Bibliographic standard for Sfeditors wiki

[netmouse]

I've noticed quite a few editors tend to post their work listings on SF Editors in reverse order, like one might on a resume. I myself tend toward the chronological standard most used in wikipedia. That might be my history degree speaking. I've also see listings with title, author, author --title, etc. many different ways to present this information. Just for kicks, I'd like to know how other people would format entries (feel free to browse SFeditors to get a feel for variation. (Check recent changes to find ones I haven't resorted yet.)

(as an aside, I've already suggested in the template that publisher only be listed where the editor is freelance or the title is not by their primary publisher. for the moment anyway, that keeps listings cleaner and makes it easier for people to add information quickly.)

[Poll #1145257]

Comments

[cherylmmorgan.livejournal.com]

I would be tempted to go look in my copy of the SF Encyclopedia to see what Clute does, but it is in California and I'm not.

However, "don't reinvent the wheel" seems like good advice, because if you do then partisans of all of the available standards will attack you. At least if you pick a standard you'll have some support.

from Kathryn Cramer

[(Anonymous)]

I've a had a serious whack at adding material to the WIki.

My feeling is that most editors with significant careers are going to need separate pages for the lists of books they edited. Formatting needs to take that into consideration.

To some extent, this won't be a problem because data is hard to come by, but think for example about the fact hat in either 1977 or 1978, David Hartwell was editor of over 250 titles. (Many were reprint, but still).

Even my own list of anthologies published is a bit unwieldy once all the books are there.

Re: from Kathryn Cramer

[netmouse.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I don't mind extra length in the page but it also makes the table of contents quite massive, so that may be true. We just need to make it really obvious if and when we split off a separate page.

And btw, thank you for all your contributions!