Connie -
In addition to Thomas Kaun's succinct distinction in referring to a
"subscription" database ("already vetted" being the key point, I might add),
I wonder about your reference to citing About.com. About.com is not the
producer of the content, so should not appear in the bibliography. It is
merely the place you found a REFERENCE to a page/article or content. In that
regard, About is an index, as are Google, Yahoo, Dogpile, and any variety of
search engines. What distinguishes the database from the index is the
continuous, active addition of content. What distinguishes a search engine
from a database is the ability to link to actual content, rather than merely
creating a mental association. Back to the 'citing', which is the part that
concerns me.
Think back to the paper days, and think of the Reader's Guide to Periodical
Literature: you would look there for reference to articles on a topic, then
go to the paper journal listed to find the content. You wouldn't cite the
reader's guide, just the magazine in which the content resided. Same with the
web or a subscription database. You don't cite Ebsco, except tangentially;
instead you refer to the original paper magazine content, and then
additionally tell the reader you found the content displayed electronically
through Ebsco (by permission of the copyright holder, the magazine
publisher). If you examine the entire MLA manual, you will discover that
there are different formats for content found on the web versus content found
via a library or personal subscription to an online database. There are no
citation styles for search engines.
MLA makes distinctions between (as do most style manuals) different types of
electronic content. In "Citing electronic publications", the MLA manual has
5.9.2 for an entire internet site; 5.9.2a for a home page of a course; 5.9.2b
is a home page of an academic department; 5.9.2c is a personal home page.
5.9.3 refers to online books: 5.9.3a for an entire book online, b for a part
of a book only; 5.9.3c refers to citing an online government document. For
articles, MLA distinguishes in general between an article in an online
periodical (5.9.4) versus a scholarly journal (5.9.4a), newspaper/newswire
(5.9.4b), magazine (5.9.4c), a review (5.9.4d), an abstract 5.9.4e), an
'anonymous' article (5.9.4f), an editorial (5.9.4g), a letter to the editor
(5.9.4h) and a serialized article (5.9.4i). All of these are in _formally
published_ periodicals, as opposed to search engines or individually
published web pages. The basic example for a magazine online looks like this
(minus the hanging indent and underlines that plain text won't allow!):
Brooks, David. "The Culture of Martyrdom." _Atlantic Online_ June 2002. 24
Sept. 2002 <http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2002/06/brooks.htm>.
MLA goes on in 5.9.5 to "a publication on CD-ROM, Diskette, or Magnetic Tape"
AND THEN GOES ON to 5.9.7 "A work from a library or personal subscription
service". If you are using a web version of Ebsco, this is the version of MLA
that should be used. Their example is:
"Cooling Trend in Antarctica." _Futurist_ May-June 2002: 15. _Academic Search
Premier_. EBSCO. City U of New York, Graduate Center Lib. 22 May 2002
<www.epnet.com/>.
The distinguishing feature in both cases is providing the date of viewing
versus the date of publication, in case there's been some sort of change in
the content or the page "goes away" in the meantime. The subscription
database goes a step farther, listing THE LIBRARY THAT SUBSCRIBES TO THE
CONTENT.
**************************
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, just as it claims. It compiles information and
makes it available in one place. The difference between Wikipedia and any
other encyclopedia is the wiki feature - allowing anybody to post, rather
than seeking the best subject specialists to relay the content. What becomes
problematic in citing Wikipedia is the inability to point to an author,
someone 'responsible' for the content. And THAT is the reason it is
unacceptable to so many teachers/professors; not that the content is always
inaccurate, but that there is no easy way to trace attribution and that some
real someone is "responsible", which is what we're trying to teach the kids
in the first place.
***************************
:-)
Laura Jacobs
Associate Professor
Information Literacy / Archives
JDH Library
UW-Superior
PO Box 2000
Superior WI 54880
Tele: (715) 394-8359
ljacobs@uwsuper.edu
-----Original Message-----
From: School Library Media & Network Communications
[mailto:LM_NET@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of Connie Marr
Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2008 7:12 PM
To: LM_NET@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Subject: Target :Definition of Database
I need to know if I am outdated on the view of what constitutes a Database.
In a glossary of online terms from Online Retrieval A Dialogue of Theory and
Practice I found the definition as, "A collection of related records in
machine-readable form. Databases may be of various types-bibliographic,
numeric, directory, or full-text. It is the computer version of a file." In
my mind I always viewed databases as things such as EBSCO Host or other such
services.
Last week I had a student questioning why about.com was not considered a
database. After applying the above definition I am questioning myself. He
was saying that a family member recently graduated from college and for
classes it was considered a database and not a web site. We are using MLA so
basically the citation comes out the same with either way. This just got me
thinking that maybe I was missing something. Would that make Wikipedia a
database?
Is something like about.com a database? If you asked me on Thursday I would
have said no but am I wrong? Has what constitutes a database changed? Did I
have the wrong impression from the start? How do you define it for students
so that they can see the difference? Thank you for any help you can provide
so I am being accurate with students.
Connie Marr
Librarian
Ford City High School
Ford City, Pennsylvania
librarylands@alltel.net
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Please note: All LM_NET postings are protected by copyright law.
You can prevent most e-mail filters from deleting LM_NET postings
by adding LM_NET@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU to your e-mail address book.
To change your LM_NET status, e-mail to: listserv@listserv.syr.edu
In the message write EITHER: 1) SIGNOFF LM_NET 2) SET LM_NET NOMAIL
3) SET LM_NET MAIL 4) SET LM_NET DIGEST * Allow for confirmation.
* LM_NET Help & Information: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/
* LM_NET Archive: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/archive/
* EL-Announce with LM_NET Select: http://lm-net.info/
* LM_NET Supporters: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/ven.html
* LM_NET Wiki: http://lmnet.wikispaces.com/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Please note: All LM_NET postings are protected by copyright law.
You can prevent most e-mail filters from deleting LM_NET postings
by adding LM_NET@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU to your e-mail address book.
To change your LM_NET status, e-mail to: listserv@listserv.syr.edu
In the message write EITHER: 1) SIGNOFF LM_NET 2) SET LM_NET NOMAIL
3) SET LM_NET MAIL 4) SET LM_NET DIGEST * Allow for confirmation.
* LM_NET Help & Information: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/
* LM_NET Archive: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/archive/
* EL-Announce with LM_NET Select: http://lm-net.info/
* LM_NET Supporters: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/ven.html
* LM_NET Wiki: http://lmnet.wikispaces.com/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
LM_NET
Mailing List Home