The other day I ran across what is perhaps for me, one of the most bizarre situations with references I've yet to encounter.
Webster's has produced a book.? I found it in some random Google books searches I was doing on a subject.? It states certain facts and a few of them I knew to be without evidence, which made me wonder where they'd come from.? After a few minutes of scanning back-and-forth I realized that their source citation, which is only cited as (WP) stands for.... Wikipedia.
Checking the Wikipedia article on the same subject, that "fact" is no longer present.
I hope we can all see what horror Webster has now unleashed upon us, by this act of intellectual graffiti, not to mention amateurish citation.? They need to be taken to the woodshed.
This is not published by the "real" Merriam–Webster, but Icon Group
International. That is company that computer generate enourmous numbers of useless books that fill up Google Books. These "Webster’s Quotations, Facts and Phrases" books that are made from excerpts of Wikipedia articles are especially annoying, as people who don't check their sources properly create circular references. I search for these occasionally and remove them from articles.
2009/7/25 Apoc 2400 apoc2400@gmail.com:
This is not published by the "real" Merriam–Webster, but Icon Group International. That is company that computer generate enourmous numbers of useless books that fill up Google Books. These "Webster’s Quotations, Facts and Phrases" books that are made from excerpts of Wikipedia articles are especially annoying, as people who don't check their sources properly create circular references. I search for these occasionally and remove them from articles.
The problem is that "Webster" isnt a trademark - it's become genericised. See [[Webster's Dictionary]].
As you note, there's all manner of works, some high-quality and some not so high, published by all sorts of companies. Editors need to pay particular attention ...
Merriam-Webster is in fact the genuine Noah Webster-descended company.
- d.
David Gerard wrote:
2009/7/25 Apoc 2400 apoc2400@gmail.com:
This is not published by the "real" Merriam–Webster, but Icon Group International. That is company that computer generate enourmous numbers of useless books that fill up Google Books. These "Webster’s Quotations, Facts and Phrases" books that are made from excerpts of Wikipedia articles are especially annoying, as people who don't check their sources properly create circular references. I search for these occasionally and remove them from articles.
The problem is that "Webster" isnt a trademark - it's become genericised. See [[Webster's Dictionary]].
As you note, there's all manner of works, some high-quality and some not so high, published by all sorts of companies. Editors need to pay particular attention ...
Merriam-Webster is in fact the genuine Noah Webster-descended company.
I don't think that I would agree with that last statement. There were numerous cases over the use of the name "Webster" in the late 19th century leading to the generic status. "Merriam-Webster" is a trademark in its own right, but that does not substantiate a unique descendance from Noah Webster
Ec.