thecitationslut

[thecitationslut]

Why we can't have nice things...

So, this was a random article that I don't care about. However, I spent a lot of time on it becuase it appeared to have a significant impact on popoular culture in the US and UK. So, even though I don't care, it matters. SO WHY CAN'T YOU. JUST LEAVE IT ALONE RANDOM IP ADDRESSS. LIKE BRUH.

It would have been less annoying ahd they ruined something I did care about, because then it wouldn't have been for nothing lol.

[thecitationslut]

That's so Norwegian...?:

The story of a Wikipedia editor's obsession with complete references.

Photo by Geir Hval.

So, long story short, the Norwegian National Research Ethics Committees organization published a clarification document about the ethical responsibilites that were discussed during the meetings of the "Vancouver Group" in the 1970s which ultimately created the ICMJE standards for manuscript and bibliographical sources—thus formalizing the note/bibliography system structure for international use (oh, hai Wikipedia).

Above—I mean, I did it. Was it worth it? Yup. To others? Probably not. This is a screenshot of the end result of my editing to this reference, Wikipedia, s.v. "Vancouver system."

In a rather bizarre turn of that which is self-referencing, I didn't relize how diffcult it is to link to a non-English Wikipedia page inside a reference while keeping the title of the non-English page in English.

But, I did it. As they say in Norway, "Hodet mitt kan gjøre vondt, men hjertet mitt gjør det ikke." [1]

Notes

Well, that's what Google Translate says they say in Norway if you say in English, "My head may hurt but my heart does not." No doubt, that is terrible Norwegian. My deepest apologies. ↩︎

[thecitationslut]

A pleasurable clean up

The before wasn't so bad. But, the artist is ever growing in popularity especially with teens. It's important that this information be accurate and well-sourced since kids are reading it often.

THE HIDEOUS BEFORE!

I've got to say, this was one of the most relaxing Reference cleanups I've ever done. I did have to find a few sources to replace quite sketch, most-definitely-not reliable sources. But adding the archives, correcting the type of citation, and for goodness' sake, adding in the dang authors—why is this so hard people?—was so smooth and relaxing. I did end up forgetting what was technically, the first reference because the note was hiding up in the Infobox for musical artists.

I may have declared that,

"References: The entire ref section is now complete and consistent. Changed a few refs from website to news, added authors, and archive URLs. Replaced some refs to Spotify and Apple Music to news articles reporting the information needing citation." — TheCitationSlut

...but, I forgot the first reference because of a glitch with the Infobox for musical artists.

So, slightly embarrassing if not extremely productive and satisfying.

Regardless, I prsent to you, the glorious after!

THE BEAUTIFUL AFTER!!!

[thecitationslut]

Down the Rabbit Hole 0001

Okay, here we go. Let's see if we can find something to back this happy horseshit up. I mean, maybe its my minor in philosophy talking, but I'm pretty sure that the onus is on the counterclaimant to prove their case. If I say, "hey, the sky is blue," and everyone else agrees except douchebag Bill who says, "no it's not, it's green!" Well, now its his job to prove its green, not blue. Fuck off, Bill and fuck you to whomever wrote this parenthetical piece of douchenozzlery.

CAPTION: A wonderful example of the magical douchebaggery that is parenthetical commentary in reference prose. Fuck you, Bill.

I shall update eventually, if I bother to even try this one out.

[thecitationslut]

Bullshit Article 0001

So, as I am want to do, I went to Wikipedia and looked up Category:All articles lacking sources. I clicked random and boy-howdy was this a journey. First of all, as a millennial American, I'm not likely to know many GenX children's books authors. Even so, this lady—with all due respect, it's not like she has done nothing with her life—has a very faint digital footprint that would fall under the credible source category. This article had zero in-text citations, nor a functioning reference section (the references had no corresponding in-text citation. What the what?

So, this is what we started with. Wikipedia, s.v. "Ingrid Jonach," accessed 29 Oct 24. Yeah, sorry, Ingy—I have no idea who you are.

Most of the links were dead, and several of the crappy references had no link whatsoever, just vague bullshit about a newspaper article from the early 00s. Well, guess who couldn't verify most of that. The almighty archive.org had nothing, the alleged sources returned no results, etc.

This is what we left off with.