6th December 2007, 03:39 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by beamo
I am very much in favour of grey literature (i.e. client reports) being under the company name, with due acknowledgements given within the body of the report to those who contributed in whatever way. I see no problem with citing such reports as **** Archaeology 2005a, 2005b etc.
Care to tell us why?
I wholeheartedly agree about acknowledging field staff, and their absence demonstrates a lot about power relations in knowledge production. That is a separate issue though, since they typically are contributors, not authors. Generally, the people who write the words are the ones whose names go on the front of books.