I guess it isn't too bad when the peer reviews just say to make the article shorter.
@drb: If it is a well-written paper, I'll read it no matter how long! Especially if it explains things to me that I didn't know before (e.g. if it's in a field very different from mine). :) But, at the risk of being, well, me, citations don't mean people read things. :P Some #LHC papers have stupidly high citations and I doubt they're page-turners.
Will you have to do a lot of trimming?
@RaoOfPhysics Yea, totally agree about the notion that citations≠reads.
I don't think we'll have to trim a ton from it. The editor was rather apathetic about the whole issue so I think we'll try to cut some bits and make others less verbose.
I'd really rather not break it apart into separate papers because I think it's stronger when everything is together in one place.
@drb: All the best!
Scholar Social is a microblogging platform for researchers, grad students, librarians, archivists, undergrads, academically inclined high schoolers, educators of all levels, journal editors, research assistants, professors, administrators—anyone involved in academia who is willing to engage with others respectfully.
We strive to be a safe space for queer people and other minorities in academia, recognizing that there can only be academic freedom where the existence and validity of interlocutors' identities is taken as axiomatic.
"An academic microblog that you can be proud to put on the last slide of a presentation at a conference"
(Participation is, of course, optional)
Scholar Social features a monthly "official" journal club, in which we try to read and comment on a paper of interest.
Any user of Scholar Social can suggest an article by sending the DOI by direct message to @email@example.com and one will be chosen by random lottery on the last day of the month. We ask that you only submit articles that are from *outside* your own field of study to try to ensure that the papers we read are accessible and interesting to non-experts.