Timeline for Reference to Mathoverflow
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 30, 2014 at 15:06 | comment | added | Joël | Gehrard, good point. Each time I thank someone for an argument he gave me on MO, I will also give the question number so that the reader can easily see for himself. | |
| Apr 28, 2014 at 18:07 | comment | added | András Bátkai | Thank you. My question was about cases when something is almost verbatim taken from MO. My concern is, as @GerhardPaseman mentions, that in some cases when writing a paper you use copyrighted material. This you are free to use but common professional etiquette is to mention the source, even if only vaguely as general thanks. | |
| Apr 28, 2014 at 16:51 | comment | added | Gerhard Paseman | I think there is a significant difference between the proverbial colleague and MathOverflow: the former (and likely you) are not recording the conversation you had, whereas MathOverflow does record things. You and your readers thus have something that they can access and independently evaluate. How much you reveal to the reader is also interpretable, but not as broadly. I recommend at least listing the questions that were useful, if not also the answers. Perhaps someone might see something you missed. Gerhard "MathOverflow Is Too An Entity" Paseman, 2014.04.28 | |
| Apr 28, 2014 at 16:02 | history | answered | Joël | CC BY-SA 3.0 |