08-05-2016, 07:15 PM
(This post was last modified: 08-05-2016, 07:16 PM by Diane.
Edit Reason: sp
)
Rene,
I think we can comfortably assume that thousands of people had observed apples dropping to the earth, and some may have conceived the idea of gravity, but we still cite Newton, because he brought it first to public attention, and wrote about it.
The same principle applies. In scholarship, we attempt to refer readers to the original instance - not only to credit the person concerned, but equally so that our own readers can see for themselves how the original source used their data, and reached their conclusions.
So I shall cite David, since you mention no-one earlier and it is clear just how he came to that opinion.
Thank you.
Your web-page, as you say, records your own research, but (as it also says) is a re-presentation, and in a number of cases in the past I have found that undocumented statements, or ones documented by the papers you choose to cite, happen to omit the name of the first person to reach that conclusion from their work. In many cases, therefore, I have cited persons from the first mailing list as having precedence over those you choose to acknowledge, most of which seem to come from hard-copy sources, often ones supporting your 'central European' theory - though that may be happenstance.
I'm sorry not to have a reply to the other questions, but understand that your time is limited.
I think we can comfortably assume that thousands of people had observed apples dropping to the earth, and some may have conceived the idea of gravity, but we still cite Newton, because he brought it first to public attention, and wrote about it.
The same principle applies. In scholarship, we attempt to refer readers to the original instance - not only to credit the person concerned, but equally so that our own readers can see for themselves how the original source used their data, and reached their conclusions.
So I shall cite David, since you mention no-one earlier and it is clear just how he came to that opinion.
Thank you.
Your web-page, as you say, records your own research, but (as it also says) is a re-presentation, and in a number of cases in the past I have found that undocumented statements, or ones documented by the papers you choose to cite, happen to omit the name of the first person to reach that conclusion from their work. In many cases, therefore, I have cited persons from the first mailing list as having precedence over those you choose to acknowledge, most of which seem to come from hard-copy sources, often ones supporting your 'central European' theory - though that may be happenstance.
I'm sorry not to have a reply to the other questions, but understand that your time is limited.