A couple of things come to my mind with respect to this thread.  The first is that there is a lot of work that can be done &quot;behind the scenes&quot; to encourage the voice of women within the WMF community.  I recently advocated for a woman to be included in the Funds Dissemination Committee Advisory Group, and FloNight (Sydney Poore) answered the call there.  Now there are calls for members for the Grants Advisory Committee - an area where I think women editors can have a big impact, helping to identify and support funding requests that will help our overlapping communities to support the development of knowledge that highlights the achievements of women scientists, sportswomen, authors, designers, architects....I&#39;d love to see one or more women on that committee.  <br>
<br>I&#39;ve not done a lot of work on content lately, but completely coincidentally I was asked some questions about the work of a scientist over on my talk page.  Some judicious research demonstrated that she is a woman who is highly respected in her field.  It occurs to me that one place where we can continue to illustrate the contributions of women to many fields would be to include their peer-reviewed scholarly works as references in our articles.  I am not saying that this should be done in a way that would be unbalanced in the articles, but I think sometimes it is easy to stop looking for expertise after a couple of decent references have been found.  Diving deeper is more likely to find these &quot;experts who are also women&quot;.  <br>
<br>Risker/Anne<br><br><br>