Talk:Hannah Kempfer

Sourcing problems
I found numerous sourcing problems: text not in citation given, wrong citation listed, etc. Please review my edit summaries; a thorough doublecheck of the sourcing is in order. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 14:20, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I think most of the perceived problems with referencing here are due to the assumption that every sentence and fact that precedes a reference should be supported by that reference. I usually provide an inline citation for the sentence or fact immediately preceding the reference. I'm working with a number of online and offline sources for this article. I think, in the process of creating, I may have expanded a sentence with an additional detail and then provided a source for it. I can see how that could potentially cause confusion. I have gone through the article and my sources again to ensure that the facts are supported and that the references line up. For clarity, allow me to address the each of the edit summaries:
 * I cannot find the "recently lost their only child" in that source - My intention was not to support this particular fact by the reference at the very end of the paragraph. That reference supported the final sentence in the paragraph. The statement is now sourced.
 * I can't find these statements in this source either, am I looking at the wrong source, or was the wrong one listed??? - Everything in the first sentence could be found in Women in Minnesota with the exception of the exact date of the marriage, which is now separately sourced. I'm fine with removing the statement that she was unable to bear children since it's rather self-evident anyhow and I don't really like how it reads. The reference did indicate that she was childless, but I understand that you were probably looking for the specific wording. The source that specifically says she was infertile is An Immigrant Girl (see this website).
 * not in that source, where did it come from? Again, the reference in that paragraph supported the sentence after the one that you marked as needing a citation.
 * yep, problems here in sourcing, that piece comes from a different source - addressed above.
 * again, wrong source, sourcing needs review here - addressed above.
 * If that addresses the sourcing, I believe you also mentioned that you saw some close paraphrasing at the DYK review. Were there specific instances that you had seen? Gobōnobo  + c 21:26, 2 April 2012 (UTC)