I’m in the humanities, and I’m currently using zotero to cite primary and secondary materials in my dissertation. I apply the Chicago Manual Style, and don’t have any issues with secondary sources.

I do have problems with primary documents. I use archival materials, so the standard practice in my field goes something like this:

“name document”, archive, x, y, z, page.

However, zotero puts the archive at the end:

“name”, x, y, z, page, archive.

Is there a way to change the citation code in zotero to correct it(while keeping the CM style)?

Or do I change everything manually (and risk messing up the footnotes)?

Thanks!

I’m writing a mathematical paper. In it, I use a lemma. The lemma is not hard to prove and I have verified it myself. The proof is too tedious to include in the paper, so I want to just include a citation. I found a paper that includes the result. However, that paper does not actually include a proof. I cannot find any other place where this lemma appears.

I see three options:

  1. State the lemma without proof or citation.

  2. State the lemma without proof, but cite the paper (that states the lemma without proof or citation).

  3. Provide a proof of the lemma.

Which is most appropriate? Option 1 is easiest, but might annoy some readers who don’t believe me. Option 2 seems like a cop out. Option 3 is safest, but I don’t think it’s necessary, as the proof is really just a long and boring calculation.

ADDED: To be clear, the lemma is basically an integral. The proof consists of splitting up the domain of integration to remove absolute values, evaluating each of the parts (easy enough for symbolic integration packages like mathematica), and then joining them back up. This is “obvious”, but messy because the expressions are quite long. My writeup is two pages.

Maybe a better way to phrase my question: The result is trivial — I think so, the authors of the other paper think so, and the journal they published in thinks so. Should I still provide a citation? Is it misleading to cite the other paper without clarifying that it doesn’t provide a proof?

I am working on a small paper for university and am citing an archival source several times. The citation style we use (History department at a university in Switzerland) is similar to the Turabian style and when citing from a book a second time we were told to use a short form. However, I am not sure whether or not that also counts for archival sources? And if it does, what would that look like?
I imagine something along the lines of “name, a short titel or description, link to the digitalized version”?

I don’t know it my question is appropriate for this forum (newbie here). The citation guide my university offers doesn’t answer this question. Thanks a lot!

I am writing my thesis (computer sience) and wonder how to refer to an algorithm which i reimplement as a part of the thesis.

There is a paper describing the original algorithm and I am only implementing this algorithm in my thesis.

I considered to refer to it as ‘baseline’ or ‘reference algorithm’ but ‘baseline do have a different meaning in data mining and in my opinion (as a not native english person ‘reference algorithm’
sounds like the algorithm completely differ from mine. The algorithm itself is not named and the paper is having a name that is too long (i.e for the TOC)

I want to manage my references within Zotero, because I want to do a dissertation using Markdown and the reference manager. I have done this tutorial and it said this:

The general idea is to keep your sources organized under one centralized bibliographic database, while generating specific and much smaller .bib files that will live in the same directory as your project. Go ahead and open your .bib file with the plain-text editor of your choice.

So I tried to manage my references by using topic-based directories and then I exported each directory as a separate Bibtex file. I added two different news articles from the same site and they are written by the same author, and when I looked at the IDs within two Bibtex files, they had the same ID.
So I decided to just highlight all directories (by clicking on a top directory to collect all references) and then export them as one big bibtex file and that sorts out ID duplicates.

Is my above method the best way to manage and create the bibtex files or is there another way of doing this better?

My situation: I got two papers underway and the second one was accepted only days after the first one. The second one cites the first one and, naturally, I want the citation to be attributed correctly. Currently, both publications are “accepted” and probably on the editor’s desk or something.

How should I provide the bibliography information for an accepted paper? Can my citation still be accurately attributed to my first paper if I do not have a DOI for it (e.g. in Scopus)? Is there anything I can tell the editors of either journal to guarantee everything is going smoothly?

The field is solid matter physics/materials science.

I was assigned to find the mistakes in the In-text examples below and I can’t seem to find them . NEED A LENDING HAND !

1) According to surveys most adults think the A level examination system in the UK needs reforming .

2) Temporary workers have been defined as “those who believe their job are temporary” (Gallie,et al, pg 34)

3) ” A contract of employment is formed when an offer of employment is made and is accepted ” ( Lewis , Thornhill and Saunders 2003)

4) According to Burnes , the most significant event to affect the economic world as we see it was the British Industrial Revolution which began in the late eighteenth century

I have uploaded a preprint to the arXiv. I can find it in google search now. However, I cannot find it in google scholar. The reason for searching in Google scholar is that I want to make a BibTeX citation for my paper as below. Do I need to do something for my paper to appear in Google Scholar or do I just have to wait?

@article{tatarchenko2017octree,
  title={Octree Generating Networks: Efficient Convolutional Architectures for High-resolution 3D Outputs},
  author={Tatarchenko, Maxim and Dosovitskiy, Alexey and Brox, Thomas},
  journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.09438},
  year={2017}
}