Q. In a footnote I have a quote that, in the original, itself has a footnote. The latter footnote (i.e., the original author’s footnote) is salient to the discussion, and I’d like to include it in my footnote. What are the mechanics to handle such a situation? Currently I have this:
1. Author (date: page) writes, “Body of quote [original author’s footnote #] ([original author’s footnote #] body of footnote).”
A. This seems more complicated than necessary. You could simplify by leaving out the note number, which conventionally would be left out in any case (see CMOS 13.7). After the close of the text quote, write “Smith adds in a note that . . .” If you like, reference the note number at the end of that quote or paraphrase, e.g., (2004, 25n16).
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I have been asked by my professor to cite in my reference list all newspaper articles that I have used. The articles do not have authors. They do include the date and all other information. What is the correct way to cite this? The manual does not go into detail on this area of citation.
A. Please see CMOS 14.199: “Unsigned newspaper articles or features are best dealt with in text or notes. But if a bibliography entry should be needed, the title of the newspaper stands in place of the author.” Example:
New York Times. “In Texas, Ad Heats Up Race for Governor.” July 30, 2002.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. How should I cite a work I’ve already cited in a previous chapter: in full each time I cite it or with
formal direction to the previous citation?
A. Either method is fine. You can cite a work in full the first time it appears in each chapter, or you can use short citations
for all but the first one in the book. The latter method works best if you include a bibliography, so readers don’t
have to rummage through the entire book to find the full citation. Or if you don’t have a bibliography,
you can refer the reader to the note where the full citation appeared: Miller, Quest, 81 (see chap. 1, n. 4).
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. If you have tables in your manuscript containing six or so columns of tabulations, do you in your text discussion of the
table go into detail about what calculation is in each column of the table? For instance, in the text, “Table
1 shows, in column 4, the sphere’s true volume percentage change from the initial 10-unit radius sphere.
Column 5 shows . . . Column 6 tabulates the . . .”
Or do you do a generic, nondescriptive text statement like “For changes in a sphere’s
radius of up to 10%, table 1 details the level of error introduced by . . .”
Do you leave it to the reader to figure out the details of each column?
A. This is not a matter of style, but of figuring out why you have included the table. Think about where your readers need to
focus in order to understand your points. If you are using a single column or cell of the table to support a specific point,
by all means refer to it. Likewise, if the entire table supports a general conclusion, say so. Tables are evidence, materials
that support your explanation or argument. If you aren’t clear in your own mind as to why your table
is there or how to use it, reconsider whether you need it at all.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. When an author refers to his own book, how should it be capitalized and/or punctuated? E.g., According to the list in Appendix C . . . ; in the Glossary . . . ; discussed more fully in Chapter 25 . . .
Q. In my essay, I have referred to a couple of articles passed to me by an interviewee. They are photocopied, and the article
titles and dates are either blurred or missing. How should I footnote and biblio the photocopied materials?
A. These are not proper sources and you must not quote them. I’m sorry—it would
be very sloppy scholarship. You might as well write, “I overheard this on the subway.”
You might take the photocopies to a library and ask the reference librarian if she can help you find some clues as to their
origin. Or try typing a distinctive phrase from the pages into a search engine and see if the article appears online.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I am copyediting a short report that makes reference to Wikipedia. In citing this, is it necessary to put the specific date the article was accessed, as the article may later change?
A. Yes, it’s a good idea to note the date of access for web pages that change constantly. Citations of pages that are records of a static print version, like those of many published journals, don’t necessarily require the date of access. In the case of Wikipedia, more useful than an access date is the last-modified date posted with the article. For examples, see CMOS 14.207.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I have a question about the place of publication (country) to be included for a book in a reference list. The Chicago Manual of Style says to use the place that appears on the title page or copyright page of the book cited. My question is, if you need to
specify the country but the name of the country has changed, do you use the name as it appears in the book, or do you use
the current name? For example, if “Soviet Union” is shown on the title page, do
you change it to “Russia” for the reference list entry?
A. Cite what is printed on the title page. Readers who are searching for a book need the details as they are printed and recorded
in library records. Changing these details would be contrary to the purpose of a bibliography, which is to record sources
and help readers locate them. (And aren’t you glad you don’t have to research
political developments in every country in your reference list?)
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. What should I do if I’m missing certain bits of information for the bibliography? For example, I have many instances where I wrote down the date of a publication, but I can’t find the volume and issue numbers. The same goes for the page numbers of the entire article; for example, I jotted down the number of the page I’m citing from but not the pages of the entire article. This is problematic, as I’m a historian completing my PhD dissertation on materials from the 1930s, and the sources I use are not available online.
A. I’d say you’re in something of a pickle. First, try again online. Even if the text of an article isn’t available, it’s possible that you can find references to it that will include the missing information. Search for the article title and whatever information you have (journal title and year). Sometimes if you search for the journal, its year, and a page number (not the article title, which would limit the search), you will get hits that include the volume and issue numbers. Consider carefully whether to trust what you find. Try to confirm the information at more than one reputable site, keeping in mind that misinformation tends to replicate quickly online.
If you can’t locate the information you need online, you’ll have to dig it up the same way you did originally. Visit the libraries or archives where you did your research and find the sources. You might be able to ask a reference librarian by email or phone to help you.
In some cases, it won’t be disastrous to omit some information—for instance, if your note citation gives the year, volume, issue, and page number of the material you are quoting or referencing, the bibliography can do without the page range of the entire article. Unfortunately, even if a citation includes the year, page numbers alone aren’t always helpful without an issue number. In that case, unless you are certain that the page numbers for that year number straight through without starting anew in each issue, you should consider dropping the source.
And need I scold you about not taking thorough notes on your sources?
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Sometimes articles in periodicals—particularly in magazines—skip several pages. Typically, most of the article is contained on several adjacent pages, but then it finishes somewhere toward the back of the periodical. When citing such an article, how should the page numbers be listed? Should the very first and the very last pages displaying the article be shown, as in 25–62? Or should only the actual pages be indicated, as in 25–32, 62, 65, 66?
A. Neither solution is ideal; the first is misleading, and the second is just annoying. Please see CMOS 14.188: “Weekly or monthly (or bimonthly) magazines, even if numbered by volume and issue, are usually cited by date only. . . . While a specific page number may be cited in a note, the inclusive page numbers of an article may be omitted, since they are often widely separated by extraneous material.”
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]