I'm guessing that there is no way to edit a bibliography document if I think a source is being cited incorrectly?
You can delete individual entries but you can't change them.
Yes, I knew they could be deleted. However, some of them are not correct and need editing.
I'm assuming then that the only way to address it is to report it to Logos? That seems like a time-consuming approach if you have to do that every time you find an error.
I'm assuming then that the only way to address it is to report it to Logos?
Yes, that's correct
That seems like a time-consuming approach if you have to do that every time you find an error.
If you are seeing some sort of "systemic" problem - such as the problem is worse in older resources than newer ones, or in a particular series - that might help in tracking down the problem and, potentially, in getting it fixed.
What sort of citation issues are you seeing?
The problems are diverse and don't seem to belong to any particular series or period. In fact, most of them seem to be more recent books.
In this particular case I have collected a bibliography of any type of commentary I have on Exodus. I have used the Chicago Manual of Style, which is what I used when doing my MTh at Queen's University Belfast. So I would feel fairly confident with the style. The issues can be categorized into the following:
1. Problems with the place of publishing.
α. Some are simple, such as the one by Blackburn below. It should be "Nottingham, England", or just "Nottingham".
β. With others, there seems to be an inconsistency of whether or not the American state is included or not.
א. Sometimes it isn't:
ב. Sometimes it is:
2. Odd numbers being included. I cannot make any sense out of the numbers I have put a strike-through below. They seem unnecessary to me - but maybe I am mistaken. The only consistency characteristic seems to be that they are all 'book sections'.
3. The editors of a series being included in the citation. This is not necessary, and not normal either.
α. The following citations unnecessarily include the editors of the series:
β. But notice from the following example that Logos does not consistently include the series editors. There were many others like the one below:
4. Miscellaneous errors.
α. The "trans." in the citation of Clarke's commentary. Normally this would suggest the person listed was the translator of the work, but of course that is not true in this case.
β. The obvious confusion in the following:
γ. The lack of spaces between the locations of publishing:
δ. The following citation should be reading "Simon, Patrick." It is true that he was bishop of Ely, but this is not how it should be cited.
In a document listing 81 citations, there are at least 15 incorrect citations, which is quite a bit really. If this feature is going to be worthwhile to me, then I need Logos to get this right, or at least make it possible to correct them myself.
Hi Jordan
Some great (worrying) examples - hopefully someone from Faithlife will see and comment.
One detail:
The numbers seem to be the page number within the specific article.
Interesting. That may explain some of the numbers, but others seem to be in a "volume:page" format, e.g., "Hoffmeier.... 3:38". Which doesn't make sense to me.
Here's hoping that a FL rep will notice this post...
Having just written my first extensive paper and using Logos to cite 70+ sources, this was my first time using the bibliography tool.
I'd agree with all these concerns, as it was not as simple as "drag, drop, and forget". I had to cull through them and make modifications, and double check authors and check for consistency.
I am fine with doing my due-diligence and going over my work, that seems to be part of the process of writing. I'm also grateful for the time this bibliography tool saved in organizing and sorting for me. It also got me a huge head-start.
However, as the facts have been stated there is room for improvement and accuracy. I wanted to add my thumbs up for any changes Logos could make in updating resource bibliography and improving the tool.
PS: And any way of adding Page Numbers to older resources that are lacking them would be a HUGE improvement!!
What sort of citation issues are you seeing? The problems are diverse and don't seem to belong to any particular series or period. In fact, most of them seem to be more recent books. ... In a document listing 81 citations, there are at least 15 incorrect citations, which is quite a bit really. If this feature is going to be worthwhile to me, then I need Logos to get this right, or at least make it possible to correct them myself.
...
Wow, that is a little troubling to me. With such an automatic feature (as it is promoted to be), this causes concern- as I don't want to have to pull the hand book to double check each citation! I hope this gets corrected asap.
Yes, this is concerning. Even if I am transferring it to something like Zotero, it seems that I lose the publisher place names in the process. Maybe this is a problem with the exporting format (BibTex), but I expected Logos to offer more exporting options.
My workaround is to ignore the Bibliography feature and use Zotero. I hope that FL will fix this in time for Verbum/Logos 8....
The meta data for a lot of resources would need to be corrected to overcome this problem. Dodgy resource meta data has been a long standing issue that FL has yet to address adequately. For those who would benefit from this feature I hope this is resolved one day sooner than later.
The meta data for a lot of resources would need to be corrected to overcome this problem. Dodgy resource meta data has been a long standing issue that FL has yet to address adequately.
That's concerning. Of course, I can also work around it through Zotero. However, if the feature is there, it needs to work properly, or be removed.
