So I’ve noted. Lots of reprobates here 
Brilliant, thanks for the tip. Does it show all track changes (e.g. deletions and insertions) as well as comments in red? Think I’ll do a quick experiment.
Rejections? What rejections?
I think it’s just that in my field the variation in citation styles between different journals is small enough that amending is very easy.
That said, maybe I need to revisit citation management.
I see that importing as a word doc doesn’t marks deletions and insertions correctly, unfortunately. But importing as a PDF does the trick. Thanks again for the tip.
I have a slightly different problem. I like to use the corkboard to organize all/parts of chapters. It allows me to develop and organize my thoughts/writing. However, unless I have missed something, the only way to transfer corkboard cards into text is by copying/pasting. Is anyone aware of a smoother process. Thanks.
Have you tried Documents > Send Synopsis to Main Text? I think it will do what you want – and it works on multiple documents if you select them in the binder.
Another very happy academic user here. At this very moment, I’m finishing a book of many hundreds of pages with a lot of footnotes, and even some tables, entirely written in Scrivener. In order to send it to the world, all I have to do is to export it to Nisus, and to do some light tweaking there. My publisher will do the rest. Life couldn’t be easier!
We use tables all the time, in different ways, mixing numbers and words and having real use for reordering the table according to the content of its cells. This is really part of the intelectual project which Scrivener supports so well when it comes to text. A final version might be worked in word processors, but the coming and going, the different formats and colors of a table in development do belong to Scrivener.
We would argue strongly for an upgrade of Scrivener’s ability to deal with tables, that is a disturbingly primitive feature in so rich and powerful a tool. Scrivener should support at least the same functionality of tables in Word. We say at least because we have learned to respect your talent in doing far more than the least; some way of putting images in cells and working them as such would be most convenient.
The very next upgrade would be a good time for it.
I’m afraid that the next major version will not include any upgrades to tables in text (other than some minor bug fixes pertaining to adding and removing rows and columns). As I’ve explained in other thread, as a one-man coding team, it’s just not possible for me to completely replace all of Apple’s tables code. It’s not just a matter of replacing the UI for them; if I did so, I’d also have to somehow update all of the import and export code for all file formats that support tables - HTML, RTF and so on - when currently all of that import and export code is also based on Apple code that does the table read/write stuff for me. If Scrivener ever becomes big enough to support a team of coders, so that we can have a coder dedicated solely to the text engine, updating tables will definitely be one of the first things we do, but currently we are a niche product and a long way from that, I’m sorry to say.
All the best,
Keith
Yeah. Takes a long time, and constant practice, to reach that level… 
That’s a practice I use as well, with the added step of then opening the PDFs in QuickReference windows for, well, quick reference. 
There are other benefits to citation managers. For a start, you can add, remove and change citations without having to worry about remembering to change your reference list every time. You don’t need to double check each citation to make sure it’s referenced, and triple check each reference to make sure it’s cited, every time you think you’re done. With most citation managers (Papers, EndNote, etc) you also get a handy reference manager which stores the source document as a PDF, and also goes online and downloads the citation data for you. So not only do you get your citations and reference list continually updated and easily adjusted to different reference systems, you also save on all the data entry, and build a searchable library of relevant references that will sync between devices.
And that’s just for starters.
Ok, you’ve sold me on a retrial. Any recommendation as to the best to use, bearing in mind of course that I’ll be working in Scriv? I’m in a humanities field, if that makes a difference.
I am a longtime Endnote user and have always been satisfied with it. I have occasionally looked at other solutions over the years as they emerged, but not enough to provide any worthwhile comparisons. Academic. Check. Humanities. Check.
-gr
I’m currently unaffiliated, so Endnote is a teensy bit out of my price range 
Your future self will pay you back for it later! 
OS X is fairly flush with good reference managers with bibliography abilities, I trialled Endnote (my default), Sente, Bookends, Mendeley and Papers some time ago. Papers never used to do bibliographies, so discounted it at the time but it now does them, and claims to support lots of word processors and styles. Mendelay really disagreed with me, giving me indigestion and a hangover (I don’t really remember my problems but it was really underpowered, buggy and overhyped). Sente was and still is excellent, and their price including cloud backup is hard to argue against. Endnote is, well, endnote. Made by a big corporation coded by programmers-for-hire and designed by committee. It works, many others use it and I get it for free.
But I ended up buying Bookends. By far the best low-level database management (including custom SQL), great online interfaces, great PDF auto-scan, collects PDF annotation into the reference better than others, has flexible formatting and supports ODT well (As I wanted to transition from Word to Open/LibreOffice at the time). The icing on the cake is the developer Jon, who responds to email queries and bug reports usually within minutes and clearly cares deeply for his product. Reminds me a bit of KB and Scrivener in fact.
Couldn’t agree more about Endnote - and I never found their Mac app to be on a par with Windows. I actually tried to use the manual. It did my head in. Still find it to be one of the most unintuitive programs I’ve ever had the displeasure to use.
2 things about Bookends: Jon puts so much work into it, and updates it so frequently - that I never know whether the feature I just discovered that “can save hours of my life”, was added recently, or (frustratingly) has been there all along!
[I think that almost amounts to a complaint about too regular updates! Oh the horror!! 
]
And secondly, and I hate to be that guy, but the very thing that makes BE so amazing, with it being a small but passionate and on-the-ball owner/development team - is also what sometimes has me worried… Where will BE be in 10/15 from now. What if Jon decides “to hell with it”, and disappears to join a small sect of locust worshippers, somewhere in Kryzjekistan. I guess I would be happy for him. But it would make my BE experience a bit more challenging…
On that note… Anyone know what KB’s views on locusts are?
I haven’t used Endnote in ages, so things may have changed (most likely) but I did find it the buggiest, clunkiest, most unintuitive app ever. I converted to Sente a while ago, and it served me well for years. I had considered Bookends at the time of getting rid of Endnote, I really did like the icon ( ) but I don’t think at that time they offered a trial period. Not sure. Too long ago. Anyway, went for Sente. Lately, I can’t say I am totally happy with Sente. It’s OK, but there are a few wrinkles to iron. I really like ReadCube now, although it’s pretty slow (and doesn’t work with Scrivener, but it does work with Word, and so, no biggie that it doesn’t work with Scrivener, I don’t need to have my refs until the manuscript is out). Working on the manuscripts of my trainees, however, is the best. I don’t have to worry about formatting refs. They’ll do it!
Ex-academic here. Endnote was out of my reach, and I’d read too many users moaning about it, so I didn’t even bother. I trialled Sente and Bookends (yes, it did have a short trial) and though majority opinion at the time favoured Sente, I found it didn’t click with me, whereas I immediately felt at home with Bookends, so I bought that (10 years ago, or so) and continue to update, even though I hardly use it these days.
Papers and Mendeley came along later. I looked at Papers, but it wasn’t what I wanted, and I seem to remember there was some problem even downloading Mendeley — I was in China and the Great Firewall of China may have been blocking their site — so I never bothered. I was happy with Bookends anyway.
As for the continuous and regular updates of Bookends and the future … it shows how totally committed Jon is, and I don’t know if any function on which anyone was relying has been programmed out, but I imagine not. And the interface, to my mind is even better than what it was when I first used it.
And as for Jon bowing out and going to worship whatever, wherever, or just giving up, that is a problem that besets any indie software, and there are such apps that have just disappeared. My wife uses a really nifty photo editor called “Photo Complete”, which came out in 2006 and showed great promise, but, unfortunately, development ceased about 2 years later; however it still works in SL, so I daren’t upgrade her system in case she loses it. And I use GyazMail, which fortunately Mr Hirakawa has hitherto updated to work with each new version of OS-X, but there have been no other changes to functionality for the last 5 years or so.
So one can only hope.
Mr X
The benefit of EndNote is that is customisable. If you find a reference-style error, or it doesn’t quite do want you want, it includes the tools to modify the rules it uses. This is geeky and needs some comfort with technical tinkering, but it’s there if you need it (which also means that there’s a good chance someone, somewhere, has already tweaked to suit). For many of us writing at universities, EndNote is provided free.
But EndNote is ugly, un-Mac like, and not intuitive. It also leads to people using its Cite-While-You-Write feature in Word – let’s just say my experiences with CWYW were “not promising” and almost all the horror stories I’ve heard about EndNote involved CWYW and Word.
Personally, I like Papers. It has been my reference manager of choice for many years because it is intuitive and Mac-like. I even used it conjunction with EndNote when writing my doctoral thesis (it couldn’t do in-document citations when I started, and I didn’t want to swap mid-way through). Although still developed by a small dedicated team, Papers is now owned by a major publishing company and won’t go away anytime soon.
In the end, it doesn’t really matter which one you pick. Most citation software manages source references well, including automatic retrieval of citation data, and most integrate with a wide range of writing software (including Scrivener – although test this as not all do. I have used both Papers and EndNote with Scrivener with no issue). It really comes down to personal preference and budget.
Visit the sites, watch the demo videos, download the trial versions of the app(s) you like, then pick one and make it yours. Then set aside an afternoon to learn it and forget about the others.
Can I just point out, since I can’t remember this being mentioned in any of the discussions of reference managers, that Bookends not only includes virtually every journal and style you can think of, it also has a fairly straightforward (I think) system for rolling your own or modifying an existing style. I had to modify, or show students how to modify references to meet Chinese style requirements.
And I’m nothing to do with Sonny Software, may I add.
And another that I haven’t seen mentioned here or for a long time is Zotero. As it was free, a number of my Chinese students used it, at least of those who listened when I advised them to use bibliographic software — since the Chinese are fundamentally averse to paying for software! — but I never did, merely mentioned its existence. So I don’t know anything about it, really, or even if it is still going.
Mr X
My preference is for BibDesk. I created my own templates so I now drag and drop references into my projects. The citation itself needs to be inserted explicitly but then that’s also true for any one the big name packages.
I use Endnote, and love its customization. And, though I’m not a pirate myself, I might add that you CAN download it for free from some places, if you’re so inclined (read: poor student).