This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Open access article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 365 days |
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was nominated for merging with Open access journal on 20 May 2009. The result of the discussion was to not merge. |
This article is substantially duplicated by a piece in an external publication. Please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following source:
|
Like everything else, OA model has some advantages and some disadvantages. The advantages are discussed thoroughly in this page but the downsides of OA are not mentioned at all. Here are a few sources that can be used on this topic:
Some Online Journals Will Publish Fake Science, For A Fee
What the Open-Access Movement Doesn't Want You to Know
The Open-Access Movement is Not Really about Open Access
Marzbans ( talk) 06:51, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi! I'm an library science grad student taking a look at this page as part of a Wikipedia editing assignment for a course on Information Policy. This page has been identified by our instructor as needing some work, both structurally and for minor issues. I'm going to be making some edits, most likely starting with working on wordiness and readability but I wanted to introduce myself as you may be seeing a lot of edits from a new user! I'm reviewing the talk page for areas that have been previously highlighted for improvement. Feel free to share priorities or feedback.~~~~ ACBatSLIS ( talk) 18:30, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Baldwin, Peter (2023). Athena unbound : why and how scholarly knowledge should be free for all. Cambridge, Massachusetts.
ISBN
9780262048002.{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (
link)
https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262048002/athena-unbound/
I think this book tries to be a complete story of open access, and as such, should be a resource for developing this article. I do not yet have a copy. Bluerasberry (talk) 18:43, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
The "Venn diagram highlighting the key features of different types of open access in scholarly publishing" contains mistakes. For example Gold OA and Diamond OA are exclusive, with Gold OA restricted to "author pays", whereas the definition of Gold OA in the page specifies correctly:
The majority of gold open access journals charging APCs follow an "author-pays" model,[13] although this is not an intrinsic property of gold OA.
The diagram also includes two types of "Vanity press", neither of which are defined in the page nor in the source article [4]. Marcrr ( talk) 15:04, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
I've removed the diagram. There's no need to keep such obviously incorrect imagery. Nemo 18:48, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Open access article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 365 days |
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was nominated for merging with Open access journal on 20 May 2009. The result of the discussion was to not merge. |
This article is substantially duplicated by a piece in an external publication. Please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following source:
|
Like everything else, OA model has some advantages and some disadvantages. The advantages are discussed thoroughly in this page but the downsides of OA are not mentioned at all. Here are a few sources that can be used on this topic:
Some Online Journals Will Publish Fake Science, For A Fee
What the Open-Access Movement Doesn't Want You to Know
The Open-Access Movement is Not Really about Open Access
Marzbans ( talk) 06:51, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi! I'm an library science grad student taking a look at this page as part of a Wikipedia editing assignment for a course on Information Policy. This page has been identified by our instructor as needing some work, both structurally and for minor issues. I'm going to be making some edits, most likely starting with working on wordiness and readability but I wanted to introduce myself as you may be seeing a lot of edits from a new user! I'm reviewing the talk page for areas that have been previously highlighted for improvement. Feel free to share priorities or feedback.~~~~ ACBatSLIS ( talk) 18:30, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Baldwin, Peter (2023). Athena unbound : why and how scholarly knowledge should be free for all. Cambridge, Massachusetts.
ISBN
9780262048002.{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (
link)
https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262048002/athena-unbound/
I think this book tries to be a complete story of open access, and as such, should be a resource for developing this article. I do not yet have a copy. Bluerasberry (talk) 18:43, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
The "Venn diagram highlighting the key features of different types of open access in scholarly publishing" contains mistakes. For example Gold OA and Diamond OA are exclusive, with Gold OA restricted to "author pays", whereas the definition of Gold OA in the page specifies correctly:
The majority of gold open access journals charging APCs follow an "author-pays" model,[13] although this is not an intrinsic property of gold OA.
The diagram also includes two types of "Vanity press", neither of which are defined in the page nor in the source article [4]. Marcrr ( talk) 15:04, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
I've removed the diagram. There's no need to keep such obviously incorrect imagery. Nemo 18:48, 2 December 2023 (UTC)