Hi all WikiJournal participants,
Because of an increased burden in the stage of finding and inviting peer
reviewers for submissions, we've been discussing at WikiJMed about
including funds in our next grant application to Wikimedia for hiring a
paid editor to help out in this task. It would be unfair to have it for
only WikiJMed so I take it up with all of us, also since WikiJSci currently
lacks a willing peer review coordinators
<https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/WikiJournal_of_Science/Associate_editors#Co…>
for
the 2 most recent submissions
<https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/WikiJournal_of_Science/Potential_upcoming_a…>.
A paid editor could look up potential peer reviewers and either invite them
directly, or prepare an email list with links to their credentials to board
members.
A paid editor would be able to help in many tedious tasks, including to
(citing Thomas' entry at WikiJMed):
- send followup emails at certain dates
- track submissions
- copyediting (for a wikijournal this could be things like image
formatting, finding who images should be attributed to, checking ref
formatting)
- formatting the final pdf upon acceptance
- managing the doi submission to crossref upon acceptance
- If having bot-experience, program bots for technical tasks such as to
keep the {{article_info}} template synchronised between main page and
subpage and add accepted articles to the relevant issue page
These tasks would not involve direct knowledge of the subject material. The
idea would be to have them handle those elements to free up time for the
medical/academic editors to focus on specialist tasks.
What do you think for WikiJSci and WikiJHum?
Best regards,
Mikael
Simple, I have provided a list of the respective authorities in two
countries along with the list of recognized journals. We have to do it for
the rest. Next is to look up the criteria they follow. The third step would
be to approach the respective authorities. For South Africa, that
would be Academy
of Science in South Africa (ASSAD). We will have to identify such bodies
and identify the criteria that we do not fulfill (yet). The next is to
determine whether it is plausible to fulfill. If so, to delineate the steps
required for the same (if not, forget that country/list/body). And, bingo,
we are done!
In short, it would require much effort. We would need to be systematic. But
it can be done nevertheless since we are not a predatory journal body.
Regards
Diptanshu
Please do not print this e-mail unless you really need to.
On 19 July 2018 at 20:51, Kai Alexis <kaialexis(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> How do you propose we do this? In a spreadsheet?
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Ms. Kai Alexis Smith, MSLIS
> www.kaialexis.com
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/kaialexissmith
> Knowledge Ally, ALA Knowledge Alliance
> <http://knowledgealliance.org/users/kai-alexis-smith>
> Jamaican Art Research Guide <http://jamaicanartresearch.wordpress.com>
> ORCHID ID: 0000-0002-3241-7930 <http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3241-7930>
>
> “Activism is my rent for living on the planet.” Alice Walker
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 8:07 AM Dr. Diptanshu Das <das.diptanshu(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Dear All
>>
>> It seems that unless publication in WikiJournals is academically
>> recognized, academicians lack the incentive to publish in our journals. For
>> example, Department of Higher Education and Training
>> <http://www.dhet.gov.za/> (DHET) in South Africa, University Grants
>> Commission <https://www.ugc.ac.in/> (UGC) in India recognize journals as
>> on this <https://journals.co.za/content/accreditation/dhet> and this
>> <https://www.ugc.ac.in/journallist/> list respectively. It should be
>> similar for other countries as well.
>>
>> We need to compile the list of criteria they have, and attempt to meet
>> those criteria. Need the cooperation of all of you for the same.
>>
>> Regards
>> Diptanshu
>>
>> Please do not print this e-mail unless you really need to.
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "WJH board" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to wjhboard+unsubscribe(a)googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to wjhboard(a)googlegroups.com.
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/wjhboard.
>> To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/
>> msgid/wjhboard/CADcdAx9Cas2jPoQLuT_JzA3%2BeY1DTFyrVZ9ksy0SNnhJ6P3FZA%
>> 40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/wjhboard/CADcdAx9Cas2jPoQLuT_JzA3%2BeY1DT…>
>> .
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
Dear All
It seems that unless publication in WikiJournals is academically
recognized, academicians lack the incentive to publish in our journals. For
example, Department of Higher Education and Training
<http://www.dhet.gov.za/> (DHET) in South Africa, University Grants
Commission <https://www.ugc.ac.in/> (UGC) in India recognize journals as on
this <https://journals.co.za/content/accreditation/dhet> and this
<https://www.ugc.ac.in/journallist/> list respectively. It should be
similar for other countries as well.
We need to compile the list of criteria they have, and attempt to meet
those criteria. Need the cooperation of all of you for the same.
Regards
Diptanshu
Please do not print this e-mail unless you really need to.
Hi all,
Some good news, we just broke a new record in terms of people reaching the
journal through our doi codes
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_object_identifier>!
Best regards,
Mikael
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <reports(a)crossref.org>
Date: Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 4:23 PM
Subject: Resolution Report for prefix 10.15347 from Jul 3, 2018
*Report for Publisher: Wikiversity Journal of Medicine*
*Resolutions for last 12 months.*
We continue to filter out known search engine crawlers. This month they
accounted for 236,545,112 resolutions.
Months 2018-06 2018-05 2018-04 2018-03 2018-02 2018-01 2017-12 2017-11
2017-10 2017-09 2017-08 2017-07 2017-06
Resolution Attempts 1,970 1,554 1,289 1,528 1,312 1,283 1,149 1,512 1,421
1,503 1,686 1,327 1,156
Resolution Successes 1,934 1,499 1,288 1,524 1,308 1,277 1,144 1,511 1,410
1,480 1,672 1,323 1,140
------------------------------
The overall resolution failure rate for all publishers is 2% and your
failure rate is 1%. These failures may result from deposit errors by the
publisher or from linking errors being made by end users. If your rate is
significantly above zero or the overall average please investigate to
determine the cause.
------------------------------
Top 10 DOIs Resolutions to DOI
10.15347/WJM/2014.010 <https://doi.org/10.15347/WJM/2014.010> 512
10.15347/WJS/2018.006 <https://doi.org/10.15347/WJS/2018.006> 176
10.15347/WJS/2018.004 <https://doi.org/10.15347/WJS/2018.004> 168
10.15347/WJS/2018.003 <https://doi.org/10.15347/WJS/2018.003> 119
10.15347/WJM/2014.008 <https://doi.org/10.15347/WJM/2014.008> 110
10.15347/WJM/2014.005 <https://doi.org/10.15347/WJM/2014.005> 103
10.15347/WJS/2018.002 <https://doi.org/10.15347/WJS/2018.002> 102
10.15347/WJM/2017.002 <https://doi.org/10.15347/WJM/2017.002> 77
10.15347/WJM/2016.001 <https://doi.org/10.15347/WJM/2016.001> 75
10.15347/WJS/2018.001 <https://doi.org/10.15347/WJS/2018.001> 53
------------------------------
Resolutions attempts 1,970
Resolved at Handle 1,934
Handle Failures 36
Resolved at local link server 0
Unique DOIs attempted 40
Unique DOIs resolved at handle 33
Unique DOIs that failed at handle 7
Unique DOIs resolved at local link server 0
------------------------------
Resolution Counts by Publication Title
Publication Title Total Resolutions Unique DOIs
WikiJournal of Humanities 22 1
WikiJournal of Medicine 1,223 25
WikiJournal of Science 689 7
CrossRef has created a system to automatically email publishers statistics
on the number of DOI resolutions through the DOI proxy server (
https://doi.org/) on a month-by-month basis. These numbers give an
indication of the use of your DOIs and the traffic coming to your site from
users clicking DOIs. The DOI links are largely from links in other
publishers' journal references to your articles, but they are also from DOI
links in secondary databases, links from libraries using DOIs, and even
DOIs in used in print versions.
When a researcher clicks on a DOI link for one of your articles, that
counts as one DOI resolution. A DOI resolution is when a DOI is "clicked" -
for example, clicking on https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02426 counts as one
resolution to Nature. No information is captured about who the user is or
where they are coming from. The information on DOI resolutions is captured
by the web server logs on https://doi.org/ which is run by CNRI on behalf
of the International DOI Foundation. These numbers are not a precise
measure of traffic to your site - cached articles, search engine crawlers
not following re-direction and traffic that is directed to a locally
appropriate copy through a library link resolver would be included in these
numbers, but would not result in inbound traffic on your website.
Nevertheless, these numbers provide one important measure of the
effectiveness of your participation in CrossRef.
In March 2004, the report on DOI resolutions through the main
https://doi.org/ proxy server was updated. This report now tracks the
number of DOI resolutions based on the owner of a DOI:
- Resolutions : attempted resolutions of DOIs based on the owner of the
DOI.
*Top 10 DOIs* is a list of the most popular DOIs that were successfully
looked up and how many times each was looked up.
*Resolution attempts* is the same at total "Resolutions" above.
*Resolved at handle* is the number of resolutions that successfully looked
up at doi.org.
*Handle failures* is the number of resolutions that failed to look up at
doi.org, either due to a technical problem or because the DOIs did not
exist.
*Resolved at local link server* counts resolutions that were looked up at
local link servers.
*Unique DOIs attempted* is the number of unique DOIs represented in the
total "resolutions attempted" from above.
*Unique DOIs resolved at handle* is the number of unique DOIs represented
in the "resolved at handle" count from above.
*Unique DOIs that failed at handle* is the number of unique DOIs
represented in the "handle failures" count from above.
*Unique DOIs resolved at local link server* is the number of unique DOIs
represented in the "resolved at local link server" count from above.
The attached file, if present, contains all of the DOIs that failed to
resolve followed by the count indicating the number of times that DOI was
attempted.
*"na" - means that data is not available for that month and type. *
If you have problems with this report, contact support(a)crossref.org.