You can write it in whatever makes you feel comfortable. However, I think you should consider; what software your supervisor/department likes, can you do the required formatting and will you exceed the 50MB docs limit. I would say most formatting requirements (journals, thesis) are written around MS Word and LaTeX. Google Docs is not that common so you may have issues with people accepting the file format. I would recommend LaTeX as you have complete control over the formatting and doesn't have any compatibility issues.

HR doesn't usually contact rejected applicant. It sounds like they need to complete formalities and they want you accept the offer it comes.

Contact the university. Most admissions offices are flexible with language entry requirements but you need to talk with each one individually.

I am doing an engineering PhD and I can tell you an engineering PhD does not improve your job prospects but severely curtails them. Employers will suddenly think you are overqualified for most jobs and the jobs you are qualified for are very competitive. A masters is a far better investment and better for your overall job prospects. Most reputable universities offer part time masters via distance learning over 2-3 years, which require 2-8 hours a week of work (I am guessing). Masters allows a certain degree in specialisation in a specific sub field (bioengineering, business, H&S etc) and you can choose the course that suits your interest the best. Most of the work will be coursework or exam based. I would only recommend a PhD if you are passionate about your project/topic as it is a far more substantial degree than a masters (with regards to effort).

You should talk with the university that has offered you the place. They will know the most relevant funding sources and deadlines. You may find that they can partially subsidise it and offer you teaching assitance work, or that funding is field specific.

People are being affected differently by COVID-19 and have to respond differently. So don't compare yourself to other student who may be affected differently to you. There is no point doing a side project unless it benefits you in the long term and you can finish it. If you start something irrelevant to your PhD and don't finish it during your lockdown you may just waste your time. As when the labs reopen, you will be super busy and not have time for side projects. So if there isn't a side project that that is both relevant to you and smallish you might as well lie on the sofa. Working on your thesis now is useful as you can use the 6 months at the end of your PhD to do more lab work.

I have started too many side projects that I haven't finished. I would do the first few experiments and then find that the project requires soo much work than I initially intended. My preliminary data would not be enough for a paper and so irrelevant to my main work that it is now useless. It is easy to start a side project but difficult to "finish" it.

I also had to suggest reviewers for my papers. I usually submit people in my area who I am friendly with or have non-contradictory opinions to me. Reportedly editors will only use one if any of your suggested reviewers, so you can't completely game the system.

No one knows. Simply, we have no clue what is going to happen in 3 months let alone 2 years.

However, most governments and institutions will not cut already established grants, so your two years of funding is safe. Two years is enough time to move university and do enough research for a thesis, as long as it is in a similar field. I would make the decision sooner rather than later as moving labs/university is disruptfull and you would rather spend more time at the new lab.

On another note, can you learn the local language?

Do you need feedback from second supervisor? I am in a similar position; super helpful main supervisor and a phantom second supervisor. My second supervisor only sees the final drafts of any submissions and the only significant feedback she has given me was on a journal paper. However, I don't feel I need her help, as my main supervisor is so helpful. So if your main supervisor is genuinely useful, I think you should be asking do you need extra support from a second supervisor?

If you do need their input, explain what you want in a polite manner. Lecturers are incredibly busy and they do prioritise work. Your supervisor may see supervising you as something minor and if you ask for more effort from them it may cause drama. Like asking for detailed feedback for an entire chapter is a big ask but asking for feedback on the section specific to them is a lot easier. I knew someone who had 5 supervisors and for her thesis drafts, she would tell each supervisor exactly what section she wanted them to read specific to their expertise. While if you are doing well and on time, asking for them to review everything you write is a bit demanding. So what I am trying to say is, with phantom supervisors be realistic with what you want from them and work with them to find out how much effort they can give you.

One year post-docs aren't perfect but better than nothing. If it is a well established lab with a clear plan you can be rather productive in that year and get a lot done in that time. It is a chance to build your CV so you can get something better in the future. A one year post-doc is nothing more than a stepping stone to better job in that university or somewhere else.

You can't use the EXACT same methods and questionnaire. Your research has to be completely your own work. Copying a questionnaire exactly is bordering on plagiarism.

However no research is completely unique. The different market segments and different country focus will make your research novel, so that is good. If you cite the other researcher appropriately as well as justify the individual parts of your methodology, it won't be plagiarism. So if you organically create your own methodology that is similar but not EXACTLY the same as the other researcher's methodology, you should be fine. It is good to have some small differences in methodology so you can avoid plagiarism accusations.

PS: Engineering field so my advice may not be applicable.

If they are congratulating you, it probably means it is a good result. I am assuming that the several professors that congratulated you know more about the system than we do and understand the significance of your relative position.

As getting a wait list position can be just as good getting it. I know someone who got wait-listed third for a research council fellowship. The round was funding 20 fellowships and after a few days she got a call saying she had received the funding. If it is an especially large funding round it is not uncommon for several people to drop out.

From my understanding you have to send them the corrections formally and you cannot ask for them to review your work before resubmission. As if you could bounce drafts backwards and forwards, some awkward examiners would request several drafts, wasting everyone's time. It is better to submit it and see if they pass or ask for corrections.

However, I do think it is acceptable to ask for clarification about points.

Are you trying to ask for research ideas for your proposal?

Hi Simm,

Thanks for sharing. We all have been there, lost in the topic and not knowing what to do. For fidning gap, I try to read a appear and ask myself, based on that paper what else do I want to know? Then I try and find the answers to my questions. If I can't find the answer, I try to guess what the answer might be, search those questions. Then slowly by asking myself lots of questions, I have develop areas of what I do know and what I don't know but want to know, therefore my gap. So for me it is about learning to ask good questions (which was what I was always good at). If you want more or better advice, I would recommend creating a new thread so more people can see it.