I have fixed the linting errors I initially missed, but there are still three categories of issues remaining that I would like to explain:

[Firas2515]

I have fixed the linting errors I initially missed, but there are still three categories of issues remaining that I would like to explain:

1. Double-link issue

I have resolved this in part, but due to the nature of the content, it’s difficult to eliminate entirely. In this field, it’s common for researchers to release tools as part of their academic publications. These tools—introduced in papers and often open-sourced—become widely adopted standards in both academia and industry. As a result, certain repositories naturally appear in both the Papers and Tools sections.

2. Invalid list item link & missing dash between link and description

These errors occur due to the formatting used in the Papers section. I was inspired by the formatting style used in awesome-deep-learning-papers, which I believe is well-suited for listing academic papers. Unlike general resource lists, academic paper entries often require structured metadata—including title, year, authors, paper link, and code link—which doesn’t fit neatly into the typical Awesome list item format.
While it’s technically possible to reformat this section to pass linting, I believe the current layout offers the clearest and most useful presentation for readers.

Please let me know if you have any suggestions or if there’s a better way to handle these cases.

Originally posted by @yijun-lee in sindresorhus/awesome#3411 (comment)