See larger version of this image.

Works Cited

3 papers done.

You’re looking at my bibliography.

In case you don’t “get” how stupid Kate Turabian’s style of citation is, look at just the first example here for “Book: Single Author”.

For Footnotes:

Neil Sheehan, A Bright Shining Lie: John Paul Vann and America in Vietnam (New York: Random House, 1988), 425.

For Bibliography

Sheehan, Neil. A Bright Shining Lie: John Paul Vann and America in Vietnam. New York: Random House, 1988.

DEAR GOD WHY?

First of all, if I have all of that information in the bibliography, why do I need to reproduce it on the footnote/endnote?

Secondly, did you notice the slight-but-vital differences in the formatting?

Read this aloud:

For footnotes, first name last name comma italics on title italics off open parenthesis publisher location colon publisher name comma year of publication close parenthesis comma page number period

Now this:

For bibliography, last name comma first name period italics on title italics off period publisher location colon publisher name comma year period

Why why why why why why why?

So if you ever wonder why I hate Kate Turabian, now you know. This is the dumbest, least efficient method of citation I can imagine. It is fraught with slight-but-vital difference in formatting and requires that you duplicate all of your bibliographic information.

Now if you’ll excuse me…

You may have noticed an empty glass in desperate need of some attention.