you may require to assist with Wikiquote campaign administration etc., but my best ideas of someone who might know someone who could help would be The wub. Thankyou and good luck. -- Bigdelboy (talk) 17:55, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Anthere I don't know about fancy dashboards, but I see the Hashtags tool has a consistent URL for CSV exports. So one idea is you could import it into a Google Sheet (or I assume Excel will have a similar function) by adding a cell =IMPORTDATA("https://hashtags.wmcloud.org/csv/?query=SheSaid") and then have the sheet set up with whatever you want to calculate. Then updating the data becomes simply a case of blanking the IMPORTDATA cell and replacing it, rather than having to do a manual download. Here is a quick bashed together sheet with the general idea.
@The wub:. Thanks for that, its a technique I might be able to leverage in spreadsheet I'm using to prep book editions for Quickstatements. Possibly better to ignore my use of the term 'dashboard' but from your example I think I see Anthere is particularly interested in a tool that works across all wikiquote language implementations. To some degree I'm almost looking at some 'micro tools' that would be of assistance to automate in what is effectively the (informaal?) page curation process here at an article level: Tagging SheSaid comment, linking to English (or associated language) Wiki. While I'm grappling to come up to speed with common.js, common.css, plus skins and it friends I've also come up with a possible idea for a language independent template that may be of some use that may be a quick win and I may be having an alt conversation with Djm-leighpark on their talk about getting some useful test cases set up on it for enWQ & frWQ. It is alright having these idea's but ultimately getting a useable output is key. I very much minded of a Wikibooks project failure but there was no consensus on rules of engagement there at the start but I did get far enough into it which despite some fantastic progress made me realise the result of the transwiki would be functionally poor even if successful. This feels a better start point for me as it feels I would be more supported in my efforts and people not to bothered if I have to give up etc. Thankyou. -- Bigdelboy (talk) 10:28, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm currently trying to slog through the Unconnected pages minimization and I've got train image work which is time critical for tomorrow evening. The simple answer to your question is No (well without violating the safety dance). The longer answer would be a semi-effective variant but I'd probably end up with a CIR block before completion per simples. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk00:03, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for the reply but I don't understand why this would be a problem. wouldn't this be a simple database query done by sql or other means that shouldn't affect anything at all? for the semi-effective variant, how would it be done? thanks. --ᘙ (talk) 14:20, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thankyou, I assume you are able to supply the required simple SQL or other code. (Or identify an existing bot/bort runner). And I am looking for a little more than not simply creating a trivial wikidata item sitelinked to Wikiquote. But the key point is that as I am individually Slogging over those that list I'm not singling out an individual and it gives an indicator as to where the choice of articles I am raising at VfD etc are coming from. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk17:05, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
on the face of it, it does not seem complicated: filtering the database for articles that have or have not the link to wikipedia should not be too difficult. Bots are probably a more complicated matter and now I understand why you were worried about CIR blocks (because of malfunctioning bots I assume). --ᘙ (talk) 00:07, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @Bigdelboy: and @The wub:. I will have to read again with a fresh mind and to test the links provided above to better understand what you wrote. But one point that really needs to be understood indeed, is that the SheSaid project (and similarly wikigap or WPWP, using hashtags as well) are multilingual campaigns. And local languages teams need to be fairly independent to run it (and thus to track record) with as simple as possible tools to do the tracking. I can help in French and English myself. Yes, I can do CSV export and reshuffling in those two languages. But am completely useless in Igbo or Ukrainian, so it really needs to be simple as I can not expect others to put a lot of time understanding how to track info. The other thing is that it would certainly be simpler to wait till the end of the campaign and only compile when things are over... but practically speaking, we want to know what’s going on :) Anthere (talk) 01:09, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
yesterday, I cleaned up all the lists on the French SheSaid using Djm queries. I also did dummy edits to all lost articles. The queries were super useful. I love them. Anthere (talk) 16:42, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Those are all global drives, that use hashtags in the comment box to track participation. See m:WPWP (adding photos to wikipedia articles), and m:WikiGap (closing the gender gap in March), or the m:The Wikipedia Library/1Lib1Ref (1Lib1Ref) campaign (adding sources) Anthere (talk)
I understand. Well... I do think your queries are HUGELY helpful and a super great improvement over previous years. From time to time, I come to press the query button to update them and I am amazed by the figures that comes in a few seconds. This is lovely. See for example the new articles from the English Wikiquote : https://quarry.wmcloud.org/query/69366
A *lot* of articles have been comping through which many feel some persons of note here consider to have a lack of notability, to which the standard of an English Wikipedia article linked via a wikidata data item is the normally expected standard for bio class article at least. -- 02:29, 25 November 2022 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Djm-leighpark (talk • contribs) 02:29, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
I've developed 3 Quarry scripts that help. If I've not run them recently you can fork your own copy and run them. I think there helpful in identifying #Shesaid articles. You can view the output on quarry. The output can be downloaded and pasted into a sandbox (Change Wikitable to Wikitable sortable). You dont need to save it, simply preview it. The absence of associated Wikidata item in these outputs may be flag of a possible notability problem. You may already have better tools/techniques/methods than these I'm not aware of. These are all subject to change with time. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk02:29, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That one looks great. I particularly appreciate that output are ordered by alphabetical order and that it is displayed when there is no Wikidata entry. I only recently realized that Wikidata entries had to be connected. Possible improvement : also adding a column for size ? Anthere (talk) 10:44, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
NNot Done: Whoopsie! @Anthere: Just noticed there is a bug on the length. Sorry. Insufficient testing, -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 09:33, 2 December 2022 (UTC) I believe I have now corrected the article length in the Quarry querriesbelow and the current snapshots they show from 4 December 2022 and thereafter (hopefully) should show correct article length. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk00:43, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, very impressive. Here are a few questions (some may be stupid):
I was loosely referring to an article that had a revision edit summary including one of more with the "#SheSaid" strings. My terminology use is somewhat poor as some editing tools may add "proper" tags outside the summary (e.g. "manual revert")
Is it at all possible to use the DEFAULTSORT so that items appear in the alpha order they should?
It is possible with relative ease for someone to fork the query and add a column that that transforms a title of the form "word1 word2 ... wordN" to "WordN, Word1, Word2..." is fairly easy and that will often but not always be the same as DEFAULTSORT; but will produce nonsense in some cases as well. I don't believe Quarry can pull out page content by itself but external aggregation methods or tools might.
Is it possible to get a clickable list so everyone can easily get to an article they are interested in with only one click?
The output has been customised to be functional when presented on enWQ but that not to say it can be used on Quarry for many purposes. (or in fact any xxWQ). Its not actually necessary to publish the page put and will function in "Show Preview" mode. At present I've an example of a saved snapshot at User:Djm-leighpark/XY if that helps. I'm not aware of any tool or bot that could help set this up seamlessly, and but you could ask at Quarry-discuss. The manual method is not onerous with practice.
I think I've noticed some of the lengths on at least some if not all of the Quarry queries here may be incorrect. I need to review that (but not immediately). thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk09:33, 2 December 2022 (UTC) I believe these have all been corrected from about 4 December 2022. -- 00:43, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
enWikiquote: All new articles the past two weeks: This shows all new articles in the past few weeks SheSaid tagged or not which may help identify new #SheSaid articles and notability problemss. It's a bit expensive at 30s to 1 min elapsed to run and the current version certain could be improved. ---
Very useful generally. In particular for the English Wikiquote which is more active than the other Wikiquote. I think it is not too difficult to change the starting and ending time, so from my perspective, it is good and very helpful Anthere (talk) 10:56, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The latest version o this query understand the current date and does not need to be modified in normal use. This version also reporta article length and if it has been comment tagged for "#SheSaid". The runtime for this is 3s but likely to increase substantially if the range is extended further back than two weeks. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk11:45, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I’ll look at them in details at the latest this week-end. Friday will be a super busy day for I. But I will look and I am very grateful you took the time to work on those queries. I thank you. Anthere (talk) 02:41, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
After review... big big big big thank you ! This is a wikiquote-life-changer !
I am going to do forked versions for the other languages. And yeah... add dummies to English and French (I can not help on the other languages as I do not speak them...) Anthere (talk)
Many articles that were either created or updated during this year's campaign have been deleted. Some of the entries in the LIST OF ARTICLES have been directly entered by some of the participants of this campaign, while others have been added through some magic that has not been explained to participants here. They have also not been related to the MANY WOMEN'S CATEGORIES that exist here.
The list in previous years was ordered alphabetically, and divided by the different categories, such as nationality or occupation. I personally find it very hard to follow this years list.
Going through this year's list of articles I found 18 red-links which indicate deleted/never created articles. I don't know who added these to the list and why. There may have been other articles created that have not been added to the list but deleted with no trace:
Sorry, I'm not getting it - what exactly is your concern? Is it that the list to which you refer is unorganized? Or is it that a number of new articles have been deleted? Or something else? Personally, while I support the campaign's intent, I find that there is not much structure or organization to it and many who seek to add pages under its banner do not seem to pay attention to proper formatting or whether or not a person is worthy of having a page (particularly troubling has been the influx of people that do not appear to be notable enough) ~ UDScott (talk) 21:30, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ottawahitech: I think you've been around long enough to be a be have checked you has maintained Wikiquote:SheSaid#Articles_created_or_improved_during_SheSaid_in_2022 this year by checking the page history, which is essentially Anthere who has done the formating and I have updated the list from time to time but not recently. I've used manipulated output from a quarry tracking query (or fork thereof) to re-create the list. This all is reliant on a relevant #SheSaid as part of a comment, which is why I spend some time adding ensureing (new) women related articles in this period have the tag. In my opinion there appeared to be a surge of new articles particularly around the end of November and the first two weeks in December, and some or perhaps even a lot of that was I believe due to successful campaigns particularly originating from Africa. Many of these did not have a #SheSaid tag, too many to identify manually. I used [6] to identify these which relied heavily on categorization applied by yourself, UDscott and others. My alt account Bigdelboy used AWD to apply these in batches around 19/20 September. Broadly speaking #SheSaid comment tagging here is up to date. On the 22nd December using Quickstatements on Wikidata I've added a load of missing sitelinks to Wikiquote. In general I'm continuing to look at add sitelinks and #SheSaid comments to new stuff as they arrive and also working manually over bio article stuff which is missing sitelinks and #SheSaid ... working through alphabetically by creator, albeit suspended around Christmas day.. This will also result in some PROD's, VfD noms etc. Obviously the new articles list is only accurate for the point at which it generated unless people make additions of articles they've created ... I've they do I usually check they have a #SheSaid comment tag. Obviously the list may contain redlinks due to items deleted by expired PROD, VfD etc. If I re-generate the new list of articles I'm likely to exclude those under PROD, VfD etc. If you need to see what've been deleted see Special:Log/delete. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk02:31, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Following a bold boxing day update to [7] (hopefully it works (Update 20:00 UTC : it doesn't work for Prods) ) I've updated the new article lists which will removed currently articles from the campaign and also excludes those currently under PROD/VfD etc proceedings. Its someething I've been meaning to do anyway. Broadly 925 new articles within the campaign period are currently with a #SheSaid comment; about 36(eyeball count) of those are currently up for PROD/VfD etc. and I've excluded those from the list I've updated on the project page. I anticipate more articles on that list will be PRODed/VfD over the time remaining in the campaign ... I am targetting in getting all/most appropriate PROD/VfDing in place prior to campaign end at year end. Doesn't mean I will do that. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk11:47, 26 December 2022 (UTC) & 20:00, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Update: I've now fixed my ability to recognise articles with deletion procedures in place and by last update to the new she said articles on the 26th Dec 2022 (UTC) created during the campaign now excludes those article currently under proposed deletion as well. Probably speaking (from memory) of about 930 new articles comment tagged she-said 50 are currently under some form or deletion proposal/discussion. Thankyou, -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk01:12, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@UDScott: Thanks for replying to my previous post. I have not been aware of your response - I guess I forgot to click he Subscribe button on the right, sorry.
I am concerned about the well-being of the English Wikquote (ENWQ). There is ongoing discussion on our Village Pump in which only a handful of ENWQ volunteers have posted their views far. Those who have participated have all agreed that this wiki needs more volunteers. This is the third year in a row that the shesaid campaign has been held on ENWQ. Many of the participants in last years campaign did not return this year, so I am wondering why?
I am concerned when I see many articles added by wannabe-editors who are new to enwq being deleted. I am even more concerned when there is no way to methodically count and analyze which articles and why these articles have been deleted, so that the organizers can learn from mistakes. Am I making sense?
@Ottawahitech: The broad rule of thumb for Wikiquote newbie's is to ensure an article exists on the English Wikipedia for the subject, that it has existed for some time and that there are no notability flags raised. That should stop and deletions for lack of notability unless the Englisth Wikipedia article gets deletion. The second thing to do is to actually add some quotes to avoid a "No Quotes" deletion. Thirdly the Wikiquote:Quotability guideline is important. I too do not like to see people's volunteer wasted and I wish more attention was paid to be realistic about warning people about the need for quality rather than awesomely faux-friendly template messages that only result in upsetting and mentally annoying people when stuff gets deleted. I've just tried to correct an obvious error (likely by me) at Special:Diff/3222817 and to place more emphasis on the suggested need for a pre-existing wikipedia article. I've already pointed out the deletion log above which is a key audit log for tracking deletions. VfD's have an archive. In the case of Prod's I think there is a case for suggesting an improvement to the page to give a section to monitoring proposed deletions rather that one sentence inappropriately tucked in a section of text. The informaiton is present to analyze this stuff but you need to put in effort to work out how to do it and to do it. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk01:03, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I get it - it would be great if we could somehow better educate new users so that fewer pages are deleted. But the torrent of new pages being created that have issues has not let up. And it has become quite difficult to keep up, let alone teach people how to do it right. And I get that you and others may be concerned with the lack of knowledgable volunteers working on the site - I share this concern, but I don't see an immediate fix (certainly flooding the site with poor quality pages will not help). I find myself (a long-time veteran of the site) becoming increasingly disenchanted with it all, as I now spend the bulk of my time fixing new pages or tagging new pages for deletion, rather than addressing other site issues or even adding new content. I don't have any simple answers, and it appears that many of my fellow admins have become increasingly withdrawn (or absent) lately as well. Sorry to be such a downer, but I'm not sure how a lot of this gets fixed any time soon. ~ UDScott (talk) 02:06, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@UDScott I know exactly how you feel (I think). I get the same feeling myself often. There are so many areas on the English Wikiquote (ENWQ) that require first aid, it is hard to pick one and stay focused on fixing it. But what is the alternative? I myself have been painted into a corner, so if it is not ENWQ it is probably the end of the road for me. But for you there are still many options, and by the way, I don't find your comment above to be a downer at all. I wish more participants here were more open about things that cause them grief without pointing fingers. You don't fix problems by pretending everything is rosy IMIO.
How do you educate newbies at ENWQ? I don't think we have enough knowledgeable volunteers to guide the hundreds of potential wannabe-editors that flooded us during this campaign, but I hope no one here thinks that these newbies are disposable. I believe that if we don't treat them right the well will dry up. I hope User:Anthere will find the time in the new year to educate and tell us how much work, experience, planning, etc, it took her and other volunteer organizers to get that many new participants to come here to try out our Wiki. Ottawahitech (talk) 17:05, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Trying to collect my thoughts about what has been said above.
First, article order... The number of articles created is too high to track by hand and with the recent changes as I did in the past years. But Jim created queries that help track, provided that people add a hashtag. The output of the queries is alphabetically ordered, which is why it is disturbing you Ottawahitech. We updated the list using the outcome of the queries + articles missing in the query but manually added to the wiki page. This explains that things gets reordered. It used to be possibly per category, more by addition date to my memory. And now is by alphabetical order. I am sorry if that create disturbance. The thing is... it is the only way to track really. But what we could definitely do is to have two lists... one where people gently add them manually, in whatever order they think make sense. And one for tracking purposes, by alphabetical order.
Every year, I organize training sessions. I think this year I did over 5 online. Plus a face-to-face. I also did videos.Problem is that in many cases, only the local leaders come. And then they facilitate their own activities, and some of the info gets lost. Thus leading sometimes to poorly constructed articles, or non notable that ends up deleted. How could we avoid this ? Well, we can insist again that only entries where there is an English article should be created (but to be fair, I said that soooooo many times... that I am not sure it is a significant lever of improvement). Providing more red lists ? That’s a lot of work. It was done in South Africa (see here). But a lot of work... What else ? Is there a welcome template to put on those new editors talk pages with key elements to remind them to pay attention to ? What else ?
It could be useful to do a query which would list all participants of this campaign. And possibly mention in the query when they actually joined Wikiquote for the first time, or how many edits they have, and list the article they participated to. This would help identify more quickly the new people, facilitate delivering them fine-tuned advice, and possibly anticipate next year with information to post for them. And obviously could help with the clean-up... User:Djm-leighpark ? would you be able to help with that ?
Also query wise... is it possible to list automatically (through a query) articles that were created as part of the campaign but do not exist any more (= were deleted). With the name of their author (again, to facilitate follow-up with them).
Another thing that I could try to do is suggest the local organizers to TRY to list the participants to their activities. This could help again target those most in needs (and help target organizers...) Anthere (talk) 21:57, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Anthere: Broadly speaking the surge in new articles at the end of November 2022 meant SheSaid comment got heavily in arrears. My alt account. Bigdelboy got access to AWB about December 2022 which helped get on top of that backlog,as well as incentivising me to create this query to drive it. In general my queries also got upgraded to help identify articles under a deletion process. Thus for example the new shesaid articles in campaign period contains a problem column (it was also was used to generate the new articles list via a filter). For identifying articles that might be problematic [8] helped identify that as well as a few female articles that had escaped Shesaid tagging: in general anything not linked to a Wikidata item got scrutiny (ie resolved). I think at one point 500+ items total shesaid and non-shesaid in the campaign period were not linked to wikidata items during December but things were generally resolved by 29 December 2022. Thereafter [9] was optimised to look at newly created articles. I'm really for identifying problems early and challenging them early and getting on top of them early before "bad habits" kick in. Anyway I also posted the output from quarry 69862 here and the filer used to generate the list of new articles that I published is just below:
Filter to get list of new campaign shesaid articles from quarry 69682 output
type .\SheSaidNewPages.py
fin=open("SheSaidNewPages.txt","r", encoding='utf8')
fout=open("SheSaidNewPages.out","w", encoding='utf8')
for myLine in fin:
if myLine[0:3] == "|[[" and myLine[-5:-1] == "||No":
print ("# " + myLine.split("|")[1],file=fout)
fin.close()
fout.close()}}
Investigating articles deleted etc. requires information from different sources. I might/might not have a look at some of this in a while but I'm focusing on mainspace articles in Special:UnconnectedPages which probably went as high as 1800+ in December but which were got down to 1248 by new year and are now down to about 700 ... but further reductions are tough. I confess most people wont have a clue what I'm on about here. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk01:27, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wow. You sure have been busy... Yes, I think this is very useful and answers many needs. And the sortable output make it super flexible and answer many of my questions (such as list of contributors of problematic entries). Anthere (talk) 11:42, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Anthere: I concerned administrator Mdd may have done a vengance attack on an article I created on the English Wikipedia. I'm indefinirely blocked there, and its mentally upsetting to see the referencing technique changed without discussion and being impotent to do anything about it. One voice in my head is telling me I need to assume good faith, another voice is having darker thoughts. I am reminded of the gun video my blocker introduced to an ANI thread. I have to AGF Mdd did not intend this, and my analysis is incorrect. The correct thing for me to do here is to take a break from editing, and that will at least for present include any help offered in the SheSaid wrap up. I'll also suspend work on sitelink resolution as its pretty intensive and stressful. Good luck with the wrap up. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 11:18, 5 January 2023 (UTC)> (struck by Djm-mobile (talk) 21:11, 5 January 2023 (UTC) (an alt account of Djm-leighpark)[reply]
Thankyou guys for the understanding. It unbelievably frustrating at times not being able to make even simple corrections on enWQ and watch IP's and some editors vandalize and w:WP:HIJACK sourced content without doing anything about it, let alone being able to hop over to enWQ simply to line things up. I totally accept this outburst was unjustified and thankyou guys for support. Totally accept Mdd had absolutely accidently tipped about the worst article he could have chosen at an incredibly unfortunate point in time - and there is absolutely no way he could have worked out why - and there's only a couple of WP funkies and a couple of others I might be prepared to give an explanation to. Mdd's response on Djm-leighpark's talk page was brilliant and really helpful. In general I re-instate my offer to help with the wrap-up. -- Djm-mobile (talk) 21:11, 5 January 2023 (UTC) (Alt account of Djm-leighpark)[reply]
A break is the right thing to do Djm. This is actually why... 20 years ago... I went on editing both English and French Wikipedia. Each time I was upset in one community, I would switch to the other language to give me time to cool down. And this is why I always make sure to really take a time-off from editing from time to time (such as during Christmas holidays ;)). This is needed to stay useful in the long run. Please note that you have been super helpful here and I really appreciated your help. I know the wave of contributions was stressful for some people here, but I think there were several benefits to the drive and your work is one of those ! We’ll continue with the wrap-up. Take a break ! Anthere (talk) 11:42, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's good advice (and yes rarely ever take good advice - or I might practice borderline testing on it). But truly thanks for the support. And I guess there's always the option of taking d:Q23682438 to your home place to join his wife :-; -- Djm-mobile (talk) 21:11, 5 January 2023 (UTC) (alt of Djm-leighpark)[reply]
@Anthere: Happy new year. I believe the 2022 is now over so please:
Can I respectfully suggest the SheSaid is ongoing! Join the coordinated effort from Wiki Loves Women to improve coverage of girls' and women's voices on Wikiquote. banner is removed from the top of pages. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk23:57, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There's been a small number of issues and criticisms that have arisen during the campaign with roles, responsibilities, article quality, deletions, and pressure on those who cleanup articles to keep place. I would therefore suggest you might consider organising a post campaign clean-up. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk23:57, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
yes. Let me check all of that in the next few days ! I am landing... It is a bit strange that the banner is still active... I’ll drop a word to the banner admins. Anthere (talk)
Hello everyone ! I took a GREAT disconnect time with my family and it was resourcing :)
I hope everyone had the opportunity for a restful time and I wish you all a wonderful year 2023, with lot’s of love, good health, delicious food, shelter and warmth, and productive wiki time :) Anthere (talk) 14:08, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The subject of deletions & nominations has been raised today at Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Aram Sargsyan; and recently at Wikiquote talk:SheSaid#Article deletions. The latter most disconcerningly seemed to indicate articles were disappearing without trace. While in general I've not found that to be true I am minded there was one isolated totally against policy by a sysop (since restored), a handful of speedies not executed under best practice where the reason would likely not be able to be discerned from the log. There have also been the case of a large batch of in my view inappropriate speedy nominations by campaign organisers but I don't think that happened previously and is unlikely to re-occur. There's been one case of a deletion nom. not notifiying the major creator. But overall the processes are probably working as they should. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk15:30, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For notability this wiki relies heavily on the English Wikipedia project for articles to demonstrate notability, and the associated NPP which seems to often to trigger creation of the associated Wikidata item. To this end people might care to peruse the w:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/MB where many issues directly and indirectly relevant to this wiki are discussed. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk15:30, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Djm-leighpark: I find your post very confusing. What is NPP? - I think I know it stands for New Page Patrol at Wikipedia. But what does it have to do with new editors at Wikiquote (WQ)? And why are you linking these newbies to one particular Request For Adminship, again at Wikipedia? Is this supposed to help wannabe editors learn how to build pages at WQ which will not be nominated for deletion? Just trying to figure out what you are trying to say.Ottawahitech (talk) 00:32, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I wish to refer to commenting on aspects of that RFA until the RFA has completed and result published. But one item of relevance there were cases during the campaign of poor quality articles on the English Wikipedia being created relating to new Wikiquote items and being deleted / draftified soon afterwards as part of the NPP process. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk01:28, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Ottawahitech: That RFA now has completed with no consensus to promote a very hard working user and very active in NPP. NPP is relevation to articles being retained on enWQ and therefore being available support notability here including availability of Wikidata items. The RFA discussions indicate the pressures of page curation and the difficulties of admin/sysops dealing with sock and prolific block evaders. I personnally think NPP patrollers should have the ability raise an AfD that they think is marginally without having to do a full BEFORE and if someone had brought that concept to the RFA discussion the result might have been different. I might elaborate later in a fresh section as you have been exploring delete discusions and processes. Thankyou -- 00:20, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@User:Djm-leighpark mentioned earlier that he was blocked on the english wikipedia (ENWP) for two reasons, IIRC (if I recall correctly):
battleground something or other
CIR
I am particularly interested in the second one, CIR, which I believe stands for Competence Is Required (Is this right?). I take it that whoever blocks a user for CIR believes that the blocked user should not belong to the community because they lack the necessary skills. (Not sure I am correct, anyone?). If so I wonder who determines
wether someone has/has-not the right skills to be a wiki-editor.
As an aside, I have a little personal story to tell about competence. A long long time ago, when I was still permitted to wiki-edit ENWP, I started an article about a woman who built a business selling quilts. I doubt this article still exists at ENWP (sorry I don’t remember the name of this quilter), but the reason I remember thinking it was a good idea to add this article to ENWP was the absence of articles abut quilting in general. I know very little about quilting, but I do know a woman in real-life who is an expert in the field. I am speculating that this woman would not even dream of joining this community of wiki-editors because she probably does not believe that she has the required "editing" skills. When I get a chance I’ll have to visit the quilting articles at ENWP and see if there has been any progress in that area. I would imagine it takes good understanding of geometry to be an efficient quilter.
Back to blocking for lack of competence. I have a question to @Djm-leighpark: Were you blocked for CIR by one individual ADMIN, or was there a public discussion in which the ENWP-community decided by w:WP:Consensus that you do not have the required skills to participate? I hope you don’t mind my asking you publicly to link to this discussion if it exists?
I do not believe there are substantive changes since my blocks in April 2022.
I have to AGF its use on my block did not constitute a w:WP:NPA or I AGF the English Wikipedia community, administrators, and functionaries would have challenged that.
I admit failures in respect of points of that essay.
However I do feel I have been mentally damaged by application of CIR and that that CIR labelling has been counter productive. I am reminded of it every time I edit here and I go through a mental pain barrier to edit. I would have a mental pain barrier not to edit. I have mental anguish watching disruptive actions and vandalism and unexplained content removals from the English Wikipedia and being impotent to do anything unless I was to resort to block evasion / sock puppetry.
The keys logs including the for enWP are here: [Djm-leighpark], Djm-mobile. for context the good faith removal of a redirect that allowed talk page access is here
I have mental anguish watching disruptive actions...and being impotent to do anything
Just a small note to address the loaded comment above:
I know how you feel, but be careful not to say anything about it. If you do , the stewards may construe this as "editing by proxy". Being unable to communicate with users left behind after I was blocked is a struggle because I can no longer thank them for little things, such as posting a new years virtual card on my former-talk-page. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:40, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The list of creators for female bios should be available from [10]. I've forked a non-optimized derivation of that at [11]. The list of people who have contributed with regards updating articles can only likely be derived by determining who has used a shesaid comment during the period. I don't have query for that currently. Please sanity check any results. -- Djm-leighpark(a)talk23:28, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The list of #SheSaid creators is at: [12] This is people you used #SheSaid in a comment. This query is unverified and may have a bug or other limitations. Mot all creators did. I had a quick attempt at combining the who but fell on my face though it is certainly doable. -- Djm-leighpark(a)talk00:06, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The quarry query [13] combines updaters and creators. It is the sort of query that can contain a bug unless thoroughly checked (and I haven't). It also contains articles in the deletion process. -- Djm-leighpark(a)talk12:44, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I sometimes tear my hair out, (not that I've much left and even less when she who must be obeyed gets her hands on the scissors) when women simply don't turn up and participate in things like Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Susan Wojcicki. There's all these mighty campaigns and then when the former CEO of YouTube turns up here seemingly she gets ignored with her article heading to the dustbin! But it is very interesting that some delete arguments on that VfD is based on Quotability whereas the normal main issue is Notability. I am a poor judge of Quotability but I'd suggest that some articles in the #SheSaid campaign may have had poor quotability. So this VfD may set a precedent in that regard. Thankyou. -- DeirgeDel tac08:55, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DeirgeDel: Here is my problem : It is very difficult to participate in both talking and content building at the same time. Content building is what all of us should be doing, and it takes precedence IMIO.
I have tried to convince others (unfortunately with no success whatsoever) to stop blocking good content contributors, such as User:Pludimir Vatin. Pludimir Vatin has added an image to an article I have just started working on. They are the only other wikiquote editor who tried to help building this article. I now see that Pludimir Vatin has been globally locked by User:Superpes15.
Global locking of good content contributors happens regularly around here. Check pretty much all the new articles that have been added to WQ during #sheasid campaigns and you will see many such contributors being blocked right and left. I feel that participating in VFDs, a nicety we cannot afford, is a waste of time, but would be interested in listening to what others have to say. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:49, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Ottawahitech: To be clear associating with a user account named 'Pludimir Vatin which is an anagram is Vladimir Putin is likely to be very problematic. Its also likely makes in unwise in my opinion for the people I was trying to reach out to contribute to this thread. I'm possibly going to say nothing more here myself. -- DeirgeDel tac01:42, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Ottawahitech I'd like to give you a warn, if you keep defending risto hot sir, it will definitely become disruptive and even more, proxy editing and meat puppetry. A lot of sysops have warned you about that, this is the last time. The next time when you defend some accounts that has been confirmed as sockpuppets of risto hot sir by stewards, I will contact other sysops to get a consensus of taking action. Best regards. Cc @Superpes15 and @Vermont, though I have a strong belief this thread is hijacked and highly disruptive. Lemonaka (talk) 02:14, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Lemonaka & all: Discussion with regard to Ottawahitech should probably continue on their talk page if necessary. @Lemonaka: In all events I think it would be useful if you could set up archiving on this talk page like you've done elsewhere and possibly consider a manual archive of this thread at a reasonably early opportunity. thankyou -- DeirgeDel tac10:04, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've raised a thread at Wikiquote:Village pump#Significant VFD discussions and I am opined women (and indeed everyone) should consider contributing to such matters so its not just the view of e.g. "men or some subset of men" to get a balanced viewpoint. I remain minded of the quote " Would be nice if there was a way to make sure most of the people voting on something like this are women" at Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Elena Ospina. Although this is a UK-only issue content of enWikiquote might result in blocking due to w:en:Online Safety Bill. Notability/inclusivity issues are some issues that arose during the #SheSaid campaign and I have put some effort into article that has been presented recently that did not have an English Wikipedia article and my view is there are considerable issues than arise with potential issues of spam when there is no English Wikipedia present. But I'd like the opportunity to be given for women to be involved in these discussions. Some of these may set community precedents and shape the site and who is permitted/restricted from using it. To avoid a forked discussion please discuss at the other thread or open a new section here. Thankyou. -- DeirgeDel tac11:28, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Better advertising for #SheSaid and Wikiquote[edit]
Has anyone suggested advertising on college campuses and maybe having one of those community edit marathons to drive up new membership for Wikiquote? I'm wondering to what extent Wikimedia would really be willing to promote Wikiquote rather than Wikipedia when there's such a vast difference in popularity between the two. The #SheSaid campaign is distinct from efforts to address the gender bias on Wikipedia (and presumably the equivalent gender gap in Wikiquote editors); advertising to address both would be preferable, but it might be much easier for #SheSaid to accomplish it's goals through better advertising than it would be to get thousands if not hundreds of thousands of new editors of a preferred gender or a preferred gender identity to join Wikipedia. CensoredScribe (talk) 19:47, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would not think it would be a good idea to do too much promotion. I think the workload to welcome and orient the new ones is currently quite heavy. There is only so much we can absorb, no ? Anthere (talk) 01:40, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
When are we supposed to add the #SheSaid hashtag to edit summaries?[edit]
I've asked this question before on the talk page Wikiquote_talk:SheSaid/RedLists, but I've received no response so I'll ask it again: when are we supposed to add the hashtag to edit summaries? Almost all of the entries on the page Wikiquote:SheSaid/RedLists are for historical individuals, however Pandora is also listed in the mythology section, as are forced marriage and forced pregnancy under general suggestions. Wikiquote:SheSaid has a list for Articles created or improved during SheSaid in 2022 and the only one that isn't for an individual is Abortion in the United States. I would certainly appreciate some help in editing the abortion articles, but if this isn't the right place than I would like to know so I can look elsewhere for assistance. I am confused what the scope and purpose of this project consists of and would like to help, but in order to do that I need someone authoritative to tell me what exactly ultimately gets counted as a contribution to the #SheSaid tally. Are any of the Wikiquote admins actually part of this project; I generally regard their answers as being the most definitive. CensoredScribe (talk) 15:36, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I had a little involvement last year (The Campaign ran from September to December) in running some Quarry queries (NB: Quarry is soon be be superceded) to track newly created articles tagged #SheSaid in the comments. I also ran around tagging #SheSaid to new created Women articles than didn't have the tag. I totally ignored the red lists myself. I'm not actually such what the "rules" are but that's what I did. The queries I used specifically consider new articles created in the campaign period with a #SheSaid tag. The query for updates would show existing articles with an update tagged #SheSaid in the period but I didn't go chasing up the women not tagged as such. So from my view there's little point tagging #SheSaid outside the campaign period, but women's articles are obviously wanted the whole time! My best answer is the Admin's don't really have anything to do with it, they just have to sometimes manage the tumult of new articles that come in for MOS, non-notability etc. Adding articles to the Red Lists, providing there is an article on the English Wikipedia, is probably not harmful and possibly good. Really a question for @Anthere:. -- (formerly Djm-leighpark) DeirgeDel tac16:08, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That didn't really answer my question but it was never the less still informative; I will avoid using the haghtag outside of the specified time frames of the campaigns. That being said, why there is a time frame at all still confuses me, I understand that that is the period during which SheSaid is advertised across Wikis, but outside of marketing there doesn't seem to be a real reason to limit collecting data to a particular time of the year. I don't think a hashtag would really be necessary at all if the parameters of this project were as simple as "the addition of quotes from women to the pages for those women", because if it were that simple, one would just need to check for changes in a single category, Category:Women. Instead we are all left guessing which themes and works of fiction are somehow construed as being worthy of inclusion on the #SheSaid redlist; to which the answer is Alice in Wonderland and Pandora apparently. CensoredScribe (talk) 17:46, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure what to answer this. I am a person who likes identifying the year according to my activities. A couple of years back, I thought the last quarter of the year could be associated to wikiquote. It made sense to me to try to track what was going on, in particular because it was done in several languages, according to who was interested to join. Hence... the hashtag...
You are right that we could limit ourselves to simply looking at the evolution of the upper category woman. I never thought of it. I think the reason why I never thought this way is... that this is not how I use Wikiquote. I regularly look at pages for inspiration... but my entry point is very rarely « people ». It is more « themes ». Such as Education or innovation or Artificial intelligence. And each time I do so... I am disturbed by the fact that most of the quotes on such pages... are quotes from men. I wish quotes from women were not only populating pages dedicated to them, but would infuse the pages of the themes they are talking about. Because... this would show their actual expertise on the matter and the fact their expertise is recognized enough to be considered worth standing next to the men’s. Ok, I probably sound like a bit of a bore when I say that. But in truth... yeah... look at all those themes... such as Industry... 100% quotes are from guys. I know that most participants ONLY focus on creating entries about those women. But for... a quote added in a thematic page... is worth tracking as well.
To answer your initial question... tracking or not tracking during the year... from my perspective, no tracking during the year. But it is still worth sharing big quality additions made on the talk page... Anthere (talk) 02:04, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You have aptly justified the inclusion of pages beyond just people and the advantage of having the hashtag. It's been a few years since I've had other wikis to be working on, so I can see now how dedicating a time would be helpful for people as well. My only issue is with the requested pages on the red list and the things to do on the main page, which I understand are just starting points. I think it would help to see how much a particular requested page needs more quotes from women, like you said with industry, neither of those pages lists industry and it would be a really good addition given how much work it needs. What if there was a list of pages which have approached the 50% mark, perhaps the pages could be given something like the green plus Wikipedia adds to good articles? I'm guessing the majority of pages on Wikiquote are in need of more quotes from women, with most pages being closer to 20%. Also I think the listing of "core" articles is just going to lead to needless arguing over what to include in the highlights. Wikipedia has core articles and vital articles but I don't think Wikiquote has either, so it's a bit odd for #SheSaid to be using them but not the rest of Wikiquote. I'm surprised no one has added father and son alongside mother and daughter, nor is there homosexuality, heterosexuality, bisexuality, transgender or LGBT; in fact there's no mention of sexuality or gender outside of biology topics associated with reproduction capacity and one for a venereal disease. I'm not really sure that the gender bias on Wikipedia is even something that most people are aware of who don't use Wikipedia on a regular basis, so if it is part of a list of topics of prominent concern for a randomized survey of women it would have to be pretty close to the bottom of the list unless some serious sampling bias was involved. I believe it is a very important issue, but I'm not sure that most of the world outside of Wikipedia really views it that way given the general absence of any major news coverage of the topic. When was the last time you even heard Wikipedia being mentioned on television, and was it a brief citation or was Wikipedia actually the main focus of the conversation? So other than that, I've no concerns; and thank you for explaining #SheSaid a bit better for me. CensoredScribe (talk) 18:42, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Grants to assist SheSaid or the Wikimedia Foundation non profit organization of which it is part of[edit]
I know SheSaid isn't a nonprofit organization, but the Wikimedia Foundation is. SheSaid is active across wikis, although I don't see SheSaid specifically mentioned under the campaigns section of the Wikimedia Foundation's website, most of the links are for topics of interest to SheSaid. So the question I'm asking is, would receiving grants be something that would actually assist either the Wikimedia Foundation in general, or SheSaid in particular, with operations? I'm still confused as to whether reproductive rights is an issue SheSaid or the Wikimedia Foundation considers to be of any particular importance. I don't really add quotes specifically because they are from women, it just so happens that half the authors of the scientific journal articles I quote are of the female gender identity, regardless of what the particular subject is. Universities in most countries, unlike Wikipedia, do not have a gender gap problem as most college students are now listed as female, so in that one particular sense, Wikipedia more closely resembles a countries armed forces than it does their college campuses, with the exception of those countries for whom service is universal and mandatory. I have no interest in being an administrator, which I have been on a Wiki before, however I would be interested in writing grant proposals, which I'm assuming would require that I have some kind of position working for the Wikimedia Foundation outside of being a random volunteer with a good idea. I have lots of time and information to give, but I would prefer to be helping with money as well. CensoredScribe (talk) 16:40, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why is it so hard to start pages about women?[edit]
I was kind of watching Rosemary Barton on live TV this morning (CBC) and realized she had interviewed two former prime ministers, one from Israel and the other from Palestine. So of course I checked to see if she had a quote page on enwq, which I already suspected she did not. How would I go about having a page added?
So, the first thing I do is check her at Google, and I see she has lots of coverage including a wikipedia entry. That's good, it means whoever ends up creating a page for her will not have to fight wq:admins who believe that a page should only be added for "notable" people (we can have a separate discussion about what this means when it comes to the lesser-known living people on the internet).
When I go to see what information WikiData has about Barton, I notice at [[Rosemary Barton (d:Q19955946)]] that her photo does not look anything like the what she looks like when she is interviewing people on live TV. I panic for a moment thinking I have uncovered info about a different Rosemary Barton (who is also a Canadian, also a journalist, etc). But of course as is quite common for women, wikimedia-commons has only one old photo for her (with shorter hair of a different color).
So the next thing to do is add an entry for her at Wikiquote:SheSaid/RedLists and hope someone notices it shortly and builds a page for her at enwq to allow adding quotes from the interviews with the two former prime ministers while they are still available on the web (are they?).
First off, good question. Secondly, your formatting and choice of when to make links is bizarre at best. Third, I don't think I can give a very good answer to this question without spinning out into much broader questions related to our general mission here and issues related to fundamental fairness and decency (and feminism). I think that in almost all cases, we should only have quotations here that are themselves quoted and attested as quotations, i.e. we don't just indiscriminately choose the parts of a book that we think are "best" or "coolest" or whatever, but we quote that book when a third party quotes that same passage and we have a citation to both the original work and the secondary quotation. As I understand it, that's how de.wq does it (tho my German is not very good) and it seems a lot more reasonable than the current free-for-all we have now. Unfortunately, that clashes with two other realities which are 1.) that we already have some pretty fundamental rules that are not really enforced here (e.g. the length of quotations, which is routinely ignored) and 2.) the fact that sources are themselves biased toward/against certain groups. So this actually attempts to answer your question: just as with Wikipedia, where we have a dearth of (e.g.) women in science biographies, this is in part us reproducing the deeper embedded issues of misogyny and patriarchy in academia and popular-level reliable sources. So the short answer as to why it's hard to make collections about women or women-centered topics, it's because of bigotry, which is not necessarily started here or particularly pronounced here, but ends up being tacitly expressed here due to much larger social forces. Long answer, sorry. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯00:03, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
if you only allow quotations that are themselves quoted, then since women (and other "unpopular" subjects) are a lot less quoted, pages about women will continue to be in the minority.
The first is a British politician whose official photo does not resemble what she looks like today (I am speculating). The second is a Canadian journalist that has no photo at all available on commons. Both reconsidered "notable". Ottawahitech (talk) 22:07, 7 November 2023 (UTC) updated Ottawahitech (talk) 14:37, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A. third obstacle to finding information about women, which many times ends up making those women not wq:notable, is the fact that women often change their names throughout their lives. Heck, I still remember the days when women used call themselves Mrs John Smith even when their name before marrying John Smith was Rita Moreno.
Here is an excerpt from a 2022 Washington Post article about female scientists on Wikipedia. Those who have not read it might find it interesting.
About 15 biographies [Jess] Wade has written have been deleted, including one on Clarice Phelps, a nuclear chemist who is recognized as the first Black woman to be involved with the discovery of a chemical element. […] On Wikipedia, which is written collaboratively by self-appointed volunteers around the world, edits are approved or denied by volunteer administrators, who use a set of notability criteria to determine which articles deserve to be published.
"You're stuck in a spiral where you have to be double exceptional as a woman or person of color to fulfill these requirements," Wade said.
A 2019 op-ed has more details on the Clarice Phelps article:
Take Clarice Phelps, the first African American woman to be part of team that discovered a superheavy element. Phelps purified the berkelium-249 that was used in the discovery and identification of Tennessine (element 117), named after the location of the lab where she works. But Phelps was not named in the official announcement and was not profiled by international newspapers. Without these crucial pieces of recognition, her biography was quickly deemed not appropriate for Wikipedia.
Measure the number of pages you've created by gender[edit]
I've created a handy little tool which measures gender statistics for your list of created pages. It was designed for Wikipedia but it also makes sense for Wikiquote.
Observable is a commercial digital platform which makes it easy to analyse and Visualize data using JavaScript. It has been created by Melody Meckfessel and Mike Bostock. Mike Bostock is known in the dataviz community. He has created the D3js library and has worked for the New York Times. The good thing is that there is a nice community of users sharing dataviz on Observable. I use it to design quickly tools to analyse Wikipedia and Wikidata. PAC2 (talk) 21:46, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How do WE disseminate this information to best facilitate ladies adding their voice to this by sharing a quote that is positively meaningful for her?[edit]
Please share! On all your social media pros 😁 I want women from Topeka to Tianjin, Patagonia to Port Author and anywhere, everywhere, in-between and besides. StarrRyder (talk) 13:22, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why is it so hard to start pages about women?[edit]
I was kind of watching Rosemary Barton on live TV this morning (CBC) and realized she had interviewed two former prime ministers, one from Israel and the other from Palestine. So of course I checked to see if she had a quote page on enwq, which I already suspected she did not. How would I go about having a page added?
So, the first thing I do is check her at Google, and I see she has lots of coverage including a wikipedia entry. That's good, it means whoever ends up creating a page for her will not have to fight wq:admins who believe that a page should only be added for "notable" people (we can have a separate discussion about what this means when it comes to the lesser-known living people on the internet).
When I go to see what information WikiData has about Barton, I notice at [[Rosemary Barton (d:Q19955946)]] that her photo does not look anything like the what she looks like when she is interviewing people on live TV. I panic for a moment thinking I have uncovered info about a different Rosemary Barton (who is also a Canadian, also a journalist, etc). But of course as is quite common for women, wikimedia-commons has only one old photo for her (with shorter hair of a different color).
So the next thing to do is add an entry for her at Wikiquote:SheSaid/RedLists and hope someone notices it shortly and builds a page for her at enwq to allow adding quotes from the interviews with the two former prime ministers while they are still available on the web (are they?).
First off, good question. Secondly, your formatting and choice of when to make links is bizarre at best. Third, I don't think I can give a very good answer to this question without spinning out into much broader questions related to our general mission here and issues related to fundamental fairness and decency (and feminism). I think that in almost all cases, we should only have quotations here that are themselves quoted and attested as quotations, i.e. we don't just indiscriminately choose the parts of a book that we think are "best" or "coolest" or whatever, but we quote that book when a third party quotes that same passage and we have a citation to both the original work and the secondary quotation. As I understand it, that's how de.wq does it (tho my German is not very good) and it seems a lot more reasonable than the current free-for-all we have now. Unfortunately, that clashes with two other realities which are 1.) that we already have some pretty fundamental rules that are not really enforced here (e.g. the length of quotations, which is routinely ignored) and 2.) the fact that sources are themselves biased toward/against certain groups. So this actually attempts to answer your question: just as with Wikipedia, where we have a dearth of (e.g.) women in science biographies, this is in part us reproducing the deeper embedded issues of misogyny and patriarchy in academia and popular-level reliable sources. So the short answer as to why it's hard to make collections about women or women-centered topics, it's because of bigotry, which is not necessarily started here or particularly pronounced here, but ends up being tacitly expressed here due to much larger social forces. Long answer, sorry. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯00:03, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
if you only allow quotations that are themselves quoted, then since women (and other "unpopular" subjects) are a lot less quoted, pages about women will continue to be in the minority.
The first is a British politician whose official photo does not resemble what she looks like today (I am speculating). The second is a Canadian journalist that has no photo at all available on commons. Both reconsidered "notable". Ottawahitech (talk) 22:07, 7 November 2023 (UTC) updated Ottawahitech (talk) 14:37, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A. third obstacle to finding information about women, which many times ends up making those women not wq:notable, is the fact that women often change their names throughout their lives. Heck, I still remember the days when women used call themselves Mrs John Smith even when their name before marrying John Smith was Rita Moreno.
Strict notability requirements can often work against their intended purpose[edit]
Here is an excerpt from a 2022 Washington Post article about female scientists on Wikipedia. Those who have not read it might find it interesting.
About 15 biographies [Jess] Wade has written have been deleted, including one on Clarice Phelps, a nuclear chemist who is recognized as the first Black woman to be involved with the discovery of a chemical element. […] On Wikipedia, which is written collaboratively by self-appointed volunteers around the world, edits are approved or denied by volunteer administrators, who use a set of notability criteria to determine which articles deserve to be published.
"You're stuck in a spiral where you have to be double exceptional as a woman or person of color to fulfill these requirements," Wade said.
A 2019 op-ed has more details on the Clarice Phelps article:
Take Clarice Phelps, the first African American woman to be part of team that discovered a superheavy element. Phelps purified the berkelium-249 that was used in the discovery and identification of Tennessine (element 117), named after the location of the lab where she works. But Phelps was not named in the official announcement and was not profiled by international newspapers. Without these crucial pieces of recognition, her biography was quickly deemed not appropriate for Wikipedia.
@Ottawahitech: The main document is WQ:N, which states: "Generally, if a topic is notable on Wikipedia, then it is notable enough for Wikiquote. Conversely, if an article about the topic has been deleted from Wikipedia on grounds of non-notability, then it is likely to be considered not notable on Wikiquote." Thus, WQ:N takes after WP:N, while adding a few criteria of its own. But note that WQ:N is an essay, not a policy or guideline. Notability requirements are not an exact science. In practice, notability is determined on a case-by-case basis by active members of the Wikiquote community, some of whom have strongly divergent views on what is notable or, indeed, what the Wikiquote project should be. BurningLibrary (talk) 17:00, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Re “Generally, if a topic is notable on Wikipedia, then it is notable enough for Wikiquote”:
@Ottawahitech: "Any comments?" It is possible to have a situation where the topic itself is notable, but where the page does not meet Wikiquote's other requirements. For example, one factor that is all-important here on Wikiquote is good sourcing. If a page consists of nothing but unsourced quotes, it could be nominated for deletion on that basis.
That being said, when it comes to unsourced quotes, I strongly prefer the practice of moving them to an "Unsourced quotes" section on the talk page, where they can be improved upon and reintegrated into the page once they meet a certain standard. I think this is much better than just deleting the quote or nominating the whole page for deletion, since there may be a great many unsourced quotes which are still notable and would warrant inclusion if they were sourced better.
On the contrary. Deletions of pages contributed through the #SheSaid campaign are, or were, more likely to be nominated for deletion. When you have people arguing over whether articles should be kept or deleted, not because they contravene ENWQ norms but because of w:wp:I just don't like it, or I don't like the contributors who worked on the nominated page, you have to organize and learn how to object.
Measure the number of pages you've created by gender[edit]
I've created a handy little tool which measures gender statistics for your list of created pages. It was designed for Wikipedia but it also makes sense for Wikiquote.
Observable is a commercial digital platform which makes it easy to analyse and Visualize data using JavaScript. It has been created by Melody Meckfessel and Mike Bostock. Mike Bostock is known in the dataviz community. He has created the D3js library and has worked for the New York Times. The good thing is that there is a nice community of users sharing dataviz on Observable. I use it to design quickly tools to analyse Wikipedia and Wikidata. PAC2 (talk) 21:46, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@PAC2: Well I must say I sympathize. Using some of the primitive/broken tools suppled by the wmf is a pain. But here is the rub: I believe you are going to have a hard time convincing many contributors to venture outside what they consider the safe borders of the wikimedia web pages. Many will not click on any link that leaves wiki-land behind.
_-_The_Noun_Project.svg)
.jpg)
Done -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 11:45, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Not Done:
![[1]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Businessperson_(3287)_-_The_Noun_Project.svg){kind=link}
