Is it ok to include an epilogue dedicated to colleagues who passed away in the end of the manuscript?Restoring self confidence - possible?Is it crass to acknowledge a colleague that passed away in my thesis?Should a collaborator who recently passed away be included as an author?Firstly manuscipt 'rejected' and then status changed to 'revise'I am preparing for my PhD applications, and my referee passed away unexpectedly. What should I do?What if the author I am seeking his permission to use part of his work has passed away?Should I write something to the reviewer who rejected my manuscript?Peer-review in ‘fully peer-review journals’Who( editor or reviewer) reviews a revised manuscript?Manuscript Revision: How to include the response to reviewer comments as an attached file?
Multi tool use
Prove that the total distance is minimised (when travelling across the longest path)
Make a transparent 448*448 image
Do f-stop and exposure time perfectly cancel?
Should we release the security issues we found in our product as CVE or we can just update those on weekly release notes?
This equation is outside the page, how to modify it
What is the definition of "Natural Selection"?
infinitive telling the purpose
Is going from continuous data to categorical always wrong?
Silly Sally's Movie
US to Europe trip with Canada layover- is 52 minutes enough?
Good for you! in Russian
Block storage rewrites
Force user to remove USB token
validation vs test vs training accuracy, which one to compare for claiming overfit?
If the Captain's screens are out, does he switch seats with the co-pilot?
Who is our nearest neighbor
Can't remove a file with file mode bits a+rw
Sword in the Stone story where the sword was held in place by electromagnets
Plywood subfloor won't screw down in a trailer home
What is the dot in “1.2.4."
what does the apostrophe mean in this notation?
Straight line with arrows and dots
Should QA ask requirements to developers?
How to make readers know that my work has used a hidden constraint?
Is it ok to include an epilogue dedicated to colleagues who passed away in the end of the manuscript?
Restoring self confidence - possible?Is it crass to acknowledge a colleague that passed away in my thesis?Should a collaborator who recently passed away be included as an author?Firstly manuscipt 'rejected' and then status changed to 'revise'I am preparing for my PhD applications, and my referee passed away unexpectedly. What should I do?What if the author I am seeking his permission to use part of his work has passed away?Should I write something to the reviewer who rejected my manuscript?Peer-review in ‘fully peer-review journals’Who( editor or reviewer) reviews a revised manuscript?Manuscript Revision: How to include the response to reviewer comments as an attached file?
We are writing a dedication in the form of an epilogue to honour our colleagues who recently passed away. Both colleagues have substantially changed our field and we believe they deserve to be honoured in a paper that will be published soon so that the next generation could read it and will always remember them. However, one reviewer wants to remove it and placed in the 'acknowledgement' section. Any advice?
publications peer-review death dedication
edited 4 hours ago
corey979
4,27052233
asked 7 hours ago
xavierxavier
552217
add a comment |
We are writing a dedication in the form of an epilogue to honour our colleagues who recently passed away. Both colleagues have substantially changed our field and we believe they deserve to be honoured in a paper that will be published soon so that the next generation could read it and will always remember them. However, one reviewer wants to remove it and placed in the 'acknowledgement' section. Any advice?
publications peer-review death dedication
edited 4 hours ago
corey979
4,27052233
asked 7 hours ago
xavierxavier
552217
2
Can you explain why you don't want to put it in the acknowledgment section? An "epilogue" section does seem strange in this context (it would make more sense if you reprinted a classic paper and added an epilogue to explain what happened since its publication). Are you open to finding a new title for this section?
– cag51
6 hours ago
I would try to keep it, provided that you actually worked with them. You don't need to take the advice of every reviewer - only consider it. But it is the editor who chooses as Bryan Krause says. But if they have changed your field, you might, instead, think about organizing a retrospective volume in their honor.
– Buffy
5 hours ago
add a comment |
We are writing a dedication in the form of an epilogue to honour our colleagues who recently passed away. Both colleagues have substantially changed our field and we believe they deserve to be honoured in a paper that will be published soon so that the next generation could read it and will always remember them. However, one reviewer wants to remove it and placed in the 'acknowledgement' section. Any advice?
publications peer-review death dedication
edited 4 hours ago
corey979
4,27052233
asked 7 hours ago
xavierxavier
552217
We are writing a dedication in the form of an epilogue to honour our colleagues who recently passed away. Both colleagues have substantially changed our field and we believe they deserve to be honoured in a paper that will be published soon so that the next generation could read it and will always remember them. However, one reviewer wants to remove it and placed in the 'acknowledgement' section. Any advice?
publications peer-review death dedication
publications peer-review death dedication
edited 4 hours ago
corey979
4,27052233
asked 7 hours ago
xavierxavier
552217
edited 4 hours ago
corey979
4,27052233
asked 7 hours ago
xavierxavier
552217
edited 4 hours ago
corey979
4,27052233
edited 4 hours ago
corey979
4,27052233
edited 4 hours ago
corey979
4,27052233
4,27052233
asked 7 hours ago
xavierxavier
552217
asked 7 hours ago
xavierxavier
552217
asked 7 hours ago
xavierxavier
552217
552217
2
Can you explain why you don't want to put it in the acknowledgment section? An "epilogue" section does seem strange in this context (it would make more sense if you reprinted a classic paper and added an epilogue to explain what happened since its publication). Are you open to finding a new title for this section?
– cag51
6 hours ago
I would try to keep it, provided that you actually worked with them. You don't need to take the advice of every reviewer - only consider it. But it is the editor who chooses as Bryan Krause says. But if they have changed your field, you might, instead, think about organizing a retrospective volume in their honor.
– Buffy
5 hours ago
add a comment |
2
Can you explain why you don't want to put it in the acknowledgment section? An "epilogue" section does seem strange in this context (it would make more sense if you reprinted a classic paper and added an epilogue to explain what happened since its publication). Are you open to finding a new title for this section?
– cag51
6 hours ago
I would try to keep it, provided that you actually worked with them. You don't need to take the advice of every reviewer - only consider it. But it is the editor who chooses as Bryan Krause says. But if they have changed your field, you might, instead, think about organizing a retrospective volume in their honor.
– Buffy
5 hours ago
2
2
Can you explain why you don't want to put it in the acknowledgment section? An "epilogue" section does seem strange in this context (it would make more sense if you reprinted a classic paper and added an epilogue to explain what happened since its publication). Are you open to finding a new title for this section?
– cag51
6 hours ago
Can you explain why you don't want to put it in the acknowledgment section? An "epilogue" section does seem strange in this context (it would make more sense if you reprinted a classic paper and added an epilogue to explain what happened since its publication). Are you open to finding a new title for this section?
– cag51
6 hours ago
I would try to keep it, provided that you actually worked with them. You don't need to take the advice of every reviewer - only consider it. But it is the editor who chooses as Bryan Krause says. But if they have changed your field, you might, instead, think about organizing a retrospective volume in their honor.
– Buffy
5 hours ago
I would try to keep it, provided that you actually worked with them. You don't need to take the advice of every reviewer - only consider it. But it is the editor who chooses as Bryan Krause says. But if they have changed your field, you might, instead, think about organizing a retrospective volume in their honor.
– Buffy
5 hours ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
This sort of thing is really up to the editor, not the reviewers. Reviewers are to assess your paper on scientific/academic grounds. The proper position or appropriateness of an epilogue is not really their purview, it's an issue of journal style (though I also don't find it wrong that they commented on it; effectively, they are helping the editor by 'flagging' this for their attention, kind of like is done on StackExchange). To me, the acknowledgment section seems appropriate if it goes anywhere, but I'm not your editor.
If you will be writing a response to the reviewers, thank them for their opinion and inform them you will be consulting with the editor, and do so. The editor could prefer you remove it altogether, place it in the acknowledgment, or suggest you submit a separate entry in some other format, for example to appear as a comment on your paper in the same issue.
answered 6 hours ago
Bryan KrauseBryan Krause
14.2k14065
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "415"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f126407%2fis-it-ok-to-include-an-epilogue-dedicated-to-colleagues-who-passed-away-in-the-e%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
This sort of thing is really up to the editor, not the reviewers. Reviewers are to assess your paper on scientific/academic grounds. The proper position or appropriateness of an epilogue is not really their purview, it's an issue of journal style (though I also don't find it wrong that they commented on it; effectively, they are helping the editor by 'flagging' this for their attention, kind of like is done on StackExchange). To me, the acknowledgment section seems appropriate if it goes anywhere, but I'm not your editor.
If you will be writing a response to the reviewers, thank them for their opinion and inform them you will be consulting with the editor, and do so. The editor could prefer you remove it altogether, place it in the acknowledgment, or suggest you submit a separate entry in some other format, for example to appear as a comment on your paper in the same issue.
answered 6 hours ago
Bryan KrauseBryan Krause
14.2k14065
add a comment |
This sort of thing is really up to the editor, not the reviewers. Reviewers are to assess your paper on scientific/academic grounds. The proper position or appropriateness of an epilogue is not really their purview, it's an issue of journal style (though I also don't find it wrong that they commented on it; effectively, they are helping the editor by 'flagging' this for their attention, kind of like is done on StackExchange). To me, the acknowledgment section seems appropriate if it goes anywhere, but I'm not your editor.
If you will be writing a response to the reviewers, thank them for their opinion and inform them you will be consulting with the editor, and do so. The editor could prefer you remove it altogether, place it in the acknowledgment, or suggest you submit a separate entry in some other format, for example to appear as a comment on your paper in the same issue.
answered 6 hours ago
Bryan KrauseBryan Krause
14.2k14065
add a comment |
This sort of thing is really up to the editor, not the reviewers. Reviewers are to assess your paper on scientific/academic grounds. The proper position or appropriateness of an epilogue is not really their purview, it's an issue of journal style (though I also don't find it wrong that they commented on it; effectively, they are helping the editor by 'flagging' this for their attention, kind of like is done on StackExchange). To me, the acknowledgment section seems appropriate if it goes anywhere, but I'm not your editor.
If you will be writing a response to the reviewers, thank them for their opinion and inform them you will be consulting with the editor, and do so. The editor could prefer you remove it altogether, place it in the acknowledgment, or suggest you submit a separate entry in some other format, for example to appear as a comment on your paper in the same issue.
answered 6 hours ago
Bryan KrauseBryan Krause
14.2k14065
This sort of thing is really up to the editor, not the reviewers. Reviewers are to assess your paper on scientific/academic grounds. The proper position or appropriateness of an epilogue is not really their purview, it's an issue of journal style (though I also don't find it wrong that they commented on it; effectively, they are helping the editor by 'flagging' this for their attention, kind of like is done on StackExchange). To me, the acknowledgment section seems appropriate if it goes anywhere, but I'm not your editor.
If you will be writing a response to the reviewers, thank them for their opinion and inform them you will be consulting with the editor, and do so. The editor could prefer you remove it altogether, place it in the acknowledgment, or suggest you submit a separate entry in some other format, for example to appear as a comment on your paper in the same issue.
answered 6 hours ago
Bryan KrauseBryan Krause
14.2k14065
answered 6 hours ago
Bryan KrauseBryan Krause
14.2k14065
answered 6 hours ago
Bryan KrauseBryan Krause
14.2k14065
answered 6 hours ago
Bryan KrauseBryan Krause
14.2k14065
14.2k14065
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f126407%2fis-it-ok-to-include-an-epilogue-dedicated-to-colleagues-who-passed-away-in-the-e%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
bmz80B9f,yLKGvABAyXbUadSS Y1JCMLBb,n53,k83HpSWGXu 6KuhzcSb WQTQ46n0edF2CjlCAe LXk ftSO4D5lH,ocGJN,C bgfJQn
2
Can you explain why you don't want to put it in the acknowledgment section? An "epilogue" section does seem strange in this context (it would make more sense if you reprinted a classic paper and added an epilogue to explain what happened since its publication). Are you open to finding a new title for this section?
– cag51
6 hours ago
I would try to keep it, provided that you actually worked with them. You don't need to take the advice of every reviewer - only consider it. But it is the editor who chooses as Bryan Krause says. But if they have changed your field, you might, instead, think about organizing a retrospective volume in their honor.
– Buffy
5 hours ago