Well whatever works.
A "list of lists" is fine with me. Meaning page that points to
collections about women related subjects needing improvement.
There are just tons of lists (I have a few on my own user space) that
are spread out. It'd be ideal to have one repository space for people to
Alas, I don't have time to create the list, so...whoever decides to do
it...I trust them to make the best decision.
On 5/29/13 9:35 PM, Risker wrote:
On 29 May 2013 10:58, Sarah Stierch <sarah.stierch(a)gmail.com
Perhaps we can have these lists combined.
Actually, I'd really suggest not doing that, or only having links to
smaller lists in a central location. With the exception of DSP's
list, each of these lists is small enough to feel "achievable", but
putting them into one really big list makes the task look and feel
overwhelming. Creating 10 articles in a smaller grouping makes a
significant dent. Creating 10 articles on DSP's list barely scratches
the surface, and I'd question whether such a redlist actually
constitutes a reasonable working list even just considering its
smaller chunks. A passing mention in a single book, or membership in
a professional association, does not make for notability, but that
does seem to be where several of DSP's sublists are coming from. (A
random sampling of the "women psychoanalysts" shows that many would
not to pass even our ridiculously low notability standards.)
In other words, smaller lists are more likely to be done than long
lists, and are also much more likely to be "adopted" by one or a small
group of editors. It's how *successful* wikiprojects have operated for
years. They have clear focus, they have specific objectives, and they
support systems that give their members a sense of accomplishment
rather than leaving them feeling as though they could slave away for
months on end without having an effect.
Gendergap mailing list
*/Museumist and open culture advocate/*