The Web Conference Skills

A 12-skill depth pack for The ACM Web Conference (WWW): topic and track selection, research-tracks submission audits, rebuttal drafting, ACM camera-ready and TAPS, artifact badging, web-data reproducibility, appendix packaging, review-process reasoning, writing style, related work, web-scale experiments, and cycle workflow. Grounded in the WWW 2026 research-tracks CFP, important-dates page, artifa

by @brycewang-stanford 12 skills

Install

npx skillmds@latest add plugin:brycewang-stanford/the-web-conference-skills

One command, no setup. In Claude Code it lands as a managed plugin you can enable, disable or remove with /plugin. On any other agent it installs the 12 skills into that agent's own folder.

Or inside Claude Code

In the Plugins tab, add this marketplace:

skillmds/skillmd
/plugin install brycewang-stanford-the-web-conference-skills@skillmd

Adds the marketplace once; later plugins need the second line only.

Or install by hand

Download the plugin and unzip its skills/ folder into your agent's skills directory. Works with every agent, no CLI needed.

Download plugin Paths per agent

Just the markdown? SKILL.md files only.

This plugin

skills: 12
authors: 1

Published by a registry member. Review its skills before installing.

Skills in this plugin

▌
Webconf Workflow · brycewang-stanford
Use when planning a team's calendar around the Web Conference (WWW) annual cycle — the autumn abstract/paper deadlines, the holiday-week rebuttal, January decisions, the short-paper and Web4Good fallback windows inside the same edition, venue-volatility contingencies, and rerouting after rejection.

1k repo stars
▌
Webconf Submission · brycewang-stanford
Use when auditing a Web Conference (WWW) research-tracks submission before the abstract or full-paper deadline, covering track choice among the ten research tracks, the single-PDF 8+references+appendix page arithmetic within 12 pages, EasyChair profile completeness, the author-list freeze, the 7-submission cap, and double-blind checks.

1k repo stars
▌
Webconf Experiments · brycewang-stanford
Use when designing or auditing the empirical section of a Web Conference (WWW) paper — matching evidence to the claim's scale, choosing datasets with provenance and freshness, blocking temporal and popularity leakage, running honest baselines from the sibling circuit, and deciding when live-platform or user-study evidence is required.

1k repo stars
▌
Webconf Camera Ready · brycewang-stanford
Use when preparing a Web Conference (WWW) camera-ready after acceptance, covering the uniform 12-page/8-content proceedings budget, de-anonymization and restored acknowledgements, ACM e-rights and TAPS production, ACM Open cost exposure, author registration, and the artifact-badging submission that rides along with the final files.

1k repo stars
▌
Webconf Related Work · brycewang-stanford
Use when positioning a Web Conference (WWW) submission against prior literature — tracing lineage through three decades of WWW proceedings, contrasting with the WSDM/CIKM/SIGIR/KDD sibling circuit, handling the venue's preprint-non-citation rule, and budgeting references against the shared 12-page PDF tail.

1k repo stars
▌
Webconf Supplementary · brycewang-stanford
Use when deciding what belongs in the Web Conference (WWW) appendix versus the 8 main pages versus an external artifact, under the single-PDF 12-page ceiling where references and appendix share the tail, reviewers need not read past page 8, and no separate supplementary upload exists in the research tracks.

1k repo stars
▌
Webconf Writing Style · brycewang-stanford
Use when drafting or revising a Web Conference (WWW) paper's prose — building the web-native framing that answers "why is this a WWW paper" on page one, writing for a mixed computing/social-science/economics readership, compressing into 8 self-contained pages, and handling scale numbers and platform names with precision.

1k repo stars
▌
Webconf Review Process · brycewang-stanford
Use when reasoning about how the Web Conference (WWW) evaluates papers — track-scoped double-blind review, the rebuttal-to-notification pipeline, how the ten research tracks shape reviewer expectations, main versus companion proceedings outcomes, and what authors can and cannot influence at each stage.

1k repo stars
▌
Webconf Author Response · brycewang-stanford
Use when drafting the Web Conference (WWW) rebuttal inside its one-week window, triaging reviews from the venue's mixed systems/mining/social-science reviewer pool, answering misread-track objections, protecting anonymity, and deciding what can honestly be promised for the camera-ready versus what needs new evidence.

1k repo stars
▌
Webconf Reproducibility · brycewang-stanford
Use when hardening the reproducibility of a Web Conference (WWW) paper whose evidence rests on crawls, platform APIs, live systems, or user logs — covering dataset decay, temporal snapshots, seed and environment reporting, the reproducibility appendix inside the 12-page PDF, and honest claims when the Web itself cannot be replayed.

1k repo stars
▌
Webconf Topic Selection · brycewang-stanford
Use when deciding whether a project belongs at the Web Conference (WWW) at all, which of the ten research tracks should review it, whether the short-paper or Web4Good lane fits better, and when the work should instead route to WSDM, SIGIR, CIKM, KDD, ICWSM, WebSci, or an ML flagship.

1k repo stars
▌
Webconf Artifact Evaluation · brycewang-stanford
Use when packaging datasets, models, or code for the Web Conference (WWW) Artifacts Available badge or for reviewer scrutiny, covering archival-repository choice, the light-verification bar, web-data licensing and takedown realities, anonymized artifacts during review, and what the badge does and does not certify.

1k repo stars