Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

13
  • 26
    This is gratuitously heavy-handed for the situation described in the question ("The paper [...] really doesn't need a reference for their use of technique X, since they spend a lot of time developing it anyway..."). Do you really think that "public scorn" is appropriate here? Come on. Commented Nov 23, 2017 at 10:40
  • 12
    Don't you think you slightly exaggerate things here? Did you consider that the wrong quotation may just be a typo and not the meanness of the author who is trying to end the the world? I find myself often copy+pasting references in LaTex from my bib, grabbing a wrong citation would stay unnoticed. Commented Nov 23, 2017 at 21:06
  • 13
    Whooooa there. For all you know, the error is a simple typo and the paper says "Widget theory, as developed in [14]" when it should really be "Widget theory, as developed in [41]" or something similar. Please stop throwing around these wild accusations of gross misconduct that are based on nothing more than supposition. Commented Nov 23, 2017 at 23:00
  • 6
    Answerer, please be reminded of Hanlon's razor. Commented Nov 24, 2017 at 23:55
  • 2
    @CogitoErgoCogitoSum so you never made a mistake? I'm pretty sure you have so that shows your "inability" of writing a paper and "speaks to your competency in the field", right? It just happens that one selects the wrong publication in the library and soemtimes such mistakes slip through proofreading and peer-review. If it's nothing substantial (which from the description it isn't) it's not nearly as big as a deal as you want it to be. Commented Nov 25, 2017 at 10:31