![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
In practice bibliographies on with a broad historical scope in years such as this one are best organized by topic, then chronologically. The reason being is that when using such a bibliography, one first finds the suitable subtopic and then can scan entries from the oldest to the most contemporary. Looking for a specific author is not really useful as one is using to the Bibliography to find either old or new sources on a specific topic. This one still needs some adjusting to get all the citation in {{cite book}} format which makes chronological simple, but the topic, chronological organization is a better approach.-- Mike Cline ( talk) 23:39, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm looking to add some items to this bib but I wanted to suggest a reorganization first. Currently, we have very little order to the topics. I suggest we adapt the topical headings found in the "Recent Articles" section of the Western Historical Quarterly. I've used these over the years in my own bib creation and they've been very helpful for me in organizing references to both books and articles. I think starting with the Survey section is good (though I'd like to change the title to "General Montana history," since I'm not sure the novice historian or student knows what survey means). Then starting the topical sections in alphabetical order with "Agriculture, Ranching, and Rural Life," "Biography," "Business and Economics," etc., etc. There are a few I'd leave out since they don't exactly fit Montana or the history of a state, such as: "International Borderlands," "Method and Theory," and "Public History and Material Culture." I would also suggest folding "Literature, Film, and the Arts" and "Science, Technology, and Industry" into other, broader categories. I don't mind making the changes, and I think just adding one topic at a time, shifting titles that need to shift and adding a few new titles from some of my own working bibs would be the way to go. Some issues may come up as the change is implemented and we can discuss those as they appear. Anyway, I wanted to see what anyone else out there thought of this. Any concerns, suggestions, or comments? -- KingJeff1970 ( talk) 22:45, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Bibliography of Montana history. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:35, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
In practice bibliographies on with a broad historical scope in years such as this one are best organized by topic, then chronologically. The reason being is that when using such a bibliography, one first finds the suitable subtopic and then can scan entries from the oldest to the most contemporary. Looking for a specific author is not really useful as one is using to the Bibliography to find either old or new sources on a specific topic. This one still needs some adjusting to get all the citation in {{cite book}} format which makes chronological simple, but the topic, chronological organization is a better approach.-- Mike Cline ( talk) 23:39, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm looking to add some items to this bib but I wanted to suggest a reorganization first. Currently, we have very little order to the topics. I suggest we adapt the topical headings found in the "Recent Articles" section of the Western Historical Quarterly. I've used these over the years in my own bib creation and they've been very helpful for me in organizing references to both books and articles. I think starting with the Survey section is good (though I'd like to change the title to "General Montana history," since I'm not sure the novice historian or student knows what survey means). Then starting the topical sections in alphabetical order with "Agriculture, Ranching, and Rural Life," "Biography," "Business and Economics," etc., etc. There are a few I'd leave out since they don't exactly fit Montana or the history of a state, such as: "International Borderlands," "Method and Theory," and "Public History and Material Culture." I would also suggest folding "Literature, Film, and the Arts" and "Science, Technology, and Industry" into other, broader categories. I don't mind making the changes, and I think just adding one topic at a time, shifting titles that need to shift and adding a few new titles from some of my own working bibs would be the way to go. Some issues may come up as the change is implemented and we can discuss those as they appear. Anyway, I wanted to see what anyone else out there thought of this. Any concerns, suggestions, or comments? -- KingJeff1970 ( talk) 22:45, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Bibliography of Montana history. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:35, 1 November 2016 (UTC)