Timeline for In writing a paper, how far can criticism of previous works go?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 18, 2014 at 20:43 | comment | added | Andreas Blass | I agree with @RexKerr that the field makes a big difference. I see far more explicit criticism of prior work in (theoretical) computer science than in mathematics, even though the fields are quite close and some of the same people (including me) work in both. | |
| Sep 1, 2012 at 20:24 | vote | accept | ShadowWarrior | ||
| Aug 11, 2012 at 20:26 | comment | added | Rex Kerr | The field makes a huge difference here. In philosophy, if you're not criticizing previous works, you're probably doing it wrong. In some friendlier sub-fields of biology, you are expected to phrase your criticisms as extensions and insights. Also, the more data-driven the field is, the less it matters what you say either way. | |
| Aug 10, 2012 at 23:36 | comment | added | Aaron | Good guidelines for this issue can be found in the following style guide: redbowlabs.com/~ali/words.html -- it is directed at a machine learning audience, but I think the recommendations are fairly universal. | |
| Aug 9, 2012 at 8:15 | answer | added | StrongBad | timeline score: 4 | |
| Aug 9, 2012 at 7:38 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackAcademia/status/233467301133959169 | ||
| Aug 8, 2012 at 17:17 | history | edited | aeismail | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Improved English grammar for clarity and readability
|
| Aug 8, 2012 at 17:15 | answer | added | eykanal | timeline score: 26 | |
| Aug 8, 2012 at 16:53 | history | asked | ShadowWarrior | CC BY-SA 3.0 |