Timeline for Note rejected from arXiv: what to do next?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 12, 2020 at 8:41 | comment | added | Kostya_I | I don't see how all this is relevant to the question. Papers might have various problems content-wise, but it's clearly not up to arXiv moderators to judge whether that's the case - there's simply no resources to do it sensibly. | |
| Apr 11, 2020 at 23:15 | comment | added | Andreas Blass | Conventions about asserting the importance of one's own work vary greatly between fields. I've noticed a difference here even between such closely connected fields as mathematics and theoretical computer science. Computer science papers are much more likely than mathematics papers to emphasize their own importance. Perhaps physics is more like computer science in this respect. | |
| Apr 11, 2020 at 14:56 | comment | added | Joël | I disagree. It is not the role of a paper to assert its own importance. The author may not be the best person to judge on that. The reaction of the mathematical community will tell the author about the scientific importance of his/her work. The only possible justification of ArXiv's behavior in this case is that it is a mistake, and mistakes happen. | |
| S Apr 11, 2020 at 14:04 | history | answered | user21349 | CC BY-SA 4.0 | |
| S Apr 11, 2020 at 14:04 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by user21349 |