Report type in Chicago Style
Hi,
For a long time I used the "Report" item type to cite Working Papers Series as Zotero does not come with a default type for WPS. The Report type worked perfectly as it cites "WPS Title" between quot. marks. After new upgrades, the Report type changed and now, Title is cited in italics. I worked around the CLS file and manged to get back "Title"; however, when I produce the Bibliography, the Title appears in italics. I'd appreciate any suggestion or idea. Many thanks!
For a long time I used the "Report" item type to cite Working Papers Series as Zotero does not come with a default type for WPS. The Report type worked perfectly as it cites "WPS Title" between quot. marks. After new upgrades, the Report type changed and now, Title is cited in italics. I worked around the CLS file and manged to get back "Title"; however, when I produce the Bibliography, the Title appears in italics. I'd appreciate any suggestion or idea. Many thanks!
I think all you need to do to get it in quotation marks is to delete "report" from the if type="... list in both the "title" and "title-note" macro.
I don't have a strong opinion on this either way--I'd personally tend to follow the working paper rather than the government report citation rules in Chicago Manual, but other people may feel differently about that.
https://www.zotero.org/support/dev/citation_styles/reference_test_pane
does it work there?
https://www.zotero.org/support/dev/citation_styles/style_editing_step-by-step#change_the_style_title_and_id
I totally agree, and would strongly support patching the various Chicago styles to have them format the Zotero (and CSL) “report” type as recommended in the Chicago Manual of Style, 16e, “14.228 Working papers and other unpublished works”, i.e., titles not italicised and in quotation marks.
I’m not sure which type exactly adamsmith means by “government reports” (I can’t find that exact term anywhere in the Manual), but I would guess it's something like “14.249 Pamphlets, reports, and the like”. For these, the Manual advises, “Pamphlets, corporate reports, brochures, and other freestanding publications are treated essentially as books.”
So the “14.249 Pamphlets …” format is very easy to obtain if you assign the “book” type to such an item (and populate series and series number, if necessary).
On the contrary, the “14.228 Working papers …” format currently is rather difficult to come by. You would have to (mis-)use “Presentation” or “Manuscript” but that’s by no means straightforward, in particular regarding type and number.
That’s why I’m in favour of patching the various Chicago styles to have them format “Report” titles in quotation marks but not italicised.
If you’d like me to submit pull requests for this, please let me know.
I'm afraid I don't understand gusv2007's comment. What exactly are you doing? Differentiate Working Paper versus Government Report in the Report type based on the presence of a report number?
I don't think using book for government reports that are (as described in 14.303) basically published as books is terribly problematic, no.