Gerry Canavan @gerrycanavan.bsky.social

attn scholarly organizations, this is now considered best practice

16 replies 357 reposts 1188 likes

Susie Steinbach @susielaurie.bsky.social [ View ] Jun 27, 2024 at 16:43 UTC

literally need to do this in current project!

0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes

‘stina is a shiny special one @stinapag.bsky.social [ View ] Jun 26, 2024 at 19:24 UTC

Is the person in general an "oof" or the cited work the "oof"?

2 replies 0 reposts 6 likes

Dr Emil Seidel, MD @zbk.bsky.social [ View ] Jun 26, 2024 at 19:04 UTC

Are snarky footnotes also acceptable?

3 replies 5 reposts 75 likes

Hippopeteamus @hippopeteamus.bsky.social [ View ] Jun 26, 2024 at 22:58 UTC

Lysenko [sic] (1937)

0 replies 0 reposts 3 likes

thereal_attentive @therealattentive.bsky.social [ View ] Jun 26, 2024 at 19:30 UTC

This is only acceptable if the reference date predates the ooof-date in parens. (i.e. "Snoswick 1997 (Ooooof 2010)")

1 replies 0 reposts 13 likes

Trip Kirkpatrick @triplingual.bsky.social [ View ] Jun 27, 2024 at 14:09 UTC

#Alt4This screenshot (from Tumblr?)

nathanielthecurious:
i think you should be allowed to cite scholars who are bad people but only if you put the word (oof) or (yikes) after their name like Parker (yikes, 1989) or Obbink (big oof, 2007)

kaceycat:
Freud (derogatory, 1923)

0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes

Wagatwe Wanjuki @wagatwe.com [ View ] Jun 27, 2024 at 13:17 UTC

yes love this

0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes

David Ziff @djsziff.bsky.social [ View ] Jun 26, 2024 at 19:13 UTC

There's some of this in the law! digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/faculty-arti...

1 replies 1 reposts 9 likes

Tarquin 'Howling Mad' Holmes @tarquinhh.bsky.social [ View ] Jun 26, 2024 at 22:04 UTC

Assume 'yikes' is a higher level of problematic than 'oof', but where does 'big oof' fit into this scale?

1 replies 1 reposts 4 likes

John Mashey @johnmashey.bsky.social [ View ] Jun 26, 2024 at 21:22 UTC

I’d be delighted if there were a standard way to tag references, say: + credible , maybe relied on = neutral, or just mentioned in passing - not credible or outright wrong (I often skim references looking for known awful ones, but that can be misleading if the paper is critiquing them)

2 replies 0 reposts 9 likes

ACAB Includes the NYT @untimelygamer.bsky.social [ View ] Jun 26, 2024 at 20:05 UTC

Which Parker is this? Does anyone know?

0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes

Carl Boettiger @cboettig.bsky.social [ View ] Jun 26, 2024 at 23:34 UTC

brilliant! maybe these can be added to the existing cito ontology sparontologies.github.io/cito/current... maybe somewhere between 'derides' and 'parodies' 🙂

0 replies 0 reposts 4 likes

𝕜𝕦𝕣𝕚𝕧𝕒𝕚𝕞 @kuriva.im [ View ] Jun 27, 2024 at 03:06 UTC

Spengler (listen, I know; 1918)

0 replies 0 reposts 12 likes

Ed Rybicki 🇿🇲🇿🇦🍷🚀 @edrybicki.bsky.social [ View ] Jun 27, 2024 at 15:32 UTC

Or the Dothraki referencing system:

0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes

David M. Perry @lollardfish.bsky.social [ View ] Jun 26, 2024 at 18:38 UTC

In

0 replies 1 reposts 12 likes

christoph_STCmicrobeblog @christophstc.bsky.social [ View ] Jun 26, 2024 at 22:51 UTC

please include the personal pronouns

1 replies 0 reposts 1 likes