User talk:Keithatciren

Welcome!
Hello, Keithatciren, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! 220  of  Borg 10:17, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Introduction to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

Summaries
Hi there. When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's header in the Edit summary field – please fill in your new section's name instead. Thank you. --220  of  Borg 10:19, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Sources for Jane Martha St. John
First of all Keithatciren, welcome to Wikipedia. We are lucky to have someone who shows such real interest in the pioneers of photography. Thank you in particular for adding so much useful material to this article over the past few days. Strange as it may seem, Wikipedia has a policy of requiring published sources to be used when creating or adding to its articles and does not welcome "original research", i.e. material based solely on an editor's own findings or experience. From the style of your additions and from the explanation you give at the foot of the page, it looks as you may have written much of the material yourself rather than by drawing on other published sources. Fortunately, as you mention yourself, Roger Taylor has published a fairly detailed account of St. John's photography but his book does not contain many of the details you have now included in the article. Maybe you have published some of the details elsewhere, in a journal article or in book form? If so, would it be possible for you to provide the necessary references in the article itself? I could certainly help you with the mechanics if you encounter any difficulties. If you are unable to develop the article along these lines, perhaps you can provide further explanations here. You are also welcome to contact me directly by email. I hope you will take these comments constructively. I certainly do not want to discourage you in any way. I'm sure we can work it all out together. --Ipigott (talk) 09:21, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Keithatciren replies, I am still working on the article and intend adding references as I can identify them, please be patient with this new contributor! Keithatciren (talk) 14:24, 15 June 2013 (UTC)


 * No, that's not the way to do it. Please hurry to add references to published material to what you have already written; and when that's done, only add more content when you can do so together with the references for this additional content. References to unpublished research, no matter how conscientious and perceptive this unpublished research may have been, is not acceptable.


 * What Ipigott has written above about the requirements of/for Wikipedia is exactly right. (And he has also phrased it very helpfully and generously.)


 * (A common objection to this is "But look, lots of articles, for example the article on such-and-such, fail to meet these requirements. So why pick on this article?" Yes, plenty of articles do indeed fail to meet Wikipedia's requirements. But their existence doesn't justify their further proliferation.)


 * In addition, please keep an eye on Talk:Jane Martha St. John, and respond there (and raise questions there) where doing so is likely to improve the article. If you add Jane Martha St. John to your "watchlist", you'll be alerted when there's any change to either the article or its talk page. -- Hoary (talk) 10:19, 16 June 2013 (UTC)