Upgrade StorageStyle Error: Biological Psychiatry
Hello. There seems to be a small error with the Biological Psychiatry style. It is generally correct, but for item type Book, it is putting two periods after the title instead of just one period. The style for a book should look like:
2. American Psychiatric Association (1994): Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.
but in my paper it looks like:
1. American Psychiatric Association (2000): Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-IV-TR. . Washington, DC: Author.
It is doing this for all books, and there is not any period in my library under title.
Additionally, for those journal article citations with a DOI in my library, it is listing the DOI, when this is not consistent with Biological Psychiatry's style.
The link to the style is at:
http://www.biologicalpsychiatryjournal.com/content/bps-authorinfo
Thank you.
Pilar
2. American Psychiatric Association (1994): Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.
but in my paper it looks like:
1. American Psychiatric Association (2000): Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-IV-TR. . Washington, DC: Author.
It is doing this for all books, and there is not any period in my library under title.
Additionally, for those journal article citations with a DOI in my library, it is listing the DOI, when this is not consistent with Biological Psychiatry's style.
The link to the style is at:
http://www.biologicalpsychiatryjournal.com/content/bps-authorinfo
Thank you.
Pilar
-
zuphilipI have to look closer for the two periods. However, the doi should only appear if there are no pages specify, i.e. for "online first" articles. Can you confirm that? Otherwise please give us a specific example here.
-
zuphilipThe periods (and some other wrong interpunctation cases) should be fixed now and the updated style should appear shortly in the repository. Please let us know about further errors or inconsistencies in the style.
This is an old discussion that has not been active in a long time. Before commenting here, you should strongly consider starting a new discussion instead. If you think the content of this discussion is still relevant, you can link to it from your new discussion.