text:
Re-citing a math theorem with errors
A follow-up question to this: Citing a math theorem with errors
Let's say a paper A has some error in a proof of a theorem and then I publish a paper B citing the theorem and its proof and also indicate the error in the proof and provide a corrected proof.
And now say I want to use this theorem in paper A for another paper C, what do I do? (Let's say the paper wasn't corrected.)

Copy all the stuff I said in my previous paper B to my new paper C, as if paper B never existed. (assume paper B is otherwise irrelevant to paper C.)
Cite both papers A and B.
Cite only B, since it also has a citation of A.
Other?

Please don't engage in edit wars. This question has been locked for cooldown.

I would recommend citing both your previous paper, and the other one, as well, explaining the genesis of the result correctly proven in your previous paper. That way someone just looking at the bibliography (without following the chain of past references!) has a better idea what's going on.
Sure, either way you are probably avoiding any charge of not giving credit, etc., but you're not explaining things as you (easily) could if you don't mention the other paper.
Further, just on appearances alone, you look more credible when you cite other people, not just yourself. :)  At the very least, it shows that you are not a solipsist. :)

Also follow-up: if I cite this theorem in another paper D, then what do I do? paper E? paper F? (like even up to paper F, there's no correction published for paper A. Maybe author is dead.)

Regarding your follow-up: even when the correction itself becomes "old news" (which is non-trivial to judge...), I'd tend to cite the original + my correction of it. Not create a long, unhelpful (misleading) chain of backward references. When it's so-old news that everyone knows its story, and it's become folkloric, sure, you can stop citing. Still, sometimes people are not aware that various "modern" concepts may have arisen a looooong time ago. :)

For a/the thing already set up in A and B, even if cited in C, if paper D does not use anything else from C, just cite A and B. In particular, if the citation is in reference to that particular result, citing A and B correctly explains where it came from. To my taste, piling up chains of references is at best unhelpful, and sometimes is like playing the game "telephone". But tastes vary.


text:
Citing your own stackexchange post?
Let's say I answer some question, either someone else's or my own (eg this, this or this), on, say, maths se. Then later say I have a class that gives a certain homework and for 1 of the problems in the homework and I decide to use a fact or proof that comes from my answer on the maths se question.

If for some weird reason I cannot find this extremely elementary fact or proof elsewhere on the Internet or in several books I've read, then like what, I have to cite it?

If so and if I use an alias on stackexchange, then do I have to say that it's me? Or can I just pretend it's someone else and cite that anonymous person? (In which case...like...what happens if it's revealed that I am the anonymous person even though I have cited correctly?)

What about research in general, like, say, after you've already gotten a PhD? Eg Does Terry Tao have to cite anything e says on overflow, stackex or wordpress?

These questions might be weird. Actually, I'm not quite sure what's the right question to ask here. Currently, the questions seem to fall under general ideas of self-plagiarism or citing stackexchange. Idk. Personally I prefer to just read other questions already asked about on acad se, even if they're not directly equivalent to the above questions.

What is permissible for class work is up to your professor. You can't get permission here for anything. Ask the instructor.

@Buffy hmmm...what about research in general like after you've already gotten a PhD say?

Probably not, since anyone can write anything here. Find the original.

@Buffy did you not see the 'If for some weird reason I cannot find this extremely elementary fact or proof elsewhere on the Internet or in several books I've read' ? eg this or this

@Buffy wait it sounds like you're saying i cannot cite not because of ethics but because of credibility...? what? but in case of credibility, when is maths, at least on se maybe not wiki, proofwiki, reddit, groupprops, etc actually not credible?

@BLCL, you can reasonably include the proof in the new document, and note that it came from the Stackexchange post. If the only source you can find for the fact is your own post, then there's less need to cite it, but you might want to just to cover your bases. When in doubt, talk to a professor or advisor.

@JoshuaZ well the professor or advisor does cover the if you're a student thing. if you've already gotten a phd, then what ask a colleague? I mean is this really like a base-to-base casis?

@BCLC Yes, and if you had a PhD, then your old advisor can still help answer questions about how to navigate things.

@JoshuaZ thanks. post as answer?

Please do not edit meta commentary into your question; the question should just be a question, not a comment on how the question has been received, nor a solicitation for anything besides answers to the question.

Let us first check whether not citing the Stackexchange answer could be plagiarism. Since it is your own answer, it cannot. (However, if the question is by someone else it might be best to cite, as the question itself might constitute an intellectual contribution to the answer). If it is not apparent for someone seeing your name and your stackexchange nick that these both refer to the same person, you should cite already to avoid the appearance of plagiarism (and, unless there are strong reasons against it, mention that it's you).
Next on the list, self-plagiarism (badly named, not a case of plagiarism). This concept applies only within formal publications and/or within coursework, so we're clear here.
The final thing to check is whether you need to reference the Stackexchange answer to give proper context of the work to the reader. I'd personally would cite Stackexchange  if writing the answer there was an integral part of the development of the paper. If, on the other hand, its just a random accident that some calculation is relevant both in my paper and my answer; if I've already mentioned a proposition from a work in progress on Stackexchange prior to publishing it, I probably wouldn't (unless its about also crediting the asker, see first paragraph).

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

sort: votes


text:
Is it appropriate to give a student a "negative grade" (fewer than zero points) for a small portion of the overall grade?
I teach a course where attendance is required. The syllabus says "Every unexcused absence will result in a deduction of one point from the attendance grade". The total number of points for attendance is 3. Thus if a student has perfect attendance, they will receive 3/3 for the attendance grade, if a student has two unexcused absences, their attendance grade will be 1/3, etc. The school rule also implied that any student who has four or more unexcused absences should drop this course. So when the syllabus policy was made, the case where a student has four or more absences was not considered.
There is a student who has 6 unexcused absences. By right he should drop this course but for whatever reason he has persuaded the dean to allow him to remain in this course. In this case, should I give him -3/3 for his attendance grade based on the syllabus policy "Every unexcused absence will result in a deduction of one point". Or should I give him 0/3? I think this student deserves a lower attendance grade than someone with three unexcused absences, who will receive 0/3.
Canvas allows me to technically enter a negative grade, but I am not sure if it will be a good idea. What are some possible consequences of entering a negative grade?
Clarifications:

There are 100 total points in the class, so an otherwise-perfect student with a 0/3 on attendance would receive 97% (and -3/3 would be 94%).
The student has a remarkably good attitude despite the absences (this may have affected the dean's thinking).

Comments only tangential to the question have been moved to chat; please do not continue the discussion here. Before posting a comment below this one, please review the purposes of comments. Comments that do not request clarification or suggest improvements usually belong as an answer, on [meta], or in [chat]. Comments continuing discussion may be removed.

Can I clarify - if the syllabus says the penalty is a deduction of one point from the attendance grade does it not imply the deductions are limited to the available marks for that criteria? Suppose the syllabus said every unexcused absence will result in a deduction of one point from your overall grade, it would be clear that you could deduct the student all the way to zero. If this was intended, then it would not make sense to have a separate pool of marks for an 'attendance grade'.

@fabspro, the syllabus is unclear about it. However, I, as the instructor, reserve the right to edit the syllabus as needed. I could edit the syllabus now and clarify this.

@Zuriel Editing the syllabus mid-course to change a policy seems like a poor idea; for a student who perceives the policy differently, they would see this as a change not a clarification. If it's unclear, that's your fault, not theirs.

@Zuriel I think what you have said hits the nail on the head. If you want to deduct more than three marks, a change to the syllabus would be the way to go - it would (presumably) go through a process of review and then be officially communicated to the students. I would ask however, is attendance really an effective way to decide if a student has learned the material and should pass a subject? Can't you think of a more effective way to actually assess knowledge and ability, instead of just rewarding simple attendance?

And @Zuriel I would say the syllabus is crystal clear - marks can only be deducted from the attendance grade. Otherwise, why would the syllabus even have an attendance grade?

I'd recommend that you not lower the grade below zero (0). This seems to represent "lost all points for this category", which seems roughly appropriate.
Moreover, I think in cases that are in a gray zone like this, you're better off for multiple reasons erring on the side of being charitable towards the student. The fact that you're asking here indicates there's at least some vagueness to the policy. It could result in a student dispute that will be a drag on your time. You've already got a dean involved who's signaled they're willing to go to bat for the student. Etc. Probably others can explicate other reasons, as well.
Even though I'm considered among the strictest graders at my institution/department, nevertheless, in a case like this I think you're better off not making up a novel never-before-seen grade.

(+1) for including both reasons (first 2 paragraphs). The first reason is consistent with the often-made caveat that students earn points rather than lose points (so they earn points based on attendance) and the second reason seems common sense to me if the teacher doesn't want to alienate students and face reversal (as I suspect will be likely) when the student appeals to a higher authority.

Yeah, negative points are so unusual that I would consider them not allowed unless set out in the syllabus.

"Drag on your time" is crucial here. As they say, "is the juice worth the squeeze"? What is the impact to the student? What are the potential impacts to you?

Your student is being graded on a lot more than just attendance, so I assume the purpose of the attendance grade here is primarily to encourage attendance, rather than that attendance is absolutely necessary for the content of the course (for example a course based primarily on discussion between students is basically meaningless without attendance).
Setting their attendance grade to zero sounds sufficient to me. If they're able to do well on the other 97% without attending classes, they've found some other way to learn the course material. If not, well, they're already being penalized for the lack of attendance in other ways.
I'd also keep in mind that a student missing a lot of sessions may be dealing with issues that you are not privy to (maybe the dean is, maybe not), involving their own health or someone else's health, needing to watch/assist a child or elder or person with a disability, or needing to make other tough choices between your class and something else. I don't think it's necessarily up to you to decide whether their reasons are 'good enough' and certainly not your right to know what they are, but if they're making other efforts towards the course besides being physically present at a certain time that should count for something, and you kind of just have to assume they've weighed the consequences they know about and understand and try not to create new ones that would be unexpected.

+1 for the last paragraph. I started to write something like it but couldn't keep it polite enough.

That last paragraph is golden, and our asker should bare it in mind when assessing whether docking points for attendance at all is really legitimate.

@JackAidley Sure, though another commenter linked to https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/65868/63475 - I do think it's worth considering whether grading attendance makes sense, but don't think it's without value. A couple percentage points to encourage attendance seems among the more reasonable policies to me. I'm less sure about the 4 absences = drop policy, but it seems like the administration is flexible with that part.

Regarding the last paragraph, the deduction of points is for "unexcused absence". I would think that surely most if not all reasons you mention are actually absences with a valid excuse

@Ivo Policies on excused vs unexcused absences vary quite a bit, and may or may not be reasonable in all circumstances, so I left those concepts out of the discussion. It would be reasonable, though, for a student to see the 3 point policy and not bother to get a 4th absence excused because it carries no consequences, except the forced withdrawal that they did get excused in some sense by going to the dean.

@BryanKrause Not to mention, attendance grades are basically free points just for showing up.  If you are struggling with the material, this could make the difference between a poor grade and the next grade up, just because you put in the effort to attend.

First, as I've stated elsewhere, your students are adults, and for that reason, the whole idea of "excused" versus "unexcused" absences, and grading based on attendance, is generally a bad one in the context of higher education. So I'd say you should not deduct any points for absences, but if you're going to deduct points, at least deduct as few points as possible. Giving 0/3 points for attendance instead of -3/3 would be more in keeping with this general philosophy.
Second, I think your "negative points" framing isn't actually the most correct way to look at the situation. It sounds like in your grading policy you've allotted 97 out of 100 grade points to "performance", and 3 points out of 100 to "attendance". Your idea of giving "negative points" in the attendance component is really a suggestion to have someone's lack of attendance eat into their performance-related grade points. That is effectively a penalty rather than a grade. If someone's performance grade was 97/97, they deserve to get those 97 points. You've basically declared that demonstrating correct knowledge of the course material will result in those points being awarded, but now you're proposing to retroactively change that and have a lack of attendance negatively affect the performance component of the grade. That's not logical, and does not seem like an appropriate thing to do. Students deserve to have clear goalposts to aim for that are not moved after the fact. And as @DanielR.Collins says in his excellent answer, leaning towards a charitable interpretation of your policies in cases of ambiguity is generally a good idea.

There is a student who has 6 unexcused absences. By right he should drop this course but for whatever reason he has persuaded the dean to allow him to remain in this course.

This is the Dean's problem, not yours.  You need to refer this to the Dean for them to make a policy decision or clarification of this case.
The Dean may be privy to information related to the absences which you are not, but whatever the case, it's their job to clarify the problem.
I think in the absence of guidance to the contrary I would regard the intent to have excused the absences and hence no further punishment is required.  I would suggest you put this to the Dean when asking for clarification as your default position.

Or even whether any deductions at all are required. It seems likely that the Dean may have excused the absences and forgot to mention this to the OP. As you say, the OP can only find out by asking the Dean.

Getting into "negative points" is a super weird territory for grading purposes. I've never even heard of that before. Even if the math works, what does it mean philosophically? That you've....... done worse, than you could possibly do? I don't understand. I also agree with sentiments expressed in the comments: grades at the end of the day are warranted with strength/merit, not attendance. If someone can make a 97 in the course or a 95 in the course and miss 4 days, then I do not see why it is bad for them to do so. I know, I know, different schools have their own policies, but if attendance is the biggest issue we can find with the student, then I look at that as just fine. Note, that the opposite is true as well: if you miss 4 days, and then do not do well on the material covered on those 4 days, then that's the student's fault, not yours. Part of academia is being treated like an adult in the sense that people aren't going to hold your hand and look after you, in many instances. This is one of those instances.

Negative marking can be used as a strong incentive to not take an effort/reward tradeoff.  eg if a project is worth 5% of the end of year mark but will take 100 hours to complete, some might choose to save the 100 hours and lose the 5%.  A penalty from the final year mark >>5% is a strong incentive not to do that.

@user1908704 Yes, but from a course design standpoint, I don't think an instructor should assign a 100 hour project that is only worth 5% of the grade. Except for academic dishonesty, I'm not sure I can think of a case where I would want a grading scheme to present that issue.

Negative marking is most commonly used in multiple choice examinations, to avoid them being multiple guess examinations.

Negative grades don't make sense. In fact, they ironically make less than no sense. If I get a 0 on a math exam, it means I didn't get any questions correct. If I made a -50%, does this mean that I've unlearned half of the material on the exam? It doesn't make sense! In academia, you have to earn points. You don't begin with a 100 and go down from there, you start with 0 and go up from there. Negative grading, short of better argumentation, is confusing, and should never be implemented.

@JaredGreathouse negative points could totally make sense. A zero would indicate no knowledge of a subject. A negative score would indicate having incorrect knowledge that you believe to be true. For fields like civil engineering that could be a very important distinction, where overconfidence in one's own knowledge could lead to serious harm

@SteveCox yeah this is practically true, but this is just a longer way of saying "the wrong answer". If a student puts 2 as the answer to the square root of 8, this is literally incorrect knowledge that they believe to be true. Is the severity of the consequences the deciding factor here? Anyways, in real life you don't get negative points, you just get "the wrong answer".

When you say, "the total number of points for attendance is 3", it is absolutely not the same thing as, "I will deduct a point for every day you miss." In the latter case, there is not reason to specify any number. Taking more points is not fair to students because it does not follow your syllabus. Perhaps a bit capricious too, and it seems like you are singling out one student with a special policy.

Your syllabus says attendance is worth 3 points, and the student read that and determined, for whatever reason, "I don't need those 3 points".
Now you're talking about changing the rules, and taking points away from the student in other areas (whether you think of assigning negative points this way or not, this is what you'd effectively be doing).
You should clearly stick to the syllabus, and assign the student a 0 for attendance.  If you don't like that outcome, you can change the syllabus the next time you teach the class.

Well, except the syllabus also says 'miss four classes and you're out', so this argument doesn't hold water, I'm afraid.

@DavidA.Craven -- I don't believe the syllabus says that.  "So when the syllabus policy was made, the case where a student has four or more absences was not considered."

I agree it looks less clear-cut than I originally read. But if someone had to get dispensation from the Dean to continue the course after six UAs, I would guess it's certainly considered a rule by everyone, so what to do if you have 6 out of 3 allowed UAs is far from clear.

@DavidA.Craven -- and "less clear-cut" in a syllabus often pushes the decision in the students' favor

"Every unexcused absence will result in a deduction of one point from
the attendance grade"

At 0 points, they have no attendance points left to be deducted. If you deduct points into the negative, you are taking points away from other categories.
Since you do not know the circumstances of the absences and don't need to (the dean has vouched for the student), I don't think you need to worry about minus points.

What do you hope to achieve by negative points?
If attendance can go negative then essentially your attendance grade could be rescored as a positive number but with attendance taking a larger percentage of the grade.
So for example: saying attendance is 10% of the grade and you scored a -10% on it and the other 90% of your grade was scored 85% gives you a final grade of (-10%) * 0.1 + (85%)*0.9 = 75.5% (a C+)
You can alternatively look at this as saying attendance is 11.5% of your grade and you scored a 0%. The other 88.5% of your grade was scored 85% giving you a final grade of
(0%)*0.115 + (85%)*0.885 = 75.5225% (a C+)
(for those that want the exact threshold to make them match is 151/170)
I hope you see the point. Negative grades are basically just a way to mislead what the true grading is. Any negative grading scheme can be rescored as a positively graded scheme with different weights (namely increasing the weights wherever the scheme was negative) assuming you have a maximum number of losable points for a particular weight.
Also what is the purpose of the grade? It's a measure of competency (hopefully). So what does it mean to be below 0% competent at something?
Where Negatives Make Sense:
I think in the medical field you can score someone on "did they improve the condition, did they do nothing but pass it along to the right parties, did they actively make the problem worse"
If I had a class on surgery that was hands-on I could see a justified negative grading scheme "-15% student's performance would result in severe complications, not only did they fail the task but the way they performed it caused a rupture to the lung as well"

In my opinion, if you want to give negative points, you should start with them at 0/3 and inform them that they will start getting negative points for more absences. The student may have incurred these additional absences without a full understanding of the consequences for this happening (I don’t think it’s unreasonable to incorrectly interpret your policy (you haven’t made up your mind on your own policy here either!)).
You may want to also ask the dean if the student has an executive functioning disability. Perhaps that was a factor in their decision and could inform your decision too.

No, not with the syllabus as currently written. You said "Every unexcused absence will result in a deduction of one point from the attendance grade" (which is assumed by default to be zero or positive), not the overall grade.

I think that if you give negative points then the total overall possible grade would be the positive opposite of the negative. For example, if you deduct three more points for the other absences then the highest possible grade should be 103. It doesn’t seem fair that someone with perfect attendance only earn 3 points with no chance to gain more, and someone with 6 absences can lose points outside of the allotted attendance grade. As that is not how the class’s grading system is structured, I don’t think it’s logical to go below 0/3.
Since the dean has allowed them to remain in the class, I’d follow that lead and only deduct the three points allowed for attendance.

For the sake of offering a contrary view from what I'm reading in the other answers, I will support the idea of negative points in general.
Not every instructor agrees with the importance of classroom attendance. (There would certainly be a difference between the U.S. and Europe on this question.) I don't want to get into that, but certainly in an American context it's not unusual to require attendance and participation.
I don't believe that just because participation is expected, it therefore needs to be a large fraction of the grade. That flattens out the grades and makes it hard to differentiate students.
I have used negative points in homework grading. (Again there will be different ideas about this, but for me, doing the homework is a fundamental.) So I would give people negative points if they didn't do it, to reflect the importance of the work to the course. That incentivizes students to do the work, without requiring me to have a large fraction of the final grade devoted to homework.
In your particular case, since you didn't indicate that negative points are a possibility in your syllabus, I don't think it's an appropriate thing to do. But you could change your syllabus in the future.

It's polite to make a comment when you downvote, to make clear the nature of the objection.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Does School Ranking Matter for Masters
I am currently an undergraduate at a university whose PhD Physics program is ranked 25. I plan to go into PhD for physics in condensed matter physics; I have applied to PhD programs this year but have been rejected by all of them, including my home university. I thus applied to masters programs for condensed matter physics. I have heard back from one university with acceptance. The school is not a well known university for physics (it only has a masters, no PhD program) and is ranked in the 200s. I plan to get more research experience during my masters. If I accept the offer and complete my masters there and apply to my home university (and similarly ranked schools) for my PhD will these programs frown upon the fact that I went from 25 to 200s? I have done well in my undergrad but will future universities just look at my masters program? It's already difficult to get into good schools and I am not sure if going to masters in this new place will make it more diffucult.
***PS: I have nothing against universities with lower rank. It's been a rough semester in terms of grad school applications (I never thought I would be rejected from my home university and it's making me worried)

How narrow was your search for a doctoral program? Just top 25 or so? Or did you do a broader search?

@Buffy Schools I applied to places with rank 1 to rank 40

It was based on cost, distance, and how much my interests aligned with there's

I can answer only for the US and only tentatively, since I don't know the basis of any rejection. But I think restricting your search to the top 40 schools for a doctorate vs top 200 for an MS is an apples and oranges comparison. I'd suggest that you first (or jointly) broaden your search for a doctoral program, say to all of the R1 universities in the US. Don't try to apply to every one, but cover the range.
Also, for a doctoral program, ignore the cost. You will almost certainly be offered a TA or RA position, which makes the cost 0 and gives you a modest stipend on which it is possible to live.
A MS program is likely to come with no tuition forgiveness and no TA. It leaves you still vulnerable for entry to a doctorate later. If you would be satisfied to end with an MS then it should be fine, but otherwise (again, US) I suggest the doctoral program is probably better. You might even consider broadening the field options a bit. Not history or philosophy, of course, but there are a lot of options in physics that might be "close enough" to get you started on a career.
But, since you were rejected by your home university, you have an opportunity to learn more about exactly why that happened. Depending on that information you might also consider how you would fill any gaps that there might be. Maybe even a "fifth year" project with a professor.
I doubt that the ranking of the school you are considering would have more than a minor effect. Much more would depend on what you do there.

If you did well at a college ranked 25 in your subject matter, applied broadly for a Ph.D. (did you?) only to be rejected everywhere, then I’d start by looking into your application package and strategy first because that is a bit odd: are you sure your letters are good and from the right people, is your statement of purpose well-written and as tailored to where and for what you apply as it should be (have someone read it), etc, etc.
If your Ph.D. application was rejected because of a lack of relevant undergraduate research experience, then going for a masters first might help. Going to a lower-ranked place is not going to hurt you I think, but it’s not clear how much it is going to help you either.
However, as M.Sc. programs tend to be less selective than Ph.D. ones (because they usually help finance a university), to see you rejected again almost everywhere despite what you say are good credentials, there might be something off or at least sub-optimal with your application package (or you simply didn’t apply at enough colleges). You should go over it with someone experienced, like a mentor at your alma mater if you have one.


text:
Has a reference manager ever accidentally shared unpublished data?
I was looking through my reference manager and noticed a box in the 'Details' section which says 'Unpublished work, exclude from online catalogue'.
I was wondering if there was ever a case of a paper ending up publicly available by accident by this method, eg: if a reviewer accidentally made the pdf public through their reference manager.

Do you mean the Public Domain under US law (which can't happen without the copyright owner specifically releasing it or the period of protection running out), or do you mean "publicly available" without the legal connotation? The former can't really happen.

I mean 'publicly available'.

"probably". And that's kinda the full answer, unless somebody comes along who has personally made this mistake, in which case the answer could change to "yes". At the moment I don't feel this is a useful question for the site. If it isn't quite the question that you intended to ask, perhaps you could clarify?

This has happened deliberately, where an informal reviewer made the work of an author public without their authorization. One well-known example is Wallace's twenty-page abstract of what would become known as the theory of Natural Selection, which was mailed to Darwin on June 18, 1858 with a note asking it to be forwarded to Charles Lyell. Instead, Darwin, Lyell and Hooker decided to publish Wallace and Darwin simultaneously so that Darwin wouldn't lose credit for the work he had already put in (and would put into The Origin of Species and other books). This paper was read out to the Linnean Society of London on July 1, not leaving enough time for a letter to be sent back to Wallace in Malaya to check if this was okay. It's pretty clear that Wallace did not intend this manuscript to be published (as per Prof. Charles H. Smith):

For his own part, Wallace later indicated in print on no fewer than four separate occasions that the manuscript he had sent to Darwin had not been intended as finished product: in an 1869 letter to the German biologist Adolf Bernhard Meyer (later reprinted in 1895 in Nature, Volume 52, on page 415), as a note added to the essay when it was reprinted in 1891 in Wallace's Natural Selection and Tropical Nature (on page 27), in the article 'The Dawn of a Great Discovery' in January 1903 (Black and White, Volume 25, on page 78), and in his autobiography My Life in 1905 (Volume 1, on page 363).

The question implies an online reference manager lime Mendeley.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
Professor told me up front that she normally doesn't write letters for students who haven't done as much work with her
I asked a professor for a letter of recommendation for graduate programs and she mentioned that she normally doesn't write letters for people who haven't done research with her. I took advanced classes of hers and did well though, and she agreed to write the letter, although hesitatingly. She mentioned that she normally only writes letters for people she's known for a while, so even though I did well in her coursework, am just now embarking on research with her, and have a history of tutoring for her class, it doesn't seem to be enough in her eyes. She also mentioned that she would have me write most of it and that she would basically just sign off on it.
Is this a warning sign? Should I turn to someone else to write the essay? A lot of the professors I've had left the university or were not full time professors, which is why I don't think they would be good people to ask for letters, so it's really hard for me to find recommenders right now that would be appropriate. Any advice would be appreciated.
Edit: Wanted to clarify that she seems like she had good intentions--she was willing to expand more on my teaching and ability to convey higher level concepts to new students, but that this type of letter is not the kind of letter she normally writes. Having seen the opinions of everyone, what is a good way to gauge whether or not she actually wants to write the letter?

she normally doesn't write letters for people who haven't done research with her — Good for her! — she would have me write most of it and that she would basically just sign off on it — No, no, no, a thousand times no.

Related: http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/16529/is-it-acceptable-to-write-a-reference-letter-for-yourself

@JeffE What level of involvement do you think a good recommender should have? My dept. has been in constant upheaval since I've arrived which is why it's hard for me to find a strong recommender. The only one other professor who has remained in the dept (and I know well) is someone who is a mentor, we've engaged in research discussions and I've also done well in his classes. I've only asked the female professor to write the letter for a specific program, and would be happier to switch to someone else for the other (later) deadlines if others think this would be a better idea.

Both the reluctant one you've already asked, and the mentor you've had discussions with, are good candidates to approach.  You are limited in your options.  These two people, while perhaps not ideal, seem to be the best peaches in your basket.  //  Since she's doing you the courtesy of allowing you to write the draft, perhaps she'll go one step farther and either let you see the final draft before sending it, or tell you if she made any significant changes.  At that point, if you find the letter is actually unhelpful to whatever it is you're applying for, you could then withdraw it.

Suggesting that you write the letter and she will just sign it could be the professor's way to drive home the message that she does not want to write this letter of recommendation. I feel she is really unwilling to write the letter and probably hesitatingly agreed either because you were insistent or because she felt an outright refusal might seem rude. It would be better not to push her to do something that she does not want to. In your place, I would definitely look for another professor.

To clarify, I had asked her after a discussion regarding a research project we're beginning. I don't think I was pushing her--I just asked her quite frankly and she hesitated to think about it, but seeing the responses, I'm not quite sure how I would even go about asking if she was really interested in writing the letter for me. Any advice as to how to ask questions that would give me a better feel for her willingness to help?

It's also possible that she feels that she doesn't know the OP well enough to tell the story they want to tell, and is thus asking the OP to do it. This isn't an uncommon reason.

I also have the same policy for the following fact: doing well in coursework does not necessarily equate to doing well in research; e.g., a student may be very good at passing exams but can't do project work.  I need to see a student in a research setting in order to write a meaningful letter.  Otherwise, the reference letter will simply be a consolidation of what the coursework marks already say.

I have written my own letters many times, and had it explained to me that it's a common courtesy to provide the first draft out of respect for the mentor's time. It also allows you to tailor the focus of the letter to be relevant to your upcoming opportunity (win for you and time saver for your professor). As long as she has the opportunity to edit/add/remove before sending it, this would not concern me.
I would be concerned about her hesitation in writing in the first place. You would have to use your own judgement to discern whether she hesitates to recommend you, or truly hesitated because she is not used to being asked for non-research letters. If you feel good about the work you did, and believe it was valued, write a letter that mentions the specific things you did that make you exceptional. It will remind her about how great you are, while also pointing it out for future prospects. But beware, a hesitant professor may be trying to soften the blow of telling you they would not recommend you highly, for whatever reason. You need to consider those possibilities, or even ask her directly and respectfully.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
Looking for advice about potential post-doc opportunity
I would like to read some opinions about a complex situation regarding a potential postdoc position that I am not 100% sure about how to approach.
As part of my PhD I had to take several courses, six in total. During this period, I experienced a lot of difficulties:

A huge chunk of my funding was removed, not just to me, but to all the grad students of my department as well. This left me with a salary of 650$/month during the last 8 months of my 2nd year as a PhD. While I had savings that allowed me to survive the first months, as my money started to dwindle I had to take measures like eating twice a day and was almost forced to register to the student food bank.
I had a supervisor and a co-supervisor and there was a lot of fighting between them. I felt like I was back in high school with all the gossiping, bullying and similar issues that I witnessed. It was like watching Laurel & Hardy in the 21st century academia.
I think that owing to professional jealousy, my co-supervisor decided to make life miserable for all the students that he shared with my supervisor. He denied access to equipment, delayed the approval of budget for equipment acquisition, berated us at the littlest of details and so on. It was so bad that the Ombusdman, the department chair and a dean of grad studies became involved.
I was an international student that came from a small country and had very few (if any) friends at all in the city where I was doing my PhD. While I tried hard to become involved with people from other backgrounds and work with my colleagues, I always ended up alone doing most of my assignments, study sessions and so on.
My research project was refocused, reoriented a couple of times during my first two years as a PhD, causing me to adjust correspondingly my literature review, research proposal and so on.

Certainly, these circumstances affected me; I became depressed and my motivation went down hard. My academic performance suffered correspondingly and I got a low grade (B-) in a mandatory class, which caused my GPA to go below the minimum required for the program (3.4) and I landed in academic probation. This automatically disqualified me to apply for scholarships, grants, merit-based assistant positions, internships and so on.
However, I was able to overcome all of that, got my GPA back to the minimum acceptable limit, passed my candidacy, final dissertation/viva and got my degree. However, I am now a doctor in a STEM field with some publications in my area of expertise but with a mediocre GPA.
In the last couple of months I was able to get some interviews with a couple of companies that are looking for someone to conduct R&D and have expressed their interest in me. However, these positions are conditioned to get funding through government institutions which is a slightly complex process: it requires a joint grant application from the company and a candidate, which is picked by the company based on an internal selection process. Both the quality of the project, the feasibility of the proposal and the individual qualifications of the candidate are assessed and then it is decided whether or not the application is selected among the pool of applicants.
For one company, I passed the interview stage, the presentation process and the meeting with the senior managers; all them where pleased with the way I conducted myself and decided to select me as their candidate. Although I was initially excited about the proposal, it wasn't clear until the end that the position was conditioned to the approval of the government grant. They did discuss about the fact that external funding was required but only mentioned the specific government agency they were aiming for only after the selection process was finished. Now I feel terrible because I consider that my academic credentials could be a major issue that could cause the rejection of the grant application, even though I have some publications and conferences that could provide some support to my application.
While I mentioned my low GPA during the interview, which I considered kind of odd being an interview for an industrial position, I didn't discuss my academic probation situation. I conducted my own inquiry about this agency and couldn't determine whether or not having that black spot in my transcripts would be a major issue or if it would be only a minor inconvenient. I couldn't find the evaluation criteria used by this agency either, but I know that if an application gets rejected it is accounted for in the total number of times that a company can request this specific funding.
Now I am torn because I know that when I inform the company about this, it will cause them to pick a different candidate.
Any suggestions about what can I do in this scenario?

Does your transcript actually list the academic probation? Does the federal funding agency actually want your transcript or just the final GPA? (or doesn't actually request it at all)

The transcript includes everything: # of terms, academic probation, individual grade and the class average. The federal funding agency requires the official, detailed transcript.

My personal mantra is "full disclosure" on such matters (whenever it makes sense, of course).
IMHO, you should have mentioned the whole situation up front. Because now that will eventually come to light and, following your idea of worst case scenario, the grant can get denied because of that, and that will make you look bad to the company.
Keep in mind that such situations (problems during the phd) are more common than you think and potentially are not that big of a deal... you got the title after all, sometimes that's all that matters...
I see two possible paths once you disclose that situation: 1) They decide that you are not a suitable candidate, which will avoid the whole bad thing I mentioned on the first paragraph or 2) they decide that you are a suitable candidate and to try to stick with you for the grant.
Ideally, you would rather they pick #2, but path #1 is not a bad outcome for you either... its a whole lot better than getting the grant denied afterwards...
Either way, in your position, I would disclose the whole thing right away, apologizing for not doing it sooner...

While I mentioned my low GPA during the interview, which I considered kind of odd being an interview for an industrial position, I didn't
  discuss my academic probation situation.

You informed them of the "low" GPA.  Good enough!  If this mattered very much to them, they could have asked you if there were any repercussions as a result of the "low" GPA.
Of all the skeletons in the closet I can imagine, yours is really a very small skeleton.  However, it is natural that right now, while you are on the edge of your chair about this position, that skeleton is getting larger and larger in  your mind.
Now you need to go for a hike, clean the oven, write some overdue letters to friends and relatives, go to a movie, in short, try to distract yourself from the very natural nerves you are feeling while you wait to find out!


text:
Differences among Doctoral Degrees/titles
I have two colleagues who hold doctoral degrees. They are moving to the US within the next couple months. Both of their doctoral diplomas, one from Europe and the other from South America, literally say: "Doctor of Engineering".
We were discussing about this situation and, although they are doctors, I don't know if it would be "legal" for them to use the PhD letters at the end of their names or if D.Eng would be the adequate choice. So far, they have not been asked to do any kind of nostrification process.
Are there any legal, formal or professional implications associated to this or is it just a matter of putting a set of letter at the end of your name?

EnergyNumbers indicated that it should be Eng. D instead of D.Eng.

An EngD is a different degree to a PhD. If you've got a PhD you can't put EngD after your name, and vice-versa. Both can give you the title "doctor", but they are different doctorates.
If your degree diploma says "Doctor of Engineering", it's very very likely that you can put Eng.D. after your name. But not PhD. (and I've never seen D.Eng after a name, only Eng.D. - but maybe that's UK-specific. I have seen Dr.-Ing. from Germany)

Thanks for clarifying the Eng.D/D.Eng issue. I wasn't sure which was the adequate one.
They both consider that the equivalent degree in the US to theirs is PhD. Hence, they think that it shouldn't be a big deal for them to put PhD as part of their credentials in the presentation cards as well as their resumes.


text:
How to parse "$70,000/yr for 9 months' employment payable over 12 months"?
I have received a job offer for a full-time contract position at a college in the US. The offer says that my salary will be $70,000/year for nine months’ employment payable over a period of twelve months. I received my offer not long ago, and although I will most likely accept the job, I didn't want to ask immediately about salary issues because I didn't want my first interaction after receiving the offer to be about money.
Since I am not familiar with university payment/hiring practices, which one of the following options is the correct one:
a) I will be employed for 9 months, then my salary will be ($70,000*9 months)/(12 months*1/year) =
$52,500/year
And since it is paid over 12-months, then my monthly salary before taxes will be $4,375/month.
b) Or is it simply $70,000/year paid over 12 months, that is, $5,833/month before taxes.
The wording of this is confusing and even my (non-US based) accountant is confused about what the salary will be.
Update: 7 days after posting this question, I have confirmed that the salary is $70k/year.

A third option offered at some institutions is c) $70,000 paid out over 9 months, or $7,778 per month for the nine months of the academic year.  With either (b) or (c) faculty can earn up to 3 months (3 times $7,778) of additional salary for work done during the summer such as teaching summer school courses or working on research grants.

Strongly recommend you clarify exactly what they mean by asking the college itself in writing or email and get a reply in writing or email.  Just because other people think they know what the college means does not the college is not applying it's own meaning.

@Disgruntled Doctor don't forget to accept the answer you're happy with!

When the number of options I have is equal to 1, I don't have much choice.

Can you clarify your edit? You are saying the real answer was neither A nor B and that your total compensation is $60K?

Sorry about that @commscho, it was a typo.

Option B.
Typically this confusing language reflects that you only have to teach for 9 months, and your salary is tied to your teaching responsibilities. So the university gives you $7777/month for 9 months and $0 for the other three. You can then supplement your income for the remaining three months. In particular, many research grants allow you to cover part or all of your own summer salary at your usual rate -- so if you win such a grant, you can actually gross $7777 every month and end up making a total of $93K per year.
In your case (perhaps because it's a teaching college and research grants are unusual?), they will "pay the salary over 12 months," which works out to $5833/month. This will save you the trouble of having to set money aside during the year and use it during the summer.
Note, your college may still require you to be "productive" over the summer (for certain values of "productive"). For that matter, they may provide the opportunity to take on additional paid work (i.e., teaching summer classes).

Many thanks for your clarification. You are correct, it is primarily a teaching college so I don't expect research grants to come flying my way.
I think that this payment setup also allows one to maintain benefits throughout the year.

Note, however, that such colleges, especially prestigious ones, expect you to be "productive" during those months. But you get to define productivity. Sitting on the beach may not be productive. Sitting on the beach writing publishable poetry may be, if, say, literature is your field.

In this case – Shouldn’t this rather be otherwise?

I don't know of any US colleges that leave their regular faculty unpaid for three months. Adjuncts, perhaps, but not regular faculty. You get 1/12 of your annual salary every month, including summer months. It isn't a question of being paid more or less per month. The only issue is whether you have assigned duties or not for a few of those months. So, it is $70,000/12 per month for 12 months. Less taxes, of course. Don't forget the taxes. And you may need to contribute to your health plan, and may need to contribute to a retirement plan. Typically those three are shared expenses.

But you are probably allowed to take in additional funds/stipends during the "summer" even from the university itself, if you take on additional duties.

Wrzlprmft, Buffy -- thanks, updated my answer.

@Buffy:  I'm regular tenured faculty and I choose to take my pay over 10 months and not over 12, so I actually do not receive a paycheck from my university two months every year unless I have an NSF grant.

@Buffy, I have a friend at a US teaching college, he is an assistant professor but only gets paid 9 months a year. He usually teaches summer school in order to make ends meet, as it is a high-priced area.

@DeboraWeber-Wulff, I think that is unusual and possibly by choice.

This is a common type of arrangement for US faculty jobs, and in my understanding exists to allow supplementary summer salary from other sources (e.g. grants). The stated figure is the actual salary, but it is paid throughout the year instead of only during the 9 months of the academic year where your duties take place.

Actually, you are "employed" throughout the year per US labor law. But you have no assigned duties for three months. You can use it for research, for extra stipends for teaching summer courses, for consulting, etc. You are free, but still employed. You can't get unemployment insurance, for example. Your health insurance stays in place, etc. It is just a way to help you manage your income flow over the year so that you don't need to either save or seek other funds for a few months each year. The practice is standard if not universal in the US.

You also get health insurance and other benefits during the summer months even though you don't have any work responsibilities.

@Buffy: thanks for pointing that out, I was not aware of that.

The spread over 12 months is almost always available, but not always the default. I know of at least one colleague who got caught their first spring when they thought they had been receiving salary on a 12-month schedule but were actually on the default 9-month schedule.

In my experience it is always B

Great! Thanks for the help. I wanted it to be (B) as well, but I wasn't sure about the implications of "9-months employment payable over 12".

There's a lot of answers that go into much more detail, but the answer seems without a doubt, right here in your own question:

"The offer says that my salary will be $70,000/year for nine
  months’ employment payable over a period of twelve months."

Therefore:

You will be getting $70,000
You will be working for 9 months
But it will still take you 12 months to receive the full $70,000.

Congratulations on the job by the way!

You can still usually choose for it to be paid in 9 months

@AzorAhai this is a good point, and the OP can make this request if they really want (although asking for things is sometimes like a "currency", you don't want to ask for things all the time because eventually people will stop giving them to you even if it doesn't cost them much). My interpretation of the contract still stands though.... if their request is granted, it is out of good-will and generosity, not because of legal obligation in the contract.

That's not a big deal - just talk to the payroll person after starting. The people hiring you don't need to know (nor would they care). No legal obligations. Just addressing your point it would take 12 months to receive the full salary.

Not relevant to this question, but perhaps relevant to others that might come here.
In the UK, it would probably mean A: A university techer positon might be grade 7, which attracts a base salary of £32k a year, but some university teachers are only paid for 9 months of the year, so they are only paid £24k. But it make it easier for them to budget, the university will pay them £2k a month for 12 months. This also applies to high school teachers in the UK I think.

Exactly, in the UK, the yearly equivalent is just 12monthly payout; then if the contract says you will be employed for X months, you only get Xmonthly payout. So a contract for £24 a year, in a duration of 3 months, would pay you out £2k/month for 3 months (before taxes) -- and you might be able to arrange it with the employer to pay it in more, but smaller, instalments in case of teachers and academics.

I understand your reluctance to ask directly about salary. But I don't think it would be amiss to say that you were uncertain of the details of the offer, and could they please clarify exactly what it meant. There is absolutely nothing wrong or pushy about wanting to be completely clear on the terms.

Yes and as Noah Snyder mentioned in a comment, you may have options available.

I am at a lost to know why this is voted down.  Regardless of the OP's reluctance to ask it's the correct course of action and the only one guaranteed to eliminate potential misunderstanding.


text:
How to ask for a recommendation letter?
The recommendation letters seem to be one of the most important aspects of the application.

First of, how will I manage to ask a professor to write a recommendation letter for 5 colleges I am intending to apply to?
Does it make a difference for the professor what school I am
applying to (ivy league or not)?
What criteria should I use when picking the professors that will write a good recommendation?
I live in a different country at the moment. Should I go and meet them in person to ask for this?
I burned a few bridges, but how can I influence their opinion at this point and show them how much I have grown after college and how
much better I have become and it is partially thanks to them?

I am really scared of asking them. Any tips or advice is greatly appreciated it.

You ask too many question. Please ask one at a time. Thanks.

I have not been a very good student while attending college. Whenever attendance was not mandatory I would probably miss class. My grades were a lot better than people attending every day but it has been cases I attended only few times a class over the entire semester. But my GPA has been 3.8 and did a double major (Both were science majors, 20 credits a semester, in a reputable school).

It sounds like you were a very good student in some ways: first, a 3.8 GPA is excellent.  Second, to get those kinds of grades while rarely attending class except when it is required demonstrates a talent in learning and understanding independently: this is very beneficial for graduate school.  On the other hand, if you are rarely showing up for class, you are missing most of the benefit of being enrolled in a university.  Moreover, a class that you can mostly ace without showing up for might be the right class for a student who is trying to get a degree with minimal effort; it is exactly the wrong class for a student who wants to pursue a professional academic career.  The vast majority of students who are going to the very top programs have all of your talent and are using their time as undergraduates to dramatically increase their knowledge and skills.

But I am sure that all of them don't think high of me, in terms of achieving a master's degree.... I went to office hours and was respectful of them.  The problem is that I did not act in a very professional manner towards them. I had many personal issues and was still discovering myself at the time, but this is all excuses nobody will understand.

I'm not sure that your old professors do not think highly of you, professionally speaking, and you haven't said enough to explain why you think that.  I would describe a large percentage of the undergraduate students I've interacted at with as "respectful but not very professional".  Most faculty figure out pretty quickly that they can't expect 18-22 years young adults to behave according to the professional standards of academia (or other adult, professional life).  Someone who is 20 years old, intelligent and successful in their coursework but somewhat unprofessional has a good chance to become a 25 year old graduate student who is intelligent, successful in their research and  more professional.  When it comes to evaluating undergraduates, when tend to look for unprofessionalism and immaturity that impedes their studies and acquisition of the material.
I agree with Brian Tompsett that a large range of suboptimal student behaviors will not factor into recommendation letters (though some will).  I think the real problem is not that you necessarily have "burned bridges" with your instructors (although I don't know exactly what you did...) but rather that you failed to cultivate positive relationships with them outside of the classroom.  As far as I can see, you have a good shot at getting routinely-good letters from your professors: the kind of letter that says that the student did well in the courses they took, as evidenced by their very high grades....and doesn't say much else.  These kind of letters, written by faculty at a reputable institution, ought to get you into a graduate program somewhere, but in my experience will leave you far short of the top places (the Ivy League and others of the same caliber).
Here are (necessarily brief) answers to your questions:

First of[f], how will I manage to ask a professor to write a recommendation letter for 5 colleges I am intending to apply to?

You should begin by composing an email briefly explaining that you are applying to graduate programs and X and would like a recommendation letter.  Let the email sit for a day or two and then reread it to make sure that it doesn't sound weird.  Then send it.  Don't overthink this.

Does it make a difference for the professor what school I am applying to (ivy league or not)?

In my field (mathematics), faculty usually write just one letter and send it to everyone.  If they have a substantial professional relationship with faculty at one or more of the institutions being applied to, they might separately contact their, um, contacts at these places, or they may in turn be contacted by them.  That's about it.  The job of the "one letter" is to calibrate rather precisely the student's potential.  For instance, I recently wrote a letter for a student in which I meant to indicate (without saying it in so many words) that they should be a strong candidate for admission at a top 20 program but less so for a top 10 one.

What criteria should I use when picking the professors that will write a good recommendation?

There are whole questions on this site about this, but: you want to strike a good balance between someone who (i) knows you well, (ii) has good things to say about you and (iii) has a status in the academic community that lends weight to what they say.  In practice, students who have not been very mindful about cultivating strong relationships with their instructors end up in a situation in which the number of faculty members who could possibly write such a letter is not much larger than the number of letters needed, so it's not such a difficult task.

I live in a different country at the moment. Should I go and meet them in person to ask for this?

It's really up to you, but to my mind this is not worth a serious or long trip.  If your email communications are not resulting in faculty agreeing to write letters, maybe reevaluate.

I burned a few bridges, but how can I influence their opinion at this point and show them how much I have grown after college and how much better I have become and it is partially thanks to them?

To be honest, I don't think there's that much spin you can put on the situation at this point.  The faculty are writing based on their past interactions with you as an undergraduate, not based on the person you are now or who you aspire to be (there are already parts of the application for you to address that).  If you have subsequent academic work or accomplishments, you should certainly convey that to them, but if you're asking how to talk them into writing you a stronger letter...Sorry, I don't think you can.
Good luck.

Thanks for taking the time. Really helps me understand their perspective.

I have no knowledge of you, your university or the staff that taught you; however, despite what most students believe most academic staff are extremely professional. Their position requires it of them.
When I and my colleagues provide a reference (our equivalent of a letter of recommendation) we base  it on the facts checked from the student records. We would check the transcripts look at the attendance records and other material on file (such as disciplines, warnings), we would note late submissions of work and other statistical details. From that we would build up a picture of the student as a scholar and use that as the basis for a recommendation.
It would be unprofessional to just base such a recommendation on a memory of a previous meeting, and incident in class. Actually, with so many students passing through over the years individuals rarely remain in the memory unless they were remarkably outstanding in a positive or negative sense (i.e. one in a million).
We aim to write accurate and factual references to our sister institutions in a manner that we would expect to receive them for our own applicants. We would expect the references supplies to us similarly written in a detached and professional manner.
All you can do is ask. You need letters of recommendation. The only way to get them is to ask. Although you might have matured and learned a professional approach, don't forget they had to also do this to gain their own position, and will continue to do so.
Your mileage may vary, but I can only give my opinion from my experiences of supporting students every year in their quests for future success.


text:
How to cite "Crelle's Journal"
Crelle's Journal is a nickname of a Mathematics Journal, and it's full name is "Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik". It's commonly called Crelle since it is founded in 1826 by August Leopold Crelle.
Now I want to cite a paper in Crelle, but I realize that in the official page they also include (Crelle Journal) in the citation information, for an example see here. On the other hand, some mathematicians once told me that it is "pretty weird" to see the nickname being used.
So my question is, is it common to include (Crelle) in the citation? Or, how official is the name Crelle's journal?

In actual fact they include "Crelles Journal" (with an "s" yet no apostrophe) as it's the German genitive.

I think it's not much different from saying "Abramowitz & Stegun, p. 355" or "OEIS A001203" or indeed "arXiv:hep-th/9802150" or "PRL 59, 2044" if this journal is equally thoroughly familiar in your field. Not perfect but immediately understood, and the journal editors can always substitute the proper citation in preparation for publication if that's their policy.

No one uses Borchardt's journal anymore either, but both this name and the name Crelle's Journal were used in the 1800s, and thus something anyone pursuing old literature would find very useful to know. But no one would now use either of these names, outside of historical discussions, and similarly no one would now use Liouville's Journal for "Journal de Mathématiques Pures et Appliquées".

@DaveLRenfro "But no one would now use either of these names, outside of historical discussions" That's just false. Plenty of people use Crelle's Journal to refer to this journal in informal contexts.  Also Liouville's journal is sometimes used.

@quid: Actually, I meant to comment about citations in published papers, but I can see how "historical discussions" is a poor way to say this. Nonetheless, I would have guessed my comment would still be true for the broader view you're taking, and in this I suppose I am wrong -- I had no idea anyone actually used these terms today when talking (in person) about these journals. FYI, neither journal has for a number of years published much, if anything, in areas of my interest, and their names have never really come up in conversations I've had with people at conferences and such.

@DaveLRenfro I think a reason why it is somewhat common is that to say the actual name of the journal is quite a mouth-full and to type it correctly maybe is not obvious either. If you search arXiv for Crelle as I propose in my answer, you'll find about a dozen usages of "to appear in Crelle" or "submitted to Crelle" etc.  That it is really used in a bibliography is more rare, but there are a couple instances of "recent to recent"  (I did not check if it survived copy-editing for the published version).  The parenthetical usage is still pretty common.

I usually see "J. Reine Angew. Math." without "Crelle".
MathSciNet has citation information in the form of BibTeX entries; for references indexed there, I recommend going with that. (Indeed if you use BibTeX you can just download the bibliographic information without writing it out again.)

I agree with Anonymous.  I think you are misreading the website.  They are not telling you say "Crelle's journal" when you cite.  If you click the cite link on the journal homepage, they give you something like this (for APA format):

Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter. Retrieved 26 Sep. 2016, from http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/crll

without the nickname.
That said, it's pretty weird that the cite options you get are APA, MLA and Chicago as none of them are ever used in math.  It's already pretty weird to use the full journal name, rather than the standard abbreviation.  I usually use MathSciNet to make my bibliographies, as Anonymous recommends.
Note: I have seen people include (Crelle's Journal) in citations on their CV or website, which is okay though perhaps not common, but I wouldn't do it for a bibliography (edit: not to say it doesn't happen, as other answers point out).

I actually had one math professor who insisted on APA as it was department standard (being part of the general Science department of a small school); so to say none of them are ever used in math may be too strong a statement.

@WeckarE. How can a professor insist on a citation standard when which standard to use is determined by the journal you submit to (meaning that you should completely ignore all issues of style as the journal will handle that)?

@TobiasKildetoft I'd assume  that the professor insisted that students follow this standard for their theses and other documents they write as part of their studies, where the guidelines of the department apply. (As opposed to the professor insisting on using this style for their or their students to be published articles).

For citing most any mathematics journal there is an easy way to get what the common way to cite it is: look up the (short) title in MathSciNet or zbMATH, the latter allows limited access without subscription (almost always they use the same).
If you want to be on the safe side use whatever is given there as (short) title. For the current case this is "J. Reine Angew. Math."
It is true that for this journal specifically mention of its founder's name Crelle is somewhat common, so if you want to you might include it. It is sufficiently official as for zbMATH mentioning "Crelle's Journal" as parallel title.
A reason for doing this could be that some might recognize it more directly than under its real name, but this is (if at all) relevant for a CV more than for a bibliography.
I'd say if you really want to you could use Crelle's Journal as the journal name. It might get changed in copy-editing though. But if you are not convinced it is a good idea just don't. No one should find it strange if you do not use it.
To get a feeling how common it is to use it nowadays one can search for example arXiv with fulltext search. One gets around 250 hits for Crelle. Mostly they mean the journal. A cursory look shows that:

the format to include Crelle's journal or Crelle in parenthesis to complement J. Reine Angew. Math. or something similar is no uncommon (as mentioned by Andreas Blass).
to use only Crelle's journal is rare but nevertheless is still done sometimes.

In this process I noted that the DOIs of the journal contain the string  "crelle."

the format to include Crelle's journal... is no uncommon [sic] - Really to see if it's uncommon, you should compare against counts of the abbreviated and full journal name.  Though I agree it's happens a fair amount on the arXiv (more than I expected, maybe 1/4 - 1/3 of the time?), but I guess it may be less in published journals.

When it  happens in 150+ papers  and knowing a ballpark estimate how often it could happen at all, it's clear it's not something very unusual. But, yes, one could make more precise how common it is in a relative sense. So searches for "reine angew." and "reine und angewandte" summed together are about 600. This should cover a fare share of all, and includes the maybe around close to 200 instances with Crelle.  So yes seems like around 30%, which is quite a bit higher than my threshold for not uncommon. What is in published journals is not  that relevant since it's more about what authors do.

I agree with you (+1), the arxiv data indicates it's relatively common for authors to do this.  I was just thinking that the reason I never noticed it to be this common (and why one person told the OP it's "pretty weird") could be because (i) it happens less in published articles so I see it less often, or (ii) I just didn't pay that much attention.  (Another reason it could be "pretty weird" is because people don't do this for most other journals.)

Yes, it'd be interesting to compare. Next time I have access to a bib database and some time to spare I'll check for the published data. I agree to assuming there'll be some decline.

I don't recall ever seeing "Crelles Journal" by itself as the title (in modern bibliographies), but I often see it in parentheses after "J. Reine Angew. Math."

AMS Abbreviations of Names of Serials says:

J. Reine Angew. Math. Journal für die Reine und Angewandte Mathematik. [Crelle’s
  Journal]. De Gruyter, Berlin. ISSN 0075-4102.

If the historical note is very important for you,

J. Reine Angew. Math. (Crelle’s Journal)

could work, but editors may ask you to remove it.


text:
What can I do to 'burn' a journal?
Several months ago, I sent a paper to a journal. Today, I got back a_single_review_, from one reviewer, with comments from the editor that are a sad summary of that reviewers comments. The reviewer clearly wrote the review in a rush (stream-of-conciousness, mispellings, sentences lacking referent. I'm pissed. Is there a journal-ranking site out there, like 'rate my professor'?
And yes. It was totally rejected. But I would understand that, if I'd gotten 1/3 reviewers, instead of 0/1. And no, the editor provided no useful comments.

4 months doesn't seem that long to me, but it really depends on your field. But not knowing the journal's review process (do they send it to three people initially? Or does the editor include themself as a reviewer?) it's hard to say much more.

This sounds like a rant, not a genuine question.

Could it be that the reviewer isn't a native speaker?

It is normal to be angry.   You have worked hard on the paper and expected the same level of care.  Unfortunately, some times, this doesn't happen.  It may be due to the topic area as opposed to the journal.  Indeed, some times it is the editor! he/she may be lazy or too busy.    Move on.

Publish elsewhere, become respcted then, when they want you - you can turn them down by reminding them....

If the journal is available in print, a matchbook should do.
Make sure there are not any current burning restrictions in your locale due to drought or otherwise, keep the burning outdoors and away from neighboring structures, and use a suitable non-flammable surround such as a metal firepit or ring of stones. Have a little ceremony, and keep in attendance until the embers are cool. Have a pint if that's your fancy, or whatever sort of morsel you like to treat yourself to.
Hopefully after this time, you've had a bit of time to let emotions taper a little bit and you can refocus yourself to doing what you need to do to submit the work to another journal, either as-is or preferably with some edits that take into account any useful feedback you are able to extract from the review you got. Perhaps solicit some feedback from people in your field that you know personally and trust to be honest so you can improve your chances with your next submission.
Rejection is frustrating but normal. Rejection for bad reasons is more frustrating but just as normal. Hopefully you'll have better success next time around, until then, know you aren't alone and that you will have trouble finding an experienced academic who can't share a similar story.