Talk:Lu Rees

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Australia Low‑importance

	Australia portal Lu Rees is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Women in Red: #1day1woman (2023)

This article was created or improved during the #1day1woman initiative hosted by the Women in Red project in 2023. 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

Reference to spouse in infobox

Wikipedia:Writing about women#Infoboxes states "Infoboxes are an important source of metadata (see DBpedia) and a source of discrimination against women. For example, the word spouse is more likely to appear in a woman's infobox than in a man's." This says to me that there is a gap in articles about men - and where discrimination is being played out is omitting women from men's pages, not from adding major information to women's pages. I believe a person's 30+ year marriage is worthy of mention in an infobox - no matter what sex. Clare. (talk) 03:02, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree - the point being made is that perceiving a women's marriage as a "key fact" about her contributes to the "Defining women by their relationships" problem in the following section at WAW. Her marriage, no matter its length, is not particularly significant to her notability. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:22, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, relationships are notable to our lives (both men's and women's). A person's marriage should not define them, nor should it be ignored or erased as if it is of no interest/consequence.Clare. (talk) 21:18, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What I said was it's not significant to her notability - ie. she isn't known for being the wife of Mr. Rees, but rather for what she herself accomplished. We're not ignoring her marriage, as it's still discussed in the article; we're simply not overemphasizing it. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:36, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]