Very recently, I received an email from a student (probably, undergrad) from some country asking me for an endorsement for his/her paper to be submitted to arXiv. I do not know the student. I have never cited his/her work in my publications and possibly not vice-versa. Basically, there is no link at all.

The mail to me was also cc-ed to some big persons in top-ranked universities. The email was similar to the following along with the forwarded mail from arXiv.


I would kindly like to ask your help to endorse me to submit an article. My research is already published on [some unknown journal].

I appreciate your kindness,

Thanks in advance

---forwarded message from arXiv.

However, I didn’t understand how it works? Somewhere in arXiv page, it was mentioned that we are not supposed to review the article. – Then, how am I going to take this endorsement request?

Is it somewhat based on the hypothesis that if you know a person A and you have already published in arXiv before, then the work of A is also publishable in arXiv?

  • 16
    I take endorsement on the arXiv to mean "I know enough about this person's work to reasonably expect that the submitted paper is appropriate for the arXiv." If the person and the submitted paper are unknown to me, then the only way to arrive at such a reasonable expectation would be to read at least part of the paper. In other situations, the decision to endorse could be trivial. Commented Nov 16, 2016 at 21:17
  • 2
    I would think the point of this kind of personal endorsement is partly to figure out if this person is who they say they are to root out obvious plagarism and spam. These seems very hard to do if you do not know who they are.
    – PVAL
    Commented Nov 16, 2016 at 22:03
  • I removed the "endorsement" tag that was newly created on this question because it's ambiguous and highly likely to be misused. A less ambiguous tag "arxiv-endorsement" might be better, but it's not clear whether that would be useful given the small volume of questions related to that (see chat transcript). If you want to make a case for the tag, I suggest asking for community feedback first on Academia Meta.
    – ff524
    Commented Nov 24, 2016 at 9:30

2 Answers 2


First of all

The mail to me was also cc-ed to some big persons in top-ranked universities.

For me this would already be a red flag and result in not endorsing them. The Arχiv explicitly instructs you not to spam when seeking endorsement:

Please note, however, that it is inappropriate to email large numbers of potential endorsers at once, or to repeatedly email the same endorser with a request for endorsement.

Endorsing somebody you do not know

Endorsing somebody you do not know is somewhat equivalent to saying that the article would pass the initial check of some (reputable) journal, i.e., with endorsing you confirm:

  • That the article adheres to basic standards of scientific writing.
  • The article is not complete bogus (e.g. neglecting well-established facts).

From the Arχiv’s help pages:

We don't expect you to read the paper in detail, or verify that the work is correct, but you should check that the paper is appropriate for the subject area. You should not endorse the author if the author is unfamiliar with the basic facts of the field, or if the work is entirely disconnected with current work in the area.

Endorsing somebody you know

Is it somewhat based on the hypothesis that if you know a person A and you have already published in arXiv before, then the work of A is also publishable in arXiv.

Not exactly; it is based on the assumption that if you have published on the Arχiv and know person A, you are qualified to judge whether person A is likely to attempt to publish sub-standard content on the Arχiv. If you know person A and also know that person A is not remotely capable of proper scientific writing (and research), you should not endorse them. For example, you should probably not endorse the ghost-healer who happens to live next to you.

Explicitly not endorsing somebody

It may be helpful to explicitly not endorse (instead of doing nothing) if you think that somebody should not be allowed to publish on the Arχiv. Otherwise some sloppy endorser may unilaterally allow them to do so.

If you do not want to endorse somebody, you have to select either “I do know […] personally” or “I have read the paper […] intends to submit” (at least this was the case half a year ago), even if neither applies and you refuse endorsement due to them spamming their endorsement request, publishing in predatory journals, or similar. (This was confirmed to me by the Arχiv when I had this problem.)

  • +1. Thank you for such an wonderful answers. I am waiting for few more suggestions.
    – Coder
    Commented Nov 16, 2016 at 21:21
  • 1
    And obviously yes, we can always do that "I don't know...". But, I was more interested in know how this endorsement is different from peer-review. It seems like endorsement is just the initial desk check, if we summarize.
    – Coder
    Commented Nov 16, 2016 at 21:27

I would say the default response should be the same as your default response to any other spam: just ignore, as you don't know the requester and owe them nothing. Your response may be different if the topic of the requester's article is of some interest for you.

You must log in to answer this question.

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