I thought this was great at first but when I thought more and looked into some of the names, it did start to make me uncomfortable. I tink it's probably best to call women writers by the names they've chosen. We can still share the knowledge that they were women even if they went under a man's name, and we can talk about the reasons why they may have chosen to do this. It's also true that women writers have been able to publish under their own names in many cases but a few chose not to. A bit like now - JKR was advised to use initials but she could have published as Joanne or Jo - maybe she would have been just as successful. It's not as if people ever thought she was a man, as far as I can recall. There is sexism in publishing but lots of women publish under their own names and always have. Although there are definitely cases, like James Tiptree, where you can see why they wanted to use a pseudonym to get into what was very much a boys' club.
So yeah... this is one of those situations where what seems like a great idea at first maybe falls apart a bit when you really take a good look. Although saying that, I don't think it's harmful or wrong. Just a bit misguided. It's raised awareness of women writers who many haven't heard of and they've given some free books away, so can't be all bad!