Talk:The MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Books (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Nuvola apps kig.png

This article uses the following optional standards for Style elements.

WikiProject Academic Journals (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Academic Journals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Academic Journals on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
See WikiProject Academic Journals' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Article creation in progress[edit]

This is being split off from the article MLA Style Manual. It deserves a separate article in Wikipedia. --NYScholar 08:01, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Mla cover.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Mla cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Updated the fair use rationale provided earlier by other(s) and also added that have done so to the image discussion page (as requested above by that Bot). --NYScholar (talk) 03:40, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Inappropriate comments and questions deleted[edit]

Please see the top talkpage template; this talk page is not for discussion of MLA Style format; it is for discussion about how to improve this article on this subject. Editing the article is the subject of this talk page, not MLA format per se.

I answered the signed question posed about italics vs. underlining to be helpful. Since then, I've deleted the question and my reply because they are not germane to this talk page, which is to be only about editing this article. [The deleted content can be found in the editing history.] I also deleted other inappropriate content which was unsigned. (See above re: need to use four tildes to sign, and date, comments in talk pages.) Other such questions that do not relate to the editing of the article are most likely going to be deleted too.

This talk page is not a message board or forum about MLA Style. Please scroll up and read the talk page headers and information linked in them about Wikipedia editing policies and guidelines. Thank you. --NYScholar (talk) 23:18, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Essay format[edit]

The starting of an essay should look like this,

Name LastName Date Subject

      Start of paragraph. 7 spaces indention. 

     Next paragraph.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:03, 5 March 2009 (UTC) 
The above unsigned posting by the anon IP has not been checked and verified and no source is given for the above information. Please check the actual 3rd ed. of the published MLA Handbook for current guidelines. Thank you. --NYScholar (talk) 00:56, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Recent editing history[edit]

For contexts of some recent editing, please see User talk:NYScholar/Archive 25#MLA. Thanks. --NYScholar (talk) 05:30, 9 March 2009 (UTC) [Updated link after archiving my own talk page. --NYScholar (talk) 10:14, 10 March 2009 (UTC)]

Specific examples[edit]

I question having the "Specific examples" section. It seems to skirt WP:NOTHOWTO, and whatever gets chosen to be exemplified seems a bit arbitrary at best. --Cybercobra (talk) 06:52, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Several of the fully-developed articles listed in the Styles template (Template:Styles), such as APA style, and also the WP:MOS (see WP:MOS#Section management) give "examples"; it is part of the format and content of articles on Style guides in Wikipedia. Please examine editing policies as used in similar articles. These are all long-standing protocols in Wikipedia, it appears to me (from reading and editing these articles over several years, since 2005). Please seek administrative assistance if you have further questions of this kind. Thanks very much. --NYScholar (talk) 20:52, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Given this additional explanation, I now agree. I do take some offense to your unnecessarily condescending tone however. --Cybercobra (talk) 21:19, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
[No such tone intended. Please just focus on the content. (Tone of voice in online communications is notoriously mistaken. Quotation marks are meant as quotation marks. The word example and the phrase for example are used throughout such articles. Please "focus on the content and not on the contributor" ([see top template w/ talk page guidelines; it's in WP:NPA]). Thanks very much. I refer you to administrators, because they may be able to address your questions better than ordinary editors (like me) who are not administrators, though one does keep in mind that all administrators are also editors and users of Wikipedia too, just as we are. Meant no "condescension" at all; just tryin to point you in direction of where you might find further information. --NYScholar (talk) 21:32, 9 March 2009 (UTC)]
Heh, ironic. I go to edit the talkpage to say I may have been overinterpreting and you've already responded :) --Cybercobra (talk) 21:36, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

There is no "Specific examples" section per se; as in the other Wikipedia "style guide" articles (which are more developed than "stubs"), the phrase "for example" is used, or some "examples" are given (as illustrations--part of dev. of an article on the book's content). These are selected examples, with references to the book for further information. Precedents are in the other articles on such books, mentioned above and listed in the Styles template. Please see your comments posted on my talk page, which suggest that you still need to consult Wikipedia editing policies pertaining to these kinds of articles. None of them (except for WP:MOS) is intended to be used instead of the book that it is about. WP:MOS is clearly cross-referenced in Style guide and takes the place of a "style guide" [optional editing Wikipedia guidelines--for editing Wikipedia articles]; the other articles are about style manuals, and it is customary to give selected examples. The examples are not "arbitrary"; they are examples of some major categories of kinds of sources; for a full discussion, one needs actually to consult the published books. Wikipedia in no way takes the place of doing so.

[Later I found a ref. to "Specific examples" in a heading in The MLA Style Manual and removed that. It is not necessary to use the phrase. --NYScholar (talk) 23:25, 9 March 2009 (UTC)]
(cont.) (Word of caution to all reading any of these articles on any published "style guides" in Wikipedia, as pertains to articles in Wikipedia on any subject. An encyclopedia, esp. an online peer-edited Wiki, does not take the place of primary and secondary peer-reviewed third party publications by trade and academic presses.) --NYScholar (talk) 21:07, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
(cont.) See WP:NOT. --NYScholar (talk) 21:08, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Actually, this article is not "skirting NOTHOWTO", it's violating it. That other articles on style manuals also do this only means that those articles also need cleanup (see WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS about that type of argument). --Crusio (talk) 07:23, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

EL section[edit]

Please do not change already-correct punctuation of titles. The format is correct. It is intended to illustrate the MLA Style format for such titles. --NYScholar (talk) 21:32, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

The link to "Comparison of reference management software" would appear to be unrelated to the topic. Schnoggo (talk) 17:22, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

History section[edit]

"The first 5 editions, published between 1977 and 1999 were titled the MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations (WorldCat).

The title changed to the MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers in 2003 (6th ed.)."

Not sure how to research this, but I don't think that this is accurate. I have my 3rd edition (1988) of the MLA Handbook right here in front of me, and the full title on the cover, title page, and publication page is "MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers." -- (talk) 02:20, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

One can research it further using the ISBN numbers of various editions of both titles in WorldCat; just click on the ISBN numbers in the "Works cited" and choose WorldCat as a search engine; then choose "all editions" and also substitute the various titles in the search box to find earlier editions. Also use the ISBN number on your own copy and search it via WorldCat, the Library of Congress, and other sites. If the dates and edition numbers in the quoted passage need changing/correction, based on WorldCat as a source, or the Library of Congress, e.g., then you might want to update the passage. -- (talk) 06:47, 27 June 2011 (UTC)