There are still over 2,700 known notable women scientists without stubs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Missing_articles_by_occupation/Scientists
And those are just the women scientists who made it on to Wikidata but not Wiktionary somehow. The old ISI/Thompson Reuters Web of Science list was a lot longer. I don't think 100,000 stubs is an unreasonable number. On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Keegan Peterzell <[email protected]> wrote: > "The nerve of these women, to think that they can write encyclopedia > articles on women who must inherently be non-notable! There's nothing to > write about here." > > That's basically what your email says. No complaints when the subject is > anything else from you, when these thematic editing are held on other > subjects. > > > This looks like a wondeful initiative, not a disaster. > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
