Difference between revisions of "Help talk:Bibliographic naming conventions"

From DispersiveWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
m
 
Line 7: Line 7:
  
 
These seem to me to be very good suggestions. [[User:Colliand|Colliand]] 23:44, 19 August 2008 (EDT)
 
These seem to me to be very good suggestions. [[User:Colliand|Colliand]] 23:44, 19 August 2008 (EDT)
 +
 +
I support the suggested naming of preprints with a capital letter (I already created [[Ta2008A]]). Please see [[Help talk:References]]. [[User:Tumur|Tumur]] 03:26, 25 August 2008 (EDT)

Latest revision as of 07:26, 25 August 2008

The legacy conventions are a little ad hoc (especially the assigning of codes to authors), and the need to accomodate preprints is a little ugly. Anyone have any suggestions for improvements? Terry 14:25, 30 July 2006 (EDT)

Pieter Blue has suggested that preprints be numbered with year of release and capital letter, e.g. "Au-p" becomes "Au2006A", "Au2006B", etc. Terry 00:28, 4 August 2006 (EDT)

How about "Au-p2006", "Au-p2006b" etc? I think it is convenient to subcategorize the category Bibliography into Articles, Books, Preprints etc. Then for example it will be easier to just go to Preprints subcategory and check anything there already published (if published, update). I just saw there is a template for bibliography already started; I think it will be very convenient if the template puts the entry automatically into the correct category, depending on whether it is a preprint, an article, or a book. Also it would be nice if there are subcategories by years (by journals, etc) since now Bibliography category seems to be too big. Tumur 01:12, 19 August 2008 (EDT)

These seem to me to be very good suggestions. Colliand 23:44, 19 August 2008 (EDT)

I support the suggested naming of preprints with a capital letter (I already created Ta2008A). Please see Help talk:References. Tumur 03:26, 25 August 2008 (EDT)