Editing Talk:2456: Types of Scientific Paper

Jump to: navigation, search
Ambox notice.png Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 31: Line 31:
 
::I interpret them as a mix of "over-generalized" headlines and less-than-literal summaries of that general sort of paper's content. [[User:Tague|Tague]] ([[User talk:Tague|talk]]) 14:41, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 
::I interpret them as a mix of "over-generalized" headlines and less-than-literal summaries of that general sort of paper's content. [[User:Tague|Tague]] ([[User talk:Tague|talk]]) 14:41, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 
::I read (e.g., for starters) "We put a camera somewhere new" both as very true to the emotional spirit ''and'' a  paraphrasing of the true archetype membership being referenced - such as something like "Rat-mounted cameras for remote surveying of sewer pipes" (if that's not already been done, which I suspect it has!), etc. I suspect there's a few "one weird thing"-inspired titles out there, influenced by modern 'headline' links (with or without self-awareness), and ''know'' there's a whole history of "my colleague is wrong!" papers, even if not in exactly that wording, pushing the author's own biases in a self-important ranting style, or a rambling one that's an unstructured manifesto of 'thoughts' about all prior 'experts' on a pet issue. There's some deconstruction involved, but with easy reconstruction back to reality. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.113|162.158.158.113]] 19:54, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 
::I read (e.g., for starters) "We put a camera somewhere new" both as very true to the emotional spirit ''and'' a  paraphrasing of the true archetype membership being referenced - such as something like "Rat-mounted cameras for remote surveying of sewer pipes" (if that's not already been done, which I suspect it has!), etc. I suspect there's a few "one weird thing"-inspired titles out there, influenced by modern 'headline' links (with or without self-awareness), and ''know'' there's a whole history of "my colleague is wrong!" papers, even if not in exactly that wording, pushing the author's own biases in a self-important ranting style, or a rambling one that's an unstructured manifesto of 'thoughts' about all prior 'experts' on a pet issue. There's some deconstruction involved, but with easy reconstruction back to reality. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.113|162.158.158.113]] 19:54, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 
== Derivatives ==
 
 
Should this (and any others, which I think likely exist or are about to) go in the main article?
 
https://twitter.com/GreenBankObserv/status/1388148786707406854
 
 
[[File:2456-radioastronomy.jpeg|500px]]
 
 
"With apologies to Mr. Munroe, may we present: Types of Radio Astronomy Papers"
 
 
— [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 18:40, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 
: These are good fun, but I don't think we are gonna put it up in image form in the main article. Maybe a section of external links will do. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.165.235|162.158.165.235]] 00:56, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
 
:: I don't think that links are a very effective way to show these. I feel like they need to be a gallery. Perhaps it should be a separate wiki page that is linked from the main article?
 
 
::Here are some more:
 
{| class="wikitable"
 
| https://twitter.com/neil_chilson/status/1388216386967715846 || Privacy Paper
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/SamLMontano/status/1388268078279049217 || Disaster Science Paper
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/jfbastien/status/1388229180211404803 || C++ Standards papers
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/waiterich/status/1388207060412682247 || Scientific Paper (Food, Land, and Natural Climate Solutions Version)
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/stefan_d_jevtic/status/1388192045920137216 || Hematology
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/jeffpeapod/status/1388185831140118529 || Papers for Grad Students
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/EdinburghKnee/status/1388069182642794496 || Ortho Paper
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/j_remy_green/status/1387960392954138624 || Law Paper
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/JavierApfeld/status/1387891336515362819 || Aging Paper
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/Gabeincognito/status/1387873643435216897 || Infosec Paper
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/acarriebear/status/1387870050581889024 || Toxicology
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/yesitsnicholas/status/1387865583908114432 || Neuroscience
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/nexel_art/status/1388263392545280009 || Archeology
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/skinnyfatPhD/status/1388253551013498882 || Metabolism
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/zamanian_/status/1388179675806158848 || Parasitology
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/PWGTennant/status/1387734254960975881 || Epidemiology and Public Health
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/DrIanKellar/status/1387760304818372620 || Health Psychology
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/nappqm/status/1388098251136589824 || Pest Science
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/theangelremiel/status/1388134620219297793 || Clinical Paper
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/plantspipettes/status/1387825850372997121 || Plant science
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/girlandkat/status/1388030240358768642 || Planetary Science
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/Nesquixotic/status/1387848121342853122 || History
 
|-
 
|
 
|-
 
| https://twitter.com/AndrewBarnas/status/1388161745684996098 || Scientific Paper PAYWALL meta-joke
 
|}
 
:: — [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 13:45, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
 
 
 
 
The meme is now so popular there is an article in the atlantic about it; maybe that should be included: 
 
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/05/xkcd-science-paper-meme-nails-academic-publishing/618810/
 
:: --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.113|162.158.89.113]] 14:28, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 

Please note that all contributions to explain xkcd may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see explain xkcd:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)