Citing a web-based digital reprint of a self-published book

By History-Hunter on Fri, 07/23/2021 - 11:38

Forums

The item I'm trying to cite is a digital reprint of a numbered copy of a well-known self-published book. The original author is deceased and the rights have passed to a regimental museum, which allowed a study group to publish the book on the Internet Archive. Therefor, the reprinted copy contains a few pages of lead-in showing provenance and copyright information. In all other respects it is a true copy of the original.

I've tried to incorporate the guidance of several examples from the EE book in creating the following proposed citation. So, I may not have addressed this exactly as I should. Suggestions would be appreciated.

Footnote

John F. Meek, Over the Top: Canadian Infantry in the First World War (Orangeville, Ontario: John F. Meek [7–3rd Avenue, Orangeville, Ontario], 1971), copy no. 122, [insert page no.]; PDF reprint by Richard V. Laughton, February 2013; download <i>Internet Archive</i> (https://archive.org).

Short Footnote

Meek, Over the Top, copy no. 122, [insert page no.].

Bibliography

Meek, John F. Over the Top: Canadian Infantry in the First World War. Copy no. 122. Orangeville, Ontario. John F. Meek [7–3rd Avenue]. 1971.

Submitted byEEon Fri, 07/23/2021 - 17:48

History-Hunter, you are definitely thorough. EE would differ with you on a couple of points to more closely follow norms, but no one would fault you for the citation you crafted.

EE's version would be:

First Reference Note:

John F. Meek, Over the Top: Canadian Infantry in the First World War (Orangeville, Ontario: John F. Meek 1971), 33; facsimile edition by Richard V. Laughton, 2013, available as imaged ebook or downloadable PDF at Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/OverTheTopTheCanadianInfantryInTheFirstWorldWar : accessed 23 July 2021).

Subsequent Note:

Meek, Over the Top: Canadian Infantry in the First World War, 33.

Source List Entry:

Meek, John F. Over the Top: Canadian Infantry in the First World War. Orangeville, Ontario: John F. Meek 1971. Facsimile edition by Richard V. Laughton, 2013. Imaged Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/OverTheTopTheCanadianInfantryInTheFirstWorldWar : 2021

Reasons:

  • When a book is marketed, the fact that someone bought the 122nd copy has no bearing upon the identity of the book. That point is not a part of the citation. In your own research notes, of course, you are free to add any kind of additional information you please.
  • The address of the author who privately published a book is not a customary part of a citation.
  • For a shortened cite, it is better to use enough of the title for readers to grasp what the book is about. From the short-cite you used (Over the Top), readers would have no clue to the book's subject. (EE 14.14)
  • Re "PDF": I don't see that Laughton himself PDF'd the book (although I definitely have not spent the amount of time with this book that you have). The Internet Archive version is an ebook version although it does allow us to download in either ebook or PDF version. Where uncertainty exists, EE would be less specific
  • EE would also include the full URL for the specific book at Internet Archive.

Dear editor;
I have a few questions relating to your reasons for the suggested changes:

  1. The EE book, "12.20 Self-published Works" suggests that placing the author-publisher's address in the citation is one that we might want to adopt. Why makes this situation different?
  2. How does this situation differ from a digitally delivered book in which I've seen examples that typically just gives the site name? It seems that you a re making a key distinction, which I am missing, between this and the case in which one cites the website name, URL and access/download date.

The following are just a few explanatory notes relating to why my attempted citation contained certain information about the published PDF.

My reason for saying that Laughton published in PDF format was as follows. If one looks at the full list of downloadable file formats,I believe the PDF version has the earliest date. My understanding is that the Internet Archive autogenerates other standard formats based upon the originally submitted file format and will attempt to generate others at download time.

I identified Laughton, based on the text of the following preface material included in the reproduced book.

"This digital reproduction was prepared by Richard V. Laughton in February 2013 and now replaces an earlier, lower quality reproduction that was made in May 2009."

 

History-Hunter,

Re Q1: EE 12.20 (Self-published Works) states:

Because self-published works seldom appear in publishing directories, the Library of Congress now follows a practice you may wish to adopt: placing the author-publisher’s address (as shown on the title page or its reverse) amid your publication data.

The key point here is the publishing aspect—the need to locate the publisher of a self-published work that's not listed in standard catalogs, in order to obtain a copy of the book. The word "author" appears in the discussion because we are talking about cases in which the author is the publisher and location is needed to obtain the copy.

In the instance you're working with, the book was published fifty years ago. The odds are not good that the author is alive or living at that address. Nor is it necessary to contact the author-publisher to obtain a copy of the book because it is now published online.

Re Q2:  You ask how "this situation" differs from "a digitally delivered book in which I've seen examples that typically just gives the site name?" Would you identify one of those "examples" so that we can discuss a concrete issue? I'm not sure what aspect of the citation you mean when you say "this situation."

 

Submitted bylemonstandon Fri, 07/30/2021 - 07:55

History Hunter,

   I did not know Internet Archive autogenerates other standard formats based on the originally submitted file format. I've been trying to find more information about that with some difficulty because I wanted to make sure the oldest format would be the original?

EE,

   Would this note, "This digital reproduction was prepared by Richard V. Laughton in February 2013 and now replaces an earlier, lower quality reproduction that was made in May 2009." go at the end of citation to differentiate possible availability of an earlier version of the work? 

Submitted byEEon Fri, 07/30/2021 - 09:30

lemonstand (and History Hunter)

When we describe a source and the qualities we observe, we may use whatever words we feel best describes the situation; and, yes, we place that at the end of the basic citation—usually in a new sentence or paragraph. However, if our discussion introduces information from another source, then we need to identify where/how we obtained that outside information. If our discussion is based on innate factors that others might not perceive (say, metadata that someone without IT training might not recognize), then that should be explained also.