Talk:Steger Design

Untitled

First time trying to put up an article. Please let me know of changes that may be needed. Thanks.

Citations

Welcome to Wikipedia. You are brave to try a whole article right out of the gate. I might suggest that you look at articles similar in subject matter. Open them in edit mode and look over the coding. As you might guess, it is kinda important to keep articles looking the same, so take what you see as far as coding from other articles and use the coding to make your page look better.
The single biggest thing you need to do right off is to get your citations in order. Instead of piling them all at the bottom of the article, use inline cites like you would in a term paper. Immediately after the info the reference applies to, type <ref>YOUR REFERENCE GOES HERE</ref>. The only thing you have to put in the reference section at the bottom is {{Reflist}}. The wiki software will automatically create footnotes for you.
I cleaned up your headers for you. You probably want to tighten up the lead paragraph to summarize the info you have in the rest of the article. I'll look for an infobox, they are really nice to make a page look cool.
I might suggest you visit the Teahouse. That is the place for beginners like you (and me, not too long ago) to get help in simple little easy to digest bites! Gtwfan52 (talk) 06:01, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Not so brave as excited/naive. Got ahead of myself and now behind the 8 ball. Will go to work on your suggestions right away, thanksPeppersupnorth (talk) 16:43, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Not to worry...you are doing great. After references, you probably want to work on the actual article. Try to make it sound less like an advertisement. Also, you should probably organize your info a little better. And remember, if you can't find a source independent of the company's website, things like the shoes being used on "Northern Exposure" will have to be taken out. I will show you a neater way to handle references after you get them formatted. Small steps! Gtwfan52 (talk) 17:05, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Ok, made some changes - removed some dubious claims till I can substantiate them - still need to hunt down the references for the History section.Peppersupnorth (talk) 21:24, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

The important ones to work on are the newspaper and magazine references. Use the "cite news" template when you put them in. Keep up the good work! Gtwfan52 (talk) 19:11, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Made some changes to references. Could not find links to some of the newspaper articles - sited them as best I could. What's next! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peppersupnorth (talk • contribs) 21:31, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Still needs work to sound less like an ad. Shorten the lead and move some of the stuff to the subsections. (ex: the stuff about the polar expeditions---the stuff in the lead belongs in the body. However, what you currently have in the body would be pretty close for a summary to use in the lead. there is more lead tightening to do than that, but I hope that gives you an idea of what you need to do). The lead should serve as a short summary of what is in the rest of the article. Unless you can find an interview where she talks about it, you will have to lose the stuff about the 1982-1983 expedition. it just sounds like advertising fluff. Not doubting its truth, but it isn't what you know, it is what you can prove. Cite the issues of Elle and Mademoiselle. Lose the weblink to the Camucks. That whole bit needs to come out of the lead anyway. Finally, find a citation to the copyright of the word "muckluk" and write it into the history. If you can't, just lose the whole trademark section. It isn't needed legally and adds to the sense of the article being an advertisement. This isn't as easy as it sounds, is it? But once you get the knack of doing the research, it isn't nearly as hard as writing a term paper. You don't get an automatic gizmo to do your footnotes on a term paper! lol. You are doing great! Keep it up. Small companies are the backbone of our economy and they all need to get articles on Wikipedia. Gtwfan52 (talk) 21:57, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Did a massive rewrite - removed issues till I can prove them up. May be a few days before I look again, but let me know what to do next.74.40.217.169 (talk) 20:50, 25 May 2012 (UTC)Peppersupnorth (talk) 14:38, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Did you give up on me - would also like to put one or 2 photos up or company logo.Peppersupnorth (talk) 15:55, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

No, just real life is busy. Are the pictures your personal property? The logo is very doable, just really complicated. All images are complicated. Please look at the Teahouse for instructions on uploading images, and I will try to help you with questions. Sorry I been away. Gtwfan52 (talk) 19:43, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, I added an image, now how can I improve further to get rid of the "!!" concerns of our community.Peppersupnorth (talk) 16:38, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Gosh, I guess I really goofed up this time - the picture of the arctic expedition is actually in my possession, just wanted to protect it from being used for other than what it is, however I can certainly change that to public use & also only included it, because it gave credibility to the stated history (picture is worth 10,000 words). The same goes for the image of the boot, also really not necessary for the article, but there again when I read the "World Book Encyclopedia" as a kid, I always enjoyed the pictures. Please let me know what can be done to salvage the article.Peppersupnorth (talk) 13:49, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Added a few more references to bolster article. Still looking for more like "Elle & Mademoiselle" magazines to give it a more global feel. I've got copies of the lay outs from those magazines, but so poor I can't make out any dates or issue numbers - quite frustrating. There's even mention of them in some of the other references.Peppersupnorth (talk) 19:06, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Added a line to opening paragraph & used references used further down in history. 4 of the 5 duplicated - tried deleted from history and then going back in to replace, but the system remembered the original - don't know how to fix - article showing more references than necessary.74.40.217.169 (talk) 20:50, 14 June 2012 (UTC)