[Taxacom] Journal/Wiki publication and dissemination of a new taxon description
Stephen Thorpe
stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
Mon Feb 7 19:41:16 CST 2011
some thoughts on Species-ID, for what they are worth:
(NOTE: I am an admin and a beauracrat on Species-ID, but I was not involved
directly in its creation)
so, in life it isn't how things are that is important, it is how they are
perceived ...
many taxonomists perceptions of Wikispecies/-pedia is that "you don't know who
has written the info" and that there is no data security ...
Species-ID was developed, in part, to eliminate those worries, which it might
do, but actually I don't think there is any real difference in these factors
between Wikispecies/-pedia and Species-ID, just a difference in perception, but
that's OK, because in both cases you do know who has written the info (unless
they *choose* anonymity), and Wikispecies data is just as secure (by way of the
edit history). Even if a Wikispecies/-pedia contributor chooses anonymity, that
don't matter either, because NOR requires that all items of information be
referenced with cited sources ...
... the *real* advantage of Species-ID is the lack of a NOR policy - this is why
I am keen on the site. Although it is not "peer reviewed", peer review is often
"less than perfect" anyway, and the onus is on a Species-ID contributor to write
a convincing article (that the reader can act as their own "peer reviewer" of,
and accept or reject accordingly)...
Anyway, it seems that the main reason for Species-ID is to do things like they
have done for Neobidessodes darwiniensis, i.e. simultaneous traditional/wiki
publication of new taxa. While this idea is good, I tend to think that there is
a bit too much repetition of what is already in the open access publication in
ZooKeys. If one can make the key a bit more interactive than the ZooKeys
version, then fine, but otherwise I think the Species-ID page might function
better just as a place to put corrigenda and addenda, rather than repeating info
from the ZooKeys version. For example, the species is known at present only from
the unique holotype. It is quite possible that additional material will turn up
at some stage, and it might not warrant a traditional publication to report
this, but Michael or someone could just sit down at his computer and type the
details of the new material in on the corrigenda and addenda page. Little bits
of new information on the species could be made public trivially easily and
without publication delays ...
So, my idea for a Neobidessodes darwiniensis page on Species-ID would be to just
give the basic name details, links to the original publication, Wikispecies, and
whatever other links are relevant, and then just a corrigenda and addenda
heading which can be added to at any stage ...
Stephen
Lyubo Penev's announcement seems to have gotten buried among the evolution
education and odometer georeferencing threads. This is definitely worth a look:
http://www.species-id.net/wiki/Neobidessodes_darwiniensis
One way to see the species-ID wiki is that it's a Wikipedia variant, i.e. a
Wikipedia species page with elements of Wikispecies and a lot more detail. Or
maybe a vastly improved and liberated EOL page.
The thought that intrigues me is: what a fantastic resource the species-ID pages
would now be for the first Linnean species, if only we'd had the Net and digital
tools 250 years ago!
<irony>Anyway, since nearly all the world's *important* species are named and
properly classified nowadays, we don't really need a species-ID wiki. It would
be different if most of the world's *important* species were still undescribed,
because we could use a species-ID wiki to build up knowledge about a whole range
of new taxa using 'crowd-sourced' information.</irony>
--
Dr Robert Mesibov
Honorary Research Associate
Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery, and
School of Zoology, University of Tasmania
Home contact: PO Box 101, Penguin, Tasmania, Australia 7316
Ph: (03) 64371195; 61 3 64371195
Webpage: http://www.qvmag.tas.gov.au/?articleID=570
_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these
methods:
(1) http://taxacom.markmail.org
Or (2) a Google search specified as: site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom
your search terms here
________________________________
From: Bob Mesibov <mesibov at southcom.com.au>
To: TAXACOM <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Cc: Lyubomir Penev <info at pensoft.net>
Sent: Tue, 8 February, 2011 2:04:47 PM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Journal/Wiki publication and dissemination of a new taxon
description
More information about the Taxacom
mailing list