: [Wikidata] Re: Change list policy for call for papers postings?
I agree with Beat’s sentiments. In the grand scheme of things, the noise
factor is fairly low.
—David
On Sun, Sep 19, 2021 at 12:34 PM Estermann Beat
mailto:beat.esterm...@bfh.ch>> wrote:
Dear Jan,
Personally, I haven’
ctice as you describe it, looks perfect to me.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Beat
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Jan Ainali
> *Sent:* Sonntag, 19. September 2021 18:21
> *To:* Discussion list for the Wikidata project <
> wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org>
>
unrelated stuff can be put on individual
moderation.
So, the current practice as you describe it, looks perfect to me.
Cheers,
Beat
From: Jan Ainali
Sent: Sonntag, 19. September 2021 18:21
To: Discussion list for the Wikidata project
Subject: [Wikidata] Re: Change list policy for call for papers
or any
> specific rules regarding CfPs, event announcements, etc.
>
>
>
> My 2 cents,
>
> Beat
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Nicolas VIGNERON
> *Sent:* Sonntag, 19. September 2021 14:09
> *To:* Discussion list for the Wikidata project <
> wikidata@lists.wikime
announcements, etc.
My 2 cents,
Beat
From: Nicolas VIGNERON
Sent: Sonntag, 19. September 2021 14:09
To: Discussion list for the Wikidata project
Subject: [Wikidata] Re: Change list policy for call for papers postings?
Hi,
Maybe not a full ban (or maybe, I wouldn't be against it) but at least some
Hi,
Maybe not a full ban (or maybe, I wouldn't be against it) but at least some
clear rules to avoid these spam.
My 2 cents:
An example of mail that should absolutely be avoided (and not just on this
mailing list) is when a similar mail is sent several times in a short
timespan. We had almost
It is a bit unclear what the policy of this mailing list is. All that
I can find is from https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Mailing_list
1. Wikidata - Discussion list for the Wikidata project.
This doesn't provide much guidance.
Before determining the policy for CfPs it appears to me that
On Sun, 2021-09-19 at 13:41 +0300, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
> Il 19/09/21 13:10, Peter Patel-Schneider ha scritto:
> > "In accordance with funding body requirements, Elsevier does
> > offer alternative open access publishing options. Visit our open
> > access
> > page for full information."
>
Back on point, please.
In regards to calls for papers, do we want to ban them altogether, to
set standards to allow some of them, or leave them be as they are now?
L.
___
Wikidata mailing list -- wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an
Il 19/09/21 13:10, Peter Patel-Schneider ha scritto:
"In accordance with funding body requirements, Elsevier does
offer alternative open access publishing options. Visit our open access
page for full information."
I did read it, and it says "This journal has an embargo period of 24
months".
On Sun, 19 Sep 2021 at 11:11, Peter Patel-Schneider
wrote:
> On Sun, 2021-09-19 at 12:17 +0300, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > The Wikidata community also can't benefit from those publications
> > unless
> > they're made (libre) open access, so I think it would be fair to
> >
On Sun, 2021-09-19 at 12:17 +0300, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
[...]
> The Wikidata community also can't benefit from those publications
> unless
> they're made (libre) open access, so I think it would be fair to
> require
> all the papers will be OA (preferably) or explaining how the authors
Il 19/09/21 11:10, Jan Ainali ha scritto:
I would be okay with them if the person mailing introduced it with a
sentence or two why they believe it to be specifically interesting for the
Wikidata community.
I agree.
The Wikidata community also can't benefit from those publications unless
I agree with you, Jan!
Antonin
On 19/09/2021 10:10, Jan Ainali wrote:
> I find all these academic call for papers/abstracts/submissions emails
> on this mailing list a bit spammy.
>
> I would be okay with them if the person mailing introduced it with a
> sentence or two why they believe it to
Re-reading a second after hitting send, I realise my misinterpretation of
these conclusions, which were not jumbled. The result was that one list is
more tolerant of certain cfps, the other is no-cfps. Apologies for the
extra noise.
On Sun, 19 Sep 2021 at 09:38, Dan Brickley wrote:
>
>
> On
On Sun, 19 Sep 2021 at 09:18, Jan Ainali wrote:
> I find all these academic call for papers/abstracts/submissions emails on
> this mailing list a bit spammy.
>
> I would be okay with them if the person mailing introduced it with a
> sentence or two why they believe it to be specifically
16 matches
Mail list logo
