Comment on Becoming et al.

• Batman@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Yeah I imagine they could have some sort of click to expand functionality

  source

  • SARGE@startrek.website ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Literally even a spot bumped out on the end where they list everyone, at the very end of the paper, would be infinitely better than “et Al”

    source

    • thevoidzero@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      That’s what bibliography is. It’s already like that, or am I missing something?

      source
    • MBM@lemmings.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      It sounds like you’re talking about the references, which already list all authors

      source

      • Comment105@lemm.ee ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Then what’s the issue? Sounds to me like papers already have comprehensive credits.

        source
• barsoap@lemm.ee ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Screens still have real estate that you need to fit onto. You can do “click to expand” but frankly, who would look at that. You could have the full list in the bibliography section, but frankly, who reads all that: The stuff I look at is the citation abbreviation ([Miller et al 2003]), then the doi or journal/paper title to copy and paste. Everything in between gets ignored, if I read names then it’s on paper titles, not citations. I’ve also seen a tongue-in-cheek proposal to overlay all author names on top of another in citations, sadly can’t find the paper.

  Typography isn’t the place where you want to attack this issue, at most you can get some token feel-good result that will be ineffective because it ignores the psychology of people looking up papers. Which is to say: You’ll do net damage to your cause because you’re spending goodwill capital on feel-good BS. If you want to have a systemic impact then attack the issue from the other end, such as cracking down on people which insert themselves as first author of every paper coming out of their department and stuff. Rule of thumb: If someone can’t do a thesis style oral defence of a paper, their name has no business being anywhere even close to the front.

  source

  • queermunist@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Equality of et al - how about no one gets their names inserted into the paper, everyone is just put in the bibliography. No “first authors.” Instead, the institution gets the reference i.e. instead of (Miller et al 2005) it can be (Cornell U. et al 2005). Then, because it’s digital, mouse over the reference for a full list of people involved.

    Solves the problem of worthless administration slapping their personal name on it.

    source

    • Pelicanen@sopuli.xyz ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      The IEEE reference style guide actually often works just like this, the entire reference is just a number in brackets in the text and then the details of the reference is in the bibliography at the end. For example

      ...a high correlation as shown in [5]... 
      
      
      
      [5]     A.N. Author, P. Ostdoc, and O. Verworked "A paper about a thing" Department, University, City, etc. 
      

      source

      • pmc@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        This is the citation format that makes the most sense to me, especially now that you can just click [5] and be brought straight to the bibliography.

        source
      • Blueoaky@mander.xyz ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Same for ACM. I think it’s good as it’s easier to read. But sometimes I still write names (e.g. as Mueller et al. points out, the color blue is actually red [666]), to highlight something. But that’s maybe for 5 out of 100 sources.

        source