Tweeps, an accepted article has just had proofs returned with in-text citations changed to first-named author "et al", for 3 authors listed alphabetically. Do I take a stand on this and insist that it must be reverted before I agree to the proofs?
-
Well, in some fields they have this notion of "first author" to signify who really gets the credit, or something(??). Imagine you wrote a paper with Anderson and Chen, listed alphabetically. This journal would change in-text citations to that to just say "Anderson et al"
ah I see .. that is a bit sticky .. is it consistent with their previous practices?
-
-
I think it might be. Since >2 authors in math is uncommon, I didn't find enough cases to check. But everything I found just didn't refer to any authors, eg "a result of [N]" to avoid this. Even if consistent, it's shitty practice for the field so I felt something had to be said
-
I feel that good on ya mate
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.