Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;kaparthy, post: 3816285, member: 57463&quot;]<font face="Georgia"></font></p><p><font face="Georgia">That is a whole other discussion, but let me suggest something, being a professional writer. I write online, as I am doing now. I have a blog. On my blog I write whatever I want because in most cases, I get paid to write what other people want. </font></p><p><font face="Georgia"><br /></font></p><p><font face="Georgia">The upside to writing for pay is that the editors oversee the work. They do more than check spelling and grammar. An editor has an over-arching view that the author does not (usually). The editor suggests paths for depth of presentation and improvement of the work that the author does not (typically) perceive.&nbsp; I am working now on a feature article for <i>The Numismatist</i>. The editor offered many good suggestions for improving the manuscript that I sent in.&nbsp; Note, however, that I have told this same story in print three times before. I know my facts. But those other publications do not have <b>professional</b> editors. They took what I sent and were happy for it and it was good work, but they had no expertise at <b>collaborating with writers.</b> </font></p><p><font face="Georgia"><br /></font></p><p><font face="Georgia">And, yes, then there is the proofreading.&nbsp; You don&#039;t get that on the Internet. </font></p><p><font face="Georgia"><br /></font></p><p><font face="Georgia">That said, when I worked at <i>Coin World</i>, we had a popular book in the company library that managing editor Bill Gibbs wrote a note in forbidding us to cite it. The book was just too wrong on too many points.</font></p><p><br /></p><blockquote><p>Easily the two most popular works are <b><i>Fermat’s Last Theorem: Unlocking the Secret of an Ancient Mathematical Problem</i></b> by Amir D. Aczel (New York and London: Four Walls Eight Windows, 1996) and <b><i>Fermat’s Enigma: The Epic Quest to Solve the World’s Greatest Mathematical Problem</i></b> by Simon Singh (New York: Walker, 1997; Anchor Doubleday, 1998).&nbsp;&nbsp; I found the Aczel book to be contaminated with errors.&nbsp; I found no mistakes in Singh’s work.</p><p><i><a href="https://necessaryfacts.blogspot.com/2015/06/two-books-on-fermats-last-theorem.html" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://necessaryfacts.blogspot.com/2015/06/two-books-on-fermats-last-theorem.html" rel="nofollow">https://necessaryfacts.blogspot.com/2015/06/two-books-on-fermats-last-theorem.html</a></i></p></blockquote><p><br /></p><p><font face="Georgia">So, yes, we know that books have errors. But the Internet has more.&nbsp; For all of the egegious examples you can find about failures in print, you can find thousands more of the same online.</font></p><p><font face="Georgia"><br /></font></p><p><font face="Georgia">Correcting errors online is also easier and potentially more powerful. It is one of the many reasons why I subscribe to the E-Sylum. (<a href="https://www.coinbooks.org/esylum/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.coinbooks.org/esylum/" rel="nofollow">https://www.coinbooks.org/esylum/</a>)</font></p><p><font face="Georgia"><br /></font></p><p><font face="Georgia">Overall, &quot;print versus Internet&quot; is a multifaceted topic. </font></p><p><font face="Georgia"></font>[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in