Citation & MIND House Style (mind-citation-and-style)
Mind has its own house style and supplies a downloadable MIND Stylesheet. A generic Chicago or
APA export is not the house style — accepted papers must be prepared in MIND style, and the review
copy must meet Mind's preparation rules (notably line numbering). This skill handles the mechanics
so formatting never becomes the reason for friction.
When to trigger
- Setting up references at the start, to avoid a painful conversion later
- Preparing the review copy (line numbers, anonymization) before submission
- Converting an accepted manuscript to the MIND house style post-acceptance
- A referee or editor flagged inconsistent or non-house-style references
What Mind expects
-
MIND house style for the final version. Download and follow the MIND Stylesheet. Accepted
authors prepare the final copy in this style; do not assume your default manager output matches it.
-
Line numbering for review. Number the lines of the submitted document — in LaTeX via the
lineno package, in Word via the line-numbering option. This is a stated requirement.
-
Consistency from the start. Pick one citation style and apply it uniformly (Zotero / BibTeX /
EndNote). Even before the house-style conversion, mixed styles read as careless.
-
Anonymized references for review. Neutralize self-identifying citations ("in my [2021]…") so the
review copy is prepared for triple-anonymous refereeing (see
mind-submission). This is not
optional: papers not prepared for anonymous refereeing will not be read.
-
Accurate attribution. Quote and cite precisely; every quotation has a locatable source. Misquoting
the target view is both a scholarly and a dialectical error.
Mechanics
- Keep a clean reference database; let the manager generate the list, then convert to MIND style.
- Page-cite quotations and close paraphrases of specific arguments.
- Provide alt text for any figures and declare funding (CrossRef Funder Registry) where applicable.
- Confirm the exact current house-style details on the live Stylesheet — formatting conventions
change (待核实 on specifics).
Anti-patterns
- Submitting the review copy without line numbers (a stated preparation requirement)
- Leaving self-identifying citations in a triple-anonymous review copy
- Assuming a default Chicago/APA export is the MIND house style
- Inconsistent reference formatting across the manuscript
- Quotations with no page reference, or paraphrases that misstate the source
Citation pass for Mind
Use this as a second-pass capability check. First lock the target thesis, argument map, objection sequence, and dialectical payoff; then test whether the manuscript addresses analytic-philosophy reviewers who expect a precise thesis, live objection, argument structure, and contribution to an active debate.
-
Primary move: Audit references and notes as evidence discipline: each source should position, document, or delimit a claim.
-
Decision ledger: return
claim / evidence / blocker / next edit rows so the next pass can patch the manuscript directly.
-
Neighbor test: compare against Philosophical Review for broader top philosophy, Nous for analytic breadth, Ethics for normative/political theory; if the neighboring outlet has the stronger audience claim, recommend re-routing before polishing.
-
Verification floor: before submission-ready advice, re-open
resources/official-source-map.md for volatile rules and name the one unresolved fact that could change the recommendation.
Output format
【House style】MIND Stylesheet followed for final copy? [Y/N]
【Line numbering】present on review copy? [Y/N]
【Consistency】one style applied throughout? [Y/N]
【Anonymized refs】self-identifying citations neutralized? [Y/N]
【Attribution】quotations page-cited and accurate? [Y/N]
【Next】mind-review-process
Supplementary resources
