Talk:Jane Squire

This page should not be speedy deleted because...
This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --Beckyfh (talk) 12:48, 2 May 2015 (UTC) I am in the middle of creating it! I pressed save but want to add further information now please!!

Baker source?
Hi. Do you have the link to Baker's original paper? The links we have here quote her extensively (e.g. here) but I don't know where the paper is. Protonk (talk) 15:31, 2 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi - I've also given links to a blogpost by Baker and an online essay written by her, which are open access and from the National Maritime Museum and University of Cambridge. She has not yet published her scholarly work on Squire (including a forthcoming ODNB entry).Beckyfh
 * Ok, cool beans. Just seemed weird to cite an article to Baker where in that article it says "Baker says..." etc. Protonk (talk) 15:40, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes - I've just worked that out! I guess the (unnamed) author of that piece should be "Centre for Research in the Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities"? I'm afraid I don't know how to edit that now that the references have been turned into named ones (thanks for tidying it up, though!).
 * When you switch to named references the software that builds the view of the page (What you see vs. the "wikicode" of what you type) it looks for a definition e.g. and then refers to that for each invocation ( --note there is only one tag for subsequent uses). It doesn't do this in order--you cna define the reference anywhere on the page, so long as it is defined somewhere an invocation will pick it up. If you want to edit the details of the reference, you can edit what's inside the defining one (the one which still has all the template stuff) and it will pick it up. Also you should "sign" your posts on talk pages by adding four tildes ( ~ ) to the end of posts so other editors can see who is posting what when they look at a talk page without reading through the history. Protonk (talk) 15:54, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Introductory paragraphs
Hi again. :)

For biographical articles (really any articles, but here we are) the first section normally summarizes the content of the article so a reader can quickly determine if they're in the right place and understand the most salient points about the subject. You can see some guidance on how to do that here. For an article of this length, that's not strictly necessary, since it's silly to state some things and then immediately repeat them a a paragraph later, however the very first paragraph should cover those same biographical details. Take a look at Ada Lovelace for a superlative example: "Augusta Ada King, Countess of Lovelace (10 December 1815 – 27 November 1852), born Augusta Ada Byron and now commonly known as Ada Lovelace, was an English mathematician and writer chiefly known for her work on Charles Babbage's early mechanical general-purpose computer, the Analytical Engine. Her notes on the engine include what is recognised as the first algorithm intended to be carried out by a machine. Because of this, she is regarded as the first computer programmer." In three sentences we establish her name, where and when she lives, and what she is chiefly known for--in that order. This helps readers but it also helps your fellow editors. If someone expands your article to the point where it needs a "lede" section they won't have to re-write that first paragraph, they can just slot it in at the very beginning. Protonk (talk) 15:48, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks - I'll bear that in mind, especially if I or someone else lengthens the article. Beckyfh