• Options
• Login
• Desktop Style

[split] Questions about academic publication of Voynich papers

• Index

  • The Voynich Ninja
  • Voynich Research
  • Voynich Talk
  • [split] Questions about academic publication of Voynich papers
• [split] Questions about academic publication of Voynich papers

• RE: Naibbe cipher paper

  N._N. > 30-11-2025, 09:00 PM

  For all your questions, Rafal, I would suggest comparing these aspects in other recent publications in the journal
  
  "I" should not make or break the review, but it hardly helps to make your article look more academic. Weird phrasing to avoid "I" might be just as bad, though. "We" is outdated in my opinion, unless you actually have a co-author. In other words, it's difficult.
  
  The thing with internet resources is: You do not want the reviewer to wonder how reputable the source for one of your key claims is. Therefore, it is best to avoid any independent blogs, unfortunately, even if their contents might be more up-to-date and rigorously checked than the 1890s book that can be a 'proper' source depending on the subject. Any institutional website, however, should be fine: research libraries, universities, academic platforms etc. in most contexts, established media in some, everything else only with good reasoning. But you should of course always try to get to the source material (i.e. an academic paper/book). Also, avoid google books or similar databases if possible, provide a permanent link to the repository of a research library instead. 
  
  Using non-English sources is actually a plus, particularly if your reviewers are aware of relevant publications in your field in other languages, then it might be even necessary in some cases. It's a regular complaint by Spanish, French or German-speaking academics that Anglophone researchers ignore foreign-language material. 
  
  

  (30-11-2025, 08:13 PM)obelus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

  (30-11-2025, 01:49 PM)Rafal Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.more details about writing articles for Cryptologia

  
  Reputable journals provide detailed "Instructions for authors" at their websites.  For Cryptologia, see
  
  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
  
  This page links further to document templates, the Taylor & Francis style guide, their chatbot authorship principles, etc.  Manuscripts that scrupulously follow posted editorial policies have a head start with editors and reviewers.  Where serious-minded questions remain, it is normal to communicate with editorial staff by email.

  
  To add to this: You can significantly simplify this by using a reference manager such as Zotero (there are others as well, but i am not aware of any other freeware). There are tools to streamline the whole process from importing citations from library catalogues to inserting the footnote in the right style.

• RE: Naibbe cipher paper

  bi3mw > 30-11-2025, 09:15 PM

  (30-11-2025, 09:00 PM)N._N. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.You can significantly simplify this by using a reference manager such as Zotero (there are others as well, but i am not aware of any other freeware).

  
  There is also Citavi, but I'm not sure if it's free.

• RE: [split] Questions about academic publication of Voynich papers

  Koen G > 30-11-2025, 09:51 PM

  (Thread split)
  
  About references to amateur research, I think any reviewer who knows even the slightest bit about Voynich research, will also realize that the field has been carried by amateur/independent researchers for decades. So it might be exceptional in this regard. For example, Bowern and Lindemann's paper "The Linguistics of the Voynich Manuscript" has Rene's website, Stolfi's website, my "herculeaf" blog, some paper at ixoloxi.com (now defunct link?)...
  
  I think as long as your research isn't only some guy's blog (or your own blog), then it should all be fine.

• RE: [split] Questions about academic publication of Voynich papers

  ReneZ > 01-12-2025, 01:43 AM

  The question of references to internet pages will be handled differently by different publishers.
  
  Papers specifically about the Voynich MS should be judged more from the perspective that there are far more online sources than printed sources, so it is likely to be more acceptable, but this will gradually change. 
  
  I've had a few references to my pages in historical papers not related to the Voynich MS, but these are rare, and viewed more critically, again depending on the publisher.
  
  

  (30-11-2025, 09:51 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I think as long as your research isn't only some guy's blog (or your own blog), then it should all be fine.

  
  Of course, references to your own work don't really count in more critical reviews. Having only references to your own work is not appreciated.

• RE: [split] Questions about academic publication of Voynich papers

  N._N. > 01-12-2025, 06:43 PM

  (01-12-2025, 01:43 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The question of references to internet pages will be handled differently by different publishers.

  
  
  I think you can go even further here: They will be handled differently by different reviewers. I have never received a publisher's guidelines in that regard as either author or reviewer and have never heard of a desk rejection based on such an aspect. Therefore, the paper will probably end up with someone who may or may not actually be familiar with the particular topic of research, who receives no pay or recognition for their review and who has little incentive to dedicate more than the absolute minimum of time to it. Finding questionable sources is an easy way of making a decision if the gut feeling is mostly skeptical. 
  If your research, style etc. are impeccable to the degree that the review is essentially a formality with the journal in question (which may be the case with well-established scholars such as C. Bowern, even in double-blind review), these aspects are of course less relevant.
• Next Oldest Next Newest