Timeline for Is it appropriate to add a dedication to a paper?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 25 at 15:51 | comment | added | LSpice | Re, I guess my curiosity had exactly the right amount of idleness to be gratified. I'm sorry that your co-author was unwilling; unless for some reason I specifically disapproved of the subject of the dedication, I don't think I can imagine objecting to a "the first-named author dedicates the paper to …"-type statement. | |
| Mar 25 at 15:50 | comment | added | David White | @LSpice I once asked a co-author if we could dedicate a paper to someone and he said no. So, I'll do that on a solo-authored paper someday. | |
| Mar 25 at 15:48 | comment | added | LSpice | That Kapulkin paper is interesting, because he's not the only author. I'd be interested, in an extremely idle way, to know if there had ever been any circumstances of disagreement among authors about whether, and to whom, to dedicate a paper, and how it was resolved. (I do not believe, or have any reason to believe, that such is the case here; I'm just wondering in general.) The answers to such a question would of course be too idiosyncratic to make it appropriate for MO or AcademiaSE, though. | |
| Mar 25 at 15:46 | history | edited | LSpice | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Names of links
|
| Mar 25 at 12:37 | history | answered | David White | CC BY-SA 4.0 |