In reading professional literature, I find that some papers are
printed in a regular (paper) journal and also are posted on the
web--sometimes in more than one web location. When I document such a
paper in a reference list or bibliography, should I give all the
locations I'm aware of? If not, which one(s) should be the priority?
(A note to hummer-ga: Thank you for your clarification after I'd
closed a recent question. [Sorry 'bout that. Closing too quickly was a
first-time user's mistake.] In thinking I could still respond to your
clarification [another error], I began writing an explanation of why
your answer was more basic than what I'd wanted. Suddenly I realized
that you thought I was asking about how to *refer* to internet
sources, when I meant to ask how to cite them properly *in the
reference list* at the end of the paper. I was using "citation" more
broadly, and should have asked about "documentation." I hope the
current question, above, is more clear. Thanks for your patience in
clarifying your answer.) |
Request for Question Clarification by
hummer-ga
on
16 Aug 2004 11:56 PDT
Hi susu2, it's hummer again (I hope you don't mind 8-)! This time
around, let's just use the clarification option until we're both
satisfied with the answer - how's that sound? My previous answer *was*
for how to cite internet sources, I'm sorry if you're finding it
confusing.
Ok, I think I've found a good website for you (or have I said that
already? 8-) There is alot of info here, and I believe by the time you
finish reading it, you will have a good grasp of the topic. For
example...
Citing Electronic Information in History Papers:
"Students sometimes assume, erroneously, that they must account for
each and every link they have used in finding information. Suppose
that you first used the Harvard Guide to American History to locate a
bibliography on the colonial period of American history and then used
that bibliography to identify Charles Sydnor's Gentlemen Freeholders
as a good source of information on your topic. The only book you would
need to cite is Gentlemen Freeholders, because that citation is
sufficient to lead readers to the exact material you used in your
report. Similarly, suppose that you used Netscape Navigator or
Microsoft Internet Explorer to access the home page of The University
of Memphis, then selected in turn the links for "Academics," "Colleges
and Schools," "College of Arts and Sciences," "Departments,"
"History," "Resources in history," and finally the link for the
electronic equivalent of this paper,
<http://cas.memphis.edu/~mcrouse/elcite.html>. The last URL is all you
would need to cite."
http://cas.memphis.edu/~mcrouse/elcite.html
...and this...
"Citations might, therefore, on occasion appear to be incorrect
through no fault of the researcher. A reader might be hard pressed to
distinguish between these innocent cases and cases in which the
researcher is careless or even fraudulent in citing. For this reason,
you should always give preference in citing to a printed version of
the information, because its text is rather fixed. Cite electronic
information only when a printed version does not exist or you cannot
locate it or use it conveniently. As noted earlier, you should always
give the date on which you accessed the electronic information. This
alerts those who access it later to the possibility that the
information might not be current when they see it, although it was
current at the time you saw it. Giving the date on which you accessed
the information is a "first line of defense" against charges of
careless or fraudulent citations. Ultimately, of course, the only
certain way to defend against such charges is to find a dated archival
copy of the source you used."
...and this...
Citing Electronic Information in History Papers:
[see]Abstracts and Reviews of Periodicals and Journals:
Bibliography:
Author. Abstract or Review of "Title of Article," by Original Author or
Editor. Title of Periodical volume, issue (Date): paging.
[Type of medium]: <Protocol/Site/Path/File> Additional: retrieval
information [Access date].
or
Author. Abstract or Review of "Title of Article," by Original Author or
Editor Title of Periodical volume, issue (Date): paging.
[Type of medium]: Supplier/Database identifier or number/Item name or
number [Access date].
http://cas.memphis.edu/~mcrouse/elcite.html
Basically, citing an article you read on the internet isn't all that
different than the paper version, you'll just add in where and when
you found it on the internet. Do not make a list of URLs where
something can be found, only the one URL that you used. If you used
the paper version, then it isn't necessary to include the URL.
Remember, you are citing *your* sources.
Please let me know if, after reading the article, you still have
questions or if we've finally nailed it. I will look forward to
hearing from you.
Sincerely,
hummer
|
Clarification of Question by
susu2-ga
on
16 Aug 2004 13:24 PDT
Hello hummer. I'm delighted that it's you responding to this question
too. You know what? We have a bit of a repeat happening here: you've
given me more basic information than I needed, but I can see the
answer to my question within what you've quoted or pointed me to. So,
again, I got what I needed and appreciate your work.
To clarify: I think you and I are making different assumptions again.
I gather that you're trying to clarify basic citation rules for me,
which in fact I mastered (well, understood at least) many years ago; I
am clear on the principles (such as citing only the original material,
not everything trolled through on the way to it). What I've been
asking about is simply "What are the new rules for identifying
internet resources?"--which have emerged since the olden days when I
was turning in papers to my professors. Now I write reference lists so
as to be actually helpful to my readers.
So here's what I've taken from your answer: As I suspected, a print
resource is always preferred because of its permanence and, as your
information indicated, only one citation is necessary. However, as a
reader I know how difficult it can be to get access to print
resources, and how convenient it is to scan something online to see
whether it's worth getting a copy of; therefore if a print article is
also posted on the web, I'll go ahead and give the url as well as the
print location in my reference list. If the piece is posted on more
than one website, I will cite the url that seems to be more
established or more credible on some other basis.
Does this help explain my reactions? 8-)
Sincerely,
susu2
|
Request for Question Clarification by
hummer-ga
on
16 Aug 2004 14:03 PDT
Hi susu2 - I'm relieved to hear that you didn't jump up and go running
down the street when you heard from me again! I'm posting this as a
clarification and not an answer because I want to be absolutely sure
we are on the same page (so to speak).
Since I think that I have always understood what you were asking
about, it must be me who has not been able to direct you to the
precise information that you need. When GA researchers post answers,
we tend to try and provide more information than is needed, perhaps in
this case it was confusing. However, no matter how you came to your
conclusion (in your most recent clarification), it sounds as though
you are go-for-launch. Just remember, websites come and go and what's
here today may be gone tomorrow and so the print source is preferred.
I *do* think we understand each other - we just don't know it! I
wonder what it would be like if we met in person - we'd know what we
were talking about but a listener wouldn't be able to make heads nor
tails out of our conversation! I'm sure we'd have a few good chuckles,
though.
Shall I post the answer or would you like me to find you something else?
hummer
|
Clarification of Question by
susu2-ga
on
17 Aug 2004 13:33 PDT
Hi hummer. (Sorry to be slow in responding; I couldn't find the
"provide clarification" button!) (A bit slow on the learning curve
here.)
Yes, I think we're good to go, so post the answer! As you say, we
probably do have a perfectly clear connection on the core information,
with static around it that's been getting in the way. Yes, an
in-person conversation probably would prompt some laughing all 'round.
It's been great chatting citations with you. Again, thanks for your patience.
best regards,
susu2
|
