Wikiversity talk:Journal of the future

Comments not yet incorporated
New Criterion: Science manuscripts are not just an aggregation of individual figures, and the scientist of the future will make the process of data acquisition and analysis an open process. The journal of the future will show no prejudice when deciding to publish data and processes that have been conducted in the open. --Kubke 22:58, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Rephrased Criterion 6 &mdash; does this fit? --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 14:36, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I take it you mean the 'Dynamic' criterion (now 1)? Yes, I like the idea of the inclusion of workflows. I still do wonder though: if I make my research process and data and analysis open all along the way, how will that affect my chances of getting the work into a journal? Will it pass the test of the questions journals ask as to whether what you are submitting constitutes new, unpublished data? I am also getting that question asked to me almost every time I say that I am making my embryology work 'open'. I dont have the answer. --Kubke 10:44, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Comments already incorporated
"The scientific journal of the future promotes the publication of research data and detailed methodologies, including code, as the basis of any publication." It might be worth considering whether the term should be 'promotes' or 'supports'. By promote I understand 'encourage'; by 'supports' I understand 'provides the solution (e.g., archival) but it can also be interpreted as 'encourage'. Or, should the journal of the future 'require'?--Kubke 06:58, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 07:23, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

"It also provides a space for rapid and non-conventional types of publications, e.g. by way of post-publication peer review. " there may be two different things mixed up here. For example PLoS ONE offers post publication peer review through comments, but also requires pre-publication peer-review. So from the 'types' of publications that are non-conventional I would think more of the minimum publishable unit (eg a figure), preliminary data, etc. The pre/post publication peer review to me is a separate issue. Perhaps move the 'eg by way [...] review' to the end of the previous sentence (after '[...] encompassing the University community'. --Kubke 07:06, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 07:23, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

"The scientific journal of the future, therefore supports initiatives for the on-wiki development of [...]" again I think there may be ambiguity with the word 'supports'. I interpret it as 'provides solution' whereas it can also be interpreted as 'encourage'. (said Kubke)
 * Done. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 07:27, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

'online audiences are not homogeneous': scope should not be limited to 'topic' or 'methodology' but language should be accessible outside the field of expertise (plain language while not loosing precision) (said Kubke)
 * Tried it, please check. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 08:14, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Rephrased, please check --Kubke 08:30, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, let's leave it at that. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 09:16, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Practical test
Moved here from main page.

The criteria shall be put to a first practical test by being applied to a range of publishing platforms. The scoring method is still evolving. Everyone is welcome to add some more journals. Numbers in parentheses represent an estimate for the relative weight of these criteria (they add up to 100% over all criteria).

Since editing wikitables is not very convenient, I turned this one into a collaboratively editable spreadsheet, and since embedding is not possible here at Wikiversity, I did so in my lab notebook. See also blog commentary.

--Daniel Mietchen (talk) 05:26, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Redirect to WikiJournal
I think these concepts have been integrated in WikiJournal as far as has been conceivable. As such, I think we should redirect this page to there, with a mention of these proposals at WikiJournal User Group/Milestones, such as: Mikael Häggström (discuss • contribs) 11:57, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 20 October 2010: Core criteria described