[Esip-citationguidelines] EOS article

Thu Jun 17 23:10:56 EDT 2021

Dear all

If it helps us make the point  – this EOS piece   A Tectonic Shift in Analytics and Computing Is Coming<https://eos.org/science-updates/a-tectonic-shift-in-analytics-and-computing-is-coming?mkt_tok=OTg3LUlHVC01NzIAAAF9mX_8SU80vfRDRm_wP-WMmc_HAif1BSZ4Kt54hr0eZnucHIMM0klio6ByPd8XMp9lMa7Pawq-30huRN1SYK1nvFlwehtdOIcwG-0c7IA>  has the allowed 5 authors listed, but the acknowledgements say

“The listed authors thank Peter Gerstoft, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego; Henry M. Tufo, University of Colorado Boulder; and David A. Yuen, Columbia University and Ocean University of China, Qingdao, who contributed equally to the writing of this article.”

At least they are acknowledged, even if they won’t appear in any citation metrics…...

Take care

Lesley

From: Esip-citationguidelines <esip-citationguidelines-bounces at lists.esipfed.org> on behalf of Ruth Duerr via Esip-citationguidelines <esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org>
Reply to: Ruth Duerr <ruth.duerr3 at gmail.com>
Date: Friday, 18 June 2021 at 12:50 pm
To: Ted Habermann <ted at metadatagamechangers.com>
Cc: Esip-citationguidelines <esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org>
Subject: Re: [Esip-citationguidelines] EOS article

I think using this to illustrate the point is absolutely the correct thing to do…!!!!!!
Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 17, 2021, at 3:34 PM, Ted Habermann via Esip-citationguidelines <esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org> wrote:
Sarah,

Thanks for the thoughtful response, lots of good points.

I am particularly interested in the statement "Also as described in the proposal, there are initiatives out there focused on credit and citations but we have tested them in our types of science and they are not sufficient and not easily mapped”.  I will be interested to see how that plays out. If you have a list of credit concepts from “our type of science” that can not be mapped I would like to take a look at it…

Ted

P.S. I did not see the proposal...

On Jun 17, 2021, at 1:27 PM, Sarah Ramdeen via Esip-citationguidelines <esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org<mailto:esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org>> wrote:

Ted, it may be common sense to those in our community (credit/citations focused cluster, ESIP, etc.) but the point of an EOS article is to bring it to the broader AGU/Earth Science community.  Also as described in the proposal, there are initiatives out there focused on credit and citations but we have tested them in our types of science and they are not sufficient and not easily mapped.  We are working to create suggestions but as there are also other groups working on this concept at different scales/scopes, it is important to communicate our preliminary discussions/findings.  We also can not solve this issue alone and can use this piece as a way to attract more knowledgeable and dedicated people to this cluster to help carry us forward in a way that is inclusive and not the same old same old crowd (not that I don't love this same old crowd!).

Sarah

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 11:27 AM Mark Parsons via Esip-citationguidelines <esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org<mailto:esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org>> wrote:
Kirk seemed to think it was worthwhile. We’ll see what the editors think. Credit may be obvious but it’s harder than it seems and it isn’t done routinely.

-m.

On Jun 17, 2021, at 10:20 AM, Ted Habermann <tedhabermann at gmail.com<mailto:tedhabermann at gmail.com>> wrote:

Mark et al.,

Does this opinion really merit an EOS article? Seems more like common sense than opinion, and it has certainly been expressed in many ways by many people in many fora. In fact, it makes me wonder whether EOS allows mantra articles...

Ted

On Jun 17, 2021, at 9:52 AM, Mark Parsons via Esip-citationguidelines <esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org<mailto:esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org>> wrote:

They say the rule is non-negotiable.

Meanwhile, I have submitted the proposal. They asked for the other authors. I just listed Madison for now. If we are accepted, we can reassess what next.

cheers,

-m.

On Jun 17, 2021, at 9:43 AM, Daniel S. Katz <d.katz at ieee.org<mailto:d.katz at ieee.org>> wrote:

Can we simply break the rule?

On Jun 17, 2021, at 10:32 AM, Mark Parsons via Esip-citationguidelines <esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org<mailto:esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org>> wrote:

I was wrong. As I worked through the proposal form, I found this:

"Authors are limited to 5 writers total, including yourself. Authors must be people, not groups/teams, and must participate in the actual writing, not just be part of the underlying research or assist with the article idea. Additional contributors can be listed in the acknowledgments. **This is non-negotiable, please don't email us requesting an exception. *"

So we’ll need to narrow to five although we can credit the cluster in the acknowledgements. I was thinking with going with me plus each of the artifact leads, but that makes six (Parsons, Langseth, Katz, Duerr, Ramdeen, Hoebelheinrich). Perhaps we can use this arbitrary requirement to help illustrate our point.

cheers,

-m.

On Jun 17, 2021, at 9:26 AM, Mark Parsons <parsonsm.work at icloud.com<mailto:parsonsm.work at icloud.com>> wrote:

Hi folks,

I had some correspondence with Kirk Martinez. He advised that an opinion piece would probably be best.

I think the opinion is basically  "it’s important to credit people for all kinds of work and products in science, but that’s difficult. Citation is only one mechanism because there are different roles which probably need to be credited differently for different artifacts.”

I will go ahead and prepare a proposal, but feel free to chime in on the initial draft manuscript at
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qsPuPkc4Hockej1wy9LrlzHfg0p42MwOURdTMVDWZ_c/edit?usp=sharing
I won’t work on this much though until we get a response to our proposal.

We’ll also need to discuss authorship. EOS only allows five authors but I think team authorship is OK.

cheers,

-m.

_______________________________________________
Esip-citationguidelines mailing list
To start a new topic: Esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org<mailto:Esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org>
To unsubscribe and manage prefs: https://lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-citationguidelines

_______________________________________________
Esip-citationguidelines mailing list
To start a new topic: Esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org<mailto:Esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org>
To unsubscribe and manage prefs: https://lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-citationguidelines

_______________________________________________
Esip-citationguidelines mailing list
To start a new topic: Esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org<mailto:Esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org>
To unsubscribe and manage prefs: https://lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-citationguidelines

--
Sarah Ramdeen, PhD

_______________________________________________
Esip-citationguidelines mailing list
To start a new topic: Esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org<mailto:Esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org>
To unsubscribe and manage prefs: https://lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-citationguidelines

_______________________________________________
Esip-citationguidelines mailing list
To start a new topic: Esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org
To unsubscribe and manage prefs: https://lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-citationguidelines
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.esipfed.org/pipermail/esip-citationguidelines/attachments/20210618/2c19c3d8/attachment-0001.htm>