Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women writers/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

More sections

Hi. Can we have a place where we can create a list of 1) Redlinks for articles that need to be created and 2) Link articles that need cleanup? MontOther (talk) 19:52, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

• Good suggestions. I created new sections for Redlink articles and Articles for improvement. Let's work on lists. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:30, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

My list of Spanish writers. emijrp (talk) 10:46, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Can anyone suggest entries? There's several Brazilian women writers who need an article in English. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 17:06, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

I've got a list going for writers. Dkriegls has a list for Who's Who in Contemporary Women's Writing. Dsp13 has missing entries from British and American Women Writers and Early women novelists, Chinese women poets, and Writing African-American Women. Category:Literary awards honoring women probably has some articles with redlinks too. gobonobo ^{+ c} 14:03, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, @Gobonobo:! Great lists, for sure. My last GA, Modesta Avila, started as a redlink on your Gender Gap red list, so I appreciate the value of redlists. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:58, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Also List of biographical dictionaries of women writers in English has redlinks, as do some pages for particular biographical dictionaries linked to from there.54.240.197.233 (talk) 17:29, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

As this talkpage will eventually be archived, what might be best practices for a WP to point to editors' redlists? @Missvain: and @Keilana: do you have any insights as to how WP:WikiProject Women artists and WP:WikiProject Women scientists have handled this issue? --Rosiestep (talk) 14:58, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

We have been super informal about running our worklist(s) so I'm not sure I'm the best person to ask. I'd say that linking to other worklists can't hurt though! Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 16:43, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi! Great work on starting this group. So happy to see this happening. We started a worklist, inspired by WP Women Scientists, if you scroll down on the main WP Artists page you'll see a section called "How you can help." Seems to come in handy - we also promote it when we can to people on social media :) Missvain (talk) 02:22, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Scope and bot request

For WikiProject Women artists we set up a bot request to automatically add the project banner to article talk pages. If we want to do the same thing, there are instructions at User talk:AnomieBOT under 'WikiProjectTagger run'. We can basically pick the categories (perhaps Category:Women writers and most of its subcategories) and let the bot do the work. Is the scope of this project just biographies of women writers? Should works by women writers be included as well? gobonobo ^{+ c} 15:33, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Bot request

Good idea. Looks like the first step is requesting permission from related projects so I left notes at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography#Banner header for new WP and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Literature#Banner header for new WP. Can you think of any other projects which should be notified? --Rosiestep (talk) 16:45, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

I think since we'd only be adding this project's banner to talk pages, that we only need permission from this project's members. Unless we'd be somehow modifying the project banners for WikiProject Biography or Literature, I don't think we need their permission to proceed (though they might have useful input). gobonobo ^{+ c} 17:02, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Feel free to add or strike categories from this list:

Good job on a great list! I'm in awe to think these women writers are finally going to have a WikiProject of their own (pausing, taking a deep breath, recognizing the importance of the moment). Let's do them proud! --Rosiestep (talk) 01:01, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

I think we might be ready for the bot request. We can always add anything we missed later. We just need the consent of our members. What do you say @Keilana:, @Montanabw:, @Figureskatingfan:, @Dr. Blofeld:, @Monumenteer2014camper:? Do the categories in the collapsed table above look okay? gobonobo ^{+ c} 14:34, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

I'd probably use a div col 3 to make it seem less long..♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:20, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Done. As for the categories, look good to me. I hope the bot won't be confused and put the same tag three times on one article if it is in multiple or non-diffusing categories. Also, I discovered that there are "short story writer" categories as well as those for novelists and poets. Personally, yes, I think works could be included too, but not sure if the bot can figure that out unless they are flagged in some fashion. Montanabw^(talk) 16:40, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

The bot is running now. If something goes wrong, post to User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/WikiProjectWorker to stop the run. Anomie⚔ 01:55, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

The run is now complete. 18417 talk pages were tagged, 17486 for articles. Anomie⚔ 22:40, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

It would have been complete, were it not for an editor misunderstanding the project's scope - these reverts need reverting. INeverCry, will you be doing that yourself? --Redrose64 (talk) 23:39, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Done. I think this was just a misunderstanding as we failed to update the project's scope after making a decision here on the talk page. gobonobo ^{+ c} 05:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Anomie! gobonobo ^{+ c} 05:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Project scope

Good question. Let's talk about it, i.e. include works by women writers? --Rosiestep (talk) 16:45, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

I've listed the subcategories of Category:Women writers above. I think we should exclude singer-songwriters. If we're going to include individual works as well, it would probably mean including most of Category:Literature by women. gobonobo ^{+ c} 18:30, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

IMHO, let's not include Category:Literature by women for now, but if it makes sense to add it down the road, we could readdress. --Rosiestep (talk) 00:36, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

That sounds like a good plan. I've struck the singer-songwriter categories and added Category:Literary awards honoring women. gobonobo ^{+ c} 06:42, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

I'd be OK adding the literature category now, if we're going to do a bot request. FWIW, WikiProject Horse racing has something upwards of 9,000 articles tagged, so I'm not really fretting about the numbers, the more we can automate, the better. Montanabw^(talk) 16:42, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

@Rosiestep: Not sure if you saw the above comment from Montanabw. You had previously mentioned not including the literature categories. I think we have consensus for the categories that are listed so far. Let me know and I can add the subcategories from Category:Literature by women as well. gobonobo ^{+ c} 01:42, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm cool with whatever the consensus decides. When it was first mentioned, I felt we had our hands full with just the bios, but now that we're a couple of weeks into the project, I'm feeling less overwhelmed, so, yup, let's include the lit cats. --Rosiestep (talk) 03:22, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

 Done I've added the lit cats, striking or excluding the subcats for songs, albums and libretti. gobonobo ^{+ c} 02:41, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

I've made the request here. I've also struck a few categories that might have some false positives for the project. Probably they're mostly within scope, but I'll go through them manually just to be sure. The categories are: Category:Chick lit novels‎, Category:Black feminist books‎, Category:Womanist literature‎, Category:Womanist novels‎ and Category:Womanist writers‎. I've also asked that article class be copied from other projects' banners. gobonobo ^{+ c} 14:00, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

We've included Category:Literary awards honoring women in the project scope. Are there awards outside that cat which honor women writers? --Rosiestep (talk) 14:44, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Missing categories

I've had bloggers on my mind, so (eventually) we'll need a category, Category:Women bloggers, when someone has the time and inclination... hmm... maybe an AWB project that would interest @Ser Amantio di Nicolao:? Plus:

• Category:Women letter writers
• Category:Women encyclopedists
• Category:Women columnists‎
• Category:Women copywriters
• Category:Women magazine writers
• Category:Women pamphlet writers
• Category:Women role-playing game writers
• Category:Women sermon writers
• Category:Women speech writers
• Category:Women textbook writers
• Category:Women technical writers

What else? --Rosiestep (talk) 01:01, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Sure - if you need me to AWB anything, just drop me a note. I'd be happy to help out. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 04:24, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

If you create any of the red-linked categories, please be sure to set them up in a way that complies with WP:EGRS, particularly in respect to ghettoization (WP:GHETTO). gobonobo ^{+ c} 07:11, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

I've moved this conversation into a new section. Let's consider the viability of the redlinked cats in the future, but not as part of the initial bot-enabling request. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:00, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

@Rosiestep: I created Category:Women encyclopedists but I can only find two articles!! Pathetic. Extreme bias. I think that should be a target to fill with at least 20.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:16, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Some missing names here.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:01, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

I've crossed Category:Women encyclopedists off the missing list and added it to the bot list. Btw, "pathetic" sums it up nicely. --Rosiestep (talk) 05:53, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Userbox for project participants

Mentioning here that we could use a participant userbox in case someone is interested in creating it. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:49, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Some image possibilities: gobonobo ^{+ c} 16:56, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

• 
  Sappho
• 
  Arundhati Roy
• 
  Christine de Pizan
• 
  Toni Morrison
• 
  Alice Walker

Branding

I created a userbox (photo of J. K. Rowling) and an invitation (image of Mary Wollstonecraft). The banner header currently has a photo of Maya Angelou. With a background in business, I recognize that multiple images won't work in branding a project. We need to choose one. That one image will be used in four places: the project infobox, the userbox, the invitation, and the banner header. I think the image could change from time to time and it will be fun to make the change as the project grows and ages. Regarding color background for the invitation and userbox, I spent a lot of time playing around with different colors, but in the end chose white, as in, a blank sheet of paper.

My recommendation for branding the start-up is J. K. Rowling or Mary Wollstonecraft or Mary Shelley. Enid Blyton holding a book has some merit. Most any woman writer with an FA biography would be fine. What are your thoughts/suggestions? --Rosiestep (talk) 04:00, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

• 
  Maya Angelou
• 
  Mary Shelley
• 
  Mary Wollstonecraft

• We could also use the image on a project barnstar. --Rosiestep (talk) 04:17, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Banner

Personally I like the Mary Shelley image as it looks more "classical", I'd use that on all things, including tags and project boxes.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:58, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

There is no necessity to use the same image throughout - the project infobox image could be duplicated on the talk page banner, though it needs to look good at a smaller size. But for the userbox, a different image might be suitable due to the small size of usefboxen... the current image that's in there now (Mary Shelley) is pretty, but it won't work in a userbox because it is too monochromatic - gold on gold, doesn't jump out at you. I frankly think it's too monochromatic for the infobox too, but that's my take as a person who has done some graphic design. I favor a "classical" image, as it was so much harder for women to get credit for their work back in the day, and I have long believed that we modern folks stand on the shoulders of giants, but that's JMO. I also don't think we should use an image of a living person for this, for any number of drama-inspiring reasons; better to use someone who is deceased. I am not particularly fond of any of the above images, save maybe the Mayr Wollstonecraft one (which I do like for having great contrast), and maybe the Sappho one, because I don't think they look very good at small sizes. What about a photo of someone from the early 20th century? Montanabw^(talk) 16:54, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Well, I don't really give a shit either way, I hate userboxes. And I hate infoboxes..  :-) Actually I think you're right that the Wollstonecraft one is better because of the contrast and also has the classical look. And it would honor Wadewitz of course.. I say Wollstonecraft.. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:00, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm fine with this. Does anyone oppose it? --Rosiestep (talk) 05:31, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Looks great I think. Just right.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:24, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

• Support: I like it! Montanabw^(talk) 23:53, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Invitation

Here are some options for the Invite.

Invitation to the project/image options

Hello WikiProject Women writers/Archive 1! Thank you for your contributions to articles related to Women writers. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject Women writers, a WikiProject aimed at improving the quality of articles about women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the WikiProject Women writers page for more information. Feel free to sign your name under "Members". I look forward to your involvement! Hello WikiProject Women writers/Archive 1! Thank you for your contributions to articles related to Women writers. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject Women writers, a WikiProject aimed at improving the quality of articles about women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the WikiProject Women writers page for more information. Feel free to sign your name under "Members". I look forward to your involvement! George Eliot Elizabeth Barrett Browning Mary Shelley Maya Angelou Louisa May Alcott Jacqueline Susann Emily Bronte Emily Dickinson Murasaki Shikibu

Or go ahead and suggest others. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:44, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm coming around to your idea of using the same image across all - the Mary Wollstonecroft image really works well. I definitely think it needs to be in the userbox (the JK Rowling one is too busy and it's a living person. That said, Virginia Woolf is also kind of fun. But perhaps keep a beige background for whatever is chosen, the lavender is kind of bleech and the white is no fun... I like the warm color of old parchiment feeling of a beige-family shade. Montanabw^(talk) 04:00, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

(They are seeing a method to my madness). Invitation color options:

Invitation to the project/background color options

Beige: Hello WikiProject Women writers/Archive 1! Thank you for your contributions to articles related to Women writers. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject Women writers, a WikiProject aimed at improving the quality of articles about women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the WikiProject Women writers page for more information. Feel free to sign your name under "Members". I look forward to your involvement! Isabelline (colour) (parchment): Hello WikiProject Women writers/Archive 1! Thank you for your contributions to articles related to Women writers. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject Women writers, a WikiProject aimed at improving the quality of articles about women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the WikiProject Women writers page for more information. Feel free to sign your name under "Members". I look forward to your involvement! Metallic gold: Hello WikiProject Women writers/Archive 1! Thank you for your contributions to articles related to Women writers. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject Women writers, a WikiProject aimed at improving the quality of articles about women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the WikiProject Women writers page for more information. Feel free to sign your name under "Members". I look forward to your involvement!

Or go ahead and suggest others. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:53, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Beige. Across the board. Montanabw^(talk) 00:53, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Missing articles

I suggest we create as extensive a missing article bank as we possibly can. It would be good to access a lot of women's biographical dictionaries indexes, like that Argentine one Rosie and to list missing entries!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:39, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Dr. B, for starting Wikipedia:WikiProject Women writers/Missing articles. I'll move User:Rosiestep/Gender Gap#Writers into this page. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:06, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Featured articles

There are 26 FAs about women writers, which is quite respectable. I don't know how to update the table on the project page, but it would be nice to reflect the work that's been done in the area. Stats are here. Victoria (tk) 21:01, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

I put a bot on the project page, but not being all that experienced with bots, I don't know why it hasn't worked yet. I wonder if we should just list them by hand. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:53, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Don't list them by hand, that's an endless chore. Find the bot operator and ask her/him to help. (Sometimes the bots only run once every week or month or such...) Montanabw^(talk) 23:52, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

There's info in the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women writers#Scope and bot request section. Can someone do the follow-up and make the request? --Rosiestep (talk) 01:30, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

I just put a note on the bot's talk page [1]. Hopefully, this issue will be resolved soon. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:46, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

I added the project template to all the FAs and GAs that fit here. I'm sure they'll be added here once the bot runs again. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:30, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Lists

We already have a reasonable List of women writers and several more specialized lists under Category:Lists of women writers. It would be useful to have listings by country and/or language too. Any suggestions as to how best this could be handled? As far as I can see, all we have at the moment in the way of country-based listings is List of Korean female writers but this is merely a list of names with very little information.

I think we need to address both the user community (i.e. lists providing summary information on each writer) and lists for Wikipedia editors, maybe based on those already covered by lists or categories for the various countries or languages. For instance for Danish there are a number of categories here which could be used as a basis for a List of Female writers from Denmark.

Sooner or later we should also try to put together a world list of organizations specializing in support of female writers.

Apart from creating new articles, there is also important work to be done on improving existing articles (expanding stubs, working towards GA/FA for the more important biographies, etc.). The project could perhaps create listings of priorities in this connection.--Ipigott (talk) 13:04, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Yup, a lot of work ahead of us. So, the Category:Lists of women writers are now itemized in the Wikipedia:WOMENWRI#Lists section; we could definitely create more lists. The redlink lists are located at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women writers/Missing articles‎ and this page needs sorting out; see its talkpage. --Rosiestep (talk) 05:02, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Don't know if any good ideas to swipe, but may want to see how we did the "to do" list at WP:EQUINE - I didn't create it, but I kind of like the syntax that transcludes the list from a separate page onto the project page. Also has different types of tasks. It possibly could be collapsed or something too. Just me, but I know if a project page is too long or daunting, I tend to not be as excited to help as I could be - probably because my personal style is to look for bite size chunks that I can at least start on as a solo person (collaborators always welcome, of course). WP:QAI also has some ideas, though maintaining the chart has wound up being mostly the job of one person because the rest of us are either lazy or overwhelmed by the syntax Montanabw^(talk) 22:04, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

i appreciate the clean layout of WP:EQUINE in general, and I really like "the syntax that transcludes the list from a separate page onto the project page". It would be nice to incorporate that feature at this WP. --Rosiestep (talk) 00:10, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

If I but knew how, other minds than mine did the layout ... if copy and paste works, go for it!  ;-) Montanabw^(talk) 16:17, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikiproject womens history

Some of the women writers articles will be tagged with this project, and they may be more appropriate for our project instead. for Ursula K. LeGuin i removed womens history, but for James Tiptree, Jr. i kept history. thats my gut feeling. anyone else have a guideline for this, or ideas? i will probably mostly leave the history project intact unless its obviously too soon. I dont know how much i will participate yet.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 06:27, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

@Mercurywoodrose: I think some biographies will be supported by WMNWRITE and WP:WMNHIST, for example, women writers born before 1900. I hope you like it around here, and know you are most welcome. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:04, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Thats what i thought, history would apply for earlier writers, who are now "historic". ill use that. thanks for the invite.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 01:23, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Luckily, it's a project's own guidelines that determine, so WMNWRITE and WMNHIST can be aligned "cousins" or "siblings" but one doesn't have to follow the other. Montanabw^(talk) 22:13, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Women writers/Articles created

Currently, the new articles list unsorted -- not alpha, not by country, not by genre. I think it should be sorted, either by country (to match up with the project's missing articles list) or alpha. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:08, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Project tagging of templates?

I've created several navboxes in the past for women writers, like Template:Louisa May Alcott, Template:Maria Edgeworth, Template:George Sand, Template:Emily Dickinson, etc. There are also Bronte, George Eliot, and other navboxes. Should these be tagged with {{WikiProject Women writers}}? I ask because I always tag Russian writer navboxes, which I've created a lot of, with WPRussia. INeverCry 17:50, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes, please, and thanks. Also, should we list them somewhere? --Rosiestep (talk) 01:23, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Will do. We could create a cat like Category:Women writers navigational boxes. INeverCry 01:31, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Cool; go for it. --Rosiestep (talk) 06:04, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

 Done INeverCry 15:59, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind,

but I added this project to the CleanupWorklistBot/Master list in this edit, so the template on the project page should be working within a week, unless that edit is reverted for some reason. Cheers! —PC-XT+ 01:37, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you PC-XT! It is much appreciated. gobonobo ^{+ c} 15:53, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

AnomieBOT tagging individual book/novel articles

I've reverted quite a few instances, but there are many more. I would've thought AB would tag woman writer bios only, seeing that we already have novels, poetry, and books WikiProjects. If it tags all articles on novels, poems, and books by women writers, we'll quickly have an unmanageably large hodgepodge project. If the bot is going to tag any more articles, I hope it sticks to bios... INeverCry 17:43, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

When I looked at the lead on the project page, it mentioned bios only. Now I see the project scope includes all books/novels written by women, and probably poems (I haven't checked into that, but it follows). Another project with an overly large number of pages is too much for me. Bios only would've been great. Sorry about the reverts... INeverCry 18:21, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

@INeverCry: The categories that the bot was asked to tag are listed in the collapsible box headed "Categories within the scope of this WikiProject", at #Bot request above. As you note, there are several for works; since they are explicitly listed there, I'm pretty sure that they are intentional. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:23, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion INeverCry. The scope has now been updated on the project page. While I've restored the banners to those talk pages, I for one would be open to revisiting the project's scope. Including works does make for a large WikiProject, but I think good arguments for their inclusion exist as well. gobonobo ^{+ c} 05:54, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

It would be possible to have task-forces on writers, novels, poetry. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 13:18, 26 October 2014 (UTC).

Recommended resource

Let me highly recommend Reader's Guide to Women's Studies (1997) edited by Eleanor Amico. It's massive, with 730pp of books on 500+ major topics & people that are evaluated by experts. You can browse it online at Amazon -- and they have several copies for sale under $12. Rjensen (talk) 05:20, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

New category:Women food writers

How do we notify the bots that there's a new category under our purvue: Category:Women food writers? And would anyone like to notify them? @Ser Amantio di Nicolao: I've started populating it, but it's going to be a large category so AWB would be quicker; do you have time? --Rosiestep (talk) 16:59, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Sure. I've been piddling around with composers, but once that's done (later today, I should hope) I can work on populating this category. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 17:06, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Done. Anything else? --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 00:55, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: Thank you. --Rosiestep (talk) 04:11, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm still learning about bots. So does anyone know if this cat is included in the bot runs? --Rosiestep (talk) 04:11, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Any time. Happy to be of help. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 06:10, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: When you have chance, can you add women in Category:Food writers subcats, i.e. Category:Food writers by nationality to Category:Women food writers? --Rosiestep (talk) 13:01, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Sure - give me a little while and I should be able to take care of that. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 16:08, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

It should be on everything relevant by now. Unless I'm missing something? --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 04:59, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks @Ser Amantio di Nicolao:! --Rosiestep (talk) 05:29, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

My pleasure. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 05:41, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

WP:Past Masters

Hey all, there are still slots available for free access to two of the databases offered by Past Masters, including the Women Writer's Collection. If you meet the criteria you can sign up at WP:Past Masters. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:44, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Review of Importance Guidelines

Hey All, I outlined the importance guidelines in the section for Assessing importance. Please make sure that we review and modify that outline based on the general consensus. I used the assessment guidelines that I had been running with, Sadads (talk) 04:53, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Bots

I've been adding newly-created cats into Categories within the scope of this WikiProject, a collapsed list within Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women writers#Bot request. Can someone confirm that the articles in the new cats will get picked up by the bots? As sections of this project talkpage will eventually be archived, should we create Wikipedia:WikiProject Women writers/Categories and point the bots to it? --Rosiestep (talk) 20:50, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

No, it won't. The bot task was a one-off, it was signed off as completed with this edit, and it won't rerun without another request to Anomie (talk · contribs). --Redrose64 (talk) 20:55, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I thought that might be the case. I'll put together another review proposal on this page once we've sorted through some additional cats. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:19, 20 September 2014 (UTC)