Timeline for Using "et al." in maths papers
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 23, 2015 at 12:25 | comment | added | Scott Seidman | @yo' Couldn't agree more. The point I'm inadequately trying to make is that this is a system set up by mathematicians for a reason, and going out of one's way to undo it with citation style is counter to those goals. | |
| Jun 23, 2015 at 11:05 | comment | added | yo' | You speak like a medical :) The point is that we, mathematicians, couldn't care less about the order in which we appear on papers. Rather than on stupid things like "credit of being first", we care about true cooperation :-) | |
| Jun 23, 2015 at 10:40 | comment | added | Scott Seidman | Along with the Math field's decision (or consensus) to use alphabetical authorship, comes ramifications. One would think that if the authors objected, they would rebel an place authorship in different order. In any case, the revolution should come from the authors, who bought in by publishing the way they did. | |
| Jun 23, 2015 at 10:07 | comment | added | yo' | Nobody questions bibliometrics here, as far as I see :-) So you are right that it makes no difference for bibliometrics, but it may make a difference for "the real world" :) | |
| Jun 22, 2015 at 22:26 | history | answered | Scott Seidman | CC BY-SA 3.0 |