In Harvard style, for links such as: http://corporate.wwe.com/news/2002/wwe-corporate-world-wrestling-federation-entertainment-drops-the-f, since there's no clear author, I am usually citing it as (title of the webpage year) and then in the reference list as (title of the webpage year, available from URL, viewed...).

However, in this particular case, there is a corporate author which is, simply, the WWE. How do I cite the above link and, in general, almost all websites have corporate authors, how do I distinguish between a corporate author and between a simple page which I can cite as above?

1 Answer 1


In Harvard style the Author is a Key to the bibliography, just as the index number (like [1] is a key in Chicago style). One has to disconnect this from the concept of a name. In particular, when citing a web page with no clear author name one has to find a similar keyword to use. The corporate name makes a good keyword. It better to remember it is only a keyword and not start to use full sentences. The full details of the reference will be shown in the bibliography. So the Title of web pages should almost never be used. Thus for your example I would cite like this: (WWE, 2002). The bibliographic entry would be:

WWE (2002), "World Wrestling Federation Entertainment Drops the ‘F’", World Wresting Federation Corporate News, 6 May 2002. [Online] Available at: http://corporate.wwe.com/news/2002/wwe-corporate-world-wrestling-federation-entertainment-drops-the-f [Accessed: 12 Apr 2016]

  • Aha, so with all the titles of webpages I used in the past, it will only be considered a poor practice right? I'd cite it now as: WWE 2002, World Wrestling Federation Entertainment drops the 'f', World Wrestling Federation Corporate News, available from: <corporate.wwe.com/news/2002/…>, viewed 12 April 2016. Is that correct? Just to adapt it to my style...
    – R. AS.
    Commented Apr 12, 2016 at 10:39
  • @R.AS. You seem to be confused between a citation and a reference in the terminology....; but yes your current practice is poor. Commented Apr 12, 2016 at 10:47
  • I agree, one learns with time. Is the reference-list citation I proposed in my previous comment acceptable?
    – R. AS.
    Commented Apr 12, 2016 at 10:49

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .