Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Organized Labour/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Speedy deletion of Convergencia Sindical

The Convergencia Sindical page, a Panama trade union centre has been speedily deleted. I've listed it for "deletion review" in the belief that it should be un-deleted. Your comments and input would be welcome at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review#Convergencia_Sindical Bookandcoffee (talk) 23:33, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

RfC

Hello there! There's an ongoing RfC concerning Paul Singer and WP:NPOV in a broader sense, that you might care to comment on. Thank you, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 01:43, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Category:Labor-related political violence in the United States

A few days ago I opened a CFD discussion regarding this Category, focused on a simple rename to Category:Labor-related violence in the United States. The discussion has now broadened out, with an alternate proposal to rename to Category:Anti-union violence in the United States. My sense is, that would be somewhat problematic (for reasons I elaborated in the CFD). However, I would really like to hear from other editors who are knowledgable in this subject area -- so please join the discussion! Cgingold (talk) 08:49, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Scranton General Strike

I have posted a RfC that may be of interest to this project. The article is new and doesn't have many eyes on it currently. Any input is welcome. TimothyJosephWood 12:57, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

List of political parties named "Labour Party" or similar listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for List of political parties named "Labour Party" or similar to be moved to List of Labour Parties. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 11:15, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Proposal: Industrial Unionism Task Force

This is a proposal for some sort of task force as a subsidiary of WP Organized Labour, intended to focus on industrial unionism: its theory and principles, historic strikes, and individuals and organizations which identify or have identified as proponents of industrial unionism, or organizations which are structured as industrial unions. This would include organizations such as the Congress of Industrial Organizations, Industrial Workers of the World, Workers' International Industrial Union, and others. The task force would appropriately connect articles on industrial unionism as a specific movement within the labour movement and provide much-needed coordination in this regard, which would help clarify the overall WikiProject's work. I welcome any and all comments in this regard in the hope of building consensus toward this or a similar task force. Julius177 (talk) 03:51, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

It could be interesting and useful to have something aimed at the evolution of labor movements, highlighting the strategic and historical divisions of guilds, craft unions, industrial unions etc. Really just focusing on one of these implies a regular practice of defining each in relation and contradiction to another. As it is, the labor movement is often presented as one homogeneous mass, with one union being neutrally interchangeable for another, or alternately presented as internecine fights between peers, when in truth historically these battles were deeply economic and cultural life or death fights.

But what would a task force do other than just agree on the need for attention to this history and political evolution? This Wikiproject has that too, an agreement on a need for coverage of labor, which affects nearly every topic and history, but coordination of this has been quite thin. djr13 (talk) 05:27, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

There is the Jewish Labour Bund Task Force, just as an example, which is a highly specific task force. I'd argue that in the long run there should be task forces for strikes, union organizations, biographies of prominent unionists/union organizers, etc., but given the seemingly low level of activity, things should be taken one step at a time. Right now I see the biggest problem being that there's a lot of content that needs to be more cohesively organized and I think task forces can do that. Given that industrial unionism is a coherent and specific part of the labour movement it seems very plausible to create a task force for it, with a well-defined scope. Other task forces could exist alongside of it or be defined negatively in relation to it (general unions, guilds, craft unions, etc.) The key with an industrial union task force is that it would combine articles about people, events, ideas, and organizations, rather than simply being a substitute for, say, a "history of unionism" or "concepts in unionism" task force. If you can think of a better way of doing it I'd like to hear it but to me the way to get a handle on the content and organize it better is to start with task forces with clear and logical scope. -- Julius177 (talk) 06:37, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm not suggesting there's a "better way of doing it," I'm just asking what it is it would do. djr13 (talk) 07:31, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Oh, and the first part of the response wasn't a critique, I was actually agreeing, having something on EG industrial unionism implies that this would also have to cover to some degrees the other categories it differentiates itself from. djr13 (talk) 07:41, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

I don't think it would necessarily have to cover the categories it differentiates from, but a similar argument could be made, for example, in favour of a task force on craft/trade unionism which covered the evolution of trade unions from guilds, the relationship with professional associations, and the nature of organizations which exist at least in some part to regulate the practice of a particular trade. I'd welcome someone creating a task force for it but personally my focus is on industrial unionism at least for now and I suspect industrial unionism has more active support that might form a viable task force than craft unionism does. In terms of what the IU task force would do, I've outlined that below, but in short I'd be in favour of putting together an article series and outline. This is something that could be done by individuals in the WikiProject, similar to how WP Socialism has article series on, say, Marxism and Syndicalism, but I think the scope of industrial unionism is potentially larger given that it also would cover biography, concept, organization, and event pages, whereas Marxism really only covers biographies, concepts, and some organizations. -- Julius177 (talk) 20:38, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Can anyone give a sense of the scope of work? My sense is that a few people have been working really hard on industrial unionism behind the scenes, although not recording their work much on this WikiProject. Are there a lot of missing articles? Or is it a matter of missing bios? Is categorization a real issue? - Tim1965 (talk) 17:14, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

I haven't worked much actively on this area (I've mostly focused on Canadian material and general housekeeping) but I intend to. I'd say the scope is large but specific, since it mostly applies to specific organizations and individuals, which as a group comprise a large part of the (historical) labour movement. The main issue I see is a lack of something connecting these together in a way that would make it understandable for the average reader. I'd like to see something like an "outline of" page and potentially an article series on industrial unionism which connected the political/organizational theorists, their ideas, and the organizations and people who put the ideas into practice, as well as the history of industrial unionism as a movement and its relation to the general labour movement. I think this is an appropriate scope because it's broad enough to justify a task force to build and maintain it, but not so broad as to be incoherent or muddled. Right now, for example, De Leonism is not connected at all to WP:OL, even though Daniel De Leon was in the intellectual leadership of a major union, his political movement (De Leonism) is based on unions as a political strategy, and his party (the Socialist Labor Party) had its own union wing. As well, industrial unionism as a concept is mostly contained within a single article, when it might be more helpful to illustrate by example when conflicts between industrial and craft unionism strategies arose and unions had internal debates on them (for example, the Journeymen Tailors Union of America, which briefly reorganized itself as an industrial union), which poorly conveys what kind of impact these ideas had and how it concretely affected different sections of the labour movement.

While industrial unionism needs much more material on Wikipedia, I would say it's not any more lacking in material than the labour movement in general is, and sometimes it has more. Article-wise, what mostly needs improvements, I think, is articles on actual organizations and events -- the article on theory covers it fairly well. Overall, it's just poorly organized and there's nothing that conceptually draws these pages together. The only actual category specifically referring to IUism is Category:Industrial unions, which is just a highly incomplete category for industrial union organizations. There's very little concretely connecting the theory and practice of it and that's what I think should be primarily focused on. -- Julius177 (talk) 20:38, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Request for Contributions on The Jeremy Corbyn Talk Page

A RFC has started on the Jeremy Corbyn talk page regarding which image should be used as the Lede image of the article. Over the last year the image has been frequently changed by various editors, and the have been a few separate discussions on the talk regarding it. It would be good if you could help resolve this ongoing dispute.-- BOD -- 08:13, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Categorization of Presidents of the New York State Federation of Labor and/or all labor leaders in a particular state

Which categories would you support adding to Category:Presidents of the New York State Federation of Labor?

I'm not sure what you mean. Are you looking to add subcategories to [[Category:Presidents of the New York State Federation of Labor]]? Or are you looking to help categorize [[Category:Presidents of the New York State Federation of Labor]] itself? (Forgive my being incredibly dense today...) - Tim1965 (talk) 19:02, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

I'd like both, but I was referring to the subcategories for the category in question. I've also started Category:Presidents of the Wisconsin State Federation of Labor.--TM 19:51, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

I'd say these are already quite small and specific categories, and should not be further sub-categorized. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:51, 21 May 2016 (UTC) (Pres., Wisconsin AFSCME Local 91)

The category is quite specific, perhaps even too specific, and unless one of those presidents have a category in their name I can't think what else would go under it but articles. However, the category appears strangely isolated from others, is this state federation a unit of a larger organization? AFL-CIO perhaps? djr13 (talk) 19:54, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

State Federations of Labor were originally units of the AF of L, but generally merged with their CIO counterparts as part of the AFL-CIO merger, often retaining their old names. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:34, 23 May 2016 (UTC) (member, Wisconsin Labor History Society)

Scranton General Strike listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Scranton General Strike to be moved to Scranton Strike of 1877. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 19:01, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Nomination of Big labor for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Big labor is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big labor until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Graham (talk) 19:34, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Criticism of Walmart listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Criticism of Walmart to be moved to Controversy around Walmart. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 02:59, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Upcoming editathons include Women Labor Activists

You are invited...
	Women in Nursing editathon & Women Labor Activists editathon Hosted by Women in Red - September 2016 - #wikiwomeninred

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)--Ipigott (talk) 08:55, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Feedback on proposal to revise "Debt Bondage" article

Hi, I am a student at Rice University and would like to make significant additions to the current "Debt Bondage" article. The link to my proposed revision with references can be found with the Google doc link. Please feel free to post on my user page or here if you have feedback. Thank you! https://docs.google.com/document/d/18xT2kXUKJYmPqeDNZYEekGy2CRR16wVUbUyC5CGRyGA/edit?usp=sharing Sa49 (talk) 05:34, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Suitable infobox template for articles such as Tolpuddle Martyrs

In short, I can't find one. Like the Winnipeg general strike it's a series of coupled historical events rather than a union organisation or one of the other objects that the existing templates seem to cater for. The Martyrs talk page does ask for an infobox. Are there any clear guidelines? SewerCat (talk) 14:25, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

There really isn't a good template for Tolpuddle Martyrs, and as far as I know there aren't any guidelines for use, either. The one you've chosen is probably as good as it gets. For example, the Molly Maguires in the U.S. were in a similar situation, but that article has no infobox whatsoever. - Tim1965 (talk) 17:24, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

@Tim1965: Thanks for responding. The article you mention exemplifies further difficulties. We seem to need a new template but I lack the experience with wikipedia that would be necessary to do a decent job of that. SewerCat (talk) 18:32, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Move request at Talk:UK miners' strike (1984–85)

Please comment on the requested move at Talk:UK miners' strike (1984–85)#Requested move 26 March 2017.--Nevé–selbert 13:48, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

South African Federation of Trade Unions

For those interested there is a new federation in South Africa, which now claims to be the second largest in the country, various pages need updating, shifts in affiliates etc. --Goldsztajn (talk) 13:25, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Whitefoord Russell Cole

Is anyone here is interested in expanding Whitefoord Russell Cole please?Zigzig20s (talk) 19:43, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

UK miners' strike 1984-85

Hello. I see that this WikiProject considers the article UK miners' strike (1984-85) to be high importance. I would like to do a thorough re-organisation of the article, but I thought that I should consult before doing this. The article is currently long and has changed much over the years.

If you look on the talk page, there have occasionally been concerns raised about bias, usually to the political left. I fear that it is hard to get a NPOV on this topic, as the majority of papers/books on the subject are clearly on one side or the other. I personally don't think that the current reading of the article is strongly biased, but some might disagree.

I think that the main problem is the messy structure. There is a fairly brief description of the main sequence of events, and then several sections on the various issues in the strike. I think that the sections "Issues" and "Response to the strike" could be incorporated into the sequence of events. The "Analysis of the situation in Nottinghamshire" might be better in the "Historical assessments" section.

This might be a matter of personal style, but I find the prose in the article very awkward. Some sentences seem to be written with as few words as possible.

Please let me know your thoughts. Epa101 (talk) 13:56, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

New proposed article for review

Hi! I'm wondering if WikiProject Organized Labour editors might be interested in reviewing proposed the new draft article for New-collar worker, which is based on articles for similar concepts, and intended to be a companion to the Designation of workers by collar color article. In full disclosure, I'm here on behalf of IBM via agency Vianovo as part of my work at Beutler Ink. My hope is that an uninvolved editor (or editors) can review my proposed draft, make any edits as appropriate, and move the draft into the main space if it looks good. Thank you in advance! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 22:14, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Update: This is article is now live, at New-collar worker. Now that there's a standalone article for it, I wonder if editors here would be willing to look at my request to add mention of this type of worker at Designation of workers by collar color? Previously, an editor had declined the request at that page, citing that they thought it was too similar to "grey collar"; I've explained the difference between the two, and the editors who responded again suggested more discussion might be needed. Can anyone here assist? Thanks! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 12:33, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject

The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.

Portals are being redesigned.

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template {{Transclude lead excerpt}}.

The discussion about this can be found here.

Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.

Background

On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.

There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.

So far, 84 editors have joined.

If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.

If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.

Thank you.    — The Transhumanist   07:50, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Merger proposal: Migrant worker/Foreign worker

Discussion is invited about a proposal to merge 'Foreign worker' into 'Migrant worker'. Thanks - Meticulo (talk) 12:29, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Malicious compliance

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
• Malicious compliance (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs|google) AfD discussion

An opportunity for creative thinking. Here's some ideas... 7&6=thirteen (☎) 01:02, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

A new newsletter directory is out!

A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.

– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Requested move

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:May 1968 events in France that would benefit from more input, from your input. Please come and help! P. I. Ellsworth, ed. ^put'r there 16:41, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Comment on creation of Workforce in country XX

On the economics project page, there is proposal for a new set of articles which would incorporate organized labour issues, for those interested: see here.--Goldsztajn (talk) 14:42, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Review of Updated Stub

I have recently made many edits to the previously outdated stub Western Australian Prison Officers Union for a university assignment. I would appreciate any suggestions, improvements or a review on this article. Any advice is very much appreciated — Preceding unsigned comment added by A1707323 (talk • contribs) 2020-11-17 05:53:47 (UTC)

Hi A1707323: I'll have a look at this. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 22:50, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Comments completed.--Goldsztajn (talk) 21:45, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Userbox

Here is a recently created and related userbox that people involved in this project may wish to add to their user page.

Wikitext	userbox	where used
{{User:UBX/WorkersRights}}	This user supports labor/workers' rights.	linked pages

Helper201 (talk) 00:09, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Reboot

Am proposing a reboot to the project - to get it up and running again. Using the new project X tool - we might have something like this (bare bones at the moment); let me know what you think!.--Goldsztajn (talk) 16:08, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Goldsztajn, I'm interested in the reboot and I might add some work on organized labour articles to my ongoing projects. --MarioGom (talk) 12:11, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

I’m generally interested but would like to understand what new features/benefits there are? Is it a way of avoiding sorting through old/in maintained manually generated pages? I miss some automation at the moment like “newly created/edits articles with a WikiProject labor scope. Would this new project require recategorizing all old labor pages? Shushugah (talk) 12:25, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Shushugah, no re-categorization is required. The banners would be the same. In practice, WikiProject X is more like a loose collection of tools that can be used independently, not really a completely separate thing. You can see the usage of all of them at WP:SOCIALISM, but they are independently usable. These include WikiProjectCard membership system (see Women in Red too), a feed of recent discussions in articles under the project (example) and a main page redesign. MarioGom (talk) 12:31, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi MarioGom and Shushugah: I think I've pretty much completed all the back-end work for the transition. I want to first notify all participants to the project about the membership change (I hope to do that within the next two weeks). It might be good to put together a list of general areas for work (eg collaborations with WP:Socialism or WP:Women in Red). --Goldsztajn (talk) 23:43, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Alphabet Workers Union

An article that you have been involved in editing—Alphabet Workers Union —has been proposed for merging with Google worker organization. If you are interested, please follow the (Discuss) link at the top of the article to participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. czar 18:14, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Created Wiki Edit-a-thon for February 2021

Check out this edit-a-thon: Wikipedia:WikiProject Organized Labour/Online edit-a-thon Tech February 2021 and please help me promote it, where ever possible. For our specific chapter, we're interested in English, German language edits on all topics related to German/US labour laws, technology companies and unionization, etc.. Shushugah (talk) 18:03, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Friendly bump, would love to see more people sign up/commit to this! Shushugah (talk) 23:25, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Modify infbobox company/wikidata for unions

See the discussion here: Template talk:Infobox company#Trade union. Thoughts are welcome on both data structure, and also source for grabbing data. The ETUI has a RESFTUL API on European Works Council, for example see sample body and sample agreement Shushugah (talk) 20:37, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Cleanup this WikiProject

Some of the subpages are very inactive/redundant, and I would like to assess what can be removed/merged to make it easier for new editors joining. For example in the past 5 years only three edits have been made (one was mine) in Special:PrefixIndex/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Organized_Labour/open tasks and we also have on home page of WikiProject a similarly inactive Wikipedia:WikiProject_Organized_Labour#Tasks Shushugah (talk) 17:08, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Shushugah - as part of the transition, I added the project to a bot which produces a list of open tasks/tagged articles for clean up. My feeling is this is more useful than getting people to manually list tasks, although a requests area could be opened in the new layout. The clean up/open tasks will be displayed with a link in the new layout. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 23:55, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Agreed :) new articles, recently edited etc... am looking forward! This area of Wikipedia could use more love! Though maybe it’s fitting that automated bots moved last on *Labor* 😝 Shushugah (talk) 07:45, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

If you have the energy, I just started Association of Catholic Trade Unionists. There is a ton of source material, including multiple books and journal articles which are already linked to on the article. If you feel so inclined, I would be very happy to have help expanding it.--User:Namiba 14:30, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

I am happy to have a look, but this section is about cleaning up the WikiProject itself and how we work togehter, not any specific articles. I see you linked to it already in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Organized_Labour#New_Articles which where I would have recommended that anyways. Happy editing! Also, use four tildes ````, instead of 5, to include your name in signature, instead of a date without a name ~ Shushugah (talk) 14:24, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

I updated Wikipedia:WikiProject_Organized_Labour/Intro and boldly removed the long Table of Contents. We have three primary pages that are edited here. Shushugah (talk) 22:37, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Labor Edit-a-thon in May 2021?

May is an important month for labor movements around the world. Zarasophos and I were discussing running an edit-a-thon during that time, and beforehand, figuring out what tasks need to be done, what countries/coverage are missing etc... Who's in? Shushugah (talk) 02:13, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

I think this would be a great idea. Were you thinking of running a type of contest? Perhaps we can reach out to one of the labour publishers to see if they might be willing to provide a few books to give out as rewards. Perhaps Haymarket or PM Press. --Meanderingbartender (talk) 12:40, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

That's a fantastic idea! I created a landing page for our edit-a-thon, including planning/outreach (we can extract that to another page if the volume increases. I also moved participants/registration there Wikipedia:WikiProject Organized Labour/May 2021 Shushugah (talk) 13:34, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Join the May 2021 edit-a-thon here. Shushugah (talk) 13:34, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

5 proposed category renames of Trade Unionists in X (US state)

See discussion Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 February 26 Shushugah (talk) 11:26, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Work–life balance

A previous version of the Work–life balance article was deleted due to copyright violations, with no otherwise salvageable content. This means that we need to start over on this high-priority article. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:45, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Roscoe Fillmore

An article under this WikiProject's jurisdiction, Roscoe Fillmore, has been nominated for deletion. You can comment here.--User:Namiba 19:15, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Request to delete following sub pages?

I am sorting through are WikiProject pages and propose deleting the following. Please comment underneath any if you oppose.

• Wikipedia:WikiProject_Organized_Labour/Lists a manual list of labour unions. Better served by categories/template nav boxes
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Organized Labour/Outreach it's great idea actually, but hasn't been touched in 15 years
• Wikipedia:WikiProject_Organized_Labour/Photography I think this is actually quite useful, because it shows what exists in Wikimedia Commons
• Wikipedia:WikiProject_Organized_Labour/Summaries we don't seem to have/use Template:Article summary anymore?
• Wikipedia:WikiProject_Organized_Labour/sandbox2019 What was the goal of this? It's recent so I'd err on side of keeping.

Thoughts? ~ Shushugah (talk) 22:47, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Shushugah: They don't hurt. I wouldn't mind removing the /Lists one. The others can be marked with the {{Historical}} tag if they can be useful at some point. I already did that with /Outreach. MarioGom (talk) 13:48, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Celeste Drake

Hello, I recently created an article for union official and trade expert Celeste Drake. Any help with her article would be appreciated. Thank you! Thriley (talk) 15:04, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Infobox:union being considered for merging

Heads up, the union infobox is being considered for merging into Infobox:organization. The discussion would definitely benefit from some more input. Zarasophos (talk) 17:22, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi all, I have just added information to the 1973 Durban Strikes stub page. Would love to receive feedback on it. Thanks in advance 1Haywood1 (talk) 00:05, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Missing article for Unionization drive

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Trade union § Missing article for Unionization drive. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 23:46, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I have added information to the '1973 Durban Strikes' stub page. I found researching the topic really insightful and. hope it's helpful. 1Haywood1 (talk) 00:31, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Created sandbox page for Anne Harper

Hello, I have created a sandbox page for Anne Harper, British community organiser, activist and co-founder of the National Women Against Pit Closures (NWAPC) located here. Any ratings of the page or feedback on how well it confirms to style guide for biography pages about living people and standards for notability are much appreciated before I eventually submit the article for peer review. Thanks! Wrennedangleterre (talk) 18:20, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Trade unionists from South Carolina is up for deletion

Please leave your comments here.--User:Namiba 13:55, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

History of the Industrial Workers of the World needs expansion

The History of the Industrial Workers of the World article ends with 1924 and thus covers only 19 of the 116 years of the union's history. While the first two decades of the IWW were its most influential, the 97 years since have the the group involved in a number of major strikes; the IWW was even targeted by the US government again in 1949 as part of the Second Red Scare. I hope you will help me expand this article to reflect this crucial union's full history.--User:Namiba 15:09, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

The IWW page itself has a section: Industrial Workers of the World#Activity after World War II. More radically speaking (no pun intended) would it make sense to merge the two pages? A lot of the History of the Industrial Workers of the World seems like detailed trivia/timeline instead of an encyclopedic summary of the history. Shushugah (talk) 15:33, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

I might agree if the IWW article wasn't already excessively long. According to Wikipedia:Article_size#A_rule_of_thumb, an article more than 100kb should probably be split. The current primary IWW article is 153kb and the History article is 48kb. While there is probably too much detail and overlap between the articles, I am more inclined to include a more cursory summary at IWW and split off the history section to the History article. However, I am open to any ideas.--User:Namiba 16:30, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Looking into it further, it seems that the article on the IWW might be the longest article about a US-based union or union federation on Wikipedia. It's 3x longer than the article on the UAW as well as the AFL-CIO.--User:Namiba 16:30, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

What if we split the history of the IWW into multiple articles based on time period? 1905-1924 and 1925-present might make sense.--User:Namiba 20:22, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

That actually make a lot of sense! Because they do reflect significant different periods between 1st? and 2nd red wave, along with decline of IWW membership shortly after WW1. Shushugah (talk) 21:29, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

One challenge will be to decide which article then would Industrial Workers of the World redirect to? I'd vote for the 1905-1924 period, given that's the historic period, of course tagging one over the other wouldn't be the biggest deal. Shushugah (talk) 21:29, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

I think the best way to do would be to keep the main article where it is but to create splits like History of the Industrial Workers of the World (1905-1924) and for other periods as well.--User:Namiba 21:33, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Passing of Richard Meyers (2012)

Very sadly, it has only just come to my attention that the editor User:Richard Myers passed away in December 2012; an obituary appears here, there was discussion on Daily Kos about his passing and a memorial event organised in 2013. He was very active in this project and the Colorado project (and intersections of the two projects such as Ludlow massacre). He was also a very early Wikipedian, beginning his contributions in 2004. I found him warm and generous in all my interactions and was genuinely committed to the goals of this encyclopedia. For those who wish to remember him, messages can be left on his talk page: User talk:Richard Myers. I'll be putting together a note for Signpost, please contact me if you wish to contribute. Kind regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 21:09, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Seek money from Wikimedia Foundation?

I want to float an idea here to ask the Wikimedia Foundation for money to do something to encourage labor participation.

The WMF is rolling out a new funding program soon called "alliances". Read more at

• meta:Grants:Programs/Wikimedia Alliances Fund

The idea as I understand it is to give money to wiki-adjacent organizations so that they can engage partly in the wiki community, and party off-wiki to develop content in their field of expertise. Part of the objective is to make communities with aligned values and ethics more understanding of the Wikipedia platform, and to have cultural exchange between that community and wiki.

I would like for some labor organization to apply for this. However, there are a lot of uncertainties. The WMF has not published funding specifications. This kind of collaboration is almost unprecedented. Money sharing has high risk of spoiling relationships. It is not certain what or how a labor organization or its members would do with Wikipedia.

Since there is new activity on this board and since I was thinking about the issue, I thought I would share here. I am a member of a union under Communications Workers of America, and I know people at other unions, but I have never heard of a union which has actively sought out Wikipedia for anything. I have considered approaching members of my union about doing a wiki project but I am unsure overall, and if anyone else knew of a union which already was interested and ready to consider this, then I would like to support anyone else more than start something new.

Thoughts? This is an early idea, and if now is not the time, then I hope that eventually community organization in wiki has some overlap with community organization for labor. Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:54, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

I think applying for a grant is absolutely a wonderful idea! I would prefer if we applied for it/beneficiary was a labour adjacent/educational organization, whether Labor Notes, Global Labour University (which, full disclosure I was a student of). I have a fiscal host as part of Berlin Tech Workers Coalition, that could host some of this money as well, if we are looking for a simple/pragmatic solution, and the receipts are very transparent here: https://opencollective.com/techworkersber Either way, we should clarify what are the needs for funding. Is it to fund some pizza parties, prizes for editing, scoped grants to people who otherwise couldn't contribute, e.g. Labor residents?

Broadly, I think the goal should be to ensure adequate Labor coverage on Wikipedia particularly the global south. ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 14:22, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Will also mention re unions and "digital strategies" is quite limited. This academic paper analyzes the limited examples of merely using Facebook/Twitter which are far more accessible than editing Wikipedia.. And User:Zarasophos did an interview with me about Wikipedia and Labour; we could do some more outreach/feelers with other unions to see if there's interest. I'd love to support existing initiatives, but suspect they don't exist...yet. Your expertise/experience with WMF/orga matters and fundraising would be greatly appreciated! My multiple comments are merely enthusiasm ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 14:38, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

References

In principle, I support any collaboration which strengthens participation in organised labour related work on Wikipedia. My reluctance though is that I don't think the best way to reach out for new collaboration is to start with funds; my all too frequent experience in RL is that when the funds run out, so does the collaboration. Having been in and out of this project for almost 15 years, there's a core problem that there is not a large enough body of editors concerned about this project to mitigate the inevitable periods of inactivity that happen to all editors (myself included). So, we're doing better than in a long time, but we're still too small a number. I'm not against seeking funding for collaborations, but I'm a little wary of short-termism and I'd really like to be building a varied world-wide group of committed editors to this project who can keep it alive long-term. For example, is anyone located near any institution on this list: [1]? Thinking about who is likely to have the time and interest in contributing in the long term would be my suggestion for a focus on collaboration (and, unfortunately, that often makes trade unions not the best place to focus). In solidarity, --Goldsztajn (talk) 21:56, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

@Goldsztajnyour 15 years of experience/involvement with this project is quite humbling! What were past efforts/initiatives to increase activity and or GLAM partnerships from institutions in the list you included? One setback I encountered is many labor research institutes are weary of providing such labour/knowledge for free, when their sustenance/funding is already scarce and they view Wikipedia as replacing their role, which is both true and not true.

As an aside, I will be attending Labor Notes in late March and will try to organize a Wiki-edit-a-thon session/recruiting there, and also will be attending the Global Labour University alumni network. Reaching labor scholars/organizers where they are, may be a reasonable approach, while we build relations with institutions and their communities. With regards to funding what new possibilities would be offered? The workshops/examples I mentioned above, generally can be done with little/no extra cost beyond attending the event. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 22:16, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

@Shushugah: Fiscal administration is the hardest part of receiving a WMF grant.

For $500 many community organizations will organize a wiki editing event. Money goes to coffee, childcare, and paying for some staff time. When the goal is to reach new communities then paying money to do events gets results fast.

More ambitiously there could be the possibility of strategic alignment between unions and the Wikimedia movement. Some aspects that I have considered are creating policy guidance on the copyright of open letters, petitions, and governance publications. Wikipedia editors see a pervasive problem that when community organizations publish media for sharing broadly, they do so with conventional copyright. Pictures of protests and demonstrations, for example, are almost always non-free. In addition to seeking wiki editing we could convene talks for ideological alignment in media publishing and archiving.

I am sure other people have other ideas, but before planning too much, there does need to be an identified organization to apply for this and perhaps a few smaller organizations to agree to host a smaller event. Also, as the WMF has not yet published details of what they will fund or other details of the funding offer, it is probably best not to presume too much.

I expect the applications to open in October 2021 at which time there will be more details. Check out meta, and if you know someone at any of those organizations, start early discussion with them about whether they would do wiki programs. Also, for this round, the scope may be limited geographically to North America, or maybe not. As I understand the WMF is planning to organize grants by region, but this is new, and Wikipedia has no boundaries, so I am not sure what they have in mind.

This is the info I have for now. If you or anyone else wants to draft ideas then that can happen in the meta grants space. Again - not too much effort yet with so little info. Blue Rasberry (talk) 00:12, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

RfC 2022 FIFA World Cup

There's a request for comment at Talk:2022 FIFA World Cup#rfc_9D7DD5F which is of relevance to this project. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 05:27, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Women in Green October Good Article Edit-a-thon

Hello WikiProject Organized Labour:

WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Editathon event in October 2021!

Running from 1 through 31 October 2021, WikiProject Women in Green is hosting a Good Article (GA) editathon event focused on the topic of women's rights. Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing women's rights-related GA submissions during the event period, with resources and one-on-one support provided by experienced Women in Green GA reviewers. Participants have the opportunity to receive a barnstar.

We hope to see you there!

Goldsztajn (talk) 21:40, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm a co-coordinator for this event along with Alanna the Brave; there are more than quite few shared interests between this project and the edit-a-thon, if editors are interested I encourage you to participate. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 22:22, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

RfC discussion Template talk:Socialism in the UK

Hi all, would appreciate any input into this template around the scope of socialism/ what parties to include. There is debate around whether to work on a broad church approach to socialism vs. narrowly defined. Please do put your thoughts on the talk page if you feel like contributing. Jamzze (talk) 08:51, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Template for recruiting/inviting people

We need a template that is visually, engaging and encourages people to join WikiProject Labour that we can use to invite people who've been making numerous edits to the project. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 22:05, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Apostrophe in article titles

Hey y'all, just wanted to get your opinions on proper article titling for labor strikes. I've noticed that there seems to be a bit of inconsistency with the use of apostrophes in some strike pages. For instance, with the 1997 Ontario teachers' strike the title include a possessive apostrophe, whereas the 2007 Hayward teachers strike omits this. In the pages I've made I've omitted the apostrophe and was wondering if there was any consensus on whether or not to include or omit the apostrophe. If this is already covered in MOS or a previous discussion, my apologies. -JJonahJackalope (talk) 17:28, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

I made those page moves to include the apostrophe where necessary because that is the grammatically correct form for the page titles in question (see MOS:', MOS:POSS, and the Apostrophe article). For example, omitting the apostrophe from this article's title gets us "Spanish air traffic controllers strike", which is a statement in the present tense about Spanish air traffic controllers striking, with "strike" being a verb (whereas the apostrophe's inclusion would make "strike" a noun). "Spanish air traffic controllers strike" might serve as a news headline when that strike is ongoing, but is not really suitable as the title of an article about a specific strike. 1857a (talk) 20:37, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

I'd prefer to keep it without, as you can argue it's either an adjective or noun, but the additional ambiguity is are teachers treated as a single entity, or multiple teachers? ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 15:12, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Where there is a date in the title it makes clear the use is adjective+noun, hence no apostrophe needed (ie 2017 Spanish air traffic controllers strike), whereas when there is no date it is where the ambiguity arises and would suggest using an apostrophe. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 22:57, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

What I mean is, it teacher's strike or teachers' strike? That ambiguity alone makes me prefer the simpler version without. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 12:24, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

• Default to what the sources use: In our Ontario and Hayward articles, the sources use no apostrophes. czar 18:07, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

📣 We are an active WikiProject again!

In 2020 8 new articles were listed, while in 2021 86 articles and counting were listed. Article creations are not the only contributions or metric for quality, but still worth highlighting the most prolific editors and for making WP:LABOR an active WikiProject.

• JJonahJackalope's 25 articles in 2021
• Zarasophos's 31 articles in 2021
• Namiba's 16 articles in 2021
• Goldsztajn who rebooted this WikiProject and is a prolific contributor all around

Let's make the rest of 2021-2022 epic. Shall we organize a proper hackathon soon for November or December? ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 09:40, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Shushugah, I'd also include Warofdreams whose kept things moving in 2021, too! Yes, I think it would be good to have a focussed edit-a-thon or some such before year end. I'm committed to work with the Women in Green project in October, so would prefer December. I'm also hoping to finally get the projectX conversion of the project completed this month; so my plate somewhat full in the immediate term. In solidarity, Goldsztajn (talk) 11:30, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

👏 absolutely! And to everyone: Please shout out/celebrate users who've made an impact whether content or community. A December timeline for edit-a-thon makes sense. Would it be one week/one month? I'm thinking something gamified but self paced like WP:MILCON with various point schemes, like improving articles, creating articles, cleaning up templates/tags, redlinks from Category:Trade unions by country etc.. and I'll be at Labor Notes in late March, another opportunity to do a Wiki-edit-a-thon session in person ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 12:24, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the shoutout! I am very happy to be part of a community on Wikipedia interested in the history of working people.--User:Namiba 13:29, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the recognition, and congratulations on getting this rebooted. Warofdreams talk 22:23, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Shushugah In terms of an editathon, how about a two/three week focus addressing this: "Of the 7008 articles in this project 2110 or 30% are marked for cleanup, with 3738 issues in total." ... could we get a 5% reduction in total artices? Goldsztajn (talk) 01:51, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

• I published a lot of articles in 2020/2021 but just didn't manually add them to the list. 😊 By the way, PresN was working on a script/bot that would compile new articles automatically, but not sure where that ended up. czar 18:26, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Let's nominate some articles for GA status?

There's a backlog drive in January, could be good opportunity to nominate and review some important articles topics to GA status as well as promote any other topics we're proud of at Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/GAN Backlog Drives/January 2022 ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 17:13, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Rfc on transnational company worker organization articles

With a number of transnational company labor related pages, it would be good to have standardized naming convention. In most cases, these are single trade unions. In case of VW, it's closely coordinated, while in case of Amazon, it's often quite diffused/fragmented. I've been adding redirects for COMPANY union, just because it's a likely common phrase people search, like Apple union etc...I am not a big fan of the British/US spelling ambiguity of organization, or the singular/plurality of it. Another possibility would be COMPANY Labor Relations. That is potentially a separate topic tho, for example of exploitation allegations etc.. instead of organized labour. Really we're covering COMPANY organized labour (with its US/British and Oxford spelling variations for triple confusion.

• Apple worker organizations
• Amazon worker organization
• IBM worker organizations
• Google worker organization (not to be confused with the US Alphabet Workers Union
• Volkswagen worker organizations

Additionally, how's the structure/similarity/flow between these articles? Would be good to discuss, before more are created. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 12:34, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Since the scope of the articles aren't standard, the naming does not necessarily need to be standardized either. The main distinction is whether the scope is unionized labor or not, as covered in reliable sources. Most of these WP articles are ostensibly summary style splits from their parent articles, meaning that there is so much written on worker efforts to organize or unionize that it would be undue weight to include all of it in the main article, hence the split. The problem, in these cases, is that describing worker collective efforts is not necessarily "unionization". Google, Amazon, Apple are all efforts but sources are not necessarily covering a union drive as the main aspect of the topic (though, to add complication, this changes over time, as it has with the Amazon Bessemer drive).

Is there an alternative title that reflects worker efforts to organize (Google walkouts, November Four) without implying that the company is unionizing? "Organized labor" is a usual synonym for trade union, as we currently redirect. "Labor relations" would seem to give too wide a berth because the companies are not necessarily even acknowledging nevertheless engaging with these efforts. It gets a little different with something like Starbucks (per my talk page thread) because the majority of the coverage is indeed about unions and not worker actions outside of unions. To this end, I could see something like Unionization of Starbucks becoming the article's title but wouldn't see such a thing for the current scope of the Google or Amazon articles, especially given that the individual units currently have their own split articles. Apple union, unionization of Google, etc. would make for fine redirects, though. So the "organization" in the current titles is reflecting not some unnamed, primordial trade union beneath current worker actions, but is describing the coverage: worker efforts to organize. (not watching, please {{ping}}) czar 17:59, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Since we are describing actions by workers, it makes sense to use a verb in the title: "[company name] worker organizing." This is broad enough to include formal unionization (collective bargaining) as well as a range of collective activity by people working for the same employer. Toby Higbie (talk) 01:38, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Discussion to unprotect Guy Standing (economist)

Talk:Guy Standing (economist) § Extended confirm protection too much? ––FormalDude ^talk 03:30, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

FAR for Rock Springs massacre

I have nominated Rock Springs massacre for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. (t · c) buidhe 20:42, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

New Wikipedia:Nazi affiliation Task Force

With International Holocaust Remembrance Day coming up on 27 January, after discussing in WP:GERMANY I created a Taskforce on Wikipedia to address coverage of Nazi affiliations of individuals, companies that are possibly whitewashed on Wikipedia. Please join and make some recommendations including any scholarly source that are relevant! Wikipedia:Nazi affiliation Task Force ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 18:38, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Labor section on Museum page

I am wondering if there are folks that would like to help me with creating a Labor/Museum worker organization section on the Museum page? Myotus (talk) 05:22, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Lead-refs needed

Hi all!

This is not my usual field, so I don't know the literature well. But I have seen reference to "strike paper" ("strike newspaper") in a few articles and well, those are redlinks. I can define the term and find refs that apply it to specific examples both on-wiki and in other sources. But in order to make them blue even for a stub, we need a secondary ref for the phenomenon/topic itself. Can anyone help find some please? DMacks (talk) 16:27, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject Newspapers notified as well. DMacks (talk) 16:30, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@DMacks You get some mismatches like newspaper workers going on strike (but not producing a specific newspaper/special edition) like 1962–1963 New York City newspaper strike

But I think these are newspapers produced for the 1926 general strike., there already exists British Gazette on Wikipedia.

Occupy Wall Street had a special edition of Occupied Wall Street Journal for the May 1st 2012 'general strike', Tidal Magazine (Occupy Theory) as well.

Striker's News, an IWW newspaper during a strike?

References

Just some quick google'd ideas ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 16:57, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on it! DMacks (talk) 19:09, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Any help needed in translating/expanding hispanic org. labor articles?

Hi! Just came across this WP. If I could be of use I'd be glad to help out. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 11:20, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

@A. C. Santacruz Welcome to WP:LABOR! There is definitely a lot of work to do! Category:Trade unions in South America by country doesn't exist in Spanish, and the English language content is significantly lacking. I don't know if an existing list of "most wanted" articles, or "good labour articles waiting to be translated" exists, but would be useful to know! I'm currently working through some of the Brazilian labour strikes of 1978-79, but that's Portuguese language. Greetings from next door in Berlin ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 11:58, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

@A. C. Santacruz Additionally, the Spanish version of this WikiProject may have some leads on what would be useful see es:Wikiproyecto:Sindicalismo ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 11:59, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response! I think the category might not exist in Spanish because es.wiki has Category: Trade Unions by Country, Shushugah. By "the English language content is significantly lacking", do you mean english articles on hispanic unions? If so I could translate a few of the larger ones no problem. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 12:12, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

@A. C. Santacruz: a belated welcome; great to have you around! Another place to start, if you're interested: this Wikidata query lists all trade unions in the Spanish wikipedia without an article in English. (I didn't write this, but got help here). Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 11:32, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

New attempt for "worker_representation" field at Infobox company

Hello everyone, just wanted to let you know that I'm starting a new attempt to get a "worker_representation" field added to Template:Infobox company. There were no counterarguments last year and a corresponding field was added to WikiData, but not to the Infobox. I think this would be very beneficial to have, a bit of support would probably help. Pinging a few people I think will be interested: @Shushugah: @Goldsztajn: @Soman: @JJonahJackalope: Let's see if it works this time! Zarasophos (talk) 23:01, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Good idea! I encourage you to also post this message at the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Companies page to build consensus on the change. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 23:25, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Done, thanks for the suggestion! -- Zarasophos (talk) 09:52, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Business might also be interested, Zarasophos. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 09:53, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Also done, thanks again! -- Zarasophos (talk) 09:56, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for restarting the discussion :) Zarasophos, hopefully this time it gets added. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 10:31, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Vimes Boots Index

Hello! I apologize if this is the wrong place for this, but it seems appropriate. I recently started an article on the Draft:Vimes Boots Index, which is a price index tied to the cheapest foods and living items to measure how inflation hits the poorest the hardest. It's fairly short at the moment but more details should be coming sometime this month. It's currently still a draft, could someone please review it? TheTranarchist (talk) 05:21, 8 February 2022 (UTC)TheTranarchist

@TheTranarchist: Hi and welcome! I've had a very quick look at the draft; my major concern would be that on the present sourcing the topic does not appear to be notable separate from the person who has proposed the index. To be devil's advocate, one needs to be able to demonstrate the topic is notable in and of itself, whereas most of the sourcing is about Jack Monroe proposing the index, which can simply be included in the article about Monroe themself. It well might be that this evolves into a topic noteworthy in itself, but I suspect for the moment it is WP:TOOSOON. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 11:30, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Quote from Men at Arms should have a direct citation to the book/page. Other quotes should be moved from the end of the article and moved to the information they are actually citing. Myotus (talk) 14:26, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

@Goldsztajn:, @Myotus: Thank you both for your thoughts! I updated the page format to flow better and fixed the citation locations. I also included some more sources about the history of the boots theory. In terms of notability and waiting, that makes sense, but even before this for years I've frequently seen the Men at Arms quote being shared which is why I'd thought it was more notable. However, considering the statements from the ONS I think there may be grounds to have the article if only for reference to its effects on the ONS policy. Or perhaps have a separate article devoted to the boots theory itself, since I think we should have some sort of article devoted to the premise since it seems notable enough in its own right. For the meantime, the article seems in pretty good shape and we can wait till the index is published to move forward. Love to hear your thoughts! TheTranarchist (talk) 21:22, 8 February 2022 (UTC)TheTranarchist

Great resource on Canadian strikes

The University of Toronto has this terrific resource on strikes in Canada. I will probably work on starting some of them eventually but feel free to use it to jump in yourself.--User:Namiba 14:59, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Missing assessment

Could someone PLEASE assesss my 2017 article North America's Building Trades Unions as obviously I cant do it myself ? Thank you !--Wuerzele (talk) 22:20, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done, courtesy ping to Wuerzele. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 16:04, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Updating UK list of trade unions

Hello everyone! I'm running a teach-out Wiki Workshop tomorrow connected to the UCU strike action on pensions and the 4 Fights. I'd like to contribute to the project by pointing newbie editors at articles that need improvement (references, info boxes, categories etc). I'm currently looking at adding women trade unionists, adding info to Wikidata, and updating the list of UK trade unions, as the most recent data is for 2014. Would this be a useful thing to do? drkirstyross (talk) 18:56, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Derrick Palmer

I recently created a draft for Derrick Palmer, one of the leaders of the Amazon Labor Union. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you, Thriley (talk) 02:22, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Thriley - I'm not sure that Palmer at this point is notable separate from the ALU ... I'd be somewhat concerned that this won't pass WP:BLP1E. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 02:13, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources

Main page: User:Headbomb/unreliable

I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)

and turns it into something like

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Duplication of category?

Do you think we need both Category:Labor disputes and Category:Strikes (protest)? They seem duplicative to me. Thoughts?--User:Namiba 13:33, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Every Strike is a Labor dispute but every Labor dispute is not a strike. So I would think it would be wise to keep both. Myotus (talk) 22:39, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

What is gained from keeping strikes separate from labor disputes?--User:Namiba 14:27, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Strikes are a particularly noteworthy element of labour disputes. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 12:44, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Naming convention for large companies with different union/labor structures

Currently we have articles titled:

• Volkswagen worker organisations
• Google worker organization
• Tesla and unions
• Starbucks unions

I currently dislike that organization/organisation has different spellings, but also singular/plural forms, and more specifically, it's not a phrase that actively appears in google searches. I've seen "COMPANY Employee representation" and "COMPANY unions" frequently in google search results, so would suggest going with the simplest naming conventions. In the case of Tesla, a user argued there is no Tesla union, so they renamed it accordingly. Still quite short. Thoughts? ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 13:13, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

I agree that it is better to avoid using organisations, also because not all worker organizations are trade unions (eg works councils) and in the case of the latter I think very important not to conflate the two (or any other "consultative" bodies). Personally, I prefer "trade union" over "union" by itself, mostly for reasons of precision and avoiding any ambiguity. Of course in some cases, we will run afoul of sourcing issues ... eg is there actually a registered trade union at Google? Is Tesla and unions the answer? I'm not quite comfortable with it, but for the moment don't have an alternative. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 13:11, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Category:Trade unionists

I think the Category:Trade unionists is far too vague. What is a trade unionist, anyway? Is it a union staffer? Is it a union member? If so, hundreds of millions of people around the world are members of trade unions with and without their consent, so how is it defining? A clearer and perhaps better name might be Category:Labour movement activists. Thoughts?--User:Namiba 13:47, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Trade unionist is the common term throughout the English speaking world for a person in a trade union; it can mean rank-and-file/shop floor members, union officers, elected officials, shop stewards, delegates etc. "Labour movement activist" is not necessarily a member of a trade union, it's (to my ear at least) US-English and not a phrase one commonly sees in sources used *in general* to describe people in trade unions, whatever role they might play. FWIW "Labo(u)r movement activist" doesn't even ngram. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 12:57, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Right, but simply belonging to an organization is not inherently defining, which throws the whole category tree into question. Labo(u)r activist would also be acceptable. Including the word "activist" implies that they're notable for union activism, not simply for being part of a trade union. See [2] [3] and [4] for examples of its usage. Moreover, it is already a subcategory Category:Activists by type--User:Namiba 15:07, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

I disagree, trade unionist is inherently defining; just because the set is large, doesn't invalidate it... (hello [[Category:Living people]]) ... Further, there's no reason why cross categorisation cannot refine (eg create a category of General Secretaries). The examples you cite reinforce my point about this being US-English (albeit one is Canadian, so North American English). This discussion reminded me of an earlier discussion where we participated: I think there are many people in the *organised* labour movement who describing as activists would be misleading in that it would assign characteristics completely absent from that person, eg Wang Dongming. Trade unionist is far more neutral and descriptive in a "professional" sense. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 21:40, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Categories for renaming

Hi everyone, you may be interested in participating in this discussion about the renaming of categories related to trade union leaders.-- User:Namiba 14:27, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Labor related Good Article nominations

Both Volkswagen worker organizations (created by me) and Trader Joe's United by @Czarare nomited for WP:Good Article status. Any feedback/improvements welcomed! I personally am hoping to nominate the Volkswagen worker organizations for FA status afterwards. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 00:28, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Developments in Iceland / Sweden

Some changes in leadership and conflict in the Icelandic labour movement: Iceland’s union chief quits among infighting (August 2022) and LO (Sweden) quits the ETUC: Swedish LO: The ETUC no longer represents us (January 2022). Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 11:26, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Good Article Editathon event in October 2022

Hello WikiProject Organized Labour:

WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Editathon event in October 2022!

Running from October 1 to 31, 2022, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) editathon event – Wildcard Edition! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to any and all women and women's works during the event period. Want to improve an article about a Bollywood actress? Go for it. A pioneering female scientist? Absolutely. An award-winning autobiography by a woman? Yes! GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to receive a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.

We hope to see you there!

Goldsztajn (talk) 01:28, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

New (2022) sources of interest

• Book study on trade unions in authoritarian regimes with chapters on Brazil, Turkey, Philippines, Hong Kong, Zimbabwe, Russia, China, Belarus, Burma, Swaziland.
• Recent changes in trade union movement in Ethiopia.
• Attempts at trade unionism by the far-right in Western Europe.
• Trade unions and green transition, South Africa/Germany compared.
• 2022 book length study of trade unions in Europe, chapters on France, Denmark, Czech Republic, Spain, Germany, UK, plus ECJ and migration related chapters.
• Gender inequality in Portuguese trade unions.
• Special issue on Nordic trade unions.
• Somewhat under-examined phenomenon of (Northern) trade unions as development agents.

References

Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 06:40, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

ITUC General Secretary and Qatar corruption scandal

For those interested, Luca Visentini‎ the newly elected (Nov 2022) general secretary of the ITUC stood aside on 14 December following his arrest and release by Belgian authorities in connection to the emerging Qatar/EU parliament corruption scandal. Owen Tudor, formerly of the TUC (UK), is now acting GS of the ITUC. I've updated the article and done some minor cleaning - obviously a highly sensitive matter regarding our coverage. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 11:12, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Notification of move request

An editor has requested for 1992 United States railroad strike to be moved to 1992 United States railroad lockout. Since you had some involvement with 1992 United States railroad strike, you might want to participate in the move discussion (if you have not already done so). Eldomtom2 (talk) 06:45, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Edit-a-thon for 2023

Let's try an online month long edit-a-thon in February 2023. My thought process is to not overthink it, and just have fun. I will reach out to some Academic publishers, labor institutes and try do some more outreach again, perhaps in Labor Notes, an Project report (please contribute!) in WP:SIGNPOST and just continue doing the cool work we do.

I took liberty of creating a page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Organized Labour/Online edit-a-thon February 2023 already. Two major next steps are outreach, and compiling suggested To Do/Wanted activities.

Pinging @Czar @ Goldsztajn @JJonahJackalope @Zarasophos @Comrade Toaster @AndAllForWhat? @Myotus @Drkirstyross @MaxnaCarta @Hunerwithat @Wwklnd. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:27, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

I'd like to participate since I've been meaning to cover some more labor-related topics. Do you think tenant unions would fall under the purview? I've been planning to write some articles on tenant unions and collectives for a while and this could be the kick I need. TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 01:44, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

@TheTranarchist the more the merrier, as long as the articles themselves don't become the product of WP:SYNTH. I translated the Deutsche Wohnen enteignen article from German, which is about 2021 housing referendum in Berlin, and was endorsed by various trade unions too. Recently I came across this article too. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:53, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm happy to participate. @Shushugah: Is the proposal for a generalisesd edit-a-thon or something tech related? (Tech still appearing in the title is why I ask). Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 08:47, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Goldsztajn Trout me, it is fixed. It should be general Labor related. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 10:05, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

I would be happy to participate! I will see what I can do to muster up help from the labor history community here in Minnesota. Also, is there anyone here connected with the Wisconsin Labor History Society? I see that @Aboudaqn built the page. Myotus (talk) 17:13, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

@Orangemike? czar 08:17, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Aboudaqn With pleasure! A fresh look at coverage of Walker's anti-labor (WI) legislation would be quite useful I think, or recent graduate student campaigns of SEIU in MN. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 17:13, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Can I join? I'm currently planning on adding what I can to improve labor-related articles in the Philippines, and helping beef up labor topics in general sounds appealing. Let's do this NyanThousand (talk) 16:08, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

NyanThousand welcome and yes please! Recently I was looking to improve Business process outsourcing in the Philippines and BPO Industry Employees' Network ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 17:13, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

References

February 2023 Labour Edit-a-thon

2023 WikiProject Organized Labour/Online Edit-A-Thon

Hello, WikiProject Organized Labour/Archive 9! During the entire month of February there will be an ongoing edit-a-thon on all labour related projects across English Wikipedia and sister projects. Register to track your edits and sign up on the edit-a-thon's project page as a participant. To invite other participants paste {{subst:WPLABOR/2023}} on their talk page! This event is organized by WP:WikiProject Organized Labour

I put together a box to promote the edit-a-thon that can be added to the talk pages inviting folks we think would be interested to contribute. Thoughts? Additions? Corrections? The photo is very generic and meant to encompass as much as the labour theme as possible. Myotus (talk) 23:07, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Myotus this is absolutely brilliant! I will create a substitution template for this and link it inside this template and thank you for the initiative/beautiful design! It is now substitutable template with {{WPLABOR/2023}} on any user's page ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 23:39, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Updated /Assesments page

In preparation of the February edit-a-thon, I updated the templates/instructions using newer tools available. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Organized Labour/Assessment. I can imagine there are many hidden/near GA ready gems waiting to be promoted. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 12:11, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Shushugah here's the list of articles needing cleanup which could be used as a guide for the edit-a-thon. I'm thinking to finally get on top of converting to the project X format. We could also then send out a newsletter to all project participants to announce the edit-a-thon around 23 January. Let me know what you think. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 20:21, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

@Goldsztajn I don't quite understand what convering to Project X means, but I trust you and think it's good idea to get in touch with all project participants. I manually evented all of the ones in our membership list from past 2 years fwiw using {{subst:WPLABOR/2023}}. Are there other site wide notifications we should be using? ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:45, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

I can have a go at rating the unrated ones for y'all before February rolls around. By the way, your "register here" link doesn't work! -- asilvering (talk) 03:39, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Ok, having done a few of these, I think the importance scheme for the project, which looks pretty straightforward, ends up giving a much higher proportion of higher-importance articles than most (all?) other wikiprojects, and has especially odd results when it comes to small, historical, and/or shortlived unions - these should be "mid" according to the guidelines as I read them, but I'm not convinced that rating them as "mid" actually helps project members find the articles most in need of work. Here's a couple examples: Dutch Independent Union of Public and Non-Profit Workers; Accrington and District Weavers', Winders' and Warpers' Friendly Association. The latter isn't a local exactly, but I rated it as though it were (it is at least not a national union). I assume no one would really mind if these are marked as "low"? Happy to go through and check/adjust the ratings I've done if this WP is really keen on sticking to the guidelines as literally as possible for organizational reasons. -- asilvering (talk) 05:44, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

How could we improve trade union?

I'm trying to improve the article as part of the WP:Vital article list, though I'm not sure where to start. What should we do first to make the article up to par? CactiStaccingCrane 14:12, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Throughout February will be an edit-a-thon where this could be perfect opportunity to improve this article. I personally think Trade_union#Trade_unions_by_country can be removed and replaced with International comparisons of trade unions or Category:Trade unions by country. Many sections are wholly missing sourcing for example Trade_union#Structure_and_politics needs some serious work. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 20:58, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I'll try to lay the groundwork for the edit-a-thon on the article, i.e. fixing blatant factual errors, remove unreliable references, etc. Hopefully this article would be the first Vital article GA in years :) CactiStaccingCrane 02:01, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

March 2023: ITUC GS dismissed

For those interested, the ITUC General Council voted on 11 March 2023 to dismiss Luca Visentini, their recently elected general secretary, as a result of accepting €50,000 indirectly from the Qatari government as part of his 2022 election campaign. According to a report in El País, the vote was 57-12, although I admit to being somewhat surprised he got 12 votes in support. The ITUC have announced they will hold an extraordinary World Congress to elect a new GS. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 20:07, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Updated Pages

I've done some formatting of Timeline of labor issues and events to make it easier to navigate by century. Each section is now collapsible while keeping it's original look from before. LoomCreek (talk) 22:59, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

I've added new documentation around the Columbine Mine Massacre including previously unreleased photo documentation around it. I would appreciate any help on expanding it & also establishing the related 1927–1928 Colorado Coal Strike which currently exists as an unfinished user page of mostly sources. A good place to start for reference might be Industrial Workers of the World, philosophy and tactics: Colorado coal strike (case study), established by Richard Myers

- LoomCreek (talk) 21:22, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

@LoomCreek Wonderful to see Richard's work being built on; he's very much missed. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 19:55, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

@Goldsztajn Yes I came across him through researching the Colorado Coal Strike. From what I've seen he seems like he was an incredibly dedicated and kind person, I wish I'd gotten to talk to him before he passed. I planned to contact him originally before I learned what had happened. I just hope that this can do a small part in respecting and remembering his work. LoomCreek (talk) 20:53, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Trade unions affiliated with X?

Should we create categories such as Category:Trade unions affiliated with the American Federation of Labor and other labor federations?--User:Namiba 00:51, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Isn't this already achieved through the Category:AFL–CIO subcategories list? Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 11:34, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

I agree, it's already covered. - Tim1965 (talk) 14:44, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

It could be, but there are already 27 subcategories in Category:AFL–CIO and many more articles. Given that there were/are dozens of affiliates over time, I think a category for affiliates could be useful. However, there is also the issue of unions moving between federations, especially ones which existed during the AFL and CIO split.--User:Namiba 14:55, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

I agree that there needs to be subcategories of AFL-CIO. It's willy-nilly now, with all sorts of articles in the category that don't seem to belong there (like strike actions). But I would make these for former but still extant affiliates (such as the Change to Win unions, or now-independents like the Carpenters), no longer extant former affiliates (those which merged with other unions, or which dissolved), departments of the AFL-CIO (like Union Privilege, Building and Construction Trades, etc.), and perhaps presidents/leadership. Existing affiliates, I would think, should just stay under AFL-CIO without a separate category. I'd like to hear from other contributors, though. - Tim1965 (talk) 16:27, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Belated reply, agree with Tim1965. One comment; former AFL-CIO affiliates seems a little redundant, the vast majority are the Change to Win unions which by definition are former affiliates ... are there more than two or three who fall outside that? ie former affiliates not in CtW? Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 20:17, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

@Goldsztajn Change to Win (now called Strategic Organizing Center) is the bulk of members who left AFL-CIO, but some unions who quit AFL-CIO without affiliating with SOC are

1. Laborers' International Union of North America
2. International Longshore and Warehouse Union
3. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America (they were part of treaty, but not the federation)
4. Category:Change to Win Federation

So while smallish, I think it is a relevant category. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 20:19, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

• I went ahead and created Category:American Federation of Labor affiliates, Category:AFL–CIO affiliates, and Category:Canadian Labour Congress affiliates. Category:Congress of Industrial Organizations affiliates also needs to be created.--User:Namiba 21:01, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Lowell mill girls

Lowell mill girls has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 03:29, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments

Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 19:34, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

New (2023) peer-reviewed sources of interest

• East German trade union interactions with Africa via French and British trade unionists.
• Trade union rights of police officers in global context
• Trade unions and COVID-19
• Trade union renewal in Central Europe post 2008
• Trade union rights in the platform economy
• Labour struggles in Cambodia
• New article on Carola Woerishoffer (early 20th century labour activist)
• Energy transition and unions in UK and Australia
• Collective bargaining in Nigeria
• Effects of unionism on regular and irregular workers in ROK
• Introduction to special issue on neoliberalism and trade unions in the Global South
• Growth in women's trade union membership in UK

References

Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 11:40, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

New page needs improved

2023 Writers Guild of America strike obviously quite timely. Thanks for taking a look.

Abeg92contribs 04:23, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University of Botswana Non-Academic Staff Union

This deletion discussion is of relevance to this project. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 11:20, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Employee classification?

I am searching for an article about employee classification, why it's important in labor/industrial relations, and specifically the problems of employee misclassification. I found a dozen related articles, but non concisely focused on this topic. Any suggestions how to proceed? Should I create a new article, merge some of the existing ones? ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 16:11, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Good question(s). The {{Employment}} infobox has a "Classifications" section, so it's reasonable that such a page could be created. You can use the list of classifications there as a starting guide for shaping the page content.

Based on a quick search, I expect these pages to partially overlap with a new page, so make sure you check them to see if it would be better to improve or expand one of them instead:

• Division of labour (more about the theory)
• Designation of workers by collar color
• Working class (more of a sociological classification)
• Employment
• Work (human activity)#Kinds of work

Surprisingly, neither Labor law nor the US-specific page elaborate on classification. Perhaps they should? Regardless make sure you follow WP:WORLDVIEW, because classification definitely differs between countries. Good luck! Exobiotic 💬 ✒️ 19:57, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

As a comment there does seem to be this page on classification when it comes to independent contractors vs employees.

Misclassification of employees as independent contractors @Shushugah

But I'm not sure if you mean in the form of a much broader article. Regardless I think a new article in the form of a split, or a merge could be useful.

-- LoomCreek (talk) 19:18, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#More_Perfect

Hi everyone, I've posted a request for comment on the reliability of More Perfect Union, as I'm looking for those who are versed and have expertise in labor issues. So comments from people within this WikiProject feels especially relevant. -LoomCreek (talk) 00:15, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Featured article review National Football League Players Association

I have nominated National Football League Players Association for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:31, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Starbucks strike

New stub for strike over Starbucks' rules re: LGBT pride decor: 2023 Starbucks strike

---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:40, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2022 Sierra Leone doctors strike

You are invited to take part in a discussion here about the notability of a doctors strike in Sierra Leone.--User:Namiba 19:53, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

2023 SAG-AFTRA strike article

The 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike (which started today) was established by someone. It seems of interest to the wikiproject so I'm adding it here. - LoomCreek (talk) 19:36, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Housing & Tenant Rights in New York Taskforce

Hey y'all!

I just created the Housing and Tenant Rights in New York Task Force. Please feel free to join if interested! While not strictly a subset of organized labor, there are quite a lot of intersecting articles, particularly with articles regarding tenant unions, rent legislation, and etc.

Relatedly, I just created the category Category:Tenants unions, I think I tagged all the relevant articles with it but wanted to give everyone a heads up in case there are some I missed.

Best, TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 01:28, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Graduate Student Employee Unions

Hi pals, I've been gathering info about all active graduate worker unions. I've found 170 units so far! The table is soon to be published, right now it's just on the Talk page here: Talk:Graduate student employee unionization#Table of Grad Worker Unions

I think the above webpage is part of Organized Labour WikiProject?

Please feel free to review the table if you are interested! The more eyes on it before publishing, the better. Thanks! AJVincelli (talk) 22:59, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Draft List Article

Hi again all, I've created this draft article for the list of graduate employee unions: Draft:List_of_graduate_student_employee_unions

PLEASE feel free to review it, provide feedback, update it directly, etc. so that it can be published ASAP. Thank you in advance for your help!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by AJVincelli (talk • contribs) 18:40, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Animation labor

Hello all! Today I improved the The Animation Guild, IATSE Local 839 and Screen Cartoonist's Guild pages, and did some improvements to the 1982 animators' strike page. I have plans for pages on the Terrytoons Inc. Strike and the social media campaign of The Animation Guild, called NewDeal4Animation. I'm still new to it, but I would like to, at least, improve existing pages about organized labor in the animation industry, starting with that in the U.S. Currently there is the aforementioned page on the 1982 strike, the Disney animators' strike (1941) page, and the 1937 Fleischer Studios strike page. I don't think there are any others about labor in the animation industry at present, with no others listed here: List of Hollywood strikes. Let me know if you are interested! Thanks.Historyday01 (talk) 03:00, 27 July 2023 (UTC) I would like to invite you to attend a Wikipedia meetup described on Wikipedia:Meetup/seattlewp. This meeting is scheduled for an upcoming day in your city. Thank you for your attention and I hope to see you there.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of striking US workers by year, Bureau of Labor Statistics (1916 - present)

You are invited to take part in a discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of striking US workers by year, Bureau of Labor Statistics (1916 - present) about the article's notability. -- LoomCreek (talk) 19:41, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Immanuel Ness

An article in this project, Immanuel Ness, has been nominated for deletion. Feel free to comment here.--User:Namiba 13:15, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Jake Metcalfe: Alaska labor leader and party chairman

If you have opinions, please share them. Thanks! --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 23:53, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Category:Canadian trade unionists of Italian descent

If you would like to comment, you can do so here.--User:Namiba 00:45, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

New categories

I would appreciate your help populating Category:Assassinated trade unionists and Category:Murdered trade unionists. Thanks!--User:Namiba 17:04, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Katarzyna Pikulska

Of relevance to project members. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 01:29, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2023 Starbucks strike

Please comment here.--User:Namiba 03:30, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Proposed split of Criticism of the Walt Disney Company page

Hello everyone! I would like your input on a discussion at Talk:Criticism of the Walt Disney Company#Splitting off content to Criticism of Walt Disney Animation Studios about whether to split off content from five sub-sections about Walt Disney Animation Studios to the Criticism of Walt Disney Animation Studios, in order to ensure that the page complies with WP:SIZESPLIT. Consensus in this discussion is important to determine whether such a this split is warranted or not. Thanks and I hope to see your comments. Historyday01 (talk) 00:12, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Overtime#Requested move 2 February 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Overtime#Requested move 2 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:31, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Category:Works about labor vs Category:Mass media portrayals of the working class

These two categories seem to be about the same topic to me. Do you have a preference for keeping one and merging the other?--User:Namiba 18:23, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Category:Works about labor is both more succinct, and works (no labor pun intended) is more broadly encompassing, including books, podcasts, paintings which are not "mass media". ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 18:29, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Looking over them more closely, it seems that Category:Mass media portrayals of the working class is focused on media which portrays working class life such All in the Family. I'm not sure if that is particularly useful but I'm interested in your thoughts.--User:Namiba 15:16, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

I"d concur with Namiba; perhaps mass media portrayals should be a subcategory? To me portrayal implies some kind of fictive element (so film, TV etc), whereas "works" could be anything - academic literature on labour process to cave paintings of a hunt. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 21:36, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced articles/Backlog drives/February 2024

The WikiProject Unreferenced articles currently has a backlog drive with the objective to reduce the more than 100,000 articles on Wikipedia that are unreferenced. The aim is to bring below 100,000 by the end of February. There happens to be 118 articles within this project that have no references. A bot-maintained list of the them is available here. If editors do wish to work on these, please follow the instructions at the backlog drive so our efforts are recorded. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 21:12, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Updated Electronic Media Union of Trinidad and Tobago and Hiring hall. I enjoy the mix of improving obscure topics...and more general/mid-importance topic. What have others here worked on? ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 15:44, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm mostly working on political parties and geographic areas for the moment, but will dive into trade unions shortly. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 09:48, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Biography

Hello! I've just found this project and I believe that the biography of the Brazilian Union Leader Paulo de Mello Bastos may fit this project and may be of interest to you all. In short: he was a former Air Force pilot who, in the 1960s, was the leader of the Aeronauts Union and a Varig pilot. Then, due to his political work and statements, he was fired from the company, something that shouldn't have happened since he had special immunity as a Union Leader. It triggered a nationwide protest to revert this situation.

This character was pretty much forgotten (the only modern sources only talked about his death or mentioned him in the greater 1960s context), so I had to read several archived newspapers articles starting from the 1930s until 1980s/1990s. Erick Soares3 (talk) 12:44, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Ola @Erick Soares3 - thanks for highlighting the biogrpahy and yes, fully agree, of interest to this project. More than happy for you to draw our attention to more Brazilian (or Lusaphone) trade unionists. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 19:51, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@Goldsztajn: Olá! Thanks! The Labour movement has always had been a relevant thing in Brazil since at least the Getúlio Vargas time. The former President João Goulart, while he himself wasn't a union leader, saw the necessity of the government having a good contact with those groups - and it's part of the reason of why he was deposed in a coup d'état supported by the US. Vargas, during his second (and now democratic) term, was the forerunner of the trabalhismo ideology, with the former Brazilian Labour Party being the first mass-popular political party from Brazil, only comparable in popular appeal with the modern Workers' Party. On the final leg of the Military dictatorship, during the redemocratization, the 1978–1980 ABC Paulista strikes were a big deal, which also saw the rise of popular union leaders, like the current president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (I believe that I have just linked to several relevant articles for the project haha). Erick Soares3 (talk) 22:11, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@Erick Soares3: Please feel free to start Trade unions in Brazil ... :) Cordialmente, Goldsztajn (talk) 01:09, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

That would be interesting, considering that there's no page like that in Portuguese. But, pinging @Serraria:, since that's inside the time period he's most interested in. Erick Soares3 (talk) 11:26, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Trade unions in Brazil would be quite an ambitious project. I'd recommend the following sources for the 1960s (1, 2), and a look into anarchist-related articles for sources on the early 20th century. Serraria (talk) 13:44, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

I've been slowly building the Trade unions in Foo articles for quite awhile, I've done about 15, they all start out pretty small, most are still only start level ... one of the original objectives of this project was to have an article for every country... we really should have one for Brazil! I can start a basic shell to be worked on. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 05:06, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

OK, Trade unions in Brazil now exists. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 07:01, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Help populate Category:Writers about trade unions

Hi everyone, please join me in populating Category:Writers about trade unions.--User:Namiba 16:19, 14 March 2024 (UTC)