[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Sinosaurcompsognathopteryxus

Micky Rowe wrote:

>According to a "News and Comment" piece in the current (March 21)
>issue of _Science_, the _Nature_ paper on the purportedly feathered
>dinosaur has been held up by the editors' request for revisions (it
>hasn't even been decided yet that the paper will be published, though
>I'm hard pressed to imagine that they wouldn't...).

The request for revisions is common when English is the author's second
language, especially in journals such as Nature and Science where economy
of language is essential.  In some cases even translating the 'instructions
for authors' can be difficult.  Just think how a native English speaker
would fare, trying to write a paper in Chinese!

Also such things as computers, computer aided drafting and even paper
quality, which we take for granted, are not ubiquitous in many countries.

It is probably not the subject which is causing the problem, but perhaps
the way the paper is written/organised.  Even papers by native English
speakers often need revisions before being accepted by Nature - so a
request for revision is not unusual.


cnedin@geology.adelaide.edu.au                  nedin@ediacara.org
Many say it was a mistake to come down from the trees, some say
the move out of the oceans was a bad idea. Me, I say the stiffening
of the notochord in the Cambrian was where it all went wrong,
it was all downhill from there.