Talk:Susan Orlean

message: I have commenced a tidy-up of the Bibliography section using cite templates. Capitalization and punctuation follow standard cataloguing rules in AACR2 and RDA, as much as Wikipedia templates allow it. ISBNs and other persistent identifiers, where available, are commented out, but still available for reference. This is a work in progress; feel free to continue. Sunwin1960 (talk) 08:52, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: While I would prefer capitalization and punctuation to follow the standard cataloguing rules referred to above, the Wikipedia Manual of Style at WP:MOS requires "title case".  I will make changes accordingly. Sunwin1960 (talk) 05:55, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  As I recently explained at , it is not true that that  in reference lists, as you have now claimed on multiple talk pages (in just the past week: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, etc.). The Wikipedia guideline for reference lists is at WP:CS and does not require title case; WP:CITESTYLE permits any consistent citation style within an article. If you want to change the guideline to require title case, you can make a proposal at WT:CS, but it does not currently require title case, so you should stop claiming the opposite on multiple talk pages. Biogeographist (talk) 17:31, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Another request: I would appreciate it if you could please stop commenting out ISBNs. Just because they remain available to editors doesn’t mean they are accessible to the vast majority of readers. Moreover they are required by features like In The News, so this only creates more work for others to undo later. Thank you. Innisfree987 (talk) 18:19, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @Innisfree987I've always thought it odd that (visible) hyperlinked ISBNs were frequently included in Wikipedia citations, since they point to a page full of links to commercial bookselling sites.  ISBNs are never used in formal bibliographies, which is another reason I like to hide them.  However, if you think they serve a useful purpose I'll stop commenting them out. Sunwin1960 (talk) 01:20, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @Sunwin1960, thanks for your understanding. I agree about the sales links and if I had the energy, I might suggest the template be revised. For the time being though, features like ITN understandably want the identifier included as proof the book exists (you would be surprised—or maybe you wouldn’t be!—by how often a biography will claim works that ultimately can’t be found.) So it would be great to leave them in. Thanks much. Innisfree987 (talk) 01:58, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

text:  I expect the users of bots, such as , that use ISBN data would also appreciate you leaving the ISBNs and other identifiers in citations. There is a lot of non-human (algorithmic, let's say) use of these identifiers in addition to their human users. Biogeographist (talk) 02:56, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

text: @BiogeographistThanks again for your support on this topic.  I only started using title case in bibliographic entries after receiving quite a bit of negative feedback (and reversions) from other users.  As a librarian I think citations using standard cataloguing rules are preferable. Sunwin1960 (talk) 01:12, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: As I previously mentioned at , WP:CITEVAR says: "If the article you are editing is already using a particular citation style, you should follow it; if you believe it is inappropriate for the needs of the article, seek consensus for a change on the talk page." So if you insert references in a style that conflicts with the one prevailing in an article,  would not be surprising. Also, some of the conventions of library cataloging are rare outside of library catalogs, such as putting spaces on both sides of a colon. I would be the first person to change that convention if it appeared in a reference in an article on my watchlist that otherwise used the more common convention of a space only following the colon. Biogeographist (talk) 02:56, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bibliography