Yeah, if I’m not writing for a piece that someone else is publishing (in which case, I use their house style, of course), I use a pretty loose citiation style. For a blog, I’ll usually use in-line citations, since footnotes are a PITA.
Examples:
-
Departing from the Script: Balsam Lake Mountain and Graham Mountain 2014-06-07 Several paragraphs about 2/3 of the way down have in-line citations; most of the material in the post is original.
-
Departing from the Script: 2014-11-02 North Dome - a pilgrimage, or a bugbear laid to rest. also cites sources. It tells the story first from the point of view of contemporary newspapers, so citations in the running text make sense.
-
Illustrations that I don’t own are also cited and linked after obtaining permission from the photographer or illustrator; they’re generally included only as thumbnails, with links to show them in their proper context. Alas, that practice occasionally results in link rot, as can be seen at Departing from the Script: Burroughs Range, 2013-10-12/13 where at least one of the included illustrations is no longer available. (Another remains available; I consider simply linking to the correct URL an ideal form of citation to an online source.) Such is life.
I may not be following proper UChicago style there, but I’ve at least provided enough information to credit and verify the sources, and allow the reader to consult them, and that’s the point, isn’t it?
(By the way, the North Dome and Graham Mountain posts got me compliments along the lines of, “good research!” from a local history professor, so I think I was likely doing something close to right.)
So yes, some bloggers do believe that academic integrity requires citing your sources.
