Welcome!This is where Women in Red plans future events and discusses ideas for more general improvements. Everyone is welcome to make suggestions or work on tasks. What we decide to do is based on consensus. No one is in charge. You don't have to be a member to participate. Like elsewhere on Wikipedia: be polite, be bold. Join the discussion here or on ourproject talkpage.
Like you mentioned previously,Ipigott, I don't know how to create an event page with the new system so I won't be volunteering for that task. If no one is up to it, it's okay with me if we postpone it for another month, or pass on it altogether. --Rosiestep (talk)15:23, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think it would be important that, in light of this annual event, editors be reminded/informed to include new articles inLists of deaths by year, which lists deceased notable personalities by month and day and to which I have been contributing for years. According toWikipedia statistics, it is one of the most read entry on Wikipedia, andDeaths in 2024 had a total of almost 50 million visits. In this way, the new biographies of women who died in XXXX year would be more visible. Best regards._-_Alsor (talk)16:47, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like a fun idea to write about chefs, cookbook authors, baristas, farmers, recipes invented by women, founders/columnists/editors/publishers of magazines associated with F&B, plate and glassware designers, etc. --Rosiestep (talk)17:13, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also nutritionists, dietitians, food scientists, vintners, hunger relief workers, eating disorder specialists ... Plenty of room to range on this one.Penny Richards (talk)16:52, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If someone knows how to create a redlist, we could use one for "food scientist". There are >750 nameshere, though unclear how many of them meet EN-WP guidelines.
No redlists yets for these, but there are 12 language versions of theCategory:Food scientists and 33 language versions of theCategory:People in agriculture, some of which may have women who would be eligible for an EN-WP article.
@Grnrchst andRosiestep:, We can easily pushDeveloping countries to September. I have a different suggestion though. I'd like us to consider making the 2026 Alphabet Run next year be alphabetic by country of interest rather than name. We'd cover the world by the end 2026 without making distinctions about economics or "development". Am I missing the downside, or do you think this might be a good idea for 2026? --WomenArtistUpdates (talk)16:17, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@WomenArtistUpdates: I like the idea, but we'll need to figure out a good balance for it, as the proportion of countries starting with certain letters varies. Going by sovereign states, there are 11 A countries, 17 B countries, 17 C countries, 4 D countries, 8 E countries, 3 F countries, 11 G countries, 3 H countries, 9 I countries, 3 J countries, 5 K countries, 9 L countries, 18 M countries, 10 N countries, 1 O country, 10 P countries, 1 Q country, 3 R countries, 26 S countries, 11 T countries, 7 U countries, 4 V countries, 1 Y country and 2 Z countries.
@Grnrchst: I've tided up your list a bit. Where did you get your information about the developing countries, because I would like to add the names of the countries? — Martin(MSGJ · talk)10:18, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Works for me. "works" has always been in our remit, but it could do with being re-emphasised (we can include Jilly Cooper books! without wondering if she (and that Shakespeare bloke) are getting "too much" attention). 4meter4's list should affect (improve) dozens of articles about actors, directors, singers, composers, authors, printers, and cinematographers who happen to be women.Victuallers (talk)12:19, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I'm glad the responses are positive. When would we like to have this edit-a-thon, and what would be the best process for getting it organized and created? Also, I think there are other WikiProjects besides the ones I listed that could be invited. There are many studio art related projects for example, but even general topic areas could be invited. Someone from sayWikipedia:WikiProject Biology could write an article on a biology book written by a woman for example. We wouldn't necessarily have to limit invitations to just the projects that focus on arts and literature. Works of non-fiction are legitimate content for this edit-a-thon as well.4meter4 (talk)22:08, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is this a possible candidate for our year long initiative for 2026? I realize it wouldn't add to our stats, but it is a fairly rich topic. Just putting it out there. The constraint I see is that there isn't a good source of redlinks (or is there?). Either way, the best way to get this going is to add the idea to our planning page atWikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Ideas. That is where the brainstorming ofhow happens. There you can see what is already on the calendar for upcoming months. We generally do not have more that three meet-ups in a given month. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk)22:35, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's definitely worth considering. I was originally imagining a month long wikipedia wide push to try and get editors outside the project involved with some different barnstar prizes based on amount of participation. It's a good way to recruit new members here, and/or get people thinking about topics related to women that they might wish to work on within the content area they usually edit in. Think of it as WIR planting seeds within other projects to increase wikipedia's coverage of women. That's the advantage of a short term edit-a-thon; the impact it could have on editing habits outside WIR.4meter4 (talk)23:08, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you,4meter4, for this constructive suggestion. I agree with you that inclusion in our monthly events would be a good way to start. As far statistics, I have found that writing about works created by women frequently leads to red-linked women who can then be covered in biographies. But it would also be useful if we could find a way of providing meaningful statistics on works created by women. We used to record them in our early monthly stats but for some reason we were urged to limit our listings to biographies (which are in any case covered by Humaniki). I'm not at all sure that was a sensible move. In any case, why don't we simply create an extra slot for "works created by women" in September? It could usefully be linked to our item on women writers but should of course be an independent event.--Ipigott (talk)11:37, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I never got that advice Ian I still add non biogs into the list. Maybe trial the proposal for one month for a potential year long effort. I think it would aid collaboration if we had a WIR tag that would take a choice of work i,e, theatre, film, books etc so that it would add two projects. Women in Red and Wikiproject Books. Maybe we could type "WIR|Books" or "WIR|Theatre" etc. I've no idea how to do this but maybe someone can consider this it looks do-able.Victuallers (talk)12:05, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks,Roger. I'm happy to see you still add women's creations to the list but am afraid they will have been deleted. Some time backTagishsimon strongly suggested that we should keep to biographies and the automatic listings have been created on that basis. As there has been so little in connection with works created by women (except for literature), I think it would be useful to devote a monthly evemt to any such words. If need be, we could later specialize on works in different sectors of interest.--Ipigott (talk)15:03, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that this should be the case for automatic counts. I was told as a manager that "you get what you count". If you count the number of people arriving on time... then more will arrive on time. You cannot confuse this by adding in the milk deliveries each morning. Counting biographies is a simple easy to do measure, but its only close to what we want. We do want to include womens' work, even if we cannot measure it so easily. A great painter is defined by their works not their life story per se. For instance, I have updatedSt Mary's Secondary School, Zomba and added it to #327. Its good work I reckon, the girls there can now find their school cross referenced into other articles... even if the biog count doesnt include it. HTHVictuallers (talk)07:02, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
4meter4 - I have copied/ moved this conversation from the main WIR talk page. It seems like the way to go here is to do a month long event to start with. At this point, we need to know what you would need in order to obtain your desired meet-up. If you are still in the planning stages and think September is too soon, perhaps October, or a month in 2026. It looks like there is a fair amount in interest in leveraging this into a collaboration with other projects. I think you would be the person to facilitate that and also any redlists. Please respond with your thoughts. Thank you! --WomenArtistUpdates (talk)23:18, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@WomenArtistUpdates I've never led a meetup before, and there would be a learning curve for me. I am happy to take on some of the leadership, but I think it would be better if a seasoned meetup leader were to be involved whom I could collaborate with. Is there someone willing to take this on? I think October or November would be a better month to do this. Best.4meter4 (talk)16:31, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Love this idea. I've just learnt how wide the variety of barnstars is so, the levels of contribution/variety of contribution will have to be considered carefully. Perhaps the redlink barnstar for 25 women, the goddess barnstar for 25 women from different occupations, the commons barnstar where they have 25 women and included images in all of them?
Hey all. For quite a while now I've been working on articles aboutrevolutionary women (i.e. women who either participated in revolutions or were involved in revolutionary movements/organisations). Most of my submissions have been to other themed events, but I was thinking it might be fun to do a specific edit-a-thon focused on revolutionary women. I can try putting together a red list for it, perhaps we could do it some time next year? --Grnrchst (talk)14:39, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey @Grnrchst I think this should go on the agenda next year. April 2025 does not have a theme attributed. Perhaps we add it to the list? When we get round to March it would be great if you can help create the event page, would you be happy to do that?TheResilientEngineer (talk)08:48, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was just fiddling around with thenumber of links redlist, as I noticed it hadn't updated in over a year, and managed to get it back to working order. It got me thinking whether we should have an edit-a-thon focused specifically on creating articles with a high number of interwiki links; the redlist includes articles with 7 or more interwiki links. This could be a nice way to focus on the higher importance (for lack of a better term) articles that other language wikis have recognised as worthy of articles. --Grnrchst (talk)09:46, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Faced with the continuing problems with Humaniki (see WiR talk page), it seems to me it would be useful for this project to have an alternative approach to statistics on the proportion of biographies of women on the EN wiki. We should not be dependent on the availability of Humanity's principal creator, who is in any case usually busy with other assignments.--Ipigott (talk)10:38, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This section is purely administrative. It is not about the ongoing discussions of topics.
WiR generally has a variety of monthly, quarterly and annual events. WiR also sends out an “invitation” to its registered participants notifying them of those events. This is an effort to list tasks associated with the administrative tasks of updating and adding pages. We will be maintaining this list to assist with Quality Assurance. This is a working document and should be maintained to reflect current bast practices.WomenArtistUpdates (talk)16:52, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As of March 2024 we are working with a new set of cascading templates. Because the template speak to each other thepreview of the template might not be as expected. For example 302 might look like 304. Additionally some pages won't preview correctly unless the editorpurges the page to update the cache.
The interrelated templates allow us to make changes and pages once, without updating new and past events throughout the WiR ecosystem. This will ultimately reduce mistakes, bad directs, and misinformation. The coders involved are watching these pages to ensure they work correctly. March 2024 is the first iteration. If direction are not clear it is the drafter's fault - not the coders, so please be gentle.
Each month there will be new events and ongoing events
YEAR-LONG INITIATIVES#1day1woman 2024 ** Event #293:#1day1woman #1day1woman Education - Year long initiative ** Event #294: Education Year long initiative Education Year long initiative
NEW - Alphabet run Q & R * Alphabet run Q & R** Event #299:Alphabet run Q & R
NEW - Women's History Month | Art+Feminism -260 as go by* Art+Activism** Event #300:Art+FeminismYNEW - Find Her * Find Her ** Event #301:Find HerY
Step 2 - create the event page atWikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/n where n is the number of the new event. You can use the{{WIR meetup}} header template to help you, which will populate the event header and right side infoboxes.
Step 3 - add the "body" of the page (welcome, redlists, purpose) using a similar editathon as a starting point. You can copy sections from previous month to add boilerplate language. For example, start at Participants copy through the bottom of the page (example). (Remember to update month and event number in the pasted sections.)
Step 6 - invite and receive feedback from a sufficient number of WiR enthusiasts that the event page and invite are okay. Mark reviewed items with{{ok}}
YMusic - Year long initiative ** Event #327: Music Year long initiative
N
