-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.9k
Update plos.csl (issues re. [internet/preprint]) #4323
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update plos.csl (issues re. [internet/preprint]) #4323
Conversation
Fix issues regarding [internet] and [preprint] for PLoS as per: citation-style-language#4138 (and pointed out again here: citation-style-language#4140 (comment)) Please check carefully if I did this correctly. :)
Awesome! You just created a pull request to the Citation Styles Language styles repository. One of our human volunteers will try to get in touch soon (usually within a week). In the meantime, I will run some automated checks. You should be notified of the results in a few minutes. If you haven't done so yet, please make sure your style validates and follows all our other Style Requirements. To update this pull request, visit the "Files changed" tab above, and click on the pencil icon (see below) in the top-right corner of your style to start editing. If you have any questions, please leave a comment and we'll get back to you. While we usually respond in English, feel free to write in whatever language you're most comfortable. |
😃 Your submission passed all our automated tests. Below are some sample citations generated based on your proposed changes: plos.csl (modified style; unchanged output for sample items)[1,2] |
In greenelab/meta-review#261, I evaluate the effect of the new PLOS style from 82df7b5 on our reference formatting. The result is available in I can confirm that
|
Re [Preprint]: Item 23 and 35 are blog articles and should NOT be article-journals. |
😃 Your submission passed all our automated tests. Below are some sample citations generated based on your proposed changes: plos.csl (modified style; unchanged output for sample items)[1,2] |
Unfortunately the meaning of "preprint" differs from the obvious interpretation of an article prior to print publication. Instead in the life sciences, the term is defined as such:
The key distinctions is that preprints are posted at the author's discretion, independent of approval from peer review. They are usually hosted on preprint servers that are distinct from the journals, although some journals like F1000 Research also make submitted articles available prior to peer review and acceptance and these could be called preprints (but this is a corner case). The PLOS guidelines add
I'd suggest never labeling an
Good catch. Will look into fixing my metadata. |
I see. In that case that conditional doesn't make sense. I've removed it again. |
We have discussed using |
😃 Your submission passed all our automated tests. Below are some sample citations generated based on your proposed changes: plos.csl (modified style; unchanged output for sample items)[1,2] |
I rebuilt the manuscript with the style from dfe2507: The PR looks good on my end! An improvement for sure. Thanks @POBrien333. |
Thanks both! |
@adam3smith From my perspective, the spec doesn’t really clearly define the meaning of any item type, so conventions about type usage are important to consider. The current typical conventional for preprints is to use |
Agreed although this should be fixed by updating the schema with definitions.
I'm happy to use the |
Fix issues regarding [internet] and [preprint] for PLoS as per: #4138 (and pointed out again here: #4140 (comment))
Please check carefully if I did this correctly. :)
@dhimmel, can you give this a test ride?