This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Woman article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

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

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28Auto-archiving period: 14 days

Wikipedia is not censored. Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to Wikipedia's content disclaimer regarding potentially objectionable content and options to not see an image.

Important Note: The most appropriate image to use at the top of this article has been a highly controversial issue with many valid viewpoints. The current lead image was chosen by an RfC on 5/26/2021. A gallery and discussion of potential lead images is also available here. New images may be added there.

Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated, especially about Wording of lede, Definition of woman and Self contradiction in lede. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting on that topic, and read through the list of highlighted discussions below before starting a new one: Wording of lede Definition of woman Self contradiction in lede

This   level-3 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Anthropology High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. Sociology High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Gender studies Top‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Gender studies. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Wikipedia. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Gender studiesWikipedia:WikiProject Gender studiesTemplate:WikiProject Gender studiesGender studies articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. To-do list: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Assess : see Unassessed Gender studies articles and Unknown-importance Gender studies articles Cleanup : edit to see Collaborate : see /Collaboration Copyedit : edit to see Deletion sorting : see /Sexuality and gender Expand : edit to see Infobox : see Gender studies articles needing infoboxes Merge : edit to see Notability : edit to see NPOV : edit to see Orphans : Brannon Masculinity Scale · Domestic violence in lesbian relationships · Holy Virility · Media and gender · Michael Kaufman (author) · Women's education in Saudi Arabia Photo : see Wikipedia requested photographs of gender studies Split : History of feminism Stubs : see Gender studies stubs Translate : see /translation Update : edit to see Verify : Riot grrrl Needs attention : see Gender studies articles needing attention Feminism Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Women This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles Women's History Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Women's sport High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's sport (and women in sports), a WikiProject which aims to improve coverage of women in sports on Wikipedia. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Women's sportWikipedia:WikiProject Women's sportTemplate:WikiProject Women's sportWomen's sport articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Section sizes Section size for Woman (35 sections) Section name Byte count Section total (Top) 4,196 4,196 Etymology 3,176 3,176 Terminology 5,351 5,351 Biology 615 21,259 Genetic characteristics 2,203 2,203 Hormonal characteristics, menstruation and menopause 7,149 7,149 Morphological and physiological characteristics 6,051 6,051 Circulatory system 2,223 2,223 Sex distribution 746 746 Intersex women 2,272 2,272 Sexuality and gender 6,236 6,236 Health 2,911 13,335 Maternal mortality 5,280 5,280 Life expectancy 2,670 2,670 Reproductive rights 2,474 2,474 Femininity 3,031 3,031 History 4,710 4,710 Culture and gender roles 5,131 18,006 Religion 928 928 Violence against women 11,947 11,947 Clothing, fashion and dress codes 1,777 1,777 Fertility and family life 6,696 6,696 Education 4,574 5,122 Literacy 548 548 Government and politics 2,314 2,314 Science, literature and art 181 6,672 Science and medicine 1,142 1,142 Literature 683 683 Music 4,666 4,666 Gender symbol 1,228 1,228 See also 310 310 Notes 41 41 References 30 30 Further reading 1,107 1,107 External links 692 692 Total 105,289 105,289

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Adult human female is better ShobanChiddarth ( talk) 13:11, 30 October 2023 (UTC) reply

No such change has occurred that I'm aware of. Possibly a Berenstein effect? The sources cited (and various others) tend to use use female as an adjective modifying human or person. "Adult human female" is more common as a TERF/GC slogan. See also wikt:female § Usage notes. – RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ ( 💬 •  📝) 13:45, 30 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Yes, even if the other version wasn't in use as a dog whistle the current version is more grammatically correct and there is no reason to prefer the Ferengi version. DanielRigal ( talk) 20:10, 30 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Please let me remove a image from this article Mybirthday647 ( talk) 20:42, 21 November 2023 (UTC) reply

@ Mybirthday647, can you please tell us which image you would like removed. Firefangledfeathers ( talk / contribs) 20:47, 21 November 2023 (UTC) reply

How is possible that Ada Lovelace is not mentioned in the science section of this article?

Ada Lovelace was the creator one of the first algorithms for modern computers, she had the intention to develop software for multipurpose tasks, not just the first woman, but one of the first humans if not the first in doing that.

/info/en/?search=Ada_Lovelace#First_published_computer_program

/info/en/?search=Note_G

Thanks.-- Zchemic ( talk) 16:31, 13 March 2024 (UTC) reply

The section Women § Science, literature and art is meant to be a summary of the articles Women in science, Women in literature, and Women in art. To avoid becoming overly long and cluttered (it already contains 6 paras and 2 images), it cannot hope to include every notable woman in these fields, regardless of her contributions. The Countess of Lovelace is mentioned in Women in science § Early nineteenth century and her portrait appears in an imagebox alongside Curie later in that article.

It is for the best that the text of this summary section mostly avoids mentioning women by name, as this begets lots of why does X get included, and not Y, which eventually expands into a WP:BLUESEA of links. For a particularly egregious example of the useless and unreadable text this kind of editing produces, see old revisions of the article Gay icon. – RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ ( 💬 •  📝) 17:51, 1 April 2024 (UTC) reply

The page in its current form mentions without sources the supposed existence of the Old English word wermann. This word is, unless I'm gravely mistaken, completely unattested (try finding it on Wiktionary, for example) and possibly fabricated. Unless a good source can be found for the existence of wermann as an OE word (and a cursory internet search reveals only discussions pondering where on earth it supposedly came from), its mention ought to be removed. AutisticCatnip ( talk) 04:07, 28 March 2024 (UTC) reply

You appear to be correct. For those interested, here are some such discussions [1] [2] [3]. I've gone and made an edit ( Special:Diff/1216741813) which replaces the specious wermann with wer (apparently the most common OE word for male/man) and wǣpnedmann, which is attested occasionally as the analogue to wifmann. I hope this looks acceptable.

I think the Dictionary.com link is rotten, as it no longer contains the information we're citing it for. If anyone has access to the OED or another source which verifies this etymology, please verify this text if possible. – RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ ( 💬 •  📝) 18:41, 1 April 2024 (UTC) reply

... Usersnipedname ( talk) 08:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC) reply

GENSEX enforcement vs. generic vandalism. Dronebogus ( talk) 12:55, 12 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Also because trolls and bigots perseverate more on people assigned male at birth who are either gay/bi/pan or trans. Transwomen are targeted more than transmen and thus this article gets more trolls. Here's an article: [4] EvergreenFir (talk) 16:03, 12 April 2024 (UTC) reply