Editing References in Academic Writing: Style Guides and Sanity
Nothing tests an editor’s patience quite like a reference list on a Friday. At first glance, it looks straightforward: match the in-text citations to the reference list, check the formatting, and make sure nothing is missing. Simple, right? Until you realise the author has combined APA, Harvard, and a little bit of ‘personal flair’ in the same paper. That’s when you start wondering whether caffeine counts as a reference source.
Editing references in academic writing is often treated as the dull housekeeping part of editing. But references are anything but minor: they underpin an academic’s credibility and support the integrity of the research. For academic journals and academic publishers, they’re a marker of quality. Get the references wrong, and it’s not just stray punctuation at stake; it’s the author’s reputation and, in some cases, the publication’s.
Table of Contents
Why References Matter
For many writers, references are the thing you add at the end. In extreme cases, they were clearly an afterthought. And we get it. After everything else that academic writers put into their writing, compiling the reference list, with all its rules and conventions, can be very demanding.
However, references aren’t formalities. They’re evidence that a writer has done their homework. It shows that you’re well-read on the topic and familiar with the central and most recent theories. It provides a foundation for arguing why your research deserves to be shared. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, it fends off the spectre that haunts every academic: plagiarism.
The Editor’s Responsibilities When Editing References in Academic Writing
Now, it’s typically not an academic editor’s responsibility to judge the quality or relevance of the references. If you work with publishers or journals, that’s up to the peer reviewer. If it’s a student’s dissertation, their supervisor needs to handle it.
As the editor, you need to:
Cross-Reference Citations
You must cross-reference the in-text citations with the reference list. The extent to which you do this depends on whether you’re dealing with a reference list or a bibliography:
-
- A reference list is a compilation of all the sources cited in the text. That means that all the in-text references must appear in the list and vice versa.
-
- A bibliography includes the sources referred to in the text AND additional sources the reader can explore. That means that all the sources in the text must appear in the bibliography, but not everything in the bibliography has to be cited in the text.
Many editors rely on PerfectIt to help them pick up when references are missing from either the text or the list. Of course, if you’re a sucker for punishment like us, you do it the long way with a pen and paper.
Check That References Are Complete
Completeness depends on the citation style you’re following, because each has different requirements. For example:
Style
In-Text
Reference List
APA and MLA don’t require publisher locations, but Chicago and Harvard do. Be alert to additional things like including volume, issue, and page numbers, access dates, full author names, and links/DOIs.
Ensure References Are Consistent
Ah, consistency in editing. Truly the hill all editors will die on (at least, we will). Consider these hypothetical references:
Smith, J 2021, Exploring modern literature, New York: Academic Press.
Brown, Alice. Exploring the history of science. London Academic Press, 2019.
Taylor, P., 2018. The study of economics, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Technically, these references are complete. However, their formatting and punctuation are inconsistent. Author names, date placement, use of italics, and punctuation between place of publishing and publisher all differ. Academic editors need to standardise these references according to the relevant style guide.
Wrestling with Style Guides
Editors quickly learn that ‘APA’ doesn’t mean just one thing. There’s APA 6th, APA 7th, and institutional variations that ignore both. Harvard referencing is notorious for its inconsistencies (“Is there even an official Harvard manual?” is a question many of us have asked in despair). MLA, Chicago, Vancouver … the list goes on.
And just when you think you’ve got a style nailed down, a journal will announce that they use ‘modified Harvard, house style available upon acceptance’.
Translation? Good luck, editor.
This is where experience and perseverance come in: knowing the quirks of different styles, recognising when an author has mixed them up, and having the patience to align every full stop and comma to the right place.
Common Reference Headaches (and How to Fix Them)
Here are the greatest hits from our reference-editing trenches and what we’ve found helpful in overcoming them:
Copy and Pasted References
Many writers will copy and paste a source’s suggested citation. Various publications and platforms will include a ‘suggested citation’ note at the top or bottom of the webpage, while journals often have a cite button that allows you to export the citation via BibTex, RIS, plain text, or other relevant formats.
Screenshot from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvrad.2015.07.030
Now, what this means for editors is that references are a colourful variety of stylistic mashups. Sources follow different style guides, therefore, their suggested citations (copied and pasted into the manuscript) are different.
While this can be frustrating, in most cases, it means all the relevant information is there. It was taken from the source after all, and not someone else’s interpretation of it. We just need to reorganise the information so it matches the publisher’s/journal’s/university’s style guide.
Mismatch Between Text and List
Some mismatches can obviously be attributed to human error. However, in many cases, we’ve found that mismatches happen when the manuscript was originally a thesis that has been reworked into a chapter for an academic edited collection or a journal article.
Academic writers often insert the old/original reference list from the thesis and just never update it. So, you’ll find that in-text references are missing from the reference list, as the writer may have added new citations during their re-work. In addition, the reference list may also be cluttered with old/irrelevant references that the writer removed from the text.
In these cases, we insert the missing references (surname/s and date) with a comment asking the writer to complete the reference. We also highlight references with no in-text citations to draw attention to this.
Publishing dates also often differ between in-text references and those in the list. In-text may state 2025, but in the list, it’s 2023. We prefer looking up the reference to double-check the date and amend accordingly. Otherwise, you can point it out to the writer in a comment and ask for confirmation.
Phantom References
Sometimes, sources just don’t seem to exist anywhere outside of the manuscript. You can go down that search rabbit hole as far as you want, but you still find nothing. There can be a few reasons for this:
- The source isn’t online. It might be a physical document the writer has in their possession or that they accessed in an archive or collection.
-
- The online source no longer exists. For whatever reason, the host or platform has removed the source from their webpage.
-
- The source is made up. Unfortunately, this was a practice before AI, but it has definitely increased since commercial AI use.
If you’re unsure about a source, highlight it in the text and leave a comment. Mention it again in your email or report, whether you send it directly to the writer or to the series editor or publisher.
DOIs and Links That Don’t Work
If we had to choose the biggest headache when editing references in academic writing, it would be links that don’t work. And the main culprit might not be what you expect.
It’s writers adding spaces in the URL. We’re still not really sure why they do it, but we guess it’s an attempt to manipulate the formatting. If the text is justified, then links can break off in strange places or create big spaces (rivers) that don’t look good. For example, you’re referencing one of our blogs and it turns out like this:
Those spaces look quite terrible, yes? So, you think that if you can break up the link, then it’ll help get rid of them.
Theoretically, you’re right. However, the link is now broken because of that space. So, we remove it and ensure the link works again. Because we mainly work with publishers, we leave a comment to assure the writer that the book designer will amend all formatting issues during the layout stage.
Other things to look out for when checking links:
- Links are often too long. They have this whole tail end that doesn’t actually have anything to do with accessing the website. It’s to tell the website owner where the traffic and clicks are coming from, so it’s purely for data analysis.
For example: https://www.openlearningjournal.org/
articles/digital-storytelling-in-higher-education? utm_source=university_newsletter& utm_medium=email& utm_campaign=autumn_update. Everything from ?utm_source can be removed. The link will still take the reader to the website and it makes the reference list neater.
- Links are often too long. They have this whole tail end that doesn’t actually have anything to do with accessing the website. It’s to tell the website owner where the traffic and clicks are coming from, so it’s purely for data analysis.
- Links can change. That’s why it’s so important to add an access date. Websites revamp and move content around. And if there’s no automatic redirect, the link is broken. So, it’s worthwhile looking up the source on a search engine to see if it has a different link.
- Links can change. That’s why it’s so important to add an access date. Websites revamp and move content around. And if there’s no automatic redirect, the link is broken. So, it’s worthwhile looking up the source on a search engine to see if it has a different link.
- DOIs need checking too. Just because it’s a DOI and they’re supposed to be registered, don’t assume you don’t need to check them. The DOI format has changed from https://www.dx.doi to simply https://www.doi. Therefore, links with ‘dx’ are old and may no longer work. Other times, writers add a DOI to a reference that actually leads to a completely different source. Our solution is using Simple Text Query. You can copy a whole reference list into the box and the tool will bulk-check it for you.
Sjoe. Is it really any wonder that many editors charge separately for reference editing and checking? And that some don’t do it at all?
Tools, Techniques, and Sanity-Savers
Editing references doesn’t have to mean hours of squinting at your screen until your eyes cross. A few tools can lighten the load (though none of them replace an editor’s judgement):
Reference Managers
Tools like EndNote, Zotero, and Mendeley can be very useful, if they’re used consistently. They can generate citations in multiple styles, store source details in one place, and even update reference lists automatically when new citations are added. Of course, that all depends on not overriding the software with ‘creative’ manual edits.
Databases and Catalogues
When publication years don’t exist, page numbers have wandered off, or publishers have mysteriously vanished, databases and catalogues are lifesavers. Some that we’ve found the most useful:
- Internet Archive – You can access samples of scanned books to check copyright pages for yourself.
- Internet Archive – You can access samples of scanned books to check copyright pages for yourself.
- Google Books – Many of the books provide a curated view of their content (the cover image will look like it’s curling up). Very useful for checking publishing information, TOCs, and page numbers.
- Google Books – Many of the books provide a curated view of their content (the cover image will look like it’s curling up). Very useful for checking publishing information, TOCs, and page numbers.
- Taylor and Francis – The platform hosts a ton of journals and books, and their bibliographic information is very thorough (sometimes even more so than the actual publisher). They also host chapters of books separately, so you can easily track chapter authors, volume editors, and book vs chapter DOIs.
- Taylor and Francis – The platform hosts a ton of journals and books, and their bibliographic information is very thorough (sometimes even more so than the actual publisher). They also host chapters of books separately, so you can easily track chapter authors, volume editors, and book vs chapter DOIs.
- JSTOR – This academic library contains books, journals, images, and publisher information. It’s amazing what you can find, even without an account. Just remember: JSTOR assigns its own DOIs to publications (https://www.jstor.org/). These are different from publisher DOIs (https://www.doi).
Word Tricks
‘Find’ is surprisingly effective for catching errors like extra spaces or the dreaded et al. (which we’ve encountered as etal., et al, and et.al before). You can also use it to spot inconsistent capitalisation (think ‘University Press’ vs ‘university press’) or rogue punctuation like double full stops. And if you really want to get fancy, ‘wildcard’ searches let you hunt down patterns, such as every number that isn’t followed by a page range.
Macros, Checklists, and Add-Ins
PerfectIt again earns its keep here. It helps automate the grunt work, especially when a manuscript is long enough to qualify as weight training. Macros can check for missing punctuation after initials or ensure spacing is consistent around colons and brackets. Editing checklists are great for ticking off recurring trouble spots, like making sure every DOI is live or every book title is italicised. Add-ins can also flag inconsistent reference styles across chapters, saving you from scrolling back and forth until your eyes blur.
Why Reference Editing Is an Editorial Superpower
To outsiders, reference editing might look like tedious box-ticking. But it’s one of the most valuable parts of academic editing. Getting references right improves the credibility of a paper, strengthens the author’s reputation, and keeps publishers happy.
For editors, it’s also a quiet superpower: the ability to spot small errors that could otherwise derail publication. At Blue Leaf Editing, we take pride in this work because we know what’s at stake. Having been academic publishers ourselves, we understand that reference accuracy isn’t just about neatness. It means sticking to professional standards.
Editing References in Academic Writing: The Quiet Work That Speaks Loudly
Editing references in academic writing isn’t glamorous. No one reads a flawless reference list and thinks, “Wow, what artistry!” But the absence of errors is precisely the point. It’s invisible work that maintains credibility and academic integrity.
What looks like painstaking detail-checking is, in fact, reputation management. A neat, accurate, and consistent reference list signals to reviewers, readers, and publishers that the work is professional and reliable. In many ways, it’s the unsung backbone of academic publishing – and the reason so many editors secretly (or not so secretly) take pride in it.
We like to think of reference editing as the editorial equivalent of stagecraft: no one notices when it’s done well, but everyone notices when it goes wrong. And that’s why it matters.
Blue Leaf Team
The Blue Leaf Editing team has over 15 years of combined editing, publishing, and book industry experience. We’re passionate about content and storytelling, and sharing our knowledge with others.
info@blueleafediting.com