I do not want to put a supervisor's name on a paper simply 'cause it is the way things are done. I've barely seen this particular supervisor (although they're lovely), as they gave a bit of technical advice at the start and then I was well away (actually I got most of the technical advice I needed from other sources). I have to send the finished paper to them as they said they wanted to read it and I agreed to. But is there an acceptable way to get out of having to put this extra person as an author (the paper will already have several names)?

If they meet authorship criteria- Yes (sounds like potentially they do)
If they don't - No. (but is it worth the hassle to not include them)

A minute bit of technical advice doesn't meet the criteria for authorship : ) But you are right - more hassle to stir up a fuss and not be collegial. I just will make sure they don't see the other papers of my thesis.

Cheers Thesisfun

Was your supervisor involved in the original conception of the ideas for your project, or did they provide any funding? What do your other supervisors think? In my case, they provided both funding and ideas so had to be named on the paper according to my other supervisors.

No and no. So it is all a bit annoying!

What I always do is to leave the author names blank and pass it to my principal supervisor. He adds the names and decides on the order of names. The positive point is that I know he is fair. In your case, I think you should add his name. If he had no roles and he thought he has done nothing, he wouldn't ask to see the final draft. Maybe you should consult your main supervisor about it. Last suggestion: Never ruin any bridge that can be your escape path.

Thanks for your contributions all!

pm133, it bothers me because one of the ways in which academia is in need of reform is that names are put on papers where no credit is due.

I'm doing it on this occasion (because I can't see a way out) but I won't for the other papers.

I benefited early on from a supervisor including me on a paper when I felt I hadn't made a huge contribution, so I would always include the names of all involved. To be honest, I see it mostly as a good thing, and when I was writing my lit review I liked getting the sense of different research groups and being able to look up related authors through seeing their names on relevant papers.

It is a personal principle. I was also asked to be put on a paper by someone when I had barely contributed and I said no. Shock horror horror? It is just something that I feel strongly about. I only want my name on it if I substantially contributed, and I only want others' names on my stuff if they substantially contributed.

So the point of this thread was really to see if anyone could suggest a way to not put this person who didn't give input on my paper without causing controversy/burning bridges, and not to question the principle of whether they should be or not. I already know what I think about that, even though it seems I have to go against it on this occasion. I'll just be more careful in the future. Thanks all :-)