Question

which citation correctly reflects mla guidelines for a website without an author? the land down under. australia department of tourism, 1 february 2013. net. 14 june 2013. n.a. the land down under. australia department of tourism, 1 february 2013. net. 14 june 2013. the land down under. australia department of tourism, 1 february 2013. web. 14 june 2013. n.a. the land down under. australia department of tourism, 1 february 2013. web. 14 june 2013.

Explanation:

MLA guidelines for citing a website without an author: Start with the title of the work (italicized for longer works like a webpage title? Wait, no, the title of the webpage or site. Then the organization or entity (here Australia Department of Tourism), then the date of publication, then the medium (Web) and access date. Wait, looking at the options: The correct format skips the author (so no N.A.), uses the title, then the organization, date, then "Web" as the medium, then access date. Let's check each:

1. First option: "Net" is incorrect; MLA uses "Web" for website medium.
2. Second: Has "N.A." which is wrong (no author, so start with title, not N.A.).
3. Third: Title (italicized? Wait, "The Land Down Under" – in MLA, the title of the webpage or site. Then Australia Department of Tourism, date, then "Web" as medium, access date. Yes, this matches: "The Land Down Under. Australia Department of Tourism, 1 February 2013. Web. 14 June 2013."
4. Fourth: Has "N.A." which is incorrect (no author, so don't use N.A., start with title).

So the third option (the one with "Web" and no N.A.) is correct.

Answer:

The third option: The Land Down Under. Australia Department of Tourism, 1 February 2013. Web. 14 June 2013. (The one with "The Land Down Under" italicized, then Australia Department of Tourism, date, "Web" as medium, access date, and no "N.A.")