Knowledge talk:WikiProject Feminism/Archive 2

4125:

policies. It would be be even better if any hat-note explicitly mentioned/linked to NPOV, as Danger said, and perhaps also to globalisation. For example: "This article may not present a neutral or global point of view because of its limited gender perspective. More diverse or inclusive examples are needed ..." After all, it is possible there may be too many female examples given in, for instance, articles on female-dominated industries. I also think it would be a bad idea in this context to say an article's gender-neutrality is "disputed". This suggests a dispute exists where there may not be one. The most important thing though is that any such hat-note links to guidelines which provides examples of how to improve gender diversity or perspective. There is no point applying such a template if there is no help provided to well-intentioned editors.

4906:(237–238, not 237 -238, using an en-dash and not a hyphen), capitalization of proper names, extra spacing, and some writing that seemed more fit for advertising than for an encyclopedia (probably what the other editor meant by non-neutrality). I wonder whether the law quotation should say "subjected" or "subject"; I didn't change that or look up the original; I also wonder whether the citation to that law in the U.S. Code is correct (there should be a title number and a section number). I wonder whether some citations are identrical and could be named so one reference will serve several locations in the article, but I have to leave this computer session in a few minutes. There was some other stuff and there was stuff I didn't touch because I lack expertise in the subject. Best wishes and thanks for your work. 282:"The popular notion of glass ceiling effects implies that gender (or other) disadvantages are stronger at the top of the hierarchy than at lower levels and that these disadvantages become worse later in a person's career. We define four specific criteria that must be met to conclude that a glass ceiling exists. Using random effects models and data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics, we examine gender and race inequalities at the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles of white male earnings. We find evidence of a glass ceiling for women, but racial inequalities among men do not follow a similar pattern. Thus, we should not describe all systems of differential work rewards as "glass ceilings." They appear to be a distinctively gender phenomenon." 7983:. Delany described the villains the heroine would face - "the first was a corrupt department store owner; the second was the head of a supermarket chain who tries to squash a women's food co- operative. Another villain was a college advisor who really felt a woman's place was in the home and who assumed if you were a bright woman, then something was probably wrong with you psychologically, and so forth. It worked up to a gang of male thugs trying to squash an abortion clinic staffed by women surgeons. And Wonder Woman was going to do battle with each of these and triumph." It's a pity that only one issue of the series was created. 4386:

such as on the arms, given normal perspective by the angle of the in-air foot, and possibly by the ponytail (I tried to tell if it had a form below her shoulder level, as it seems to by a tiny amount per an illumination reflection, but that's difficult to see with certainty on my defectively displaying laptop (I forgot to try enlarging)), although to be sure I want to freeze the motion and I don't know how (Print Screen chops the image horizontally, probably due to display scanning). If I'm right, then it's even more likely that the image got approved as featured via sexism.

7893: 4160:. While applauding the intention of this suggestion and being outraged by sexism on Knowledge, I agree that any such template would set a POV-pushing precedent (and so be deleted rather quickly). Rhetorically---slapping a template on an article would make many of the article's authors more defensive and resentful. It would be better boldly to implement changes or cautiously to suggest changes on talk pages. Just writing a short personal statement of concern may elicit a chivalrous volunteer offering to solve the problem 31: 5544:. But yeah, I don't get much value out of them except for a few "oh huh well that's somewhat interesting." A lot of people I help on OTRS are PR people and are often women. I've been working with folks like that for a while now, I even find them on Twitter. Most often seem like lost causes, but, some are able to learn and grow as contributors :) I do encourage you to pop on the gender gap list if subject matters related to this interest you. Thanks for popping in the conversation here! 3740:

added to them just recently, but if you go through the links, you may see something that interests you. At the bottom of that box, there is also a link for "Popular pages". If you click on that, you will see a list of articles with a feminist subject that get the most hits (unique readers I think is what the list is counting). :You can see that the articles listed there have quality assessments, there are a few with "C" or "B" assessments that could be improved.

5637:: Female Knowledge editors are less likely to contribute to Knowledge due to the high level of conflict involved in the editing, debating, and defending process." ("Controlling for other factors females were 26% more likely to select 'I got into conflicts with other Knowledge contributors' as a reason for no longer contributing. The coefficients for being afraid of being 'criticized' , 'yelled at', and 'getting into trouble' are all significant".) 4627:

alerted the project that occurred to you as relevant, and other editors are free to notify additional projects. In general I think attempts to limit participation in any given discussion are bad for consensus-building. Cliques or grudges matter less when greater numbers of editors participate. There's no reason to expect that the members of WikiProject Islam (or any other project) would hold uniform views on a given question.

7769:

interest as it preaches that policies which target only an increase in women's level of education and their participation in the labor market might not be very helpful in decreasing the gender wage gap if not accompanied by more activist policies; policies which would fight against the stereotypes of the male/female division of labor and the discriminatory practices employed at the work place as well as within the family.

3941: 5621: 3225:

Smith, and with a private part of the body I don't think she needs to send a photo of her own private part to prove the first picture is of her, because, well, her body's private parts are private but the picture is labeled as being of her body part, and only if she denies that the first picture is of her body part might removal of the first picture not be required and only removal of the name might be the result.

1852:. It's also the best possible defence against allegations of bias, and future restorations of bad material, if we correctly cite studies which have been so badly misrepresented, as you have done today, instead of deleting them from the article. It makes my blood boil that Lightfoot-Klein's work has been used to promote the idea that women with FGM are not really sexually damaged. I think she deserves an apology. 1005:. The AP obituary, "But as she got older, her father worried that his daughter's mild condition would lead her into situations that could damage the family's reputation." So we appear to have a somewhat slow but otherwise normal female whose only fault was that she was a female. It might take me a year to do it correctly and without original research, but one sentence needs to be here. Thank you for your time. - 6095:

another article (such as an author article). Then a book description could be excluded on the ground that further information would be at the linked-to article, which would reduce the maintenance burden for this list when information might change. Chronological ordering is sensible since books often build on prior literature and other lists can reflect other groupings. Thanks for considering the list.

3899: 3391:(second translation). I've looked them all up. Several never married or were explicitly lesbian and three actually did have children according to Knowledge. That still leaves a list of amazing women writers which proves the charges I made here: Charlotte Brontë, Lou Andreas-Salomé, Christina Stead, Isak Dinesen, Katherine Mansfield, Virginia Woolf, Edith Wharton, Carson McCullers, and Djuna Barnes. - 7255: 5732: 5695: 297:

something to find out about; how is the term being used, in academic or journalistic sources? I think a strong section on women breaking into executive positions would improve the article. That was what I thought the term referred to, the archetype being the executive secretary, highly skilled and competent yet still locked into a lower caste and not considered for an actual executive position.

7397: 7301: 5720: 3254:

are immune to U.S. law. And probably some sites should not be contacted except through a lawyer if at all, because contact likely gives the site owner information about the complainant that could be used for blackmail; contact that is essentially anonymous can be ignored because the complainant's authenticity cannot be verified when anonymous.

3432:

improve my list (apparently not even those who have accused me of male chauvinism!), so it remained in its original state. 2) Even if we accept Pi's requirements for the list (I strongly disagree with him/her), someone who decides to remain childless for eugenic purposes (like Quisling and the two eugenicists) surely would meet the criteria?

1659:

kind messages in between) I had already guessed that she had tried to defuse a tense AN by bending her gender a bit. The first fellow who started the phrase cannot be blamed for not stalking my user page and clicking all the buttons, but I hope he'll try to avoid sexist phrasing a bit more in the future. So I consider the incident closed.

2058:. Neither article is great at the moment; they need some major cleanup. GS is 24.2 kb and AGS is 11.1 kb, so a straight content merge (before any cleanup or expansion) would put the resulting article at 35 kb - the point where you start to consider breaking up a larger article anyway. If anything, some GS content needs to be under AGS. 4669:"honor killing," then it would be non-neutral or OR for WP editors to decide that it doesn't meet our own definition of "honor". I believe there's been some discussion that the notability of at least some of these deaths resides in the label "honor killing," without which they may not have attracted international notice. 3149:

be justified due to the thorny legal issues of free-use user-provided images. Someone could also put an email to the good folks at Scarleteen; they know their stuff (they recently published a series of (obviously legal) vulva images for an anatomical awareness campaign) and might be amenable to contributing some images.

5421:"inspired" to participate, I'd like to see it. Everytime a new study or chart comes out (including the one I did) people just go "oh yeah things suck at Knowledge." Nothing seems to happen. If every editor encouraged a new female editor to participate, imagine what a real equal world of free knowledge we'd have. 5420:

This chart is just another tool in the "duh" factor about women and Knowledge; and everything else in the movement. We know we have low numbers, and we know we need to change it. Now we just need people to start stepping up and making change. If depressing numbers make a difference in the world being

4719:

Another thing that bothers me is that the impression being left is that anything labeled "honor killing" is so much worse than other reasons men kill women (or other men). Rape killing or rage killing or inheritance killing or she's leaving me for another man killing, oh, well, that's bad, but not as

4685:

What is interesting is that the person who submitted the requested move did it on the grounds that ALL the WP:RS used quotation marks around honor killing. (I missed that point because he kept calling them upside down commas.) I've asked him to prove that point since he's still annoyed about the name

4668:

On the phrase "honor killing" itself, I agree with Kaldari's remark above. Duels, for instance, were fought ostensibly over honor as defined by the participants, but we as individuals today might view that as a poor sort of honor. If the sources considered reliable for compiling an article call it an

4626:

Even though WIkiProject Islam hadn't bannered the article in question, the main article on honor killing makes it clear that this is a controversial subject in relation to Islam, and project members may have experience in dealing with the topic, whether or not the project has chosen to banner it. You

3185:

A difficult case is where a woman recognizes a photo, her name is not attached, but the photo was by her now ex-boyfriend and if she says anything he could blackmail her by threatening to put her name on it, whereas if she says nothing she relies on him to stay silent or at least quiet enough that no

3148:

Stupid question but... how could someone prove it's them? It's not like a face where you can make a positive ID. Even putting aside the personality difficulties, the technical side would be tricky. This might be a very weird case where fair-use images (from a medical textbook or similar source) might

3070:

So we require photographs of recognizable individuals taken in a private place to have permission, but we do not require photographs of recognizable individual's privates to have permission. Further, even legally obtained images may be deleted due to "moral issues" (presumably unless the people in it

2690:

Henrietta it looks as though you were right about it being porn. The original image (this one's got retouched skin tones; how tasteful) was uploaded to Commons by "Tracy and rick Anderson". Their other uploads are graphic images of fellatio. This side of Wikimedia is all a bit surprising to me I have

2587:

Well there's that, but there's a larger issue here: on porn websites they require for the ID of the individual whose picture was taken. (Don't ask how I know.) WP is not considered a porn site, but this is clearly porn. I mean, it's one of those things that you know it when you see it. I think I will

1888:

Yes, Jakew certainly does do that, and yes, papers like Lightfoot-Klein are hard to summarise. But if you think that was hard, Abusharaf was a densely written jungle of prose. SonicYouth sent me a PDF (there must be library restrictions that stopped her posting a link). I had to quote large sections

1873:

I've noticed that Jakew takes quotes out of context and uses them the way he wants to. Also, and I don't mean for this to sound presumptious, but a lot of people who haven't read studies a lot or been trained on how to read them probably would do a very bad job on summarizing them. I had to learn how

1658:

I have been glad to accept the apologies from the two administrators. The guy who closed (in good faith) the ANI (and had to remove the box) made an especially heartfelt apology (and had been helpful and kind the previous day). The ArbCom member's personality was known to me, and (having had received

183:

I do think that women get preferential treatment in some sectors, including on wikipedia. Witness blatantly unsupported claim of 66% of work done by women, still defended by female/ pro-feminist editors at wikipedia. Basically defending privilege (the privilege to have unsupported claims maintained

7417:

Regarding your aim to eliminate or reduce the occurrence of bride burning, Knowledge can help only by describing the topic as accurately as possible. You can show how people are affected, you can give quotes from observers, and you can make sure the horror is clear to the reader. However, you cannot

6207:

Thank you CarolMooreDC. I appreciate your insight. I wasn't sure whether previous uses of the phrase would fit into the scope of the article, as I'm sure people have used it to refer to different cultural/political phenomena. I wanted to capture the term in the sense that it is currently being used,

5402:

A summary of the data in the link: in January, known male editors on Knowledge made about 40,000 edits per day, except for the SOPA protest blackout day. Known female editors made about 2200 per day; a ratio of approximately one female edit to 18 male edits. The chart does not tell us how many edits

4645:

stating "The lies and slander that have been generated against Israel are every bit as false and unjust as the lies told to justify the honor killing of girls and women." Which shows the kind of POV I suspected lurked. I.e., painting the barbaric old tribal custom actions against women done by a few

4078:

Good wording! I'd go for that. (While it's probably the right template for the Goldberg page, the one thing I don't like that much about "This article needs attention from an expert on the subject. ... WikiProject Gender Studies or the Gender Studies Portal may be able to help recruit an expert." is

3458:

But did they? I've seen no evidence that their choice to be childless was correlated with their beliefs. I don't have evidence (can't as say I know any personally...) but I suspect that no eugenicist would think themself unfit to reproduce. After all, to them, they're responsible enough to have even

3204:

Even if it does not violate laws on obscenity, it might violate laws on commercially using someone's likeness without their consent, a body of law in the U.S. (probably state laws) that typically applies to facial portraits, signatures, names, and so on. Probably her entitlement to removal would not

728:

I think that arguing on an out of the way page is less useful than taking the issue to a centralized place, like the talk page guidelines discussion page, which seems to be what's actually at issue (whether offensive comments should be removed). That's why I hatted the discussion in the first place.

484:

In the NPR article Russlynn Ali (Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, Department of Education) used the phrases "hostile environment" and "hostile environment and discrimination" in meaningful ways. This might support an article if the concept is in, or comes into, general use. This seems to be the

7456:

I want to keep the section about "Gender differences", which is the main argument behind the double burden or the second shift. As Lyn Craig states in "Is There Really a Second Shift, and If so, Who Does It? A Time-Diary Investigation", "Women do work a second shift in the sense of having a greater

6468:

or duplicating current content. I'm open to expanding the background and providing more context. I think the current scope describes a real phenomenon that warrants a standalone article though. That said, there's lots of room for improvement here. While the legislation is being passed by one party,

6094:

I watch it but it's not an editing priority for me. Go for it. I'd argue for title and author only, and another detail only when needed to distinguish from an easily confused book that would not be on the list. A criterion for inclusion could be that there's an article on it or it's a major part of

4824:

During the past 11 months or so, with a few exceptions (mostly consisting of vandalism and revert), most substantial editing has been by myself, Kaldari, Mmyers1976, and Danavanell. The current revision contains a significant amount of text (I'd guess around 13kb including the citations) that I've

4521:

The presence in the article title of the word honor or honour lends editorial credence to the killing, acknowledging that it is okay to carry out such murders in some cultures. Knowledge must not give even the slightest hint of support in the article title. The more neutral title is "killing of" or

4385:

I agree (and didn't know about the professional dance conflict). Also, the picture seems not to illustrate the captioned point, since I think I can tell that rotation is clockwise by the temporal sequence of facial features appearing and disappearing, the lengths of on-body illumination reflections

3253:

None of this addresses the copying of the picture to other websites. Probably some sites' owners believe everything on Knowledge can be freely copied and will proceed to copy pictures without regard to limitations in Wikimedia. Probably some sites that make copies are hosted outside of the U.S. and

3224:

As to whether she has to prove that the picture is of her, if it is identified as being her, that's probably enough; the law against commercially using a likeness probably applies to (hypothetical) Chris Smith's face even if the face actually belonged to a look-alike but is captioned as being Chris

3122:

I've been concerned about this for a long time, but trying to do something about is like wading through whale blubber in a pair of flip-flops. The issue of age is one concern, but even ignoring that, we are asking that women who find someone has posted an inappropriate photograph of them must write

2650:

is basically unillustrated. Dicks are that important. There is no article dedicated to the genitals of female non-human animals. (I am reminded of the probably apocryphal story of male scientists baffled by the bizarre corkscrew shaped phalluses of some duck species until a female scientist had the

1390:

I have recently been contributing a lot of research to women of color issues, and these were some of the women I'm concerned with not having articles of their own. Right now I'm writing broad articles on the issues, but I suppose eventually I will start writing short biographical articles. Is there

886:

Very much missed. Its very sad people are continually being driven off wiki, dispite a clear need for them to be here. This will probably only continue to worsen with others. Knowledge is like a certain political party in power for years; head buried in the sand saying nothings wrong, nothing needs

606:

has a large focus on K-12 education more so than university. Also, one might argue the Greek life setting of the Yale incident was not all that "education", especially because my understanding is that the offending organization was not a registered campus organization. I think this clearly needs to

4980:

Copyediting points: The syntactical conditional ("... would ....") shouldn't be used for the past in an encyclopedia; either the event happened or it didn't. And setting the References section to three columns may be burdensome for users of cell phones and other small screens. On capitalization, I

4743:

Go for it. I don't have the expertise. I'd delay renaming, since articles generally should be globalized until there's almost no more room and then it might help to break out national movements into their own articles, leaving this for everywhere else and as a worldwide summary at that time. Thank

4656:

with details. The new article of with "Honor killing" retained that name but it was quite clear there was no community consensus to change all the others. And I think it's pretty much a wikipedia principle that when two editors object to a name change the person who made the original change should

3994:

I see this as a bad precedent because soon we'd have every group clammering for one and there would be "Smacks of Antisemitism/Racism/Islamophobia/Anti-GLBT/Anti-Military/Anti-Republican Party/etc" templates and all of that could become quite subjective and be used to stifle debate. Let's face it,

2293:

Hi Slim, thanks for the link to the right discussion forum! Of course you're right, the consent of an adult subject is an important issue. It's violating the subject's privacy if there's no consent and I agree with everything you said. In regard to our immediate concern though, in terms of cutting

6005:

I assume this goes for volunteer work of all kind, including political organizing? (Of course, eventually some of that is "paid" in that "volunteers" get jobs when their candidate wins. An interesting valuation in itself!! Don't know if anyone's done any work on that, though I'm sure commentators

4810:

From the article's inception in 2005 until it came to my attention about a year ago, a significant majority of the edits were back-and-forth-and-back-and-forth-ad-absurdium conflicts over minor points. Back in October 2009, there was a brief controversy over a massive personal essay from a blog -

4592:

I left a note on Jayjg's talk page asking if he could clarify the canvassing accusation. I didn't see anything wrong with Carol's notice personally. On the issue of the titles, I agree they should be decided on a case by case basis and reflect whatever wording is used by reliable sources. I don't

4124:

I think that Pharos' suggestion is better and I agree with the points made by Carol and Sarah. The term "gender-neutrality" is likely to be provocative in many unhelpful ways and it is also but harder to understand than the need for greater diversity, which aligns with both NPOV and globalisation

3739:

Hi there. Do you want to start a new article from scratch, or edit an existing article that needs expansion? If you go to the WP:Feminism "main page" for this project, on the lower right side there's a box with the header "Articles needing attention" -- some of them have had a lot of new material

2667:

Which prompts me to say that my point is mainly "What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander." The greater difficulty of documenting animal vaginas is a point well taken; but it seems like a good encyclopedic goal to at least try to treat male/female, human/animal genitalia in a comparably

2267:

Hi Ruby and Henrietta, I know there have been discussions about these issues for a long time, but I haven't taken part in them myself because they are so frustrating. I'm therefore not up to speed. My own concern has always been whether the fully informed consent of the subject has been obtained,

6427:

The context helps, though as a radical antiauthoritarian female who easily could be indefinitely detained for crimes never described in a law signed by a Democrat and barely protested by any Democratic women, you'll have to pardon my disgust that the larger context of ALL males and patriarchy vs

3431:

In addition to my other comments on the the talk page and my user talk, I must present two issues here. 1) Gender bias? The editor who originally made the list (that would be me, actually) was unaware of any historically notable women who chose to remain childless. Not a single editor decided to

2602:

I've replaced the picture with an illustration. We'll see how long that lasts. But this really calls into question a something WP has really overlooked. Just because a girl has pubic hair does not mean she's of age. Are these pictures being accounted for at all? I have no problem with penises or

621:

Add information about the Yale complaint to the other articles, but also create a main article about that incident itself. It received national news coverage and is thus notable, it might be titled, 2011 Yale sexual harassment complaint but make up the best title you can think of. Yale is rather

7768:

Justification: Even though the education achievements of women in Russia are higher then those of men and their participation in the labor market is roughly equal to the male participation, the wage gap in this country is persistent and substantial. Russia’s case therefore becomes of particular

6463:

Naming and scope were and are significant hurdles with this article. The title doesn't have to stay; it seemed the common name and there wasn't anything to disambiguate it from at the moment. Still, this is one of many things deemed a "war on women" and this chapter is admittedly part of a much

2465:

I'm not sure if it's a matter of choice, or a matter of biology. It's fairly simple to get a picture of either human genitalia, or of an animal penis (hell, there's a whole museum of em), but I suspect it's rather difficult to get a picture of an animal vagina. There is one picture of an animal

1601:

In most cases, disputes with administrators should be resolved with the normal dispute resolution process. If the dispute reflects seriously on a user's administrative capacity (blatant misuse of administrative tools, gross or persistent misjudgment or conduct issues), or dialog fails, then the

4905:

I did some editing of your text. Feel free to pick up where I left off. Problems I recognized included tense (the present tense was used where the past tense should have been), placement of ref elements before periods ending sentences (they should follow them), dashes and spaces in page ranges

4811:

22kb in size, or slightly larger than the article in its entire current state - which was eventually removed as irrelevant POV commentary. Were these use as a propaganda page? Quite possibly. Most of the text that lasted until 2011, though, was extant from the very first version of the article.

3743:

If you want to start a new article, I'm not sure where you could start for ideas. Since you're studying Poli Sci, you may be studying some areas that have only limited coverage on Knowledge. Whatever you write, aim high, aim for Feature Article status. (-; Welcome too, it's good to see a fresh

3243:

Discussions about a person and the history of past images may be damaging, such as for a career, even if the images themselves are gone. Provision for anonymizing discussions, including not only her name but also information potentially identifying her, should be included. (Anonymizing permits

3087:

I agree with you, as someone who has worked in the photography industry (and even been dragged in front of a camera myself a few times), we have model releases. I don't know why "body parts" have to determine why permission should not be provided. If I was any person with my junk slapped up on

3018:

It's like having a modeling release. I'm not opposed. I also hate the idea that we need it that badly, that there is that much "nudity" on Wikimedia? Again, I think we should at least hit up the legal team. I met with a few folks this past week at WMf, when I get home (this upcoming week) I'll

3003:

of US law, WP is exempt from monitoring of photos, but I will also say that Wikimedia is already self-monitored by users--copyright issues and such. I don't believe suggesting that we monitor for underage content is much of a hassle to ask for considering that copyrighted material is so easily

4787:

I am surprised that so many have been happy to ignore the reality of "Rape Culture" in it's entirety affecting millions of women, men and children on a global scale. It would appear that past editing has trivialised the subject and reality, and compromised the "Five Pillars". I too think that

4777:

The the gross failure to address Synonyms such as "Rapism", "Rape-Enabling Culture", "Rape-Supportive Culture" and "Culture Of Rape" which have "Parallel Use" causes Systemic Bias and Institutional/System Racism, as it would seem that some only want to bother with media uses of the term "Rape

296:

Yes, I was surprised when I looked at it to see that the concept had seemingly been applied to nearly every group that is discriminated against when I had understood the term to apply generally to women. The question is whether there are reliable sources which support the broader use; that is

7506:

Hi ThatRavengirl. Normally I would advise students against improving articles that are already at Good Article status, but I believe that your plans could result in an overall improvement the article. Your references look good and I like most of your planned revisions. When discussing racial

5403:

were made by people who do not disclose their gender, nor does it tell us what was the practical value of each edit, whether it is male or female editors that put more effort into each separate "Save page" contribution. It does not say how many of the known-gender edits were quickly reverted.

1645:

I know the traditional technique for stopping sexist behavior: Turn and face the jerk with squared sholdiers, firmly wag the finger once into a pointing position, and firmly state "Stop that! Nobody likes to be treated like that"; the technique's supposed to rekindle fear/respect of maternal

4825:

written, as well as substantial work by those three editors. If you believe I am using this as a propaganda page, then please say so. Knowledge is an open system; my mistakes are there for everyone to see, and if I edit with a bias then it's for the best to let me know so I can correct it.

6196:. News archive and scholar searches surely could find more. So I think the various significant uses of the term should be discussed and the current use should be no more than 1/2 the article. Otherwise you may get some strong opposition, complaints about WP:Undue and an AfD. Good luck! 917:

I added to your discussion on the talk page section "Stereotype." I would like the intro to declare the article is explicitly about the feminine stereotype if that is what is being defended. Also, there needs to be references for the stereotypes that are there, especially in the lead.

597:

Would there be a way to create a newer standalone article that would largely encompass practices such as that which have been discussed at Yale (and thankfully, largely in an academic tone that lends itself to broader discussion within the context of a Knowledge article?) Our article on

2627:

There are a few images on commons where the subject's anatomy allows one to see the vaginal opening without spreading the labia manually, but they are either unlabeled or have non-English labels. I'm not sure how to make labels on images. I've added a few medical images to the article.

2268:

even for images of apparently adult women. If not, what can a woman do if she sees an image of herself on Knowledge—write to OTRS and ask them to take down the image of her body parts? The onus should not be on the subject to sort this out, but on the uploader. There are discussions

7704: 6053:

This definitely sounds like an article that needs in-depth research due to the complex issues involved. I would also recommend gutting the reactions section (which is basically just a long list currently) and limiting it to more thorough descriptions of the most notable reactions.

1833:

is my summary of the 1989 article. I will add the newer articles to it later. But I would like to note, and I am sure you are aware, 1989 is considered very outdated for this sort of information. Most scientists and researchers will only consider research within the past 10 years.

330:

We are a class on Poverty, Gender, and Human Development at Rice University. The reason you have noticed a lot of recent activity is that adding to the WikiProjects is a step in our process that is due tonight. It is assigned by our Professor so there is not a page on it any

3123:

to an anonymous person (possibly a teenage boy) at OTRS, and must say, perhaps providing her real name, "Excuse me, you have published a photograph of my vagina without my permission; please remove it." Does the woman then have to prove the image is of her? The mind boggles.

3999:

offensive things in many males eyes. And we can expect the best organized groups with the most representation here would push hard for and get a template that would censor wikipedia on their favorite topics. It's best to put up NPOV tag and then bring the problem here.

7457:

workload than men, not just doing a greater share of domestic work. Mothers have greater workloads than fathers because they are doing more work activities at any one time, and also because more of their non-work activities are combined with the care of children" (166).

1848:

Thank you Henrietta. That's a brilliant new section you've written which properly represents the study. I've only just seen it. Yes 1989 is outdated but Lightfoot-Klein is a very important study which started her 30 years of work against FGM (see her website, books and

2436:

Henrietta, could you please amend the title at the Village Pump so it's 100% clear it's a proposed information page about an existing policy, and not a proposed policy. I think the first contributor had a point - it could go astray rather quickly unless that's clear.

6208:

which I think is referring more to the post-2010 elections. Perhaps I need a different title. Then again, the current raft of legislative initiatives is part of a trend that has been building for some time and can be best understood in that context. Off to research.

5198:

Sadly, I don't. Unfortunately, I have the same problem with my Hot Articles bot. I've had to turn away all new requests unless they involve a very small number of articles due to strains on the toolserver. I can't wait until there's an alternative to the toolserver.

3472:

Also, most of the females listed as partners have their own articles. Yet the entire list was specifically formatted with information about the males and nothing about the females. If this information belongs anywhere, it's something like the not-currently-existing

120:

Possibly, although the Men's Rights Movement seems to be quite active on Knowledge with or without canvassing. It would probably be worth keeping an eye on that user's contribs to check for evidence of sockpuppetry, although right now they only have a single edit.

3214:

As to contacting through OTRS and the possibility that a teenage boy might be the one resolving an OTRS issue, she has the option of writing a letter to Wikimedia Foundation's office, where it's likelier, although not guaranteed, a responsible adult will open her

311:

Can I ask what class project this is related to? I'm just curious as we seem to have a lot of people showing up here all the sudden :) Is there a page about the project somewhere? Is it Robin Kelley's Women and Human Rights class at Georgetown or a different one?

2294:

through objections and prevarications, I'm hoping that a focus on the need to exclude potential child pornography for legal reasons might meet with some success. There must be a lawyer somewhere in WMF. Henrietta, do you want to start the topic there or shall I?

2727:

I'd never thought about age of consent in regard to these photos before. I'm fairly blasé about this kind of stuff, but this is a very serious question. How do we know that sexually explicit photos don't use minors? We don't require release forms, for instance.

3785:

as proposer. I see two advantages: (1) The category would help with locating and fixing problematic articles. (2) The presence of the template would send a signal to the readership that we are aware of and working on the problem, and encourage participation.

2998:

I haven't gotten much of a response (except Sarah's above), but I believe based on other conversations here there won't be much of an upset if I say this is endorsed by the Feminist Project on the petition. I will also point out that I have been told due to

3835:

Given the rabid reactions of many when the topic of gender bias comes up, we would probably be better off using existing NPOV tags with explanations on the talk page. I think explicitly identifying articles as gender biased will just shut down discussion.

1815:

I'll help with it, since i know a quite a bit about it. I was a psyc student so fortunately I have experience with summing up these sort of studies too. I'm just staying far from the talk page because some of those people trigger my anger just a bit too

1428: 4448:

I had to check to see whether it was a drive-by review or a clerical oversight but no, it's really true. This is fantastic news, it's such an important article for the project to get right, heartiest of congratulations and gratitude to the authors!

7762: 6963:

And people need to keep the pro-Putin editors from adding irrelevant nonsense such as "she was x months pregnant at the time" to the article. Bad enough these neo-Stalinists have locked away innocent women without they take over Knowledge as well.

4838:

As for the worry over the 1975 date: please see Kaldari's recent edit (summary: Origins and usage: adding info about 1974 use and consolidating some redundant wording) where they provide a citation for a 1974 use of the word in a feminist context.

3371:" person it's even weirder reading that page!). Why do they even need to be so detailed? I brought this up on the gender gap list, as well. And the photos used are just as bad. I don't have time this second to work on it, but, it does interest me! 770: 3336:

Unless someone can come up with a damn good reason, that list is going into the trash bin. Something like 5-10% of couples have no kids.... are we supposed to list 5-10% of famous married people? That'll be a long list, and totally worthless.

7583: 1357: 4928:

That seems awfully lazy for that other editor to just revert, rather than allow for copyediting (or do it themselves) - especially since your revisions looked pretty good, Genevieve. Then again, not everyone is a copyeditor like I am...

4686:

staying the same. If it is true in these WP:RS, I don't know if it is in the others. So that's another issue. My last message states my main concern, given the overall circumstances of who is putting in what and why in my estimation.

1038:

I've added the banner to Misogyny (really needs it, be careful not to get banned fixing it), Femininity, Gender Roles (Should be renamed Gender Stereotypes), and Misandry (need to bust up the misconception that misandry is feminism).

5710: 7831: 4014:

Changed to neutral, after finding the above template and mulling over Carol's comments....I think a number of us who write about feminist topics have seen the effects of opposing parties. It's something to seriously think about.

4767:

As the person/editor referred to - I have been addressing the origins of the term and it's first known usage which is in fact the 1975 Film "Rape Culture" a view supported by the Director Margaret Lazarus. Citations provided in

2712:

Yeah I noticed it was an adult only account or something--locked for viewing for non-users, and I have lost my flickr password so I assumed as much. Sadly, I've seen enough porn incidentally for one women to know what it looks

2547:

That image has to be a porn picture. There is no other way. I cannot imagine any other time someone would spread a woman's labia like that other than for extreme penetration. Also, I'm not even sure if that is an adult, which

2180:

As others have noted elsewheres, some guys get their jollies getting articles deleted; another notch in their sorry gun, evidently. Maybe we need some limitation on the number of articles an individual editor can nominate for

1210: 843:

Or consider taking a break. I have been from most contentious articles anyway - (though still haven't been getting much writing done off wiki ;-(. But one day the itch to get in there will return, and perhaps yours will too!

4543:

you mentioned, supposedly justified on the basis of "canvassing." You took no position in posting your notice, and merely informed the project of the move discussion. The deletion of your post is a clear misapplication of

3052:. Unfortunately this incident just goes to show how many people do not know about the legal policies of Knowledge, and even if you are right, they will argue you to death. In any event, I think I'm going to create a page 3607:, cette phrase, qui annonçait son entreprise pour la libération des femmes: « Ce sexe trop faible et trop longtemps opprimé est prêt à secouer le joug d'un esclavage honteux. »", which translates roughly to: "...in her 7507:

differences, it is important that the article maintain a worldwide view. If you are going to discuss racial differences, take care not to make blanket statements that may be true in one country but are not in another.

1966: 6024:

Sounds like a good project for the DC edit-a-thon friday - for those who know enough about math to know which women would be considered really important (as opposed to notable for whatever other tangential reasons).

3527:

Hmm, it looks like only the 2nd volume is online for some reason (in French). The second volume mentions "liberation" three times, but doesn't specifically use the phrase "women's liberation". Does that help at all?

5615: 3474: 1648:

Kaldari is the only one who can do that in Wiki-text! She stopped all the denial and caused some nervous and hopefully thoughtful silence simply by stating that a female editor "was courting the WP fraternity" was

7483:

Eichler, Margrit, Patricia Albanese. 2007. “What is Household Work? A Critique of Assumptions Underlying Empirical Studies of Housework and an Alternative Approach”. The Canadian Journal of Sociology. 32:227-258.

5166:

Merci Sarah. Thank you for the information. I don't know how to programming . It would be really relevant for the project can be desire you to help us to program her Women'sport page most popular in the month ?

4646:

individuals to symbolize a whole religion and then excuse the military aggression of Israel and western states against members of that religion. (And killing thousands and even tens of thousand women with bombs.)

7652: 485:

case, based on the NPR piece, but we need to find in use in a government document, although its extensive use the media in connection with the Yale charges has probably introduced the concept into the language.

7692: 4550:

it is perfectly acceptable to notify other editors of ongoing discussions, provided that it is done with the intent to improve the quality of the discussion by broadening participation to more fully achieve

1914:

I did quite a bit of work to remove bias and he added more sources in to put his bias back in... Sigh.... I think this will become an edit war if we are not careful. I will have to clean up his mess later.--

3033:

I've kinda decided that this is sort of an uphill battle. Too many people are blase about it and just don't care. I guess it's better to let Wikimedia have problems when it comes rather than try to prevent

7495:

Short, Susan E., Frances K. Goldscheider, and Berna M. Torr. 2006. “Less Help for Mother: The Decline in Coresidential Female Support for the Mothers of Young Children, 1880-2000”. Demography. 43:617-629.

6047: 5707:

My instincts from years of um, managing people, and the occasional large groups of people, was telling me the same thing... I actually posted very very similar stuff to what this says it's almost eerie:

7469:

add a section called "Family structure" with subsections called "Nuclear families", "Non-nuclear families", which would include single parent households, "Heterosexual couples", and "Homosexual couples"

7463:

add a section about the effects of economic differences on the double burden with subsections called "Middle-class families" and "Non-middle-class families", which would include the poor and the wealthy

4029:

Alternate wording suggestion: "The examples and perspective in this article may not represent a gender-diverse view of the subject. Please improve this article and discuss the issue on the talk page".--

1284:

She sounds like a great role model for women trying to break the glass ceiling. And yet, I can find almost no other mention of her online. No Knowledge entry. Nothing. History is very strange sometimes.

7477:

Chafetz, Janet Saltzman, Jacqueline Hagan. 1996. “The Gender Division of Labor and Family Changes in Industrial Societies: A Theoretical Accounting”. Journal of Comparative Family Studies. 27:187-219.

5826: 1215: 4863: 2352: 7005: 1542: 1256: 6913:

Damn, yesterday while in the Castro there were posters saying "Free Pussy Riot," I even thought about taking a photo and got too busy to do so. What types of improvements do you think it can use?

5644:: Female Knowledge editors are less likely to contribute to Knowledge due to gender differences in confidence in expertise to contribute and lower confidence in the value of their contribution. " 5457:

It's also sad to see that the gap is roughly the same or worse in all the major languages. The only ones that I've seen that are better are Dutch and Hebrew. Maybe we could ask them for pointers.

7492:

Ruijter, Esther de, Judith K. Treas, and Philip N. Cohen. 2005. “Outsourcing the Gender Factory: Living Arrangements and Service Expenditures on Female and Male Tasks”. Social Forces. 84:305-322.

7861: 1971: 1548: 7657: 6514:

Describing special interest groups would help make it seem less like a partisan adventure. Just wish the phrase "Obama's War on Civil Liberties" had enough traction to support an article. :-(

5811:

I am concerned that a decision was made to delete the page on Sandra Fluke, so that she only apears in Knowledge as a victim of Rush Limbaugh. The question is - is this a gendered decision? --

3647:

Well done. Kaldari I am happy to see you know this subject and have improved this article. It just sounded ridiculous to say the phrase was first used in 1964. You've fixed that now. Thanks. -

1484: 5584: 1874:

to do it in school myself so I can't imagine what a person who doesn't read scientific studies regularly would do when summing it up, but it would probably be a lot like what happened here.--

6321:

To avoid the criticism that not every slogan from one party against the other warrants an article, I'd present evidence that it was especially widely used or historically recognized, as was

3556: 6069: 4318:

The article looks very good. I just combined multiple citations (57 down to 30) and left a note on the talk page explaining how to do it in the future. Other than that, it looks excellent.

2510:. The hands in the image and the extreme spread of the vagina are unnecessary, and the caption doesn't mention that the pubic area is shaved. There are better images of the human vulva in 1640:

Soon after I wrote the complaint to them on AN, I started to receive messages of support and apologies (even from people who had not said the "grow a pair"), which was deeply appreciated.

6573:

issue and keep the recent partisan issue to no more than 20%. Then the editor who deleted it would have to approached in the proper manner, preferably with a few of us signing on to it.

2360:

I'm just going to say this: Regardless of one's stance, there are so many fucking dumbasses who contribute to Commons, I'm just glad I never have to meet most of these people in person.

472:, several years ago but this is actually something quite different; it's not rape or assault so much as a hostile climate, although that was certainly present at the military academies. 7141: 2017: 1631:

Thanks for your support and suggestions. I have had a tough weekend and start of a week with the ANI/AN thread, some legitimate but a lot imho not, and I was tired of facing antagonism.

7974: 3019:

investigate and we can write them (email me if you want?) just to see what they think. I just want to be post-vacation.....I have a lot of WP:Feminism talk messages to follow up on =)

7584: 6227:

though I don't know if some would consider that too partisan a sounding article. I guess others will have to opine on that - or should I say WILL opine on that if they don't like it!

5055:. Then I need of yours fellback, to know of what you think of the text. I also need to make correct the text (spelling and syntax) saddened for the bad quality of my English language 1176: 1159: 1230:

FYI, the offending editor was exposed by others as a sockpuppet of AFolkSingersBeard and reverted his changes so it now has a balanced presentation of this important feminist topic.

7570: 7489:

Greenstein, Theodore N. 1996. “Husbands’ Participation in Domestic Labor: Interactive Effects of Wives’ and Husbands’ Gender Ideologies”. Journal of Marriage and Family. 58:585-595.

2566:

That didn't occur to me (the age question I mean) but it raises a serious issue. I'm surprised that Wikimedia accepts this type of image without a declaration of the subject's age.

2204: 4065:

for reasons stated by others. Plus templates with existing comments sometimes easier to remember/find than the empty ones you then have to remember how to appropriately fill out.

1167: 5085:, and the press went nuts over how great she looks "for her age," as they say. I think Yoko has some new music out, I follow her Twitter. I have to say, I'm a fan of both! Also, 2074:

LATER: Carolmooredc, I did not put the link on the main project page; that was Laprofre. My edit was merely fixing the redlink; you're free to remove the whole link if you wish.

8015: 4900: 7472:

excluding "See also", "References", and "Further reading", the last section would be the above-mentioned "Effects of the double burden" with a subsection about "Health effects"

5589: 6868: 4848: 4797: 3065: 3013: 2612: 2346: 2152: 1843: 7501:

Torr, Berna Miller, Susan E. Short. 2004. “Second Births and the Second Shift: A Research Note on Gender Equity and Fertility”. Population and Development Review. 30:109-130.

6192:

and a rather biased POV narrowly vs. Republicans for this election. The phrase has been used for a longtime by many women, including in book titles. See some examples with

1195: 3774:"The examples and perspective in this article may not represent a gender-neutral view of the subject. Please improve this article and discuss the issue on the talk page" or 1536: 946:

I am adding "Computer Programming" to the list of traditionally feminine occupations because the first modern computer programmers were women. Please join the discussion.

6037: 5959: 5744: 3158: 2493: 2324: 2232: 1562:

requested that the editor avoid sexist terminology like "grow a pair", particularly when addressing editors (me) displaying the Livestrong userbox (about testicle cancer).

4611:

FYI, I did learn one important thing on canvassing issue. One should look at which Wikiprojects are listed on the page and go to one or more of those first. In this case

3751:

Hey Kristen, we have a LOT of articles that need research and improvement. What areas are you mainly interested in? History? Comtemporary issues? Biographies? 3rd World?

3097: 3043: 3028: 2991: 2973: 2166: 2134: 1802: 1788: 1772: 1746: 1272: 5831: 5315: 5271:

I'm inclined to delete the article, as it has no useful content, and we normally do women's rights articles by country, not by continent. Looks like we need to create a

4183: 1684: 1613: 465: 135:

Agree on some articles it's hard to tell. In the current state of play its more likely that edits to this project page or other feminism related pages were targeted but

1522: 699:(b) personal attacks, including racial, ethnic, sexual, gender-related and religious slurs, and derogatory references to groups such as social classes or nationalities; 4938: 4788:

oversight by experienced editors would be highly valuable. I fear that in the past the page has been edited as a Propaganda Page and not a valid source for reference.

4253: 3280: 2430: 2392: 1470: 1408: 7292: 7023:

Yes, I would probably put Feminist journals and Feminist magazines directly under Feminist publications, and make the changes you suggest to Camera Obscura (journal):

6989: 6367: 6104: 4753: 4267: 4204: 3380: 3303: 2737: 2722: 2597: 2582: 2561: 2453: 2258: 2117: 1923: 1909: 1883: 1868: 1825: 1724: 1073: 7855: 7805: 7347: 7264: 7240: 6940: 6579: 6428:

women is being ignored and partisan concerns expressed. If I was a Republican I'd be out to delete but not so shant. (That's who I meant by those who might object.)

6125: 5929: 5452: 4726: 4530: 4024: 4006: 3877: 3866: 3294:

Legally? A significantly lesser penalty than rape. Personally? Not as traumatizing as rape but should it happen to me I would feel m privacy exceptionally violated.

2109: 1239: 899: 649: 177: 7177: 6823: 5430: 5117:

Well at least you didn't out yourself by admitting you watched junky celebrity news programming....I swear it was on after the news, that's the only reason why! :)

5031: 4959: 4915: 4615:

was particularly relevant. Wikiproject Pakistan also listed which might have given some of the same demographics as Wikiproject Islam. Oi, so much too learn still!

4587: 3362: 3346: 3080: 1322: 193: 7756: 7557: 7539: 7341:

Note: COI issue resolved; the editor left before the other one resolved -- after I realized he had some good points. But now lost energy to do something about it.

6638: 5678: 5519: 5506: 5493: 5385: 5361: 5193: 5161: 5143: 4295: 3441: 3400: 3324: 3131: 3057: 3035: 3005: 2983: 2714: 2604: 2589: 2553: 2485: 2470:. I'm not sure it'd add much to the article. I agree that there needs to be more species selection; I'm not sure I can pass judgement on where the problem arises. 2338: 2144: 2126: 1915: 1875: 1835: 1817: 1764: 1716: 1528: 1462: 1400: 1314: 853: 590: 566: 550: 534: 508: 492: 373: 262: 7517: 6402: 5351: 5333: 5284: 4395: 3825: 3486: 2542: 2479: 2083: 2067: 1148: 1001:, "Rosemary was a woman, and there was a dread fear of pregnancy, disease and disgrace,” author Laurence Leamer wrote in an unauthorized Kennedy biography called 980: 304: 289: 7427: 7251:

has lots of keeps. But only two women in the category, and I just joined. So feel free to do so and to add the user box to your use page, which I also just did.

6973: 6894: 6837: 6775: 6520: 6479: 6434: 6233: 6218: 6202: 6012: 5969: 5176: 5067: 4692: 4678: 4663: 4650: 4636: 4612: 4562: 4513: 4434: 4420: 4380: 4362: 4327: 4210: 4133: 4115: 3777:"The gender neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved." 3704: 3690: 3515: 3418: 2424: 2369: 2198: 2041: 1949:

It failed again, so please feel free to take a look at the article again. The reviewer left some vague comments as to why it did not pass. Thanks in advance! :)

1440: 1091: 881: 798: 6958: 6922: 6757: 6031: 5466: 5295: 5257: 5208: 5126: 5112: 5098: 4621: 4606: 4576: 3718: 2920: 2908: 1958: 872:

Geneviève, I've seen your contributions time and time again. Thank you for all your work, and I hope you'll decide to come back someday. You'll be much missed.

723: 709: 409: 391: 7687:

demonstrates what we like to see in regards to the level of detail and number of references. For your topic, you have some options. You could add a section to

7332: 7171: 6627: 6616: 5993: 5820: 5605: 5415: 4152: 4071: 4055: 4038: 3845: 2310: 2280: 1369: 688: 479: 452: 211: 165: 7386: 7365: 7206: 7197:. The omission of the date from the original sig block appears to have been erroneous. This retrospective date information is added now to support archiving. 7133: 7115: 7097: 7079: 7054: 6797: 6746: 5799: 5779: 5479: 3656: 3624: 3582: 3568: 3551: 3537: 3453: 2226: 887:

to be done to attract people over, we'll keep on truckin like everythings going to be ok......and then comes the future, opps where did all our supporters go?

867: 629: 616: 340: 321: 236: 4457: 3804: 3506:

has a human pregnancy and animal gestation/pregnancy page. I think it's perfectly acceptable, and will benefit readers greatly, since it is a popular topic.

3437: 2818: 1308: 1118: 642: 7993: 6325:. Otherwise, it would qualify to be a redirect or a disambiguation page. And, if there's an article listing political attack slogans, this likely would fit. 6063: 5953: 4540: 4313: 4229: 3760: 2864: 1033: 7717: 7222: 6176: 6018: 5553: 5243: 4864: 4482: 4097: 3681: 3642: 3205:

be satisfied by simply removing her name; once the association between name and picture has been made, removal of the whole thing can probably be required.

2882: 2707: 2677: 2660: 2637: 1513: 1048: 955: 941: 927: 831: 130: 115: 7676: 7321: 5651:: Female contributors are less likely to contribute to Knowledge because they prefer to share and collaborate rather than delete and change other's work." 2950: 1278: 1245: 756: 738: 667: 147: 1552: 1327:

If you can generate some lists, or provide sources for generating such lists, we can start the process of creating those articles. See, for example, the

603: 7791:

I think that Knowledge would be improved through the addition of an article discussing the gender pay gap in Russia. We already have an article for the

6565:

article already had been deleted, which I didn't know, and so this new version also was deleted immediately. I don't see User:Gobonobo participating in

4653: 5391: 4488: 185: 6300:

and close variants arose inside feminist discourse, more within radical feminist discourse, but not much elsewhere, to my knowledge; the phrases with

4881: 4875: 2329: 8001: 7017: 5228: 3496: 1328: 2779: 2334: 6667: 5752: 5540:

We have talked about how these statistics are menial at best due to most women not declaring gender. Most of these conversations take place on the

4947: 4884: 3433: 1396: 4581:

Given that a couple editors (neutral and evolved) have agree with me here, I think I'll put it back, but update to note it involves six articles.

7699:(though the latter article would be broader than your focus). Your literature looks to be good start. These sources also looked promising to me: 2979: 2937: 2890: 2805: 2694: 2569: 2529: 2440: 2297: 2245: 2097: 1896: 1855: 6690:

article needs a cleanup and neutralising, because it seems to be mostly from a "hurr hurr women are such bitches" viewpoint that killed off the

6151: 5725: 5571: 5561: 2459: 7605: 4732: 3353:

The presence of Hitler, Lenin, Quisling and two eugenicists tells me that it's someone pushing an agenda. That section is going, and quickly.

997:, "I wonder how it is for you, Harold? If I don't have a woman for three days, I get terrible headaches." The Associated Press quote from her 7572: 6464:

longer story (of the backlash against feminism, of the American birth control debate, and of patriarchy). I limited scope to avoid violating

6156: 5934: 1692: 1574: 1570: 1561: 433: 81: 76: 71: 59: 7523: 5660:: Female contributors are less likely to contribute to Knowledge because they have less discretionary time available to spend contributing". 7836: 7638: 2239: 1220: 469: 7724:

Thank you very much. I'm still working on the literature reviews and data collection. You advice and recommended article are very helpful.

5265: 4144:

I think Carol's suggest of using existing teamplates with a comment field is a better way to go. Otherwise I agree with Danger's remarks--

714:

Well I tried deleting it twice and was reverted. Perhaps others could share their views. (Click "show" next to "Much ado about nothing.")

7591: 7433: 5999: 4304:

It looks like the article has been created. It is quite an impressive piece of work. Please help to copyedit and revise it as necessary.

4275: 227:

The "Women's participation in different occupations" section needs to be converted into a navigation template (preferably footer style).

7849:

Better late than never opening up a talk section. If AnonIps keep reverting without talking, try to get the page protected for a month.

7359:

Searching "individual freedom is limited third wave feminism" in books and scholar google, got some interesting results. Give it a try.

3728: 2831:

There is most definitely a bias in using nude or semi-nude women to illustrate Knowledge articles. I've personally seen this debated at

1587: 1581: 7460:

add a section about the effects of racial differences on the double burden with subsections of "White families" and "Minority families"

7353: 1461:

Yeah I added to the requested articles, but it's such a large list it seems they'd get lost, so that sounds like a really good idea. --

7194: 5836: 790:

Thanks for the heads-up, you are in the right place yes. I've commented at the talkpage and will watch the article for any flare-ups.

7578: 7270: 5974: 4405: 3000: 1893:

I needed to explain why the sentence I deleted misquoted and misrepresented the source, and I don't have a month to write a summary.

1604:

WP:Wikiquette might be a place to complain. Or just tell them that you left a complaint here and maybe they'll feel somewhat chided.

1360:

to try the automated approach. Sidenote: The ratio in the original list of as-yet-uncreated articles was 1619 women to 8384 men.) --

1260: 986: 6656: 1168: 7480:

Craig, Lyn. 2007. “Is There Really a Second Shift, and If so, Who Does It? A Time-Diary Investigation” Feminist Review. 86:149-170.

5248:

Wow, what a book. I think I just added "Hellfire" to another potential Halloween costume concept. Thanks for starting the article!

5002:(I indented all replies one additional step, since when I first replied I hadn't noticed that the original post was also indented.) 3871:

This is a good way to deal with these issues. Use general templates that include spaces for personal comments, as the two do below.

3406: 1160: 7182: 5715: 4495: 2467: 7597: 7373:

it's more about striving to increase freedom as opposed to simply needing to recognize it into existence. That makes sense now. —

6902: 6193: 4593:

really buy the argument that calling an honor killing an honor killing supports it being 'honorable'. We also have an article on

4442: 2964:

We should probably also bring this up with legal at the Wikimedia Foundation. This needs to move beyond just "the people," IMHO.

1707: 622:

similar to the military academies, one expects more from the men, although Yale students are not subject to military discipline.

5758:

Just to warn you, there's a chance that such a specific article will be deleted. You may want to try expanding articles such as

4217: 1755:

of mutilation. I don't think they quite get that. Also cutting could imply that a woman has done it to herself (whether through

1427:

I think the right thing to do would be to create an articles-wanted list in project space first -- perhaps with some title like

461: 379: 103: 7729:

I have finished my article and you (and others who interest in the topic) could be able to see it. The title of the article is

7628: 7441: 7404: 5303: 3674: 858:

Genevieve, there are those who would like us to think this is a man's world, but it is, and always has been, a person's world.

7453:

shift "Health effects of the double burden" farther down as a subsection under a section called "Effects of the double burden"

1737:

Put in my two cents. Looks like the consensus is going to be at FGM. Really disturbing that this argument even has to be had.

1285: 7816: 7529:

I think sex trafficking is within this project's scope. I've added banners for the Crime and Sexuality WikiProjects as well.

7486:

Gimenez-Nadal, Jose Ignacio, Almudena Sevilla-Sanz. 2011. “The Time-Crunch Paradox”. Social Indicators Research. 102:181-196.

6569:

so I assume s/he didn't know. If you want to try again, emphasize the long history of the use of the phrase to deal with the

3477:

which would be gender-neutral and without commentary, and support the hundreds and thousands of people who fit the category.

3309: 1201: 818:

Aronoel, I couldn't find that section, is it still there? I just added a talk section to discuss the lack of a worldview in

580: 94: 7930: 5714:, 10 days before this! Thanks, don't feel it isn't appreciated this project just doesn't get as much traffic as it should do 3385:

Thanks to you both for the replies. Thanks also to Judith Thurman who listed childfree women writers in her introduction to

679:

So apparently removing crude humor about vaginas now requires consensus, while all other vandalism can be deleted on sight.

7333: 7060: 5590: 3962: 3615:: 'the sex too low and too long oppressed is ready to shake the yoke of a shameful slavery.'". That was published in 1911. 3315: 2398: 2157:

Perhaps a polite question on their talk pages about why they keep doing that might make them more conscious of their bias.

89: 6279:

and a contrary view that both sides weren't battling each other because women didn't have the means to, an arguable point.

5366: 1596: 242: 6819: 6086: 5435:

I do have to say - it is kind of funny to see that WikiNews is all dudes. No women on the chart. The funny thing is that

5396: 4888: 3686: 1518: 744: 153: 47: 17: 7371: 4280: 1263:

do exist. You could challenge the deletion and announce it here, but people should read the arguments before opining.

356:(I hope it's not too OT): Is it ok for me to delete this very old, very offensive unsigned comment made by an IP to the 5964: 5600: 3768: 2048: 1392: 1154: 998: 809: 7795:. Be sure to write for the lay reader (most of our readers will not be familiar with Blinder-Oaxaca decompositions). 7737: 7327: 5073: 4759: 1105:

I've added an original research tag to the Philosophy section of Misogyny. If you have any input, please join in at

6650: 6342:

I'd rename the Reaction section as Criticism, since other kinds of reaction are more or less throughout the article.

4049:

Definitely better, since if it was used by other groups above it would not have the same bite. Will think about it.

7821: 4878: 3195:

On the other hand, once her name is attached, there's less risk to demanding its removal from Wikimedia properties.

2125:

I'm not surprised at all. The same people (albeit different from these) also pop up to delete women's categories.--

1391:

anyway I can add these women to a database of women without articles? Here are the articles I have written so far:

1106: 637: 361: 6766:

60 pages are still in the Feminism books category. Is this proposed move (to Category:Feminist books) still ok? --

6632:

As I predicted the article is up for AfD. There are legitimate criticisms of it, but deleting it would be absurd.

5324:

since I couldn't figure out a good criteria for speedy deletion. If you come up with one, feel free to change it.

2143:

is kept. I nominated it and it was speedily kept because three nominations for deletes went on three years ago. --

7615: 6130: 5152:

fall under WikiProject:Feminism. I'm sure a "popular page" bot can be programmed for the women's sports project.

4883:. You have eliminate all my work without any discussion with me. I inform you that the text is in discussion on 4858: 4793: 4641:

Thanks for saying that, since it has been lurking in my mind. Especially since I found a Phyllis Chesler article

4337: 2093: 1830: 1702: 1502: 1494: 1489: 1253:

don't see this as a particularly notable intersection, Native American Women Writers, Artists etc. would be fine

1124: 837: 650: 5306:

that would allow deletion without discussion. Does anyone have any advice as to how I should tag this thing? --

7991: 7843: 7837: 7803: 7733:. I would be glad to here any feedback since this is my first wiki article. Thank you for your previous advice. 7715: 7537: 7515: 6614: 6477: 6400: 6216: 6042: 4091: 3798: 3263:

A procedure should be present and posted, and it should leave her as much choice and privacy as the law allows.

2013: 1099: 599: 524: 457: 219: 4470: 3405:

Boy oh boy. I got pretty wound up over this and would like to thank Pi for replying on the article talk page.

3244:

preserving discussion for policy and precedential value but without readers knowing who's being talked about.)

2934:

Sorry I don't speak German but I've added a translation request tag to the article just in case it's helpful.

7730: 7696: 7154:

Added some info. Not much, but a small section. There's a different article with more extensive information (

6875: 6785: 6730: 6714: 6680: 6074: 4642: 4235: 2032:. And probably could to put at least a half dozen organizations under each category to get the ball rolling. 1941: 1332: 1125: 1056: 6751:

Explanation: people don't research existing categories before create new ones. Solution above: go for it!!

6304:

arose more from men as an ironic belittling of genderal disagreements but did not arise much in scholarship.

7155: 6851: 5052: 4178: 3330: 2405: 2399: 1679: 1595:

While removing the user box was probably appropriate, the obvious jokes by the admins were not. Looking at

1296: 1190: 965: 7124:

tag to Camera Obscura's talk page?" For the time being I'll assume adding Feminism tag also reasonable. --

6694:

article (thank god). Again, the way to neutralise it comes under this project more than anything, I think.

5373: 3573:

Thanks! Google finds 5 pages with "libération des femmes" on them. So I had better cite my edit now. :-) -

7792: 7248: 7229: 6847: 6698: 6087: 5321: 5272: 5045: 3061: 3039: 3009: 2987: 2718: 2608: 2593: 2557: 2489: 2342: 2182: 2148: 2130: 1919: 1890: 1879: 1839: 1821: 1768: 1720: 1532: 1466: 1404: 1318: 643: 400:. Also, when there is a lot of old stuff on a page you can archive it, after oking with talk page first. 7980: 2982:

and I have been discussing it and no one seems to think it's an issue except for us and one other guy.--

694: 6115: 5924: 5882: 5610: 4789: 4347: 3542:

Yes, Kaldari, it helps a great deal. Do you have a link to the French? I looked up English in Amazon. -

2956: 2498:

You've made a good point Cynwolfe. I think there are signs of bias, probably unconscious. I think both

2055: 1643:

A true hero of Knowledge is Kaldari, who has now twice appeared and forced people to deal with sexism.

1313:

There are many great women who are not on WP, and it shocks me that they don't have their own pages. --

1292: 932:

Also, I'd be interested in your input on my recent addition to the talk for changing the Main Picture.

38: 5669:

Um... I'm a woman. Don't know about the others it was sent to, but what exactly is the point of this?

1336: 7763:

Gender wage gap in Russia Knowledge:USEP/Courses/Labor/Gender II: Economics of Gender (Gunseli Berik)

7183: 7146: 6120: 5944:. This collection of studies is essential reading, but it will take some time to get through it all. 5738: 4463: 4189: 2928: 673: 423: 7892: 5711:

Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility_enforcement/Proposed_decision#Humour_has_a-a_place

4524:

That's the benefit of community input. And certainly makes issue more relevant to this noticeboard.

139:

there are about 6 sysops with eyes on this so the problem will likely die down but not go away =/ --

7553: 7466:

eliminate the current 4th ("Types of double burdens") and 5th (Single vs married parents") sections

7067: 5347: 5311: 4873:

rvt to last known good version. The new text is poorly written, non-neutral, and not very accurate

4130: 2029: 771:

AfD for Iris Wedgwood: Should women simply be merged into the lives of their husbands and children?

498: 7548:

Thanks for the the response Gobonobo. And for putting up the banners too. They sure help. Regards.

6980:

Yeah...the entire "orgy" conversation is totally unnecessary and makes me uncomfortable, too. :-/

5184:

but it looks like they aren't taking any new requests. Perhaps Kaldari knows some secret I don't!

2780:

Commons_talk:Sexual_content#Release_form_for_sexual_images_as_mitigation_against_child_pornography

2335:

Commons_talk:Sexual_content#Release_form_for_sexual_images_as_mitigation_against_child_pornography

822:. Elements of this section imply that feminism is misandry. Can anyone else comment over there? 7202: 6969: 6861: 6815: 6807: 6781: 6724: 6709: 6704: 6663: 6363: 6100: 5027: 4934: 4911: 4844: 4749: 4553:

Project talk pages are listed first among the appropriate ways to solicit broader participation.

4508: 4416: 4391: 4323: 4249: 3821: 3482: 3358: 3342: 3299: 3276: 3154: 2475: 2388: 2079: 2063: 1069: 877: 658:

Deletion discussion closed as keep. The article could still use work, but what article couldn't.

583:, which is cited as a "main" article, does not contain material about educational environments. 464:

should go, although it will support an article of its own. We did one on the Air Force Academy,

7811: 7783:

Section 4: analysis of the wage gap in Russia according to the Oxaca and Blinder decomposition.

7236: 6985: 6936: 6918: 6843: 6810:

seems a good option to me. The other tow have few articles and have been recently created. --

5940:

For modern facts on abortion worldwide your first stop is the respected Guttmacher Institute's

5674: 5549: 5489: 5471:

Can anyone see what the figures are for the German Knowledge? I couldn't get that one to work.

5448: 5426: 5253: 5189: 5157: 5122: 5094: 4263: 4200: 4111: 4020: 3862: 3714: 3511: 3376: 3093: 3024: 2969: 2916: 2519: 2365: 2194: 2162: 2140: 2037: 1954: 1798: 1784: 1742: 1609: 1588:

Then an arbcom administrator repeated the phrase "grow a pair" at the Administrator Noticeboard

1268: 1235: 976: 849: 775: 705: 556: 540: 405: 369: 362:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Glass_ceiling&diff=374995045&oldid=367543187

220: 161: 6946: 6928: 4657:

change it back. As I say, I don't now how to do that myself after a couple name change moves.

7945: 7423: 7288: 6075: 5949: 5566: 5411: 4594: 4572: 4170: 3288: 3088:

Commons without know, I'd be rather pissed, it just makes sense to have a release. blarghhh..

2377: 2105: 1671: 1182: 1057: 1018: 895: 626: 587: 563: 547: 531: 505: 489: 476: 301: 286: 268: 259: 189: 6945:

The main thing that needs to be done is digesting all the international press coverage into

3709:

I left them a cup of tea. :D Woo! Now let's write 100 new feminism oriented articles... ;-)

3053: 7907: 7435: 7129: 7093: 7006: 6771: 6182: 6136: 6081: 5805: 5787: 5767: 5759: 5381: 5172: 5139: 5063: 4955: 4944: 4896: 4737: 3652: 3578: 3547: 3414: 3396: 2523: 2001: 1010: 804: 782: 336: 7705:

Occupational segregation and gender discrimination in labor markets: Thailand and Viet Nam

3186:

one she deals with ever realizes what's happening. With an ex, that's probably unreliable.

8: 7549: 7215: 6570: 6189: 6110: 5976: 5816: 5343: 5307: 4450: 4286:

This sounds very exciting. Let us know when we can take a look and if you need any help.

4126: 2325:

w:Knowledge:Village_pump_(idea_lab)#Does_WP_have_a_policy_for_sexually_explicit_photos.3F

1697: 1436: 1365: 791: 397: 3912:

Please expand the article to include this information. Further details may exist on the

428: 7989: 7801: 7713: 7684: 7664: 7565: 7535: 7513: 7198: 7167: 6965: 6907: 6811: 6659: 6612: 6475: 6398: 6359: 6214: 6096: 5897: 5023: 4930: 4907: 4840: 4745: 4674: 4632: 4558: 4412: 4387: 4376: 4342: 4319: 4245: 4086: 3817: 3793: 3733: 3521: 3478: 3450: 3354: 3338: 3295: 3272: 3150: 2944: 2897: 2812: 2733: 2701: 2673: 2576: 2536: 2471: 2447: 2384: 2304: 2252: 2075: 2059: 2009: 1903: 1862: 1114: 1065: 909: 873: 819: 253: 6683:; it's been three weeks and no-one's contributed, but I don't know exactly to proceed. 6566: 279: 7970: 7851: 7752: 7688: 7672: 7645: 7361: 7343: 7260: 7232: 7159: 7147: 7111: 7075: 7050: 6981: 6954: 6932: 6914: 6890: 6833: 6793: 6753: 6742: 6634: 6575: 6516: 6430: 6229: 6198: 6171: 6059: 6027: 6008: 5989: 5795: 5786:

That sounds like a good idea. Plus you'll get a lot more people reading your work at

5775: 5670: 5545: 5485: 5462: 5444: 5422: 5329: 5291: 5280: 5249: 5239: 5204: 5185: 5153: 5118: 5108: 5090: 4722: 4688: 4659: 4617: 4602: 4583: 4545: 4539:

I am completely uninvolved in and ignorant of any particulars here, but I did notice

4526: 4478: 4430: 4358: 4309: 4291: 4259: 4225: 4196: 4107: 4067: 4051: 4016: 4002: 3873: 3858: 3756: 3710: 3700: 3638: 3620: 3588: 3564: 3533: 3507: 3372: 3320: 3089: 3020: 2965: 2912: 2878: 2860: 2420: 2361: 2222: 2190: 2158: 2033: 1950: 1794: 1780: 1738: 1605: 1264: 1231: 1087: 1044: 1029: 972: 951: 937: 923: 863: 845: 827: 752: 719: 701: 684: 448: 401: 387: 365: 317: 232: 207: 157: 126: 111: 7879: 4891:. Can you maintaining to present to the group your arguments and opinions. Thanks -- 4354: 7744: 7691:

on inequality in the labor market. Alternatively, you could create the new article

7419: 7284: 7011: 6691: 5945: 5912: 5763: 5407: 4568: 4034: 3841: 3630: 3600: 3076: 2656: 2633: 2101: 1509: 1304: 1222: 1079: 994: 891: 734: 663: 623: 612: 584: 560: 544: 528: 502: 486: 473: 298: 283: 256: 247: 7498:

Silver, Hilary. 1993. “Homework and Domestic Work”. Sociological Forum. 8:181-204.

6469:

it is largely a push from advocacy groups and the text could better reflect that.

5941: 5131:

Little deception. No women's sport page is popular in January. It is frustrating.

4981:

think the French language often lower-cases words that in English are capitalized.

4567:

I came to the same conclusion, Cynwolfe. The canvassing accusation was unfounded.

3857:

for an example - it's for gender studies. Perhaps it was previously mentioned...?

3056:

so people know about the policy and an incident like this does not happen again.--

3049: 7826: 7604:

List yourself as a participant in the WikiProject, by adding your username here:

7447:

include a subsection about the sexual division of labor under the history section

7374: 7309: 7125: 7089: 6767: 6622: 6465: 5512: 5499: 5472: 5377: 5372:

merci Sarah, ceci est très important comme célébration féministe צעד שמיני חשוב

5168: 5135: 5059: 4951: 4892: 4371:

Well, your lack of self control gave me my best laugh of the morning, so thanks!

4244:

The AfD has been closed, with the decision being to keep the article. Thank you.

3854: 3648: 3574: 3543: 3410: 3392: 3124: 2273: 1495: 1141: 1006: 332: 6733:- Books exploring the topic of feminism either from a neutral or critical stance 4519:

An editor pointed out an opposite possible problem with this renaming, writing:

3234:

If removal is carried out, that should include removal from past page revisions.

184:

on UN/ NGO websites.) Can you really blame people for being angry/ frustrated?

46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

5812: 5406:

Still, it is clear that the goal of gender parity is still painfully far away.

3387: 3048:

Just so anyone reading knows, we got an email from legal letting us know about

1432: 1361: 1211:

Category:African American Women and Category:African American women in politics

776: 7414:

A fine choice for your project; lots of work needed on that important article.

5625: 5511:

The skwiki isn't so bad. Forgive my ignorance, but I don't know what that is.

5132: 5056: 2978:

I agree definitely! I just didn't know where I should go to bring it up. Both

8009: 7984: 7885: 7876:

Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work

7796: 7708: 7530: 7508: 7450:

edit "Pre modern day" and "Modern day" into "Pre-WWII" and "WWII-modern day"

7406: 7272: 7163: 6828:"Feminism books" is too ambiguous. Are anti-feminist books "feminism books"? 6687: 6607: 6470: 6393: 6209: 6166: 6161: 6146: 6141: 5578: 5082: 4670: 4628: 4554: 4372: 4081: 3788: 3447: 2729: 2669: 2269: 2186: 2005: 1760: 1110: 357: 4195:

Thanks for giving us the heads up! I shared it on the gender gap list also!

2802:

The Commons discussion includes links to all four discussions on Knowledge.

1779:

Excellent points. I feel like it also downplays the horrific nature of FGM.

1431:-- and when we have a start on that, see what can be done with it later. -- 7966: 7748: 7668: 7107: 7071: 7046: 6950: 6886: 6829: 6789: 6738: 6562: 6389: 6252:

The Republican War Against Women: An Insider's Report from Behind the Lines

6055: 5985: 5867: 5852: 5791: 5771: 5594: 5458: 5325: 5276: 5235: 5200: 5104: 5086: 5051:

Hello, 5 day later regrettably few participants in the writing of the page

4598: 4474: 4426: 4305: 4287: 4236: 4221: 3813: 3752: 3696: 3634: 3616: 3560: 3529: 2874: 2856: 2416: 2412: 2218: 1083: 1040: 1025: 947: 933: 919: 859: 823: 783: 748: 715: 680: 444: 383: 313: 228: 203: 122: 107: 5616:

Gender gap connected to conflict aversion and lower confidence among women

5541: 2518:- which also contains a human penis. Regarding bias, the contrast between 7216: 6673: 5573: 5234:

I should also mention it's the only Mark Twain novel lacking an article.

4145: 4030: 3837: 3072: 2844: 2758:

I'd like to suggest that further discussion is directed to Commons, here:

2652: 2643: 2629: 1300: 730: 659: 608: 440: 140: 7874:

Collier, B., & Bear, J. (2012). Conflict, criticism, or confidence.

7653:

Creation of a page that documents rape comments during the 2012 election

1564:

The sexist remark was not redacted, and nobody else objected the sexism.

1335:

for previous work on providing kicking-off points for article creation.

7832:

Discussion of broadening definition of "fringe" topics/writers/bios/etc

2848: 1135: 1082:

since one doesn't exist yet. Does anyone want to collaborate on this?

910: 7700: 2330:

w:Knowledge:Village_pump_(policy)#Policies_against_possible_child_porn

2217:, Diana Strassmann, uses Knowledge in one of the courses she teaches. 4106:

I agree about that "recruiting" statement. It's rather intimidating!

3503: 3368: 2870: 2832: 2515: 1756: 1399:. Particularly in the journalism article are quite a few redlinks. -- 156:

is appropriate for editors found actively actualizing that nonsense.

5182: 2139:

Horrendously they will put this up for deletion but this article on

2092:

The merge actually happened back in June following consensus on the

7624:

Tag relevant talk pages of articles and other relevant pages using

6879:

neutral in tone, with perhaps the other 2 included as subcategories

2511: 811: 7585:

Knowledge:Requests for comment/Abortion advocacy movement coverage

7418:

tell the reader what to do. We are descriptive, not prescriptive.

5770:

article is especially poor and could stand significant expansion.

1850: 1582:

repeated the phrase "grow a pair" at the Administrator Noticeboard

1429:

Knowledge:WikiProject Feminism/Notable women articles for creation

1216:

Good Q on Humanities RefDesk re legal majority for women in the UK

993:

Our article about her brother says he was promiscuous and said to

7786:

Section 5: Russia’s official’s position in regard to the wage gap

7621:

to your userpage, which lists you as a member of the WikiProject.

3960:

parameter to this template to explain the issue with the article.

2506:

should show human genitalia but I'm not happy about the image in

2383:

Article was deleted for BLP violations, which was probably fair.

1793:

But that's not me being "neutral" towards a "neutral subject" :P

6657:

Talk:War_on_Women#.22Attack.22.2F.22Used_by_democrats.22_in_lead

5620: 4597:, but that doesn't mean the military is actually intelligent ;) 3898: 7981:

When Gloria Steinem and Samuel Delany clashed over Wonder Woman

7658:

Proposed Revisions and New Entry: Gender Inequality in Thailand

7088:

Thank you. In the spirit of boldness I've moved the article. --

4950:. You are welcome to participate in it. Merci , Thanks ,תודה -- 4500: 4355:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/Talk:Main_Page#Spinning_Dancer.gif

3680:

Woohoo! Do we have a door prize for lucky member number 100? —

2852: 2507: 2503: 1751:

I have put in the argument, as you will see, that cutting is a

7777:

Section 2: the Oxaca and Blinder decomposition of the wage gap

5585:

feminism sidebar, wife selling, husband-selling, and Mary Daly

7862:

Shouldn't Wonder Woman be a part of the Wikiproject Feminism?

6223:

I think a more specific name would be better, soemthing like

4649:

On a technical note you can read the update on this issue at

2836: 2647: 2499: 1575:

removing the Livestrong (testicle-cancer survivor) user-box

1358:

User:The Anome/Find-A-Grave famous people filtered by gender

7774:

Section 1: short description of the concept of the wage gap

7142:

U of U Professor Ditches Term Papers for Knowledge Articles

2907:

And this is happening on Commons Village Pump as of today:

2840: 2588:

be reporting this and trying to find a more suitable pic.--

1299:. Nothing specific to feminism though, as far as I know. -- 466:

2003 United States Air Force Academy sexual assault scandal

7878:- CSCW ’12 (p. 383). New York, New York, USA: ACM Press. 6048:

Revising and Expanding "Female Homicides in Ciudad Juarez"

3633:

is even more relevant than Buisson's. It dates from 1789.

3502:

I think it's a great idea to have a split in the article.

7747:, which seems to be the same person unless I'm mistaken. 7743:

There seems to be some confusion about her name. We have

2484:

Oh christ I cannot believe I looked at that cow vagina.--

7943: 7701:

Gender, values, and intentions to move in rural Thailand

5827:

Restructuring and Expanding "Human Trafficking in Nepal"

5498:

I'd be interested to see how the women are doing there.

4613:

Knowledge talk:WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography‎

4216:

Although it's not very scientific, the list of redlinks

3910:

about Goldberg's ideas and controversy surrounding them.

3605:

Bonheur primitif de l'homme ou les rêveries patriotiques

1169:

WP:BLP and complainants in rape cases: Publicizing names

7045:

However I think zines are probably OK under magazines.

6388:

Thank you for the feedback. I've posted the article at

5378: