*Looking at the stars and the moon... wondering how I'm going to improve my academic writing skills* : [

Anyone can give me some advice? My peers said that my writing is good but it needs some scientific/academic twist in it. How do I do that? : /

I think the title says it all.

My supervisor is incredibly disorganized to the point his disorganization messes up my papers. He never commented on my works and he will ask me to do stuff hours before the deadline.

I feel that his disorganization is incredibly childish (very ironic since I worked with children before and they are ever more organized!) to the point that now I'm more worried about his (bad) random decision making skills jeopardizing my work.

I would like to tell you more but I think I'd rather be safe than sorry : /

Could anyone offer me some advice please : (

I'm at the moment editing a paper of mine for submission and I'm checking each of the reference for correctness e.g. correctly citing the works, correctly citing who says what, etc.

omg...

SOOOO many references to checkl! *screams*. lol.

Any tips to stay motivated to do this mundane work >.<

Ok, I've thought about these various situations quite a lot and I would like to hear your views; assume you have some papers from proceedings and journals:

Situation 1a:
All papers have been published in a nonindexed proceedings/journals and not peer-reviewed. No one has cited your paper or it has been cited by 5-6 people only. The papers have a mixture of you as a first author and co-authors

Situation 2a:
All papers have a mixture of peer-reviewed and indexed and nonindexed proceedings/journals but most of your cited papers have been cited by you only. The papers have a mixture of you as a first author and co-authors

Situation 3a:
Same as situation 1a, but you are the first author for most of the papers.

Situation 4a:
Same as situation 2a, but you are the first author for most of the papers.

Situation 5a:
You only have nonindexed nonpeer-reviewed proceeding publications

For the 5 situations, which one will put you in a bad (as well as good maybe) position in terms of job prospects?
I was thinking about this as I'm getting increasingly worried about publications and job prospects : (

Another completely different situation:

Situation 1b:
No publications but have a PhD.

Situation 2b:
Some good publications but have only a Masters.

Which one is more promising?

I once saw this particular researcher who seems to like bragging about himself. So, I checked his profile on Google Scholar and he has around 30+ citations on one of his papers; however, I just found out half of his paper was cited by himself.

Is he in the right to be bragging about his accomplishment if his paper has been cited by himself?

Would it be the best time if I asked my supervisors for references (for future jobs) during the final year (early month) of the PhD programme?

My rationale is that they would be busy (most of the time) so I might just ask them as soon as possible; do you think it's reasonable?

I'm somewhat confused; is the PI your supervisor if you're a PhD student or a PI is a completely different person than the supervisor? - probably a noob question; sorry!

I've my own supervisor at the moment, and today, I saw this particular signature, signing off a grant for my main project. Under their name has the title the head of research, which is different than my supervisor's signature,

I was thinking the same topic as well! *high five to invogue*