# A tagging scheme for papers

+ 0 like - 5 dislike
34 views

Proposal: If someone wants to post a question while reading / studying a paper, the following tagging-scheme is proposed:

## Format for title:

• Title: [Paper] <Title of paper>

Naming priority:

1. inSPIRE-indexed title
2. general formatting for papers
e.g. "How far are we from the quantum theory of gravity?"
not "How Far are We From the Quantum Theory of Gravity?"
• In-title pseudo-tags

• [Paper]
default; must be included to differentiate from general posts
• [Paper][Review]
for review papers

This system can be further expanded and/or modified as the site progresses.

## Format for body:

1. inSPIRE
first priority
2. arXiv
if applicable, and inSPIRE url is not applicable
3. user url
only when applicable

use only text for urls: http://inspirebeta.net/record/615514

• Body of the post — where the question is asked

## Format for tags:

• For inSPIRE-indexed papers
use the most relevant inSPIRE keywords
examples: , ,

• For arXiv-archived papers
limit to primary classification
examples: , , , , , , ,

• Both
Include both tagging groups
limit to four most relevant inSPIRE keywords + primary arXiv classification

• Neither
use appropriate tagging similar to above
should be approved by moderator(s) first

• Notes on tags:
• they have a maximum length of 25 characters
• they are all lower case
• they cannot contain spaces
• words are separated with dashes (hyphens) or periods
• posts can contain a maximum of five tags

## Example template:

Title: [Paper][Review (when applicable)] <Title of paper>

Body:

Body of post

Tags:

## Example posts:

Title: [Paper][Review] How far are we from the quantum theory of gravity?

Body:
inSPIRE: http://inspirebeta.net/record/615514

Body of post

Title: [Paper] A model of leptons

Body:
inSPIRE: http://inspirebeta.net/record/51188

Body of post

: If a person has a specific question while reading a given paper, she can use the template to ask that question; if she has multiple questions on the same paper, each question will then require a separate post (with identical referencing info).

The scheme should - ideally - integrate with the entire tagging-system. --

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
retagged Mar 7, 2014

+ 8 like - 0 dislike

I'm not entirely sold on this idea. I think it would be far better if the person reading the paper has a question, asks it in a way that a person who hasn't read it could still answer.

I have this feeling that your proposed scheme will introduce a flood of 1 line questions like: "How does the Author derive Line 16 from Line 15".

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
answered Sep 15, 2011 by (230 points)
Fair point. I could see a couple of cases where your counter example would be valid on this site, but in general, they would not be.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
I'm just afraid that people will start linking papers and assume everyone has read it or will read it in order to answer the question

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
I must admit, the thought occurred to me.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
Good point. Hadn't thought of it that way. ... Well, let's see what the rest of the community has to say. ...

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
But, on the other hand, there will be posts on papers -- and -*should*- be. So, we should have a reasonable and manageable system to handle them.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
I think it should be more case by case. Some questions regarding papers can (and probably should) be asked in a way that doesn't require reading the paper. However, some questions are going to need a greater understanding of the paper. I like the idea of having a template for asking questions on papers, but maybe the body of the post should contain enough information if possible to answer the question without consulting the paper.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)