A to Z thread

[DVV]

"Like everyone else, we do our best to strive for perfection, but if you do spot an error or something else that we need to take note of for our future editions, please let us know."

Paul Begg, Martin Fido, Keith Skinner (Introduction to the JTR A to Z, 2010)


So here is a place to let them know, in case you spot something.....

[mariab]

There's already this old thread, David: http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=98

[DVV]

Ah, ok...the link doesn't work...

[mariab]

Weird, from my comp it works, David.
Try copying and pasting the link on your internet browser, or go check casebook sub Forum Books, then Non fiction. The thread's located there.

[DVV]

Ok Maria, I've read it from A to Z.

It's quite different, and it has been completely hijacked by Pirate.

There is only one post, the last by Tom Wescott, that really addresses the authors "call" I've quoted.

Tom, for example, is of opinion that Maybrick has been granted too much space.

This is a reasonable critic (as if in a dictionary you would find two pages on Chamberlain, and one sentence for Churchill), and I've started this thread for such kind of critics to be discussed.

[mariab]

I guess at the time when the A-Z was produced the diary was a big thing going on?
I don't own the A-Z, but would be interested in buying a revised paperback edition.

[DVV]

No Maria, the discussion was intended for the last edition, 2010. You sure have to own one copy.

[mariab]

Actually I'm referring to a revised edition of the 2010 edition, which unfortunately contains many errors. VERY dangerous to have this as a reference volume for a newbie like me. Besides, I can do fine with The Ultimate and casebook wiki, and when in doubt ask the specialists.

By the by, also in my own field of musicology (as in most fields) reference volumes get old fast and generally contain errors. It's the way a field develops, through trial and error.

[DVV]

Now the example taken by Tom is most interesting.

Too much space or not ?

Tom says "too much space for a hoax". Fair enough. On the other hand, the diary have dominated the debates for years.

There is no easy answer, I think.

[mariab]

That's precisely why it's easy to date reference books by looking at their content instead of the cover. ;-)

[DVV]

Actually I'm referring to a revised edition of the 2010 edition, which unfortunately contains many errors.

What ? 2010 edition already revised ? and containing "many errors" ? This modern world is too fast for me.

VERY dangerous to have this as a reference volume for a newbie like me.

Sorry Maria, it's on the contrary one of the less dangerous to start with, out of a handful.

Besides, I can do fine with The Ultimate and casebook wiki, and when in doubt ask the specialists.

It's not the same. AZ has his own usefulness.

[mariab]

What? 2010 edition already revised? and containing "many errors"? This modern world is too fast for me.

No, David, the 2010 edition has not been revised, but it'd be nice if it would in the future.
À plus Davidoff, need to go back to my phone calls. (Calling Pa-ris right now.)

PS.: Hey, wasn't it cool how we've had this thread to ourselves? Have only done this once with Lynn so far.

[Trevor Marriott]

No, David, the 2010 edition has not been revised, but it'd be nice if it would in the future.
À plus Davidoff, need to go back to my phone calls. (Calling Pa-ris right now.)

PS.: Hey, wasn't it cool how we've had this thread to ourselves? Have only done this once with Lynn so far.

Doesnt it make you feel you want go out and get a life

[DVV]

No, David, the 2010 edition has not been revised, but it'd be nice if it would in the future.

Ouf ! Hence the authors call and this thread, my dear.

PS.: Hey, wasn't it cool how we've had this thread to ourselves?

My wife has started using the casebook. I'm dead.

Have only done this once with Lynn so far.

Thought you were more experienced, but no matter.

[mariab]

Both of you are a riot. (Marriott) (David)