Talk:Harrod Blank

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Actors and Filmmakers

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers (assessed as Low-importance).

California: San Francisco Bay Area Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	San Francisco Bay Area portal This article is supported by San Francisco Bay Area task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Photos

-Inserted photo of Harrod Taken in 2005 (my photo) If you find a better one ok....Perhaps Harrod has photos from his youth-I think there are some in Wild Wheels......--Cbladey 13:22, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

He told me he would email me one. I was waiting on that.Plymouths 14:42, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you don't need to comment that the photo is yours - that is supposed to be on the page for the photo itself. Plymouths 15:04, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Early Biography

-Consult the movie wild wheels as it is all there but you have to transcribe of course- but it is now out on DVD....--Cbladey 13:22, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Significant Achievements

I put a few lines in - this can be expanded and it needs a reference to the artcar agency page which I will put in sometime....--Cbladey 13:22, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I cited this as unpublished manuscript- a perfectly good academic practice...however I can put it on a web page and the citation can become a bit stronger.

It's not allowed by wikipedia - all references must be VERIFIABLE. We're not in acadamia here. Also see WP:V#SELF Plymouths 14:45, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ok I will put it on a web page so it will be a web source which seems to workCbladey 14:48, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I located the gale biography and there are some more bits there but no exact birth date more as time allows...and a citation tooCbladey 14:48, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Would you please actually READ the article before making edits? There were two links to Art Car World (I removed one) and now there are two links to Harrod's biography (only one of them actually formatted properly). And your art car agency link isn't formatted as a reference either. Plymouths 16:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

note- put caption on photo somehow I was doing something wrong and simply put a line of text in which is still at the top....Cbladey 14:49, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

References

Is it too much to ask to actually format references LIKE REFERENCES or not put them in? See WP:CITE#HOW. If you want to make footnotes make footnotes but things like "this article blah blah blah" are not references. Plymouths 17:44, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

no problem! Thanks for the tips...fixed them. I am used to that kind of footnote in my field....often done. Moving along-can't know it all....Cbladey 20:39, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Footnotes are OK, just don't put them under "references" because that isn't what they are. I highly doubt ANY field calls footnotes references. Like I said "if you want to make footnotes make footnotes". Plymouths 20:43, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CITE#HOW note

Footnotes
It is helpful to briefly mention in the citation what claim it is that is being referenced. This allows later editors to tell whether it's a phrase, sentence or paragraph that's being documented, and also to find undocumented claims sneaking into paragraphs that were otherwise referenced.

that is exactly what I was doing

I guess they are all right as they are but I can always look them up again....it sort of helps to know how a reference ties in sometimes...whateverCbladey 20:50, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok now it is called Footnotes...whatever...the reason I did it that way is that is how the guy helping me wickifi taught me to do it....hope that helpsCbladey 20:50, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

But you ignored the point just above the one you quoted:

"Follow the system used for an article's existing citations. Do not change formats without checking for objections on the talk page. If there is no agreement, prefer the style used by the first major contributor. "

Now you've gone and turned the original references into footnotes and referenced them to points that aren't even in the references (i.e. there isn't a single mention of burningman in that interview with Dan McKinney but there is a footnote to it after the mention of burning man). When a reference points to a SINGLE fact it is appropriate to make a footnote out of it but when several facts come from the same reference you can and should just leave it as a reference and not clutter the article with lots of footnote links. I am finding it really annoying to read now. Plymouths 22:42, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, here is the bit I was looking for:

"With articles that have lots of footnotes, it can become hard to see after a while exactly which sources have been used, particularly when the footnotes also contain explanatory text. A References section, which contains only citations, helps readers to see at a glance the quality of the references used."

Let's try to keep it readable, OK?Plymouths 22:47, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a good example of an article with a notes section and a separate references section. This allows the references to be neatly alphebetized without clutter and the explanations in the notes: Pierre_Rossier Plymouths 22:59, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]