A. Introduction.

This article critique aimed to warn readers of some common pitfalls and offer
guidance on how to write a geoscience paper of an international standard. It focuses on
the paper’s organization and emphasizes the value of organizing the paper's contents
around a clearly defined problem. Furthermore, it is stressed how critical it is to
abandon archaic and ineffective terminology for describing and understanding
deformation. It is strongly advised against using poorly supported models of multiple
deformation phases to describe structures and the evolution of the tectonic plate and
against interpreting stress from structurally complex and heterogeneous rocks where
rotations and stress perturbations are difficult or impossible to account for. In its place, I
advocate the use of contemporary structural geology and tectonics theories that,
among other things, permit composite and overprinting structures to form gradually
and diachronically with a wide variety in style and orientation over the course of a single
deformation history. Additionally, stress should be used less and more strain, and
kinematics should be emphasized. After all, stress can only be detected through strain
and kinematics; converting between the two is difficult, especially in rocks that have
undergone ductile deformation.

When structural geology and tectonics are involved, it can be difficult to write a
scientific geoscience paper that meets the standards of an international journal. It calls
for solid scientific method knowledge, a reliable and repeatable database to base the
work on, in-depth knowledge of the relevant scientific field or fields, a good overview of
pertinent published work and existing models, strong language and communication
skills, critical and constructive advisors and reviewers, and a good deal of time and
patience. This brief essay offers some opinions and suggestions based on research from
the Brazilian Journal of Geology and papers from other journals that discuss Brazil's
structural geology and tectonics.

This document addresses specific problems that frequently appear in manuscripts

submitted to BJG, but it is not a comprehensive guide to writing an academic geoscience
paper. Many of the Master's and Ph.D. theses that serve as the foundation for upcoming
international publications also use most of its contents. There are other sources of
general guidance on academic paper writing and the editorial by Eriksson et al. For
advice on writing and organizing a geoscience paper, consult (2005). The present
contribution begins with a broadly applicable section before concentrating more
intently on structural geology and tectonics. Future authors, especially younger ones
with little experience in international publication but a desire to put Brazilian geology
where it belongs, will find it useful at a high international level.
B. Summary

The traditional structure of a scientific paper is as follows: abstract; introduction; geologic

context; method; results; discussion; and conclusion. The use of master's theses is discouraged
because they often include methodological and other information that is superfluous to an
international paper. To establish a foundation for the problem's solution, a scientific paper
should be problem-oriented and descriptive.

The purpose of many journals published by national geological surveys, universities, and local
(eg, state) geology associations is to publish data, maps, and descriptions of the geology of the
related geographic region. For a paper to be of interest to the BJG, an academic problem or
question needs to be presented. The purpose of the paper must be crystal clear from the
beginning and should be to solve a question of general (international) interest, based on logical
reasoning and scientifically sound data relevant to the problem in question. Peixoto et al. (2018)
define the purpose of their paper very well: "Deciphering the internal architecture of the Rio
Pardo salient and understanding its kinematic history is crucial for testing the models postulated
for the development of the AWCO as a confined orogenic system. To provide answers to these
key questions and to contribute to the understanding of the evolution of the Rio Pardo salient
and FT-belt curves in general, we carried out a field-based structural investigation in the
northern Araçuai orogen, involving the description of c. 700 out Peixoto et al. (2018) put the
origin and implications of such salients into a global context, highlighting the international or
global significance of their work. At the end of the introduction, it may be useful to reveal both
the flow of the paper and indicate the main conclusions. They do this by describing its overall
architecture, deformation phases, and related fabric elements, and then discussing the
implications of their data and interpretations. They conclude by postulating a model for the
generation of the Rio Pardo salient in the tectonic scenario of the development of the Araçua-
West Congo orogenic system. There is no separate methodology section in Peixoto et al. (2018)
because their work was based on well-established structural and kinematic field methodology.

The most important details in this text are that breaking away from traditional descriptive
structural geology and tectonic models is necessary for any science to advance, and that field-
based observations must be unleashed from predefined schemes to become more objective.
Additionally, integrating finite strain, fabric development, kinematics, vorticity analysis, and
incremental strain data with geochronologic information, geophysical data, and physical or
numerical modeling is recommended. Counting deformation phases is easy and requires little
insight into modern structural geology, and it adds little or negatively to the advance of geologic
knowledge. Strategic dating of minerals, dikes, or other elements that can constrain structural
evolution in time is invaluable. Understanding the rheologic implications of mocks and fab.

Lyrics and their relation to tectonic evolution can also be rewarding. Rheology and preexisting
structures are linked to the partitioning of deformation, which is both common and important in
many tectonic settings and at different scales. A methodology now exists that takes structural
geology down to the microscale in a new way, such as Electron Backscatter Diffraction (EBSD).
Magnetic fabrics (Anisotropy of Magnetic Susceptibility) is another method that can reveal fabric
patterns in rocks, such as magmatic-state as well as solid-state deformation.