Homepage
Login
New Post
Profile
No, there is no universally accepted standard for this.
That doesn't mean there aren't standards you should follow, though. Usually, the set of required fields is dictated by the journal or conference you are publishing in. Many journals have BibTeX styles that will include the required fields for you (as long as they are present in your library, of course). It should go without saying that if your journal offers a BibTeX style (possibly as part of a LaTeX class), you should use it. Otherwise, check on the journal's website to see if they have a description of the kind of references they are looking for. Any self-respecting journal should have this information accessible somewhere in its submission instructions.
If you do find yourself having the freedom to choose which fields to include, I would suggest following one common-sense guideline: Include enough information to uniquely identify the reference. You'd be surprised how often I find citations which do not uniquely identify a paper, and it's really annoying. At a minimum, I would suggest the following for citing a published paper (not necessarily in this order):
Authors' names
Journal title (abbreviated if standard practice), issue, and volume
Year of publication
Page number
A DOI if there is one
An eprint identifier if there is one (for fields in which papers are pre-published on arXiv)
In other fields, any sort of widely recognized identifier, if there is one
If citing a book:
Authors' names
Book title
Edition
Year of publication
ISBN
Also, keep the references short enough to be quickly digestible. In particular, the full title of a scientific paper can often be omitted. The aim is that one should be able to pick out the key identifying information at a glance. Using font styles to distinguish different fields helps; most BibTeX styles will do this.
(0)More posts by @Carla500
Terms of Use Privacy policy Contact About Cancellation policy © selfpublishingguru.com2024 All Rights reserved.