Talk:Open Access Reader/Sourcing Papers

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Versions[edit]

Something to think about when considering using an OA repository or repository aggregator such as CORE for this project is that traditionally people would only cite the 'version of record', i.e. the print version of an article or the final post-peer review published online version. Much of the content of repositories consists of pre-prints, and other versions of articles which differ from the article of record.

In subjects which now have a strong culture of archiving pre-prints, such as high energy physics, citing those pre-prints rather than a final published version may have become more acceptable within the field (I don't have any data to hand to support that statement). However, in some disciplines it is still not the norm to archive pre-prints, and people may generally be reluctant to cite them.

We'd also have to look closely at the current guidelines for which kinds of sources are considered most suitable (I'm guessing this might vary between different language Wikipedias). - Lawsonstu (talk) 21:42, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

One way of dealing with this is to mark the proposal template with what status the paper is (e.g pre-print, version of record), so the editor can make the call. EdSaperia (talk) 23:39, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Now I think about it, repository metadata often contains a url and/or doi for the version of record, which could be extracted and displayed if editors did prefer to reference it over a pre-print. - Lawsonstu (talk) 13:37, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Citation data[edit]

Open Citations could be very useful. It now looks to be sustainable. - Lawsonstu (talk) 14:50, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata:WikiProject Source MetaData is working on citation data, and will help get large amounts of it into Wikidata. - Lawsonstu (talk) 10:48, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]