User talk:Jonathan R. Williford/SURVEY
Contents |
Keep references the same as most others
Dear Riccardo,
I would vote to keep references the same as they are, or even to adopt a recognised format (my vote would be for APA). This is because readers are highly practised with the main formats; learning a new one would take time and effort that people do not have spare. Moreover, the journal title is not necessarily less important than the title of a journal article. I think that people look at a reference to check whether it is to be taken seriously, whether they have it in their collections, or whether they can retrieve it from their institution's library. If so, I think the journal name is more important than the title for the first and third purposes and at least as important as the title for the second.
Cheers, Robert.
Robert P. O'Shea, Professor of Psychology, Deputy Director of the Cognitive Neuroscience Research Cluster, School of Health and Human Sciences, Southern Cross University, Hogbin Drive, Coffs Harbour, 2450, Australia phone: +61 2 6659 3313; fax: +61 2 6659 3202 e-mail: robert.oshea@scu.edu.au Publications: http://www.researcherid.com/rid/C-5723-2008 Psychology Colloquia: www.scu.edu.au/psychologycolloquia Discipline: http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/hahs/index.php/65/
Riccardo's comment
Dear Robert, thanks for you answer, and for sharing your point of view
I just wanted to comment about this phrase:
On Sunday 24 June 2012 08:15:47 you wrote: > This is because readers are highly practised with the main formats; learning a new one would take time and effort that people do not have spare.
People using the bibliographic templates we propose in Scholarpedia will see any change in the layout automatically implemented, with no change for them.
Robert's reply
I am sorry I was not clear. I did not mean learn to format references in a new way, I meant that readers would have to learn to look at references in a new way. They already know how to extract the key information from references--why make them learn a new way?
Voting
Let's use "approval voting" where we +1 every option we believe to be good (http://scorevoting.net/BR52002bw.png, from http://scorevoting.net)
IT-1 Current Scholarpedia standard: italics is in journal name
+1 Leo Trottier 21:44, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
+1 Paul S. Katz 03:33, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
+1 Robert P. O'Shea 05:08, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
+1 Eugene M. Izhikevich 07:01, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
+.5 Jonathan Williford 17:57, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
IT-2 Italics for article title
+1 Riccardo Guida 08:26, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
IT-3 Article title in Quotes
+1 Leo Trottier 21:44, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
+1 Antoine Moreau 21:50, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
+1 Jonathan Williford 23:42, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
+0.99 Riccardo Guida 08:26, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
IT-4 Strict APA style
+1 Robert P. O'Shea 05:09, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
