LIBLICENSE-L Archives

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum

LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU
Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
Re: Adequate Peer Review?
From:
LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 26 Feb 2013 19:47:16 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (21 lines) 
From: Elena Giglia <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 08:56:00 +0100

I think peer review goes far over copyediting.  What about a perfectly
written work with fabricated data?  Let's have a look to Retraction
Watch to see how deep and diffuse is scientific misconduct:

http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/

This is what peer review should be about, and this is actually the "decline"

Elena

dott.ssa Elena Giglia
Responsabile Progetti Open Access
Università degli Studi di Torino
+39.011.6705923
skype: egiglia
Pubblicazioni e presentazioni in Open Access su E-LIS:
http://tinyurl.com/6gbgaj2

ATOM RSS1 RSS2