Posted by: Jeremy Fox | May 15, 2011

Why my papers are like fine wine

Because they’re mostly not cited often, indicating that they can only be appreciated by a cultivated elite. If everybody and their mother was citing me, that would mean my papers were the scientific equivalent of Two Buck Chuck.

At least, that’s what I like to tell myself. And my Head of Department.

p.s. This thought opens a whole universe of new adjectives to describe my work.

p.p.s. I’m actually more of a beer drinker, so I prefer to think my papers are more like this than like this.


  1. […] An old humorous post, which actually has a semi-serious point to do with the use of citation metrics to evaluate scientific papers and authors. If you believe in bandwagons, then you should believe that sometimes being well-cited is a bad thing (because it just indicates that the author is riding a bandwagon). Share this:FacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. […]

  2. I have definitely read some papers that are fruit forward.

    • I’ve read some that are reminiscent of “horse blankets” (which apparently is an legit wine-describing adjective)

  3. […] my old humorous post on why my papers are like fine wine got me thinking about wine tastings. Wine tastings are often done blind so that the tasters […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: