I've just wikified this in my userspace if anyone wants to quickly check
out our articles on these women. The good news is that we have an article
for each of them. The bad news is that article quality is pretty grim if
these are truly the 100 most powerful women.
Hi Andrew,
Absolutely! Please do.
Yes, it was nice to see some FA and GAs in the mix. Maybe we should
compare a list of 100 most powerful men?
Toby
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 6:02 AM, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk
wrote:
Stub tags are notoriously bad for this (I've just rerated half a
Hi Risker,
Of course you are right, but that is true across the encylopedia, so the
relative abundances are probably comparable.
Sorting by category is interesting. We're doing particularly poorly for
the women in business or technology, not too bad for women in politics, and
pretty well for
Awesome article. Sorry to hear about your troubles with the peanut gallery.
Ryan
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 6:45 PM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case
danc...@frontiernet.net wrote:
It’s one thing to read about the sort of harsh reactions women get
while editing that discourages them from
I didn't find a men only list, but their list of powerful people looks
close enough. (!)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:99of9/powerpeople
I'll leave the ratings until after Andrew re-rates them ;-), but already
there's a male redlink at #36 most powerful - interesting gap.
Toby
On Tue,
Welcome to our lives Daniel :)
Good efforts all around. I stopped participating in DYK's (nominating my own
stuff) after drama llamas claimed promotional language about long dead
subjects and more.
Yeah, well, I’ve been nominating DYKSs for almost as long as I’ve been editing,
so I have come
