Is 1995.3 an acceptable format for March 1995 in English language bibliographies?
4
-
1Are you using any particular style guide (Chicago, MLA, etc) - many have particular date formats. And if you're using author-date references (Smith, 2024) then there is a specific format for that in each style guide. In general "1995.3" is not very clear and most would prefer a written month, but it's ultimately a matter of opinion where the editor or teacher gets to choose. And it's important to be consistent.– Stuart FCommented Oct 24 at 9:07
-
1Never seen that before - I would have no idea what it meant. it looks like a misprint for 1995 Q3, and 1995.6 would look like a misprint for 1995-6.– GreybeardCommented Oct 24 at 9:26
-
Thanks for your comments. I was merely curious as to whether anyone might say that they have seen or used that format before. I have been given a series of bibliographies to edit that were translated into English from Japanese. The client generally prefers that I keep the translation as close to the Japanese as possible and wants to leave that format as is, but I am arguing that I have never seen it used in English and can't find any style guide that recommends it.– Steven VentiCommented Oct 24 at 9:54
-
1I’d suggest you add that background to your question. And the question might be better suited to one of our sister SE sites like “Writing.”– PaulTanenbaumCommented Oct 24 at 11:17
Add a comment
|