Talk:Academic conference

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Organizations. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

This article is part of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of education and education-related topics. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to featured and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.

Portal

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

[edit] What about poster sessions?

it's rare to find conferences without them.

Then be bold and write an article on poster sessions.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 23:29, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi, is there anybody know how to creat a website for an academic conference? I'm stuck on this task!

Hi, is there anybody know how to creat a website for an academic conference? I'm stuck on this task!

[edit] examples and definitions

Can anyone explain the differences between

Nope - and I work in this area! It's been carried across through many revisions without anyone questioning it.

Can anyone define the differences between

or should they be treated as synonyms. ? DGG 04:11, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

They're synonyms

[edit] History

I'd love to know more about the HISTORY of academic conferences.

This article needs serious expantion. I'd love to have a list of academic conferences :) History is interesting, too. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 19:19, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] advertising?

why is the latest one more of an advertisement than the other two.?

[edit] Spam links

This page seems to have an extraordinary number of external links. If these links all contain material relevant to the article why isn't the material included in the article rather than direct linking to these services/websites? -- timdew (^Talk) 09:08, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Why are you deleting only certain links and not all of them? If you want to be correct you must delete all of the spam links or let all of them list their websites! cwfrei 16:15, 20 October 2006

perhaps you'd like to try that yourself, I've just been stopping anon-ip users adding even more links whilst waiting for the other editors on here to come to an agreement on which others should be removed. --timdew (^Talk) 20:06, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I would certainly allow these companies to add links to their respective websites. The industry is so diverse and speciallized so potential viewers of this page surely want to get an overview of possible companies who can assist them in proceeding abstract or/and full paper as well as posters. cwfrei 14:51, 23 October 2006

this is an encylcopedia not a web directory -- timdew (^Talk) 17:23, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

If it concerns a notable company that has actualy worked on major conferences, and if that can be told from their website, it is appropriate to link to them here. The comanies that have been listed here are not all of the same type.

I am perfectly willing to check each one, see if it is real, and try to determine what it does, & say that neutrally in a word or two. I have no particular vested interest in any of them, or even with the whole category. It would be of value to many users to see the variety of functions that are performed--obviously this should go in the article eventually, but at least we can keep the links. This is appropriate to WP: there are tens of thousands of such links for commercial organizations. They are part of the RW. DGG 04:57, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

cwfrei's comments are disingenuous. He's the sales manager of an abstract management company. This is a commercial marketplace like any other. Would spam links to Ford or GM be acceptable in an article about cars?

As it happens, there is a long multi-part article for both ford and GM, and among the pages linking to them is "automobile." DGG 04:21, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I added a section "Conference Resources" under external links, then added my link to a website containing information on organising a conference. The website covers all types of conferences so I also posted the link in business conferences. The content is purely informational and free to read. There is no purchase necessary whatsoever. I can't see why this is deemed "inappropriate". Why was this removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by FelixWriter (talk • contribs) 13:26, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

As mentioned in the links posted on your talk page, Wikipedia is not a promotional vehicle. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:56, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What about comitees???

It would be very nice to explain what the typicall structure of the bodies involved in organising a conference are. Howcome the word "comitee" doese not appear on the page? It should be explained what the comitees are (programm, steering and organising comitees, others?).--Powo 11:25, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Detecting Scam Conferences

It would be good to add some text to this article about how to know if a conference is worth attending. I get a lot of invitations to conferences that all seem to be sponsored by an organization that, on closer inspection, exists solely for the purpose of holding conferences. The names of these events certainly look interesting; doing a quick web search reveals that many individuals from academic and research organizations have participated in the past. Doing a web search on the names with the word scam attached, however, shows that these events are in fact not quite what they seem.

Research funding is tight, and preparing a paper or poster for a conference, then traveling to the conference, is expensive. It's a real shame to think how much money is spent on bogus conferences; it would be very helpful if we could encourage people to stick with meetings that are sponsored by legitimate research and academic organizations.

TechNaN (talk) 17:43, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I think that's a very important addition to make. Here are a couple of sources for it: [1] [2]. It seems hard to find others because i) there probably aren't many, other than blogs which are not great sources for wikipedia ii) there isn't one standard term for them and iii) many of the top links returned in searches are to pages defending certain junk conferences, set up by the same people who run the conferences Housecarl (talk) 22:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Those are good examples. I've added them to the article. Probably needs internal links to SCIGen as well. andy (talk) 23:05, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with doing it this way--disagree to the extent that I have removed the links. This would have to be done as a properly sourced section for NPOV. DGG (talk) 23:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

On mature reflection I think you may be right. Maybe I was too enthusiastic. There's already the basis of an entire article in SCIgen, Sokal affair and other places, but I'm not sure about NPOV - who's to say what's a scam and what isn't. Any thoughts? andy (talk) 23:20, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

scam is a pretty strong word, and there are degrees of quality in conferences as in other things. The term can be used all too easily for something promotional but nonetheless of some value. I think the use here was over-rhetorical, and the best thing to do is to add further general discussion about the features of academic conferences, which will provide information for people to judge. DGG (talk) 03:52, 13 August 2008 (UTC)