Science Memes

11081 readers

3196 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules

Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
Keep it rooted (on topic).
No spam.
Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.

Research Committee

!spiders@lemmy.world

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Sal@mander.xyz

fossilesque@mander.xyz

SciBot@mander.xyz

701

Becoming et al. (mander.xyz)

submitted 2 months ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to c/science_memes@mander.xyz

35 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Pelicanen@sopuli.xyz 7 points 2 months ago (2 children)

The IEEE reference style guide actually often works just like this, the entire reference is just a number in brackets in the text and then the details of the reference is in the bibliography at the end. For example

...a high correlation as shown in [5]... 



[5]     A.N. Author, P. Ostdoc, and O. Verworked "A paper about a thing" Department, University, City, etc.

[–] Blueoaky@mander.xyz 5 points 2 months ago

Same for ACM. I think it's good as it's easier to read. But sometimes I still write names (e.g. as Mueller et al. points out, the color blue is actually red [666]), to highlight something. But that's maybe for 5 out of 100 sources.

[–] pmc@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 months ago

This is the citation format that makes the most sense to me, especially now that you can just click [5] and be brought straight to the bibliography.