A list of what is still to do for this Homogenisation Journal. Much of the software will be necessary for other grassroots journals as well.
What is necessary to build a community with multiple grassroots journals (procedures to start one, oversight, etc.) is not mentioned below, but discussed on the blog for grassroots scientific publishing.
Make more reviews (which are called assessments here to distinguish them from traditional reviews made to determine whether a paper is publishable) and convert mock assessments into real ones.
Create a group of editors to become the Editorial Board. Editors select which articles will undergo assessment and write the final synthesis assessment. To be determined whether one or multiple editors will be responsible for one article. Editors invite assessors to assess these articles. The Editorial Board directs the main lines of the journal, e.g. the topics to include. The Editorial Board draws up a Terms of Reference for the journal.
In case of trouble other scientific journals have an academic society or publisher behind them. Once we have several grassroots journals we should also create organisations for groups of journals. Until then journals could have a supervisory board, which can invite and remove editors and interpret the Terms of Reference. It is also responsible for the interactions with other grassroots journals. Scientific board members should not be editors themselves, they can be reviewers.
Build a group of reviewers/assessors.
Are the categories we use for the papers the right ones?
- Homogenisation methods
- Correction methods
- Detection methods
- Validation and uncertainty quantification
- Review papers
The comment boxes should be extended to make it easy for the people writing assessments to add the five assessment categories: “Contribution to the scientific field of the journal”, “Impact on the larger scientific community”, “The technical quality of the paper”, “Importance at the time of publishing”, “Importance of the research program” and to add a link to any web annotations.
Automatically add annotations, if available, to the specific comments.
Allow for replies (need to automatically get the same comment type as the comment replied to).
List comment type on the administration panel for the comments and make it possible to change the comment type for single comments (already works for “bulk changes” and on the edit comment page).
A moderation tool for the web annotations, which allows the editors to moved the annotations from the group “Homogenisation Journal” to “Public” and the other way around. This should include the ability to add annotations from other grassroots journals to our “Homogenisation Journal”.
Editors should get a warning on their dashboard that annotations have been added to the public stream that could be moved to the journal stream, as well as of comments submitted to the articles they are editor of. On request the editor should also get a email notification. Authors should be able to get an email notification if there are any changes to the assessment (accepted comments or journal annotations).
When the first version of an assessment is written, it would be good to be able to show this to the authors for comments before it is published to all. This would improve the quality of the assessments.
A database with the references and assessments. This should allow for versioning in case assessments change and should make it easy to copy a grassroots journal and start your own. This database should get a reliable backup system as the assessments are part of the scientific literature. The assessments should also get a doi so that they can be cited.
There should not only be categories for the type of study (validation, homogenisation methods, methodology, etc.), but also for the authors of the study and the names of the assessors.
Once the number of assessed articles becomes larger, the journal needs an advanced search where the title, author, journal, year, etc. can be specified.
Make a WordPress plugin that allows the editors to just give the doi and have it be replaced by a reference linking to our assessment.
Make a WordPress plugin so that the readers can up- and downvote the articles we did not assess yet to indicate the ones they would like to see assessed.
A plugin that converts references suggested by readers in the comments into an editable proposal for a reference entry in the reference database.
Have new posts/assessments start with a default text with the structure “synthesis, assessment 1, assessment 2” and the assessment categories.
Automatically add a footer below every assessment post: “Everyone is welcome to make comments on this paper below. The comments are pre-moderated (will only appear after approval by the editors) to ensure they are on topic.”