I found some topographical errors in one of my published papers
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
i found some topographical errors mainly missing spellings in one of my published papers. However the errors does not alter the meaning or concept of the paper. I contacted the joirnal editor but told me that it remains topographical error. Am just worried about it when readers find these mistakes. what do i do
publications errors-erratum
asked Nov 27 at 6:26
Aliyu Mashud
61
|
show 3 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
i found some topographical errors mainly missing spellings in one of my published papers. However the errors does not alter the meaning or concept of the paper. I contacted the joirnal editor but told me that it remains topographical error. Am just worried about it when readers find these mistakes. what do i do
publications errors-erratum
asked Nov 27 at 6:26
Aliyu Mashud
61
3
Proofreading everything you write carefully before you publish it is generally a good habit and also the reason why the journal sends you the galley proofs. I suggest you develop this habit and start with this question. Spellcheckers are available as browser plugins and can help. For instance, the first person singular pronoun is always capitalized in English.
– Roland
Nov 27 at 7:15
12
I'm sure you mean typographical errors rather than topographical?
– henning
Nov 27 at 7:32
2
@henning: That's the first thing I noticed! Possibly one could call this a meta error, where "meta" is roughly used in this sense.
– Dave L Renfro
Nov 27 at 9:23
2
@henning I'm sure they do, but it's too beautiful for me to correct :)
– Flyto
Nov 27 at 10:36
1
"I", "typographical", "," "mistaken", ",", "do", "journal", "who"... etc. Get yourself a proof-reader!
– Strawberry
Nov 27 at 11:45
|
show 3 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
i found some topographical errors mainly missing spellings in one of my published papers. However the errors does not alter the meaning or concept of the paper. I contacted the joirnal editor but told me that it remains topographical error. Am just worried about it when readers find these mistakes. what do i do
publications errors-erratum
asked Nov 27 at 6:26
Aliyu Mashud
61
i found some topographical errors mainly missing spellings in one of my published papers. However the errors does not alter the meaning or concept of the paper. I contacted the joirnal editor but told me that it remains topographical error. Am just worried about it when readers find these mistakes. what do i do
publications errors-erratum
publications errors-erratum
asked Nov 27 at 6:26
Aliyu Mashud
61
asked Nov 27 at 6:26
Aliyu Mashud
61
asked Nov 27 at 6:26
Aliyu Mashud
61
asked Nov 27 at 6:26
Aliyu Mashud
61
asked Nov 27 at 6:26
Aliyu Mashud
61
61
3
Proofreading everything you write carefully before you publish it is generally a good habit and also the reason why the journal sends you the galley proofs. I suggest you develop this habit and start with this question. Spellcheckers are available as browser plugins and can help. For instance, the first person singular pronoun is always capitalized in English.
– Roland
Nov 27 at 7:15
12
I'm sure you mean typographical errors rather than topographical?
– henning
Nov 27 at 7:32
2
@henning: That's the first thing I noticed! Possibly one could call this a meta error, where "meta" is roughly used in this sense.
– Dave L Renfro
Nov 27 at 9:23
2
@henning I'm sure they do, but it's too beautiful for me to correct :)
– Flyto
Nov 27 at 10:36
1
"I", "typographical", "," "mistaken", ",", "do", "journal", "who"... etc. Get yourself a proof-reader!
– Strawberry
Nov 27 at 11:45
|
show 3 more comments
3
Proofreading everything you write carefully before you publish it is generally a good habit and also the reason why the journal sends you the galley proofs. I suggest you develop this habit and start with this question. Spellcheckers are available as browser plugins and can help. For instance, the first person singular pronoun is always capitalized in English.
– Roland
Nov 27 at 7:15
12
I'm sure you mean typographical errors rather than topographical?
– henning
Nov 27 at 7:32
2
@henning: That's the first thing I noticed! Possibly one could call this a meta error, where "meta" is roughly used in this sense.
– Dave L Renfro
Nov 27 at 9:23
2
@henning I'm sure they do, but it's too beautiful for me to correct :)
– Flyto
Nov 27 at 10:36
1
"I", "typographical", "," "mistaken", ",", "do", "journal", "who"... etc. Get yourself a proof-reader!
– Strawberry
Nov 27 at 11:45
3
3
Proofreading everything you write carefully before you publish it is generally a good habit and also the reason why the journal sends you the galley proofs. I suggest you develop this habit and start with this question. Spellcheckers are available as browser plugins and can help. For instance, the first person singular pronoun is always capitalized in English.
– Roland
Nov 27 at 7:15
Proofreading everything you write carefully before you publish it is generally a good habit and also the reason why the journal sends you the galley proofs. I suggest you develop this habit and start with this question. Spellcheckers are available as browser plugins and can help. For instance, the first person singular pronoun is always capitalized in English.
– Roland
Nov 27 at 7:15
12
12
I'm sure you mean typographical errors rather than topographical?
– henning
Nov 27 at 7:32
I'm sure you mean typographical errors rather than topographical?
– henning
Nov 27 at 7:32
2
2
@henning: That's the first thing I noticed! Possibly one could call this a meta error, where "meta" is roughly used in this sense.
– Dave L Renfro
Nov 27 at 9:23
@henning: That's the first thing I noticed! Possibly one could call this a meta error, where "meta" is roughly used in this sense.
– Dave L Renfro
Nov 27 at 9:23
2
2
@henning I'm sure they do, but it's too beautiful for me to correct :)
– Flyto
Nov 27 at 10:36
@henning I'm sure they do, but it's too beautiful for me to correct :)
– Flyto
Nov 27 at 10:36
1
1
"I", "typographical", "," "mistaken", ",", "do", "journal", "who"... etc. Get yourself a proof-reader!
– Strawberry
Nov 27 at 11:45
"I", "typographical", "," "mistaken", ",", "do", "journal", "who"... etc. Get yourself a proof-reader!
– Strawberry
Nov 27 at 11:45
|
show 3 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
5
down vote
As you discovered, journals usually don't correct typographical errors if the paper's meaning is unaffected. Publishing a correction is a lot of trouble, and they don't want to do it unless there is a compelling reason.
So there is nothing you can do. You will just have to live with those errors being there.
Perhaps it will motivate you to proofread your next paper more carefully before submitting.
answered Nov 27 at 6:42
Nate Eldredge
103k32296396
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Make all papers available on a website and update them if necessary.
I wouldn't update the website for typos, but I might update the offline paper to correct typos and later update the website should more significant changes be made.*
*Corrections, revisions, updates, etc., are time consuming, yet offer little reward; prioritise your time.
answered Nov 27 at 7:59
user2768
10.1k22644
I really wouldn't do this. Hosting a copy of your published paper on your personal website: Great. Making changes to it, where those changes happen after the published version is fixed: Dubious, and potentially a way that a bad actor might try to sneak around peer review. Sure, if they're just typos it doesn't matter, but then again they don't matter, so why bother.
– Flyto
Nov 27 at 10:37
1
@Flyto How is advancing research dubious? How might such advances allow a bad actor to sneak around peer review? Sure, researchers can correct technical mistakes, but that is surely only ever a good thing? (I'd recommend noting that a revision contains such corrections.) Peer review isn't avoided, the formally published version is authoritative, other versions aren't.
– user2768
Nov 27 at 10:47
when changes have been made from the published version, it is no longer a self-hosted copy of a peer-reviewed paper - it's a new work, not peer-reviewed, which shares a lot of content with a peer-reviewed paper (which incidentally may be a breach of copyright). I would expect to see such a document very clearly labelled, within the document as well as on the website.
– Flyto
Nov 27 at 13:44
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
5
down vote
As you discovered, journals usually don't correct typographical errors if the paper's meaning is unaffected. Publishing a correction is a lot of trouble, and they don't want to do it unless there is a compelling reason.
So there is nothing you can do. You will just have to live with those errors being there.
Perhaps it will motivate you to proofread your next paper more carefully before submitting.
answered Nov 27 at 6:42
Nate Eldredge
103k32296396
add a comment |
up vote
5
down vote
As you discovered, journals usually don't correct typographical errors if the paper's meaning is unaffected. Publishing a correction is a lot of trouble, and they don't want to do it unless there is a compelling reason.
So there is nothing you can do. You will just have to live with those errors being there.
Perhaps it will motivate you to proofread your next paper more carefully before submitting.
answered Nov 27 at 6:42
Nate Eldredge
103k32296396
add a comment |
up vote
5
down vote
up vote
5
down vote
As you discovered, journals usually don't correct typographical errors if the paper's meaning is unaffected. Publishing a correction is a lot of trouble, and they don't want to do it unless there is a compelling reason.
So there is nothing you can do. You will just have to live with those errors being there.
Perhaps it will motivate you to proofread your next paper more carefully before submitting.
answered Nov 27 at 6:42
Nate Eldredge
103k32296396
As you discovered, journals usually don't correct typographical errors if the paper's meaning is unaffected. Publishing a correction is a lot of trouble, and they don't want to do it unless there is a compelling reason.
So there is nothing you can do. You will just have to live with those errors being there.
Perhaps it will motivate you to proofread your next paper more carefully before submitting.
answered Nov 27 at 6:42
Nate Eldredge
103k32296396
answered Nov 27 at 6:42
Nate Eldredge
103k32296396
answered Nov 27 at 6:42
Nate Eldredge
103k32296396
answered Nov 27 at 6:42
Nate Eldredge
103k32296396
103k32296396
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Make all papers available on a website and update them if necessary.
I wouldn't update the website for typos, but I might update the offline paper to correct typos and later update the website should more significant changes be made.*
*Corrections, revisions, updates, etc., are time consuming, yet offer little reward; prioritise your time.
answered Nov 27 at 7:59
user2768
10.1k22644
I really wouldn't do this. Hosting a copy of your published paper on your personal website: Great. Making changes to it, where those changes happen after the published version is fixed: Dubious, and potentially a way that a bad actor might try to sneak around peer review. Sure, if they're just typos it doesn't matter, but then again they don't matter, so why bother.
– Flyto
Nov 27 at 10:37
1
@Flyto How is advancing research dubious? How might such advances allow a bad actor to sneak around peer review? Sure, researchers can correct technical mistakes, but that is surely only ever a good thing? (I'd recommend noting that a revision contains such corrections.) Peer review isn't avoided, the formally published version is authoritative, other versions aren't.
– user2768
Nov 27 at 10:47
when changes have been made from the published version, it is no longer a self-hosted copy of a peer-reviewed paper - it's a new work, not peer-reviewed, which shares a lot of content with a peer-reviewed paper (which incidentally may be a breach of copyright). I would expect to see such a document very clearly labelled, within the document as well as on the website.
– Flyto
Nov 27 at 13:44
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Make all papers available on a website and update them if necessary.
I wouldn't update the website for typos, but I might update the offline paper to correct typos and later update the website should more significant changes be made.*
*Corrections, revisions, updates, etc., are time consuming, yet offer little reward; prioritise your time.
answered Nov 27 at 7:59
user2768
10.1k22644
I really wouldn't do this. Hosting a copy of your published paper on your personal website: Great. Making changes to it, where those changes happen after the published version is fixed: Dubious, and potentially a way that a bad actor might try to sneak around peer review. Sure, if they're just typos it doesn't matter, but then again they don't matter, so why bother.
– Flyto
Nov 27 at 10:37
1
@Flyto How is advancing research dubious? How might such advances allow a bad actor to sneak around peer review? Sure, researchers can correct technical mistakes, but that is surely only ever a good thing? (I'd recommend noting that a revision contains such corrections.) Peer review isn't avoided, the formally published version is authoritative, other versions aren't.
– user2768
Nov 27 at 10:47
when changes have been made from the published version, it is no longer a self-hosted copy of a peer-reviewed paper - it's a new work, not peer-reviewed, which shares a lot of content with a peer-reviewed paper (which incidentally may be a breach of copyright). I would expect to see such a document very clearly labelled, within the document as well as on the website.
– Flyto
Nov 27 at 13:44
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Make all papers available on a website and update them if necessary.
I wouldn't update the website for typos, but I might update the offline paper to correct typos and later update the website should more significant changes be made.*
*Corrections, revisions, updates, etc., are time consuming, yet offer little reward; prioritise your time.
answered Nov 27 at 7:59
user2768
10.1k22644
Make all papers available on a website and update them if necessary.
I wouldn't update the website for typos, but I might update the offline paper to correct typos and later update the website should more significant changes be made.*
*Corrections, revisions, updates, etc., are time consuming, yet offer little reward; prioritise your time.
answered Nov 27 at 7:59
user2768
10.1k22644
answered Nov 27 at 7:59
user2768
10.1k22644
answered Nov 27 at 7:59
user2768
10.1k22644
answered Nov 27 at 7:59
user2768
10.1k22644
10.1k22644
I really wouldn't do this. Hosting a copy of your published paper on your personal website: Great. Making changes to it, where those changes happen after the published version is fixed: Dubious, and potentially a way that a bad actor might try to sneak around peer review. Sure, if they're just typos it doesn't matter, but then again they don't matter, so why bother.
– Flyto
Nov 27 at 10:37
1
@Flyto How is advancing research dubious? How might such advances allow a bad actor to sneak around peer review? Sure, researchers can correct technical mistakes, but that is surely only ever a good thing? (I'd recommend noting that a revision contains such corrections.) Peer review isn't avoided, the formally published version is authoritative, other versions aren't.
– user2768
Nov 27 at 10:47
when changes have been made from the published version, it is no longer a self-hosted copy of a peer-reviewed paper - it's a new work, not peer-reviewed, which shares a lot of content with a peer-reviewed paper (which incidentally may be a breach of copyright). I would expect to see such a document very clearly labelled, within the document as well as on the website.
– Flyto
Nov 27 at 13:44
add a comment |
I really wouldn't do this. Hosting a copy of your published paper on your personal website: Great. Making changes to it, where those changes happen after the published version is fixed: Dubious, and potentially a way that a bad actor might try to sneak around peer review. Sure, if they're just typos it doesn't matter, but then again they don't matter, so why bother.
– Flyto
Nov 27 at 10:37
1
@Flyto How is advancing research dubious? How might such advances allow a bad actor to sneak around peer review? Sure, researchers can correct technical mistakes, but that is surely only ever a good thing? (I'd recommend noting that a revision contains such corrections.) Peer review isn't avoided, the formally published version is authoritative, other versions aren't.
– user2768
Nov 27 at 10:47
when changes have been made from the published version, it is no longer a self-hosted copy of a peer-reviewed paper - it's a new work, not peer-reviewed, which shares a lot of content with a peer-reviewed paper (which incidentally may be a breach of copyright). I would expect to see such a document very clearly labelled, within the document as well as on the website.
– Flyto
Nov 27 at 13:44
I really wouldn't do this. Hosting a copy of your published paper on your personal website: Great. Making changes to it, where those changes happen after the published version is fixed: Dubious, and potentially a way that a bad actor might try to sneak around peer review. Sure, if they're just typos it doesn't matter, but then again they don't matter, so why bother.
– Flyto
Nov 27 at 10:37
I really wouldn't do this. Hosting a copy of your published paper on your personal website: Great. Making changes to it, where those changes happen after the published version is fixed: Dubious, and potentially a way that a bad actor might try to sneak around peer review. Sure, if they're just typos it doesn't matter, but then again they don't matter, so why bother.
– Flyto
Nov 27 at 10:37
1
1
@Flyto How is advancing research dubious? How might such advances allow a bad actor to sneak around peer review? Sure, researchers can correct technical mistakes, but that is surely only ever a good thing? (I'd recommend noting that a revision contains such corrections.) Peer review isn't avoided, the formally published version is authoritative, other versions aren't.
– user2768
Nov 27 at 10:47
@Flyto How is advancing research dubious? How might such advances allow a bad actor to sneak around peer review? Sure, researchers can correct technical mistakes, but that is surely only ever a good thing? (I'd recommend noting that a revision contains such corrections.) Peer review isn't avoided, the formally published version is authoritative, other versions aren't.
– user2768
Nov 27 at 10:47
when changes have been made from the published version, it is no longer a self-hosted copy of a peer-reviewed paper - it's a new work, not peer-reviewed, which shares a lot of content with a peer-reviewed paper (which incidentally may be a breach of copyright). I would expect to see such a document very clearly labelled, within the document as well as on the website.
– Flyto
Nov 27 at 13:44
when changes have been made from the published version, it is no longer a self-hosted copy of a peer-reviewed paper - it's a new work, not peer-reviewed, which shares a lot of content with a peer-reviewed paper (which incidentally may be a breach of copyright). I would expect to see such a document very clearly labelled, within the document as well as on the website.
– Flyto
Nov 27 at 13:44
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f120668%2fi-found-some-topographical-errors-in-one-of-my-published-papers%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
3
Proofreading everything you write carefully before you publish it is generally a good habit and also the reason why the journal sends you the galley proofs. I suggest you develop this habit and start with this question. Spellcheckers are available as browser plugins and can help. For instance, the first person singular pronoun is always capitalized in English.
– Roland
Nov 27 at 7:15
12
I'm sure you mean typographical errors rather than topographical?
– henning
Nov 27 at 7:32
2
@henning: That's the first thing I noticed! Possibly one could call this a meta error, where "meta" is roughly used in this sense.
– Dave L Renfro
Nov 27 at 9:23
2
@henning I'm sure they do, but it's too beautiful for me to correct :)
– Flyto
Nov 27 at 10:36
1
"I", "typographical", "," "mistaken", ",", "do", "journal", "who"... etc. Get yourself a proof-reader!
– Strawberry
Nov 27 at 11:45