Time for Citations to Move into the Cyber Age

[Wahoo Redux]

So, here I am, changing double quotes to single quotes, removing parenthesis, eliminating "accessed on" dates, putting the city before the publisher (wondering if the world really would be confused about Yale UP if "New Haven" did not have the "CT" next to it), and so on and so forth...trying to get this ready for publication so some resentful graduate student doesn't have to do the light-lifting for me...and thinking "Grrrrrrrrrr" the whole time.

The rational since I was an undergrad was that a full citation means scholars can vet and locate your sources quickly, easily, and thoroughly, and that's why all these bells and whistles are so necessary...

But the differences between MLA, APA, and Chicago are so mind-numbingly minute that they are essentially pointless...

And really this kind of citation is antiquated in the cyber age anyway!!  Truly, all one needs is an author and a title and Google. That is all one needs.  A publisher, perhaps, but not really.  The bells and whistles simply aren't necessary anymore.

It's time for academic citation practices to move into the 21st Century.  Ring the church bells!  Change sweeps the landscape!!

[Trogdor]

Do you not use a citation management program like Zotero or Endnote?

[eigen]

It's interesting you bring this up. I'm not familiar with any of those citation styles, but my discipline is constantly updating reference styles to be more streamlined, and referencing by DOI is becoming more and more common, especially as journals are increasingly only digital distribution.

[overthejordan]

The 8th edition of the MLA Handbook rules. It has already moved pretty much toward what you're talking about. It recommends dropping the city of publication altogether. It also involves a basic, loose formula that makes you think about what information you really need to include for each specific case. It's less pedantic and more useful.

[Parasaurolophus]

The 8th edition of the MLA Handbook rules. It has already moved pretty much toward what you're talking about. It recommends dropping the city of publication altogether. It also involves a basic, loose formula that makes you think about what information you really need to include for each specific case. It's less pedantic and more useful.

Didn't it also finally get rid of the requirement that you state the database from which you pulled the article (e.g. JSTOR, "web source"... "monograph"...)? Something along those lines, anyway? That was always so risible.

[overthejordan]

The 8th edition of the MLA Handbook rules. It has already moved pretty much toward what you're talking about. It recommends dropping the city of publication altogether. It also involves a basic, loose formula that makes you think about what information you really need to include for each specific case. It's less pedantic and more useful.

Didn't it also finally get rid of the requirement that you state the database from which you pulled the article (e.g. JSTOR, "web source"... "monograph"...)? Something along those lines, anyway? That was always so risible.

JSTOR can be included as a second container. But I think the idea is to include it if it's relevant for some specific reason.

But they totally dropped the silly requirement to add "Print" or "Web" after every source. I think that was only ever in the 7th edition.

I'm no expert on this stuff. The real nerds might correct me. But I've spent my fair share of time with MLA and Chicago, and I think the 8th edition of the MLA Handbook is a breath of fresh air. It also says you can list a film, for example, under director, title, screenwriter, a specific actor, etc., depending on who the main contributor is that you're really writing about. So you get to decide what's important for your organization. It forces you to think through why you're citing stuff to begin with.

[Parasaurolophus]

But they totally dropped the silly requirement to add "Print" or "Web" after every source. I think that was only ever in the 7th edition.

Print and Web, that was it! *Shudder*

[polly_mer]

It's interesting you bring this up. I'm not familiar with any of those citation styles, but my discipline is constantly updating reference styles to be more streamlined, and referencing by DOI is becoming more and more common, especially as journals are increasingly only digital distribution.

Zotero, EndNote, and my favorite BibDesk aren't citation styles.  Instead, they are really handy software where you maintain a database of your references and then let other software format your citations to be appropriate for whatever citation style you need.  It's not perfect to let the software write the bibliography, but it's much easier to fix the obvious errors than to have to retype everything every time.

I cannot tell you how much I love BibDesk to have all the information assembled like the index cards I was taught to keep, but with the additional features of being able to attach a PDF, put some URLs, and keep my notes as well.

[eigen]

It's interesting you bring this up. I'm not familiar with any of those citation styles, but my discipline is constantly updating reference styles to be more streamlined, and referencing by DOI is becoming more and more common, especially as journals are increasingly only digital distribution.

Zotero, EndNote, and my favorite BibDesk aren't citation styles.  Instead, they are really handy software where you maintain a database of your references and then let other software format your citations to be appropriate for whatever citation style you need.  It's not perfect to let the software write the bibliography, but it's much easier to fix the obvious errors than to have to retype everything every time.

I cannot tell you how much I love BibDesk to have all the information assembled like the index cards I was taught to keep, but with the additional features of being able to attach a PDF, put some URLs, and keep my notes as well.

Guess I should have quoted the OP, but I was referring to MLA, Chicago, etc.

There are so many citation styles in my field there's no point in keeping up with them. As you say, I just let the software generate something using the style the journal gives me.

[polly_mer]

There are so many citation styles in my field there's no point in keeping up with them. As you say, I just let the software generate something using the style the journal gives me.

Yep, that's what I do because every journal has a different requirement.

[Parasaurolophus]

Yep, that's what I do because every journal has a different requirement.

Of course, when you properly conform to whatever it is, you still get the manuscript back with "errors" flagged that are actually part of the supposedly desired style (not many journals in my field ever adopted MLA, but for those that did, nobody actually wanted you to specify 'web' or 'print').

At this point, journals in my field give us one style as a rough guide, and then the house style departs substantially from that base. And, having seen several manuscript drafts in my time already, I can confirm that authors mostly just make up their own imaginary style.

[eigen]

Yep, that's what I do because every journal has a different requirement.

Of course, when you properly conform to whatever it is, you still get the manuscript back with "errors" flagged that are actually part of the supposedly desired style (not many journals in my field ever adopted MLA, but for those that did, nobody actually wanted you to specify 'web' or 'print'").

At this point, journals in my field give us one style as a rough guide, and then the house style departs substantially from that base. And, having seen several manuscript drafts in my time already, I can confirm that authors mostly just make up their own imaginary style.

Thankfully, journals in my field supply custom output styles for Endnote that they regularly update. It's one of the reasons I stay with it.

[Hibush]

It's interesting you bring this up. I'm not familiar with any of those citation styles, but my discipline is constantly updating reference styles to be more streamlined, and referencing by DOI is becoming more and more common, especially as journals are increasingly only digital distribution.

With authors assigned a Publons or ORCID number, and publications a DOI, there's no need for text in citations anymore. Except as an aid to meatspace users who need a hint of what the article is about.

With AI doing the bibliographic analysis of the citations and apparent hotspots of intellectual advancement, literature review is fully automated. Soon there will be no reason to include text in the body of the article either.

[Wahoo Redux]

Do you not use a citation management program like Zotero or Endnote?

No.  I'm a little leery of citation programs having received endless incorrectly formatted papers from students who then complained that they "did it online!" on some inaccurate citation machine.

I will check them out.  Thank you.   

In this particular case I am editing a manuscript which is to be published this summer and incorporating a number of teeny-tiny charges based on the house style (essentially UK Chicago) emailed to me in a 40 page PDF.

[pgher]

Do you not use a citation management program like Zotero or Endnote?

No.  I'm a little leery of citation programs having received endless incorrectly formatted papers from students who then complained that they "did it online!" on some inaccurate citation machine.

I will check them out.  Thank you.   

In this particular case I am editing a manuscript which is to be published this summer and incorporating a number of teeny-tiny charges based on the house style (essentially UK Chicago) emailed to me in a 40 page PDF.

Garbage in, garbage out. These programs can only output information that has been put in the right categories. You have to know what it's supposed to generate to know the difference between, say, "year" and "date" fields.