HISTARCH Archives

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

HISTARCH@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
X-To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 4 Dec 2004 13:31:49 -0500
MIME-version:
1.0 (Apple Message framework v619)
Reply-To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Content-type:
text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Subject:
From:
James Brothers <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To:
Content-transfer-encoding:
7bit
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (24 lines)
But not if it is someone elses report. I have no qualms about
correcting my own work. In fact I feel it is my professional
responsibility. I guess I'm trying to find out if I am alone in feeling
this way or if there is an ethical consensus.

On Dec 3, 2004, at 11:12 AM, Lauren Cook wrote:

> If the error is that serious, and the site that important, you could
> correct
> it in a published article about the site.  (Not an article published
> for the
> SOLE purpose of the correction, of course.)  Anyone researching that
> type of
> site would be more likely to rely on the published (and later)
> information
> in their research.
>
> Lauren J. Cook, RPA
> Senior Archaeologist
> Richard Grubb & Associates, Inc.
> 30 North Main Street
> Cranbury, NJ 08512
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2