h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Normally in one's footnotes one would provide the full citations for the works cited --- giving one's readers the ability to find the materials for themselves. Why, then, have you only given these short forms? They are useful for virtually nothing except as abbreviations in running text, in which case one would still provide the full reference in a works-cited section or bibliography. . .

While I appreciate the amount of work you have obviously put into this, it's rather difficult to do anything further in this direction without the full citations.

For example: In several places, you cite works published by "Trull" in 1996 and 1999. Without information to the contrary, I assume that these refer to books published in those years, and search the Library of Congress catalog at [http://catalog.loc.gov]. But while it finds over 20 authors named Trull, none of them published anything in 1996.



[blackcat]

In the original I did, but when h2g2 became part of the BBC all the references were removed because they count as advertising. They might still be on the unedited version. Try:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/classic/A315596

That's simply ridiculous. There's a vast and gaping difference between advertising a product and crediting references, and anyone who can't tell the difference is going to have deeper problems than thinking the BBC is officially endorsing a book. . . .