0
edits
FamilySearch Wiki talk:Manual of Style: Difference between revisions
FamilySearch Wiki talk:Manual of Style (view source)
Revision as of 10:43, 30 April 2009
, 30 April 2009no edit summary
m (smithing) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
__TOC__ | __TOC__ | ||
== == | |||
Standardized Citation Style | |||
I agree that Chicago style with Shown Mills is used for most professional reports and is comfortable for us. Why make matters more complicated by redoing all the work entered from the old Research Guides? | |||
== == | |||
== Turabian? Shown Mills? Chigago? Oh my! == | == Turabian? Shown Mills? Chigago? Oh my! == | ||
| Line 13: | Line 21: | ||
To see how Wikipedia handles this, see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources Wikipedia:Citing sources]. [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 17:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC) | To see how Wikipedia handles this, see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources Wikipedia:Citing sources]. [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 17:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
=== Disadvantages of Shown Mills format? === | === Disadvantages of Shown Mills format? === | ||
Shown Mills seems to be the most accepted format within the U.S., but is it accepted (or even known) in the rest of the world? Also, formats like Chicago, MLA, APA, and even Turabian are supported by various word processors, software, and Websites such that users can enter bibliographic data into a form and have the system generate a reference. This brings fairly high-quality source citation to the "common man" who doesn't have a printed style manual at home. (But then, it could be argued that this "common man" doesn't cite sources anyway.) [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 17:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC) | Shown Mills seems to be the most accepted format within the U.S., but is it accepted (or even known) in the rest of the world? Also, formats like Chicago, MLA, APA, and even Turabian are supported by various word processors, software, and Websites such that users can enter bibliographic data into a form and have the system generate a reference. This brings fairly high-quality source citation to the "common man" who doesn't have a printed style manual at home. (But then, it could be argued that this "common man" doesn't cite sources anyway.) [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 17:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
=== Inertia, rework, and Chicago === | === Inertia, rework, and Chicago === | ||
Sometimes it's easier to just keep doing what's already being done than try to change everything. Chicago format was used for the research outlines -- the paper publications which made up the seed content for this site. Turabian and Shown Mills are both based on Chicago format. So if we went with Chicago, we wouldn't have to change thousands (tens of thousands?) of citations. And really, if Chicago were so broken for citing books and microfilms, would it still be around? [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 12:57, 30 April 2009 (UTC) | Sometimes it's easier to just keep doing what's already being done than try to change everything. Chicago format was used for the research outlines -- the paper publications which made up the seed content for this site. Turabian and Shown Mills are both based on Chicago format. So if we went with Chicago, we wouldn't have to change thousands (tens of thousands?) of citations. And really, if Chicago were so broken for citing books and microfilms, would it still be around? [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 12:57, 30 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
<br> | |||
== Link to FHL works on FHLC == | == Link to FHL works on FHLC == | ||