Reviews

From OpenWetWare

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m (OpenWetWare:Reviews)
Current revision (10:42, 22 February 2008) (view source)
(Current Reviews)
 
(43 intermediate revisions not shown.)
Line 1: Line 1:
[[Image:Oww Reviews.png]]
[[Image:Oww Reviews.png]]
-
==OpenWetWare:Reviews==
+
==OpenWetWare Reviews==
-
OpenWetWare:Reviews is an experiment in providing always up-to-date scientific reviews.  When a new publication comes out it can be easily incorporated into the review by OWW editors.  This should be a win-win for both the review-writer (less work) and the readers (who get a more up-to-date resource).  We'll be trying reviews with a 'curator' (as discussed for [[Consensus protocol|consensus protocols]]) as well as ones without.   
+
OpenWetWare Reviews is an experiment in providing always up-to-date scientific reviews.  When a new publication comes out it can be easily incorporated into the review by OWW editors.  This should be a win-win for both the review-writer (less work) and the readers (who get a more up-to-date resource).  We'll be trying reviews with a 'curator' (as discussed for [[Consensus protocol|consensus protocols]]) as well as ones without.   
-
*[[List:Reviews|Join the mailing list]] to discuss OWW:Reviews (reviews at openwetware.org)
+
*[[List:Reviews|Join the mailing list]] to discuss OWW Reviews (reviews at openwetware.org)
-
==Next steps==
+
==Current Reviews==
-
#Wikify some existing OA reviews
+
*[[Reviews:Directed evolution/Library construction]]
-
#Try and get the original author (or someone expert in the topic area) to be the curator for a few of the articles.
+
*[[Reviews:Synthetic biology]]
-
#Leave some of the articles curator-free as a trial, still not clear if you want/need a curator.
+
*[[Optimality In Biology]]
-
==Wikify existing Reviews==
+
==Want to help out?==
-
*At the moment it looks like we should find good reviews in PLoS and BMC, as they are the only journals that allow derivative works.  If there is a review in a journal where the author retains copyright, then we can ask the author to release a pre-print version under a CC license and that should work too. (see the [[OpenWetWare talk:Reviews|talk page]])
+
*[[Reviews:FAQ]]
-
 
+
*[[Reviews:Community portal]]
-
==Curators wanted==
+
*[[Reviews:About]]
-
*'''[[User:Jasonk|Jasonk]] 11:37, 6 March 2007 (EST):''' Anyone interested in being a curator for a review in their field of expertise?  I can't promise you scientific rewards yet, but I suspect this will become an accepted form of merit down the line ;)
+
-
 
+
-
==Resources==
+
-
 
+
-
* Is there an easy way to search only OA journals?
+
-
** Looks like best bet would be to search known OA journals such as [http://www.biomedcentral.com/info/ BMC] or [http://Plos.org PLoS].
+
-
**not sure if this is just OA, but just for UK I think: http://ukpmc.ac.uk/  --[[User:Johncumbers|Johncumbers]] 19:46, 6 March 2007 (EST)
+
-
***Yeah, I don't think PMC is OA, rather it is mainly "free", which is worse -- "All the articles in [http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/ PMC] are free (sometimes on a delayed basis). Some journals go beyond free, to [http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/about/openaccess.html Open Access]." (from the PMC homepage).
+
-
 
+
-
==Online Discussion of Wiki Reviews==
+
-
 
+
-
* [http://www.nodalpoint.org/2007/03/07/wiki_reviews Nodalpoint - Wiki Reviews]
+
-
* [http://pbeltrao.blogspot.com/2007/03/openwetwarereviews-jason-kelly-opened.html Pedro - Public Rambling]
+
-
* [http://nsaunders.wordpress.com/2007/03/08/wikireviews-an-inspired-idea/ Neil Saunders - WYDIRD]
+
-
* [http://mndoci.com/blog/2007/03/06/openwetwarereviews/ Depak - business|bytes|genes|molecules]
+
__NOTOC__
__NOTOC__

Current revision

Image:Oww Reviews.png

OpenWetWare Reviews

OpenWetWare Reviews is an experiment in providing always up-to-date scientific reviews. When a new publication comes out it can be easily incorporated into the review by OWW editors. This should be a win-win for both the review-writer (less work) and the readers (who get a more up-to-date resource). We'll be trying reviews with a 'curator' (as discussed for consensus protocols) as well as ones without.

Current Reviews

Want to help out?


Personal tools