From July 1–31, WikiProject Women in Green is hosting its second virtual editathon event with the following goals: to nominate and review GA-class articles related to the topic of women and the environment, and to help editors build a greater capacity for bringing articles up to GA status. Participants of all experience levels are welcome! We will provide instructions, learning resources, suggested article topics, and assistance from editors more experienced with the GA process.

What is Women in Green? WikiProject Women in Green works to bring core articles on women and women's works up to minimum Good Article (GA) status. Our aim is to improve the general reliability and quality of Wikipedia while also addressing gender bias in Wikipedia content. Currently, articles about women and women's works comprise just 4273 articles out of 39,109 Good Articles on the site, roughly 10.9%. Each year we organize a number of specific group goals related to nominating and reviewing GA articles, and one of our 2022 goals is focused on the topic of women and the environment (hence this event's theme).

Which articles count under the theme of "women and the environment"? We're interpreting this theme broadly. This topic covers women in climate science and earth sciences, biologists, conservationists, environmentalists, eco-warriors and activists, miners and environmental engineers, environmental philanthropists and advocates, gardeners and horticulturalists, nature/science educators, and more. Articles don't need to be biographies either – you can tackle articles about women's works (such as environmental books, plays or films created by women) or broader topical articles (Ecofeminist art, specific environmental movements, organizations, etc.).

Editors may be interested in working on some of the following article suggestions related to "women and the environment," but are welcome to choose articles from elsewhere:

WiG 20-Minute Article Assessments During the editathon period, GA nominators have the option to request a basic assessment of their article from an experienced Women in Green editor before nominating it for a full GA review. The WiG 20-Minute Article Assessment will aim to identify any major issues that remain in your article and suggest improvements for you to focus on. This support is intended to help less-experienced GA nominators build their confidence and avoid "quick-fail" situations. Make your request for a 20-minute article assessment here.

1. All qualifying GA nominations (whether submitted or reviewed) must relate to women or women's works. While participants are encouraged to work on articles related to women and the environment, articles related to women outside this theme are also eligible for inclusion.
2. Nominating editors should have made a significant contribution to their article. Co-nominations (with editors partnering) are acceptable.
3. GA nominators must submit their article nominations during the period of July 1–31, although they may choose an article and begin prep work before then.
4. GA reviewers must begin their reviews during the period of July 1–31, but may take additional time to complete those reviews up until August 30. The extended deadline takes into account that many editathon nominations may not be ready for review until late August.
5. GA nominations that are quick-failed will not be counted as a qualifying editathon submission for the nominator, but articles that are fully reviewed and failed may stay. Quick-failed articles will remain a qualifying editathon submission for the reviewer as long as reasons for quick-failing are clearly and satisfactorily stated in the review.

Event barnstar[edit]

Participants who nominate or fully review at least one qualifying GA nomination during the editathon will receive a special 2022 Women in Green barnstar. The event coordinator will give out stars after the end of the event.

Women in Green Editathon July '22

For GA nominators[edit]

1. Familiarize yourself with the Six GA criteria. Check out the resources and tools section below. Have questions? Ask them on the editathon talk page.
2. Choose the article you want to work on. This doesn't have to be an article you created yourself – it can be any existing Wikipedia article currently rated Stub, Start, C, B or A Class. Keep scope in mind: bringing an article up to GA Class takes time, so make sure you have the time and research resources necessary to tackle your chosen subject.
3. Assess which aspects of the article still need improvements to meet the GA criteria. Does it need stronger sources? An expanded lead section? Clearer grammar and punctuation? Are any images properly tagged and licensed? Make a plan and work your way through these improvements.
4. Optional: before nominating the article for GA review, post at the 20-Minute Article Assessment page to request a basic 20-minute assessment from an experienced Women in Green GA reviewer. They will scan the article for any remaining major issues and suggest improvements for you to focus on.
5. Once you think your article is ready, submit your GA nomination for review. Congrats! Add your nominated article to the "Article Outcomes" list at the bottom of this page. You are also welcome to list your article under either Goal #1 or #2 of WiG's 2022 Goals.

For GA reviewers[edit]

1. Familiarize yourself with the Six GA criteria. Check out the resources and tools section below. Have more questions? Ask them on the editathon talk page.
2. Choose an article nomination you wish to review (either from the editathon Article Outcomes list below, or from the broader GA nominations page), and follow these instructions for beginning the review. You are encouraged to complete your initial review comments in 7 days or less.
3. Optional: If you are a first-time reviewer, you may wish to contact a Good Article Mentor for additional one-on-one support or put out a call for a second opinion before closing your review.
4. Once you are satisfied that the nominated article has either passed or failed, close the review. Congrats! Add the reviewed article to the "Article Outcomes" list on this page. You are also welcome to list the article under Goal #3 of WiG's 2022 Goals.
5. Important note: to be counted as part of this editathon, a GA review must be thorough and complete, regardless of the nominated article's outcome (successful or unsuccessful). Make sure your review comments clearly state why you think the nomination does or does not meet the six GA criteria.

Additional resources[edit]

• Earwig's Copy-Vio Detector – tool to help identify plagiarism/close paraphrasing issues (good for both reviewers and nominators)
• GA Review templates – templates for GA reviewers
• "What the Good Article Criteria Are Not" – short essay

During editathon events, this support is intended to help less-experienced GA nominators build their confidence and avoid frustrating quick-fail situations. The WiG 20-Minute Assessment team for July 2022 includes Caeciliusinhorto, BennyOnTheLoose, and Alanna the Brave. Team members will complete a brief 20-minute assessment of your GA project and let you know if they see any major article issues that might lead to a quick-fail in a formal GA review.

To request a 20-minute assessment (or "mini-review") for an article you're working on, list your username and article below and add your request to the top of the list. A member of our assessment team will aim to tackle your request within 48 hours and will leave their comments on the talk page of your article.

Article assessment requests[edit]

This text is transcluded. The edit link for this section can be used to add requests. Add newest request to TOP of the list:

• Article (linked)

Editor:

Request Status:

• Article (linked)

Editor:

Request Status:

Nominated[edit]

1. Margaret Nygard - Ipiggot, SusunW (talk) 14:35, 1 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
2. Eleanor Glanville - Alanna the Brave (talk) 14:23, 4 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
3. Rita Miljo - Balance person, SusunW (talk) 21:14, 6 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
4. Eunice Newton Foote - XOR'easter, Ipigott, SusunW (talk) 14:06, 18 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
5. Elizabeth Wagner Reed - Ipigott, GRuban, SusunW (talk) 14:29, 18 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
6. We Are Water Protectors - DanCherek (talk) 03:33, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
7. Evdokia Reshetnik - GRuban, SusunW (talk) 14:30, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
8. Rosalie Edge - Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 23:19, 31 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reviewed[edit]

2. Margaret Nygard - BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 21:32, 5 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
3. Eleanor Glanville - BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 16:27, 8 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
4. Rita Miljo - simongraham (talk) 19:00, 10 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
5. We Are Water Protectors - BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:20, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
6. Elizabeth Wagner Reed - BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 21:19, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
7. Evdokia Reshetnik -simongraham 1 August 2022
8. Rosalie Edge - 6 September 2022

• Talk Page Banner – Articles nominated or reviewed for this editathon can be tagged with ((subst:WIG|2))

	Women in Green: Women and the Environment
This article was created or improved during the Women and the Environment GA edit-a-thon hosted by the Women in Green project in July 2022. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in GreenWikipedia:WikiProject Women in GreenTemplate:WikiProject Women in GreenWomen in Green articles

• Invitation – If you know anyone who may want to participate, place the following on their talk page: ((subst:WPWiGDrive-2)), which will produce this.

Next page: Women in Green Homepage→