Talk:PLEXUS West Coast Women's Press

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the PLEXUS West Coast Women's Press article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Feminism Low‑importance

	Feminism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Newspapers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Newspapers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Newspapers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NewspapersWikipedia:WikiProject NewspapersTemplate:WikiProject NewspapersNewspapers articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Journalism Low‑importance

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women writers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Red

This article was created or improved as part of the Women in Red project. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red articles

Obtaining image usage permission in progress, but slow

As described in — WP:Teahouse#Steps_to_secure_permission_to_use_from_a_willing_copyright_holder — I have an informal statement of permission to use this image from the copyright holder, and am in the process of obtaining formal permission. But the copyright holder is traveling internationally so it is going slowly. BananaSlug (talk) 19:36, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image, an early photo of the PLEXUS staff, originally published in Gabrielle Schang. “A Women's Voice” Berkeley Barb, August 15, 1974, Vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 5–6. (available here: https://www.jstor.org/stable/community.28033489?seq=5) was deleted from Wikimedia Commons, and hence from this article by @Filedelinkerbot on December 10, 2023.

When the copyright holder returns from their travels, I will jump through the hoops needed to reinstate this photo to the PLEXUS article. — BananaSlug (talk) 17:51, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Big thanks to Tagishsimon and Rublamb for super helpful contributions!

user:Tagishsimon thank you so much for noticing the plight of this draft article then swooping in to provide a great citation to a top notch news publication: Holt, Patricia (11 May 1986). "The Plight of Plexus". The San Francisco Examiner. p. 324. Your help is deeply appreciated!

user:Rublamb provided a link to a clip of that Holt article, then did a major restructure of the text which is much better than my version!

— BananaSlug (talk) 01:33, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@BananaSlug, Your draft was fine; I am just trying to focus on the content from the sources that meet notability, so this can be published. You had already found the most of the sources which makes it easy. Rublamb (talk) 01:50, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Rublamb your efforts are super helpful and very much appreciated! I'm delighted to have help just popping out of the wood work. A delightful feeling! BananaSlug (talk) 02:22, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Rublamb: it looks like refs :0 and :1 both refer to Woo's "The perils of off-beat publishing" in the Oakland Tribune? But one has a title of "paper"

I don't want to be editing simultaneously with you. I'll wait until you are done. BananaSlug (talk) 02:39, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is the same article but different pages. The link are different and should go to a copy of the correct page. The name variation matches the name on each page (although it would not be wrong to have the same name of both). Rublamb (talk) 02:42, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Rublamb thanks for helping this one along! @BananaSlug thanks for creating it and now you see why I suggested reaching out to Women in Red. :) S0091 (talk) 15:07, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@S0091 absolutely! Thanks to you and the whole “collective” who turned around this article in the last 24 hours. The outpouring of supportive help was really gratifying. This was a very positive first-article experience for me. Your slimy co-editor, BananaSlug (talk) 16:10, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Change name of second ref to the Woo Tribune article

I changed name of the “jump” of the Woo Tribune article from “Paper” to “The Perils of Off-Beat Publishing...(part 2)”. They are the same article, which are split only because of the way newspaper.com presents clippings. This is different from what @Rublamb originally wrote, but above Rublamb sayd “(although it would not be wrong to have the same name of both)” so I hope this is not a problem. I was bothered by the previous version because when I hover over (what is currently ref [6]) it said:

> Woo, Louise (1986-06-30). "Paper". Oakland

> Tribune. Oakland, California. p. 26. Retrieved

> 2023-12-02 - via Newspapers.com.

That article title of “Paper” seems confusing and wrong. BananaSlug (talk) 19:03, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was pointed to Wikipedia:Newspapers.com#Citations across multiple pages/clippings by @S0091 which describes the preferred way to hand this case of one original news article split across multiple clippings at newspaper.com.

This will require a non-trivial amount of editing. There are 17(!) references to that Tribute article in this Wikipedia article. I will come back to do that later, hopefully in the next 24 hours. BananaSlug (talk) 19:28, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@BananaSlug for the longest time I did not know the "correct" method to citing Newspaper.com so many of my citations do not contain publicly accessible links. They do have all the pertinent information so if someone wants to find the source they can, which is the most important thing. The rest is nice to have so do not stress about getting it done quickly or done at all. If you want to split it up, happy to lend a hand. Just give the footnote numbers you want me to work on so we are not doubling efforts and I will try it get to them over the next couple days. S0091 (talk) 19:59, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@S0091 I only meant I could not do it immediately, not that my OCD would allow me to ignore “something is wrong on the Internet!” for long.

Should be fixed now. I replaced refs named ":0" and ":1" with one named "woo_trib". I assume these are just arbitrary tags and the colon prefix has no special meaning?

I changed the merged ref according to Newspapers.com#Citations_across_multiple_pages/clippings with a URL for each enumerated page number.

Hope I did not bollox anything. — BananaSlug (talk) 22:22, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I restored to the two citations. The format you were referred to is great when an article is split into two sections on the same page. However, when an article is on two pages, the best practice is to accurately cite to the specific page (this is for Wikipedia in general, not just for newspapers). When you include multiple pages in the same note, it makes it much harder for others to fact-check or review an article. It may not seem important now, but it is a total pain to have to go back and find the correct page when preparing an article for GA and FA reviews. And specific pages are required for those next steps. Since this is a B-rated article, we should have that in mind. Rublamb (talk) 03:44, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

By similar reasoning, I added “...?seq=38” suffix to url for Feminist Bookstore News citation to link directly to relevant page (p. 36). Previously it had linked to the image of the front cover of Volume 8, Issue 1, leaving the reader to navigate to page 36. BananaSlug (talk) 16:14, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]