If you need help with online teaching or other challenges in academia arising from the COVID-19 crisis, we have prepared this FAQ to get you started.

New answers tagged

1

Assuming you want to be helpful to the readers (without regard for pleasing the authors of the cited articles), this depends on whether you are writing a guide to the literature, or merely explaining facts and results. A guide to the literature should include many sources, while saying something useful on these sources. An explanation of facts and results ...


0

If the papers were suggested by the reviewers, there are high chances that those papers were from "reviewers" and they wanted to increase their cite count. In my experience (non IEEE Access), I cited those papers and the paper got accepted. No need to cite additional papers (OTHER THAN THOSE OFFERED BY THE REVIEWERS). I think because the contribution you ...


1

I agree with Buffy's answer that is is counterproductive to try to "sanitise" history. Whenever you are using some literary text, you should not censor any aspect of the text that would detract from understanding the point you are making. In some cases, if the text is used only to make a limited point that does not relate to the offending word, it may be ...


2

A perspective from a different but adjacent issue I have had to deal with - specialized historical scholarship that ends up relying on sources that incidentally use offensive/jarring terminology and stereotypes regarding (North American) Indigenous peoples. (Sometimes esp. in emotionally charged situations like race, reframing in terms of adjacent issue ...


10

It is counterproductive and anti-intellectual for a historian to "sanitize" history. One of the reasons to study history is to learn from it. If we provide only a nice-nicey view of history it is basically impossible to learn anything. We use innuendo instead of plain facts, perhaps, but that is just sweetener in a bitter pill. Historically bad things have ...


Top 50 recent answers are included