The same is true for historical monuments - only those monuments for which the artist has been dead at least 70 years can be uploaded to commons without permission from the (heirs of) artist. Jane ( talk ) 16:28, (UTC) i always take photos of such statues and signage when I spot them, just in case. I was able to start an article about Edith. Wyle after seeing a square named for her along Wilshire boulevard -and added my photo to wikimedia commons to use in the entry. (Especially good for late 20c. Folks, because they're too young to have had photos fall out of copyright.)- penny richards ( talk ) 01:00, (UTC)hi penny richards - i looked at your article on Edith. Wyle - what a great idea to take photos when you see such commemorative signage!
8 ways, gloria, steinem, improved Our lives
megalibrarygirl ( talk ) 17:50, (UTC) @ Megalibrarygirl and Penny richards : The event is closer to my generation. I can reach out on social media (tho i'm only on FB) not on Flickr or Instagram, etc. Netherzone ( talk ) 22:37, (UTC) 100 days/100 articles on Jewish women (in four languages!) Nice article in the wikimedia blog today. Funcrunch ( talk ) 05:59, (UTC) Interesting factoid re: women's historical representation I just read in the nyc blog, gothamist, that in New York city there are nearly 150 historical monuments (public commemorative statues) of men, and only 5 historical statues of women. It occurred to me that this may be something to consider in relation to the work we are doing here. I will make a note to keep this on my radar screen. I can photograph these statues, however i've had trouble posting images to wikimedia commons - i'm not doing something right in relation to licensing or using my real name. If there is a tutorial someone can point me to, i'd appreciate it! Here's a link to the article - a short but interesting read: pphoto-1 Netherzone ( talk ) 23:10, (UTC) you uploaded two files to commons (I assume both were of Jenny holzer or were artworks by her). You are free to upload photos to commons that you took yourself, but you must take care that the license is also correct. So if you took a photo of the artist, that's fine, but if it was a photo of an artwork, then commons licensing policy for artwork must be met (you need permission from Jenny holzer).movie
Megalibrarygirl ( talk ) 00:21, (UTC) Pro-era forces march dnd0211 hi megalibrarygirl! Thank you for this. I'm thinking of focusing on the 1978 Wash dc march at this time. For the future, it would be great to eventually have all the equal rights marches documented. Netherzone ( talk ) 00:47, (UTC) There must be attendees who have usable photos from the 1978 Washington march-might be a good subject for social analysis media outreach to older women? (I say this as a 50-year-old. They'd be older than me, anyway.) Penny richards ( talk ) 02:13, (UTC) @ Netherzone and Penny richards : There do seem to be some photos of the march on dc, but they didn't have the correct license. .
— permStrump ( talk ) 18:10, (UTC) 1978 March for the Equal Rights Amendment There was not a wikipedia page for the march for the Equal Rights Amendment in Washington dc in 1978. So in a sense it was a "redlink." 100,000 people marched, and altho there wasn't that much press coverage, it seems like a notable event. I just created a stub, and if anyone would like to contribute to it, that would be wonderful. Netherzone ( talk ) 02:15, (UTC) hi netherzone! Looks like a good start! I was looking for images, and I found an era march in Florida. Not sure if you want to use that.
Gloria, steinem on her Bill Clinton essay : 'i wouldnt write the
The only thing I didn't understand in the 2 seconds I gave to it, was why there was a see also pointing to some other person (and then back from that person to virginia). I took a quick look but didn't grok the connection. (imo it's fine to append a desciption as part of the see also item, to say why the see also target is pertinent.) - tagishsimon ( talk ) 09:20, (UTC) I got the connection - it's a baltimore connection. (Both were from there, both were active in local civics, and both have parks named after them in the city. At might be worth elucidating a bit law in the "see also" section. 16:44, (UTC) @ Susunw, tagishsimon, and Ser Amantio di nicolao : Thanks for the responses!
Tagishimon, so what you're saying. Other people might not be able to intuitively know that baker and Dobkin are connected in my mind because when I first posted here about baker 9 months ago, penny richards replied and told me about the article she had created on Mary dobkin that. Or that after reading about Dobkin, i thought they sounded like kindred spirits who must have crossed paths at some point and become great friends (even though I can't find any documented evidence of it)? Now that you mention it, i can see how other people might not easily make that connection. . p what Ser Amantio di nicolao said is probably the extent of their connection, so i'll add a little explanation. .
When other people write articles to close the gender gap it's wonderful; when they are asked to write articles they don't have time. Nothing wrong with that - i don't mean to sound condemnatory, because i'm really not trying. I just wish I could think of some way to begin countering that perception. ser Amantio di nicolao che dicono a signa? Lo dicono a signa.
I posted here a few months ago about potentially creating an article on Virginia. Baker and got a lot of encouragement, so 9 months later, i finally started a stub. I'm planning to add some more later tonight and would love help from anyone who has some time, either adding material or feedback on how it looks so far. It's the first article i've created, so any kind of input would be helpful. — permStrump ( talk ) 23:18, (UTC) It's a very good start. Importantly, you stated why she is noted and provided sufficient references to show she meets gng. SusunW ( talk ) 03:39, (UTC) Agree.
Book by william moulton Marston
It would be interesting to have some research undertaken on why attitudes have become increasingly dogmatic on the English wiki while others appear to be far more welcoming and paperwork tolerant. When I see how many new articles on women are being added to the korean, japanese and various Scandinavian versions, it makes me wonder why we continue to be so rigid.- ipigott ( talk ) 16:16, (UTC)I think some of it, too, has. Reframing this - reframing the way people think of us - might go a long way towards attracting more even semi-active editors. I'm in dc, so i have a lot of friends/acquaintances getting involved in Saturday's march. And I have a lot of friends/acquaintances who have been posting things on Facebook about causes you can donate to, things you can do in the new administration, etc. (Not trying to get political t exactly - i have a larger point in mind.) wikipedia is not among those things. I'm sure these people are horrified to know that our coverage of women is at less than 17 of biographies in total, but it never seems to occur to them that if they themselves start writing articles that number could be cut down. Point being, wikipedia has become something in the public consciousness other than a scholarly resource. I think people understand its potential in the abstract, but for whatever reason never translate that potential into something concrete.
I sometimes think i am guilty of this myself when i am brainstorming about the summary gendergap and ways to draw women. Somehow we need to let people help themselves, without scaring them off indefinitely by the way we "welcome" their first edits. I still haven't figured out how to do this. Jane ( talk ) 15:18, (UTC). Unless i am mistaken, the English wikipedia is far less open than most of the others. It's a pity the acceptance of articles in the other languages cannot be used as justification for their inclusion in English. At least thanks to wikidata and Commons some of the essentials are beginning to seep through.
notability unless it's a very. TheCatalyst31, reaction, creation 02:07, (utc like. Susunw, i was also impressed. Anyone can edit, not everyone does: wikipedia and the gender gap. It clearly reveals wikipedia's male-dominated hierarchical approach not just to the software and overall infrastructure but to the ever stricter application of rules on what can be included (and how) in a predominantly woman-hostile environment. Unfortunately, there seem to be no signs of improvement. At best, wir could strive to achieve increased openness. But I'm afraid it might already be too late. Ipigott ( talk ) 11:07, (UTC). There seem to be ever higher gates being built to stem and channel the flow of new articles, while backlogs such as AfC only seem to be getting bigger.
SusunW ( talk ) 20:06, (UTC). And don't i know if from AfD. Anyone got a good answer to the "we aren't here to right great wrongs" (which completely misinterprets the essay on that topic.) Sigh. Montanabw (talk) 23:23, (utc not that the rgw"ng crowd usually listens to me anyway, but my usual go-to argument for this sort of thing is that there are biases in how wikipedians themselves look for sources, even more british so than there are biases in which. Gng is a low bar as written, it's usually interpreted as being stricter than it is (usually by strict interpretations of how many sources are necessary, source reliability and what counts as significant coverage, though occasionally by throwing out whole categories of sources as unworthy. There's also a bias, partly due to the demands of AfD and partly due to what's easiest for editors, toward topics that can be sourced online (and usually through google) by English speakers; this is a big part of why we have a ton. (Not that I'm opposed to content on fandoms and niche hobbies, but there are double standards at play.) given the added difficulty of finding sources on topics that one wouldn't expect to be easily sourceable online for structural reasons, it's more acceptable to set. Incidentally, this is why i feel that a certain degree of inclusionism is necessary to counter systemic bias, lest we start throwing out topics that are notable in places or fields without a strong internet presence.
Worm, farming, profitable, business
Contents, today's Signpost pieces about gendergap in "Recent Research". Link is here: wikipedia:wikipedia signpost/Recent research. Jane ( talk ) 11:35, (UTC). Includes links to this and this., rosiestep ( talk ) 17:42, (UTC). Oh how I love this "Encyclopaedias have, in the past, purported to represent all knowledge, but they have never sought to represent everyones knowledge." ( heather Ford and Judy wajcman) Exactly the issue. Hierarchy, status, top-down structures rather than encompassing structures that weigh import by other measures. Why is it that ruling mother a society seems more important than building it up and making life livable?