A question about collated materials:
something like "van fraassen's view on relational quantum mechanics" which comments, as an academic paper, an article by van fraassen, count as collated? i don't think so.
and something like "Critic review on surnames based social mobility's analysis" which critically reviews a recent paper/book?
Even van fraassen's article is entitled" rovelli's world" and discusses previous articles by Rovelli.
Definitely, a review is "collated"?
Thanks for answering.
something like "van fraassen's view on relational quantum mechanics" which comments, as an academic paper, an article by van fraassen, count as collated? i don't think so.
and something like "Critic review on surnames based social mobility's analysis" which critically reviews a recent paper/book?
Even van fraassen's article is entitled" rovelli's world" and discusses previous articles by Rovelli.
Definitely, a review is "collated"?
Thanks for answering.
Both of these are really dependent upon how unique they are. The issue we've run into in the past is people trying to basically copy-and-paste articles/books, add in a few comments here and there, and pass it off as being "original," by acting like their minor changes (sometimes being only a few percent of the overall piece of work) make it completely theirs.
The collation is something that really needs to be handled on a case-by-case basis. If you have questions, feel free to toss me a PM. I can also look over any articles and let you know if they should be under collated or original.
Generally speaking, that should be correct. When in doubt, run it by me.
thanx
Not a problem!