User talk:Timothydaly

 Hello Timothydaly, and Welcome to Wikipedia!  Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

--- Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:


 * Table of Contents


 * Department directory

Need help?


 * Questions — a guide on where to ask questions.
 * Cheatsheet — quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes.
 * Wikipedia's 5 pillars — an overview of Wikipedia's foundations


 * Article Wizard — a Wizard to help you create articles
 * The Simplified Ruleset — a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules.
 * Guide to Wikipedia — A thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia.

How you can help:


 * Contributing to Wikipedia — a guide on how you can help.


 * Community Portal — Wikipedia's hub of activity.

Additional tips...


 * Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes ( ~ ). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The [[Image:Signature_icon.png]] or [[File:Insert-signature.png]] button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.


 * If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.

Timothydaly, good luck, and have fun. --Hoary (talk) 03:16, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Photobook
Thank you for restarting work on the grotesquely bad article "photobook". However, you didn't specify your sources. The best source for this kind of thing that I have on me now is Parr and Badger's The Photobook (vol. 1). This of course is not a scholarly work, but it seems carefully done and I should guess (or anyway hope) that it has undergone some fact-checking by a third party. I thought I'd "source" your additions to it; however, while doing this I found various discrepancies. I changed them all to accord with Parr/Badger, as you'll see in this edit. This certainly doesn't mean that you're wrong and Parr & Badger are right. Where you believe that P&B are wrong, please explain briefly at Talk:Photobook, and we (and perhaps others) can decide what to do.

You'll also notice that I commented out your headers for what are now empty sections. In the short term, these are likely just to add to the irritation of the reader. However, I haven't removed them: you can easily "uncomment" each one when you add some text to go below it. -- Hoary (talk) 06:54, 10 February 2011 (UTC)


 * HI. How exciting! A very quick response to my contribution. Can I just thank you for the referencing tips, I'll be certian to follow the convention from now. However....I have much more interesting sources than Parr and Badger, especially referring to the Tennyson book, which I think had only two of Camerons works rather than the 12. My source is Princeton, http://blogs.princeton.edu/graphicarts/2009/03/cameron.html


 * Thanks also for removing empty sections, they are my content prompts and are better removed for the time being.Timothydaly (talk) 09:56, 10 February 2011 (UTC) 09:56, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

The former source says that the first, woodblocky edition had two prints but that volume 1 of Cameron's own follow-up had 12. As for the year of publication of the latter, it says the beginning of one year whereas P&B say December of the preceding year, perhaps we could rewrite compromisingly. -- Hoary (talk) 12:54, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Night photography
I've just noticed this unusually long single-shot contribution. It shows various warning signs that suggest it's copied and pasted from elsewhere, "elsewhere" usually being (conventionally) copyright. However, (i) I can't find it when I google, and (ii) people are of course welcome to contribute suitable parts of their own term papers, etc. Does this happen to look familiar to you? -- Hoary (talk) 07:15, 10 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi. This is not my contribution.Timothydaly (talk) 09:57, 10 February 2011 (UTC) 09:57, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh I know (and knew). Don't worry, I didn't suspect you. I just thought that with your interest in the history of photography you might just happen to have seen this before somewhere. I have a gut feeling that I ought just to delete it, but I'll leave it for now. -- Hoary (talk) 12:57, 10 February 2011 (UTC)