Timeline for Which journals publish expository work?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
66 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 4, 2022 at 17:39 | history | edited | aaaaa says reinstate Monica | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
add link to explain exposition
|
| Apr 27, 2022 at 22:58 | answer | added | Mark L. Stone | timeline score: 1 | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 17:02 | history | edited | Martin Sleziak | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
replaced the dead link
|
| Nov 6, 2021 at 14:50 | comment | added | David White | In the book Indiscrete Thoughts, Rota wrote Indiscrete thoughts: ``Not only is it good for you to write an expository paper once in a while, but such writing is essential for the survival of mathematics. Look at the most influential writings in mathematics in the last hundred years. At least half of them would have to be classified as expository.'' | |
| Apr 21, 2021 at 7:40 | comment | added | username | Maybe Diamond Access journals could be highlighted (no charge to readers, no charge to author)? | |
| Dec 19, 2020 at 22:51 | comment | added | Hollis Williams | There are quite a few journals which might take an exposition paper (especially some of the French journals), but it will have to be very high quality and probably worth making an informal enquiry with the editor depending on the subject matter. | |
| Feb 26, 2019 at 13:40 | review | Close votes | |||
| Feb 26, 2019 at 16:10 | |||||
| Feb 15, 2019 at 19:07 | answer | added | Abdelmalek Abdesselam | timeline score: 7 | |
| Nov 29, 2017 at 18:27 | review | Close votes | |||
| Nov 29, 2017 at 21:15 | |||||
| Oct 24, 2017 at 14:42 | review | Close votes | |||
| Oct 24, 2017 at 17:25 | |||||
| May 16, 2017 at 15:52 | answer | added | AntoineL | timeline score: 2 | |
| May 16, 2017 at 8:11 | answer | added | vidyarthi | timeline score: 4 | |
| Jun 25, 2016 at 14:40 | comment | added | Cayley | You can then stick all your expository papers together and they will form a so called 'textbook' | |
| Jul 11, 2015 at 4:56 | history | edited | Gerry Myerson |
edited tags
|
|
| Jul 10, 2015 at 14:53 | answer | added | the_fox | timeline score: 4 | |
| Oct 25, 2013 at 16:07 | answer | added | Andrés E. Caicedo | timeline score: 21 | |
| Mar 29, 2013 at 23:44 | answer | added | user39719 | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jun 11, 2012 at 0:21 | comment | added | Vectornaut | I also feel like I may be more interested in doing expository work than in doing research, and I'm surprised and gratified to hear other people say the same thing---especially here! | |
| Jun 10, 2012 at 19:15 | answer | added | Pierre Dehornoy | timeline score: 6 | |
| May 20, 2012 at 19:39 | answer | added | Samuel Vidal | timeline score: -5 | |
| Mar 25, 2011 at 16:21 | answer | added | user9072 | timeline score: 10 | |
| Mar 10, 2011 at 4:09 | comment | added | Amritanshu Prasad | In his introduction to Stanley's Enumerative Combinatorics II, Rota said, "The mathematical community professes a snobbish distaste for expository writing, but the facts are at variance with the words. In actual reality, the names of authors of a handful of successful textbooks written in this century are included in the list of most celebrated mathematicians of our time". Hardy (who took exposisiton quiote seriously) had written in his apology "Exposition, criticism, appreciation, is work for second-rate minds." | |
| Feb 2, 2011 at 15:17 | answer | added | Kevin O'Bryant | timeline score: 8 | |
| Nov 11, 2010 at 3:54 | comment | added | Pete L. Clark | Yes, Rota said this. I believe it was one of his "ten lessons". | |
| Nov 10, 2010 at 18:40 | comment | added | Michael Hardy | Some Famous Person (was it Gian-Carlo Rota?) said you're remembered more for your expository work than for your research. | |
| Oct 3, 2010 at 0:07 | answer | added | Sándor Kovács | timeline score: 18 | |
| Sep 23, 2010 at 17:58 | history | edited | Pete L. Clark | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
deleted 223 characters in body
|
| Sep 23, 2010 at 11:55 | answer | added | gowers | timeline score: 66 | |
| Sep 23, 2010 at 4:02 | answer | added | Martin Gisser | timeline score: 4 | |
| Jul 9, 2010 at 3:07 | answer | added | Greg Friedman | timeline score: 11 | |
| May 17, 2010 at 7:40 | answer | added | Terry Loring | timeline score: 39 | |
| May 14, 2010 at 1:35 | answer | added | Douglas S. Stones | timeline score: 16 | |
| Apr 18, 2010 at 18:26 | history | edited | Pete L. Clark | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
deleted 103 characters in body
|
| Mar 16, 2010 at 0:17 | answer | added | mathphysicist | timeline score: 6 | |
| Mar 15, 2010 at 23:42 | answer | added | mathphysicist | timeline score: 12 | |
| Mar 14, 2010 at 6:07 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by Pete L. Clark | ||
| Mar 14, 2010 at 2:15 | answer | added | Robb Fry | timeline score: 7 | |
| Mar 13, 2010 at 23:52 | history | edited | Pete L. Clark | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 1046 characters in body
|
| Feb 20, 2010 at 14:15 | answer | added | Graham Leuschke | timeline score: 9 | |
| Feb 18, 2010 at 8:01 | answer | added | Jérôme Poineau | timeline score: 10 | |
| Feb 17, 2010 at 16:31 | answer | added | Gerald Edgar | timeline score: 40 | |
| Feb 17, 2010 at 12:37 | answer | added | Gerald Edgar | timeline score: 54 | |
| Feb 16, 2010 at 18:57 | answer | added | Igor Pak | timeline score: 17 | |
| Feb 16, 2010 at 18:44 | comment | added | Deane Yang | @Pete: You're right. A refereed expository journal article is definitely worth more than a posting on a wiki for, say, a tenure dossier. (It's off-topic, but I can't help but add that in a research-oriented department neither carries much weight at all. I would advise any tenure-track person in a research math department to avoid devoting much effort to expository articles. Writing too many expository articles can actually harm your case, because it looks like you're diverting too much energy away from your research.) | |
| Feb 16, 2010 at 16:59 | comment | added | Pete L. Clark | @Mark, Gerald: The Monthly does still publish expository papers. However, (i) they seem to be moving away from pure exposition to papers which claim some original result; and (ii) they rarely publish "intermediate" (or advanced) exposition anymore: most of their exposition seems aimed at an audience with only an undergraduate background in mathematics. I would like to hear Gerald's story... | |
| Feb 16, 2010 at 16:19 | comment | added | Gerald Edgar | @Mark: Of course the Monthly has 3 or 4 expository papers in every issue. I guess Pete is saying there should be more places for expository papers, and not that one of the papers that was published in the Monthly should have been omitted so that his paper could have been included. I may add my own story on publishing an expository paper later. | |
| Feb 16, 2010 at 16:17 | comment | added | Pete L. Clark | @Deane: I heartily agree with this, except that it should be called a "journal". The larger academic community is rather old-fashioned about this sort of thing. | |
| Feb 16, 2010 at 16:08 | comment | added | Deane Yang | I think there is a definitely a need for more places where high quality expository writing can be published. At this point, I think it would be best done online, maybe using a wiki. But it would require a significant organized effort by a group of people or organization. | |
| Feb 16, 2010 at 15:16 | answer | added | Mark Meckes | timeline score: 20 | |
| Feb 16, 2010 at 15:12 | vote | accept | Pete L. Clark | ||
| Feb 16, 2010 at 15:04 | comment | added | Mark Meckes | I've certainly seen recent expository papers in the Monthly. I suppose different referees/editors must have different feelings about such things. | |
| Feb 16, 2010 at 2:03 | answer | added | Felipe Voloch | timeline score: 26 | |
| Feb 16, 2010 at 0:54 | comment | added | Ian Durham | I should note that in the physics community we have a number of "expository" journals (or journals that accept expository papers) that are pretty widely read and often cited. I would bet they'd take some expository mathematics papers if they were somewhat applied. | |
| Feb 16, 2010 at 0:52 | comment | added | Ian Durham | Yeah, me three. I enjoy expository work and I'm probably better at it than pure research. In fact my talent seems to be taking dense, seemingly incomprehensible material and explaining it. | |
| Feb 16, 2010 at 0:04 | comment | added | HJRW | I think of conference proceedings as an appropriate venue for expository papers. | |
| Feb 15, 2010 at 23:43 | answer | added | Noah Snyder | timeline score: 12 | |
| Feb 15, 2010 at 23:34 | answer | added | Mariano Suárez-Álvarez | timeline score: 33 | |
| Feb 15, 2010 at 23:13 | answer | added | Douglas S. Stones | timeline score: 32 | |
| Feb 15, 2010 at 23:06 | history | edited | Pete L. Clark | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 770 characters in body
|
| Feb 15, 2010 at 22:55 | answer | added | Gerry Myerson | timeline score: 8 | |
| Feb 15, 2010 at 22:32 | comment | added | Akhil Mathew | +1. I am also interested in doing some sort of expository work. | |
| Feb 15, 2010 at 22:26 | answer | added | aorq | timeline score: 21 | |
| Feb 15, 2010 at 22:12 | answer | added | Simon Salamon | timeline score: 15 | |
| Feb 15, 2010 at 22:03 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan | Me too. I have to admit I am actually more interested in doing expository work in the future than research work, so I would really like to know where to get started. | |
| Feb 15, 2010 at 21:29 | answer | added | Yemon Choi | timeline score: 76 | |
| Feb 15, 2010 at 21:24 | history | asked | Pete L. Clark | CC BY-SA 2.5 |