Title of papers that have not been submitted to a venue?How “submitted”, “to appear”, “accepted” papers are evaluated in a CV?What percentage of papers submitted to a conference or journal have been previously rejected in the same or another venue?How to automatically extract submitted/accepted dates of many journal papers?Is it okay/common/good to mention the submitted papers in my phd thesis?Can one determine whether somebody's work may have been plagiarized?How to describe a paper for which you have not yet submitted revisions in CV?JCR publication required to enrol in PhD program - is it common?“Full” versions versus “Preliminary” version of result/paper. Are they considered different?How can I prove that my article has not been submitted to another journal?Is there anything that has been tried to stop publication shopping
Can I write a for loop that iterates over both collections and arrays?
Is it possible for the two major parties in the UK to form a coalition with each other instead of a much smaller party?
What is the command to reset a Windows installation without deleting any files
How to answer pointed "are you quitting" questioning when I don't want them to suspect
Can I legally use front facing blue light in the UK?
Is "plugging out" electronic devices an American expression?
Why is the design of haulage companies so “special”?
What is the steepest angle that a canal can be traversable without locks?
Patience, young "Padovan"
Is this food a bread or a loaf?
Geography at the pixel level
Symbol above others
Springs with some finite mass
Why do UK politicians seemingly ignore opinion polls on Brexit?
Is there a name of the flying bionic bird?
What does 'script /dev/null' do?
Is std::next for vector O(n) or O(1)?
Are cabin dividers used to "hide" the flex of the airplane?
Access elements in std::string where positon of string is greater than its size
What could be the right powersource for 15 seconds lifespan disposable giant chainsaw?
What are the motivations for publishing new editions of an existing textbook, beyond new discoveries in a field?
Was there ever an axiom rendered a theorem?
Does it makes sense to buy a new cycle to learn riding?
Could a US political party gain complete control over the government by removing checks & balances?
Title of papers that have not been submitted to a venue?
How “submitted”, “to appear”, “accepted” papers are evaluated in a CV?What percentage of papers submitted to a conference or journal have been previously rejected in the same or another venue?How to automatically extract submitted/accepted dates of many journal papers?Is it okay/common/good to mention the submitted papers in my phd thesis?Can one determine whether somebody's work may have been plagiarized?How to describe a paper for which you have not yet submitted revisions in CV?JCR publication required to enrol in PhD program - is it common?“Full” versions versus “Preliminary” version of result/paper. Are they considered different?How can I prove that my article has not been submitted to another journal?Is there anything that has been tried to stop publication shopping
I have some published papers and in my CV, I mention them under the title of "Publications".
However, I have some papers that I have not yet submitted to a venue (conference or journal). I think that I cannot mention these papers under the same title of "Publications".
What is the best and more appropriate title for the papers that have not been submitted yet? e.g. Research Papers? Or Research Manuscripts? Or something else?
publications terminology titles
add a comment |
I have some published papers and in my CV, I mention them under the title of "Publications".
However, I have some papers that I have not yet submitted to a venue (conference or journal). I think that I cannot mention these papers under the same title of "Publications".
What is the best and more appropriate title for the papers that have not been submitted yet? e.g. Research Papers? Or Research Manuscripts? Or something else?
publications terminology titles
3
"Manuscripts in preparation" is pretty much the standard way AFAIK.
– 299792458
1 hour ago
add a comment |
I have some published papers and in my CV, I mention them under the title of "Publications".
However, I have some papers that I have not yet submitted to a venue (conference or journal). I think that I cannot mention these papers under the same title of "Publications".
What is the best and more appropriate title for the papers that have not been submitted yet? e.g. Research Papers? Or Research Manuscripts? Or something else?
publications terminology titles
I have some published papers and in my CV, I mention them under the title of "Publications".
However, I have some papers that I have not yet submitted to a venue (conference or journal). I think that I cannot mention these papers under the same title of "Publications".
What is the best and more appropriate title for the papers that have not been submitted yet? e.g. Research Papers? Or Research Manuscripts? Or something else?
publications terminology titles
publications terminology titles
asked 4 hours ago
QuestionerQuestioner
1634
1634
3
"Manuscripts in preparation" is pretty much the standard way AFAIK.
– 299792458
1 hour ago
add a comment |
3
"Manuscripts in preparation" is pretty much the standard way AFAIK.
– 299792458
1 hour ago
3
3
"Manuscripts in preparation" is pretty much the standard way AFAIK.
– 299792458
1 hour ago
"Manuscripts in preparation" is pretty much the standard way AFAIK.
– 299792458
1 hour ago
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
Work in Progress might be good as it implies that there may still be some work to do in the writing - and even some uncertainty about the final title. In addition it also subtly says that you are still active and not resting on your old achievements.
You could, in addition, mark each paper according to its readiness, or at least those that are ready for submission.
I think that Research Papers carries a connotation that they are internal and may not be published.
add a comment |
I want to second the idea that your "Publications" or "Scholarship" section of your CV should have subsections. Typically, there would be separate subsections something along these lines: books and book chapters; peer-reviewed journal articles; peer-reviewed conference proceedings; non-peer-reviewed publications; unpublished manuscripts; manuscripts in preparation.
I also recommend highly that any piece of scholarship that you list on your CV in this section should be publicly available, if only by request. This is of course the case for published materials. For unpublished materials and papers in preparation, I think the best practice is that you should make them available upon request. Thus, it is best not to list something until it is in state where you are ready to share it.
New contributor
add a comment |
I suggest using subdivisions in your list of publications, for instance:
- Peer-reviewed journal articles
- Peer-reviewed conference articles
- Non-peer reviewed publications
- [edited] Future submissions
@Buffy you're right, I didn't think this through. edited.
– Erwan
1 hour ago
Good, but note to the OP that something like "pending publications" is misleading if the work hasn't been submitted. If you are questioned on it you will be embarrassed (at best).
– Buffy
1 hour ago
add a comment |
I recommend to take a positive attitude and just list them in sequence (i.e. reverse chronological, right up front, along with the rest) and say "in preparation for J. Appl. Phys." or whatever journal is planned. Use your common sense. But if you publish all the time in J. Appl. Phys. and know the paper meets the subject and quality hurdles, fine, list that. If you seriously think it is a Science/Nature/Phys Rev paper, than list that. I'm going to assume you are an accomplished paper writer and getting publisheder. Or well on your way to being there. So this should not be rocket science to know where you plan to submit. And you should be submitting to places you plan to get accepted at (not chasing rainbows or submitting junk).
Given that you say "in preparation" or "submitted" or whatever qualifier, it's OBVIOUS that the paper may never get finished (or might evolve, split, merge, etc.) Even "in press" still has some wiggle room in that there is a remote possibility it shifts venue or the like (I mean it's not in the archived literature yet). So what. Not a big deal. Note, I see many CVs on the web that have this exact structure. The simple caveat is plenty. You don't need to obsess about different sections or the like.
The other, not insignificant, benefit is that it concentrates your mind. And makes you more likely to finish, submit, get published. Because you have identified the target.
New contributor
To my mind, "in press at X" is much more impressive (sorry) than "in preparation for X." The in press paper has been reviewed and accepted, so the journal name carries some weight. For things that are in preparation or submitted, the title may be informative, but the journal choice is...aspirational: reformatting a paper for a high profile journal isn't usually the hard part of publishing there. "Under Review" is in the middle, since your paper has usually been evaluated, at least by an editor, but perhaps not completely.
– Matt
4 mins ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "415"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e)
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom))
StackExchange.using('gps', function() StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', location: 'question_page' ); );
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
;
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
);
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%2f127814%2ftitle-of-papers-that-have-not-been-submitted-to-a-venue%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Work in Progress might be good as it implies that there may still be some work to do in the writing - and even some uncertainty about the final title. In addition it also subtly says that you are still active and not resting on your old achievements.
You could, in addition, mark each paper according to its readiness, or at least those that are ready for submission.
I think that Research Papers carries a connotation that they are internal and may not be published.
add a comment |
Work in Progress might be good as it implies that there may still be some work to do in the writing - and even some uncertainty about the final title. In addition it also subtly says that you are still active and not resting on your old achievements.
You could, in addition, mark each paper according to its readiness, or at least those that are ready for submission.
I think that Research Papers carries a connotation that they are internal and may not be published.
add a comment |
Work in Progress might be good as it implies that there may still be some work to do in the writing - and even some uncertainty about the final title. In addition it also subtly says that you are still active and not resting on your old achievements.
You could, in addition, mark each paper according to its readiness, or at least those that are ready for submission.
I think that Research Papers carries a connotation that they are internal and may not be published.
Work in Progress might be good as it implies that there may still be some work to do in the writing - and even some uncertainty about the final title. In addition it also subtly says that you are still active and not resting on your old achievements.
You could, in addition, mark each paper according to its readiness, or at least those that are ready for submission.
I think that Research Papers carries a connotation that they are internal and may not be published.
edited 1 hour ago
answered 4 hours ago
BuffyBuffy
56.9k17179274
56.9k17179274
add a comment |
add a comment |
I want to second the idea that your "Publications" or "Scholarship" section of your CV should have subsections. Typically, there would be separate subsections something along these lines: books and book chapters; peer-reviewed journal articles; peer-reviewed conference proceedings; non-peer-reviewed publications; unpublished manuscripts; manuscripts in preparation.
I also recommend highly that any piece of scholarship that you list on your CV in this section should be publicly available, if only by request. This is of course the case for published materials. For unpublished materials and papers in preparation, I think the best practice is that you should make them available upon request. Thus, it is best not to list something until it is in state where you are ready to share it.
New contributor
add a comment |
I want to second the idea that your "Publications" or "Scholarship" section of your CV should have subsections. Typically, there would be separate subsections something along these lines: books and book chapters; peer-reviewed journal articles; peer-reviewed conference proceedings; non-peer-reviewed publications; unpublished manuscripts; manuscripts in preparation.
I also recommend highly that any piece of scholarship that you list on your CV in this section should be publicly available, if only by request. This is of course the case for published materials. For unpublished materials and papers in preparation, I think the best practice is that you should make them available upon request. Thus, it is best not to list something until it is in state where you are ready to share it.
New contributor
add a comment |
I want to second the idea that your "Publications" or "Scholarship" section of your CV should have subsections. Typically, there would be separate subsections something along these lines: books and book chapters; peer-reviewed journal articles; peer-reviewed conference proceedings; non-peer-reviewed publications; unpublished manuscripts; manuscripts in preparation.
I also recommend highly that any piece of scholarship that you list on your CV in this section should be publicly available, if only by request. This is of course the case for published materials. For unpublished materials and papers in preparation, I think the best practice is that you should make them available upon request. Thus, it is best not to list something until it is in state where you are ready to share it.
New contributor
I want to second the idea that your "Publications" or "Scholarship" section of your CV should have subsections. Typically, there would be separate subsections something along these lines: books and book chapters; peer-reviewed journal articles; peer-reviewed conference proceedings; non-peer-reviewed publications; unpublished manuscripts; manuscripts in preparation.
I also recommend highly that any piece of scholarship that you list on your CV in this section should be publicly available, if only by request. This is of course the case for published materials. For unpublished materials and papers in preparation, I think the best practice is that you should make them available upon request. Thus, it is best not to list something until it is in state where you are ready to share it.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 1 hour ago
alereraalerera
1362
1362
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
I suggest using subdivisions in your list of publications, for instance:
- Peer-reviewed journal articles
- Peer-reviewed conference articles
- Non-peer reviewed publications
- [edited] Future submissions
@Buffy you're right, I didn't think this through. edited.
– Erwan
1 hour ago
Good, but note to the OP that something like "pending publications" is misleading if the work hasn't been submitted. If you are questioned on it you will be embarrassed (at best).
– Buffy
1 hour ago
add a comment |
I suggest using subdivisions in your list of publications, for instance:
- Peer-reviewed journal articles
- Peer-reviewed conference articles
- Non-peer reviewed publications
- [edited] Future submissions
@Buffy you're right, I didn't think this through. edited.
– Erwan
1 hour ago
Good, but note to the OP that something like "pending publications" is misleading if the work hasn't been submitted. If you are questioned on it you will be embarrassed (at best).
– Buffy
1 hour ago
add a comment |
I suggest using subdivisions in your list of publications, for instance:
- Peer-reviewed journal articles
- Peer-reviewed conference articles
- Non-peer reviewed publications
- [edited] Future submissions
I suggest using subdivisions in your list of publications, for instance:
- Peer-reviewed journal articles
- Peer-reviewed conference articles
- Non-peer reviewed publications
- [edited] Future submissions
edited 1 hour ago
answered 2 hours ago
ErwanErwan
3,5011017
3,5011017
@Buffy you're right, I didn't think this through. edited.
– Erwan
1 hour ago
Good, but note to the OP that something like "pending publications" is misleading if the work hasn't been submitted. If you are questioned on it you will be embarrassed (at best).
– Buffy
1 hour ago
add a comment |
@Buffy you're right, I didn't think this through. edited.
– Erwan
1 hour ago
Good, but note to the OP that something like "pending publications" is misleading if the work hasn't been submitted. If you are questioned on it you will be embarrassed (at best).
– Buffy
1 hour ago
@Buffy you're right, I didn't think this through. edited.
– Erwan
1 hour ago
@Buffy you're right, I didn't think this through. edited.
– Erwan
1 hour ago
Good, but note to the OP that something like "pending publications" is misleading if the work hasn't been submitted. If you are questioned on it you will be embarrassed (at best).
– Buffy
1 hour ago
Good, but note to the OP that something like "pending publications" is misleading if the work hasn't been submitted. If you are questioned on it you will be embarrassed (at best).
– Buffy
1 hour ago
add a comment |
I recommend to take a positive attitude and just list them in sequence (i.e. reverse chronological, right up front, along with the rest) and say "in preparation for J. Appl. Phys." or whatever journal is planned. Use your common sense. But if you publish all the time in J. Appl. Phys. and know the paper meets the subject and quality hurdles, fine, list that. If you seriously think it is a Science/Nature/Phys Rev paper, than list that. I'm going to assume you are an accomplished paper writer and getting publisheder. Or well on your way to being there. So this should not be rocket science to know where you plan to submit. And you should be submitting to places you plan to get accepted at (not chasing rainbows or submitting junk).
Given that you say "in preparation" or "submitted" or whatever qualifier, it's OBVIOUS that the paper may never get finished (or might evolve, split, merge, etc.) Even "in press" still has some wiggle room in that there is a remote possibility it shifts venue or the like (I mean it's not in the archived literature yet). So what. Not a big deal. Note, I see many CVs on the web that have this exact structure. The simple caveat is plenty. You don't need to obsess about different sections or the like.
The other, not insignificant, benefit is that it concentrates your mind. And makes you more likely to finish, submit, get published. Because you have identified the target.
New contributor
To my mind, "in press at X" is much more impressive (sorry) than "in preparation for X." The in press paper has been reviewed and accepted, so the journal name carries some weight. For things that are in preparation or submitted, the title may be informative, but the journal choice is...aspirational: reformatting a paper for a high profile journal isn't usually the hard part of publishing there. "Under Review" is in the middle, since your paper has usually been evaluated, at least by an editor, but perhaps not completely.
– Matt
4 mins ago
add a comment |
I recommend to take a positive attitude and just list them in sequence (i.e. reverse chronological, right up front, along with the rest) and say "in preparation for J. Appl. Phys." or whatever journal is planned. Use your common sense. But if you publish all the time in J. Appl. Phys. and know the paper meets the subject and quality hurdles, fine, list that. If you seriously think it is a Science/Nature/Phys Rev paper, than list that. I'm going to assume you are an accomplished paper writer and getting publisheder. Or well on your way to being there. So this should not be rocket science to know where you plan to submit. And you should be submitting to places you plan to get accepted at (not chasing rainbows or submitting junk).
Given that you say "in preparation" or "submitted" or whatever qualifier, it's OBVIOUS that the paper may never get finished (or might evolve, split, merge, etc.) Even "in press" still has some wiggle room in that there is a remote possibility it shifts venue or the like (I mean it's not in the archived literature yet). So what. Not a big deal. Note, I see many CVs on the web that have this exact structure. The simple caveat is plenty. You don't need to obsess about different sections or the like.
The other, not insignificant, benefit is that it concentrates your mind. And makes you more likely to finish, submit, get published. Because you have identified the target.
New contributor
To my mind, "in press at X" is much more impressive (sorry) than "in preparation for X." The in press paper has been reviewed and accepted, so the journal name carries some weight. For things that are in preparation or submitted, the title may be informative, but the journal choice is...aspirational: reformatting a paper for a high profile journal isn't usually the hard part of publishing there. "Under Review" is in the middle, since your paper has usually been evaluated, at least by an editor, but perhaps not completely.
– Matt
4 mins ago
add a comment |
I recommend to take a positive attitude and just list them in sequence (i.e. reverse chronological, right up front, along with the rest) and say "in preparation for J. Appl. Phys." or whatever journal is planned. Use your common sense. But if you publish all the time in J. Appl. Phys. and know the paper meets the subject and quality hurdles, fine, list that. If you seriously think it is a Science/Nature/Phys Rev paper, than list that. I'm going to assume you are an accomplished paper writer and getting publisheder. Or well on your way to being there. So this should not be rocket science to know where you plan to submit. And you should be submitting to places you plan to get accepted at (not chasing rainbows or submitting junk).
Given that you say "in preparation" or "submitted" or whatever qualifier, it's OBVIOUS that the paper may never get finished (or might evolve, split, merge, etc.) Even "in press" still has some wiggle room in that there is a remote possibility it shifts venue or the like (I mean it's not in the archived literature yet). So what. Not a big deal. Note, I see many CVs on the web that have this exact structure. The simple caveat is plenty. You don't need to obsess about different sections or the like.
The other, not insignificant, benefit is that it concentrates your mind. And makes you more likely to finish, submit, get published. Because you have identified the target.
New contributor
I recommend to take a positive attitude and just list them in sequence (i.e. reverse chronological, right up front, along with the rest) and say "in preparation for J. Appl. Phys." or whatever journal is planned. Use your common sense. But if you publish all the time in J. Appl. Phys. and know the paper meets the subject and quality hurdles, fine, list that. If you seriously think it is a Science/Nature/Phys Rev paper, than list that. I'm going to assume you are an accomplished paper writer and getting publisheder. Or well on your way to being there. So this should not be rocket science to know where you plan to submit. And you should be submitting to places you plan to get accepted at (not chasing rainbows or submitting junk).
Given that you say "in preparation" or "submitted" or whatever qualifier, it's OBVIOUS that the paper may never get finished (or might evolve, split, merge, etc.) Even "in press" still has some wiggle room in that there is a remote possibility it shifts venue or the like (I mean it's not in the archived literature yet). So what. Not a big deal. Note, I see many CVs on the web that have this exact structure. The simple caveat is plenty. You don't need to obsess about different sections or the like.
The other, not insignificant, benefit is that it concentrates your mind. And makes you more likely to finish, submit, get published. Because you have identified the target.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 1 hour ago
guestguest
1
1
New contributor
New contributor
To my mind, "in press at X" is much more impressive (sorry) than "in preparation for X." The in press paper has been reviewed and accepted, so the journal name carries some weight. For things that are in preparation or submitted, the title may be informative, but the journal choice is...aspirational: reformatting a paper for a high profile journal isn't usually the hard part of publishing there. "Under Review" is in the middle, since your paper has usually been evaluated, at least by an editor, but perhaps not completely.
– Matt
4 mins ago
add a comment |
To my mind, "in press at X" is much more impressive (sorry) than "in preparation for X." The in press paper has been reviewed and accepted, so the journal name carries some weight. For things that are in preparation or submitted, the title may be informative, but the journal choice is...aspirational: reformatting a paper for a high profile journal isn't usually the hard part of publishing there. "Under Review" is in the middle, since your paper has usually been evaluated, at least by an editor, but perhaps not completely.
– Matt
4 mins ago
To my mind, "in press at X" is much more impressive (sorry) than "in preparation for X." The in press paper has been reviewed and accepted, so the journal name carries some weight. For things that are in preparation or submitted, the title may be informative, but the journal choice is...aspirational: reformatting a paper for a high profile journal isn't usually the hard part of publishing there. "Under Review" is in the middle, since your paper has usually been evaluated, at least by an editor, but perhaps not completely.
– Matt
4 mins ago
To my mind, "in press at X" is much more impressive (sorry) than "in preparation for X." The in press paper has been reviewed and accepted, so the journal name carries some weight. For things that are in preparation or submitted, the title may be informative, but the journal choice is...aspirational: reformatting a paper for a high profile journal isn't usually the hard part of publishing there. "Under Review" is in the middle, since your paper has usually been evaluated, at least by an editor, but perhaps not completely.
– Matt
4 mins ago
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e)
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom))
StackExchange.using('gps', function() StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', location: 'question_page' ); );
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
;
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
);
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%2f127814%2ftitle-of-papers-that-have-not-been-submitted-to-a-venue%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');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e)
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom))
StackExchange.using('gps', function() StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', location: 'question_page' ); );
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
;
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
);
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');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e)
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom))
StackExchange.using('gps', function() StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', location: 'question_page' ); );
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
;
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
);
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');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e)
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom))
StackExchange.using('gps', function() StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', location: 'question_page' ); );
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
;
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
);
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
"Manuscripts in preparation" is pretty much the standard way AFAIK.
– 299792458
1 hour ago