Footnote Ibid and page number abbreviation for Turabian and Chicago

saniol
With Chicago citation style (17th edition full note), page number ranges are abbreviated automatically (e.g. 268-69), but it does not use Ibid. With Turabian (8th edition full note), Ibid is used, but the page number ranges are not abbreviated.

I need both Ibid and page number abbreviations! Any chance one or both of these citation styles can be updated to fix that?
  • adamsmith
    Note that Chicago recommends against ibid in its 17th edition, which is the rule that Zotero's main style follows. There is a version with ibid available, though: https://www.zotero.org/styles?q=id:chicago-fullnote-bibliography-with-ibid
  • saniol
    Perfect. That's what I'm looking for. Thanks.

    Any reason the Turabian style does not automatically abbreviate page number ranges?
  • adamsmith
    I don't think so; it's probably just not been updated. I don't like Turabian (I think they should just say "use Chicago" instead of having their own almost but not quite identical style) so I tend to procrastinate on working on that.
  • saniol
    OK. I used to always just use Chicago until it stopped doing Ibid. Then I switched to Turabian, but noticed it didn't automatically abbreviate. :) But the Chicago with Ibid, is perfect, so thanks for your help.

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.

Sign In or Register to comment.