1. The Chicago Manual of Style uses footnotes, which are far better than MLA's equivalent, in-text citation.
2. In-text citation doesn't convey nearly as much information at a glance. This means, as a reader, you have to go all the way to the bibliography if you want more information about a source.
3. Chicago Manual also has endnotes, too, just in case you don't want the footnotes cramping your style. Chicago Manual is considerate like that.
4. The Chicago Manual of Style's footnotes/endnotes can also be informational, like this one...
5. And some can even be used for humorous purposes, like this one:
6. MLA's in-text citations are just ugly. They disrupt the reading process and make what you're reading look like it was done by some high school kid, not a professional writer.
7. Chicago Manual has Ibid, which is short for "ibidem" which sounds really cool. MLA has nothing that sounds cool.
8. Speaking of things that sound cool, the Chicago Manual of Style can also go by a badass nickname, "Turabian."
9. MLA format requires an ugly, bulky heading.
10. Chicago Manual, on the other hand, requires a nice, neat cover page.
11. The Chicago Manual of Style official handbook: 1,026 pages.
12. MLA official handbook: 292 pages.
This post was created by a member of BuzzFeed Community, where anyone can post awesome lists and creations. Learn more or post your buzz!