Jump to content

Talk:F1000 (publisher)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Larry.leung.f1000 (talk | contribs) at 14:28, 21 February 2022 (→‎Delete Sciwheel). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Untitled

Some potentially libellous material removed. Cloning jedi (talk) 14:02, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism

There is still the line on this page where it says "F1000 has been criticized for unclear review standards". That could be said of pretty much every journal. I had added in 2014 that this criticism comes from the CEO and Editor of a well-known competitor, a subscription-based closed access journal on scholarly kitchen, a blog platform of many people across the closed-access publishing industry. Someone removed this sentence right away. But scholarlykitchen is always criticizing open-access journals and preprints. It's the official blog of an industry association. Their main theme is that you cannot trust preprints and open access is the wrong approach. It's not a bad website, but it's very far from an independent source. It's like saying that the National Review criticised Joe Biden. I think some criticism of F1000 (there is some, as with most publishers) should be sourced either from an independent source, hedged as coming from a publishing industry blog platform or entirely removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maximilianh (talk • contribs) 09:04, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Advertisement?

This page has the feel of an advertisement so I added the tag at the top Aaronatwpi (talk) 06:48, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links

The link: Telegraph article on F1000 evaluation it is not what it says. It is a publication of a particular evaluation by Telegraph. What the title implies is that it is a cover by Telegraph of the F1000 evaluation process. I think it is deliberately promotional and it should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kantale (talk • contribs) 12:09, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Faculty of 1000. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:03, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Update the brand name

  • Specific text to be added or removed: Please add'F1000' and delete 'Faculty of 1000'.
  • Reason for the change: 'F1000' is the current brand name. It was formerly known as 'Faculty of 1000'.
  • References supporting change: Please find the links to some news about this acquisition:

https://www.infotoday.eu/Articles/News/Featured-News/Taylor-and-Francis-Acquires-F1000-Research-136024.aspx https://www.thebookseller.com/news/taylor-francis-buys-f1000-research-ltd-1150791

Larry.leung.f1000 (talk) 16:02, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: page move requests should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves. courtesy ping @Larry.leung.f1000: IAmChaos 06:08, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Update the intro paragraph

  • Specific text to be added or removed: Please delete 'Faculty of 1000 (abbreviated F1000) is a publisher of services for life scientists and clinical researchers. It was acquired by Taylor & Francis Group in January 2020.'

Please add 'F1000 (formerly known as Faculty of 1000) provides open research publishing solutions and services to organizations such as the European Commission, Wellcome, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, as well as directly to researchers through its own publishing platform, F1000Research. F1000 is wholly owned by the Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa Group company.'

  • Reason for the change: The brand name is changed after the acquisition. The company also expands the publishing solutions and services, not only for life scientists and clinical researchers.
  • References supporting change: Please find a few links for supporting-

http://mandasoft.com/acquisition/?Source=segmentView&SearchID=C102970797 https://www.infodocket.com/2020/01/10/scholarly-publishing-taylor-francis-acquires-f1000-research/ https://www.thebookseller.com/news/taylor-francis-buys-f1000-research-ltd-1150791 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00496-z https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/gates-foundation-joins-shift-towards-open-access-platforms https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/901723 https://sciencebusiness.net/framework-programmes/news/new-eu-open-peer-review-system-stirs-debate


Larry.leung.f1000 (talk) 16:13, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Update history

  • Specific text to be added or removed: To add

In 2010, F1000 launched F1000Posters to enable researchers to openly and freely share their conference posters and slides. In 2013, F1000 launched its own open research publishing platform, F1000Research, with the industry’s first mandatory open data policy, framed around what later would become the FAIR principles. In 2014, F1000Research published a failed replication study regarding the highly prominent but controversial STAP stem cells. It has reinforced the importance of rapid publication, data sharing and transparent peer review. In 2015, F1000Research published its 1000th article. It also pioneered the use of ‘living and interactive figures’ embedded within research articles.

  • Reason for the change: to add what happened in between 2010 and 2017.
  • References supporting change:

For F1000Poster- https://www.newswire.com/f1000-posters-over-100-conferences/78565

For F1000Research- https://finance.yahoo.com/news/f1000research-provides-researchers-fast-transparent-133000125.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAANqHtWdXYz97zb0Xg2xk1NI5uiLQ-DIBhRW4bPbssm7YcfKnMsqCfINAG9Auxci1s9xFKZiQehB5FLwOr0iQsVJkoLGumRyQzofjtLyxu1dC9Yg9p75Zq1vsvLVLqh6v90c7iwI0lqhsexyLKn-RZW-K2FOdDJwB4EuNUTCo7Gvk

For 2014 F1000Research published a failed replication study- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4995676/

For 2015 'living and interactive figures'- https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/475419

Larry.leung.f1000 (talk) 12:10, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Not done The text is copied verbatim from their website. That causes two problems: 1/ the text is not neutral and encyclopedic and even worse: 2/ constitutes a copyright violation. As for the references that you provided, they are not independent because they are either directly published by F1000 or press releases provided by F1000 (and, again, this makes the text non-neutral, which illustrates why such sources are not acceptable). --Randykitty (talk) 13:45, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Apologies, I've deleted the previous comments as I added it wrongly to this thread. Sorry again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Larry.leung.f1000 (talk • contribs) 16:06, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 14 February 2022

Faculty of 1000 → F1000 – 'F1000' is the current brand name. It was formerly known as 'Faculty of 1000'. When one searches F1000 on google, F1000.com appears. F1000's business of open research F1000Research was acquired by Taylor & Francis Group in 2020. Please find the M&A information at http://mandasoft.com/acquisition/?Source=segmentView&SearchID=C102970797. Larry.leung.f1000 (talk) 15:42, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add, as I am aware of the URL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F1000 houses other variations of F1000, is it possible to change the title (highlighted in the screen shot) of the page to F1000? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Larry.leung.f1000 (talk • contribs) 16:07, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Larry.leung.f1000: Do you think that this page is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for F1000? Please explain the reason further. Sawol (talk) 04:17, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Sawol: No, there are other topics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F1000. F1000 was formerly known as Faculty of 1000. Is it possible to change the page name to "F1000 (Faculty of 1000)"? I have also raised another request to update the intro paragraph. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Larry.leung.f1000 (talk • contribs) 15:44, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
F1000 (Faculty of 1000) is not an acceptable title, per WP:NCDAB. 162 etc. (talk) 17:37, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@65.92.246.142: F1000 (publisher) is more accurate. I will make another request to move once this discussion is closed. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Larry.leung.f1000 (talk • contribs) 12:11, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Faculty Opinions

  • Specific text to be added or removed: Please delete the section of 'Faculty Opinions'
  • Reason for the change: It is no longer a service provided by F1000 after the acquisition by Taylor & Francis (part of Informa).

Larry.leung.f1000 (talk) 10:38, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Larry.leung.f1000 (talk) 10:38, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That seems a violation of WP:RECENTISM. Wikipedia is not only a record of what is right now, rather it also covers history. WP:NOTNEWS Wikipedia is not a news source. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 04:25, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The reference provided does not state that Faculty Opinions is part of F1000Research or not. It only states that the name changed after F1000Research was sold. It doesn't say anything about who owns Faculty Opinions. So the reference provided does not support the nature of the request -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 04:41, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@65.92.246.142: Understood that Wikipedia also covers history as well as maintains accurate information. The service 'Faculty Opinions' is not provided by F1000 now. It is a service provided by Sciencenow Group. Please refer to below two sources:

  • Bulleted list item

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitek_Tracz - According to this wikipedia page, "In January 2020, F1000 Research was acquired by Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa Company. Sciencenow Group continues to offer the literature evaluation service, now branded Faculty Opinions, alongside Sciwheel, a reference management solution."

  • Bulleted list item

https://sciencenow.com/ - According to Sciencenow's website, Faculty Opinions is one of Sciencenow group's services providing "personalized recommendations of the best research articles in biology and medicine by the world's largest group of leading scientists".

This service is provided by another company, so I've requested to delete it on an F1000 wikipedia article.

Larry.leung.f1000 (talk) 14:25, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Sciwheel

  • Specific text to be added or removed: Please delete the section of 'Sciwheel'
  • Reason for the change: It is no longer a service provided by F1000 after the acquisition by Taylor & Francis (part of Informa).
That seems a violation of WP:RECENTISM. Wikipedia is not only a record of what is right now, rather it also covers history. WP:NOTNEWS Wikipedia is not a news source. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 04:25, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The reference you are using does not mention either way who owns Sciwheel, only that the name changed after F1000Research was sold. It doesn't say if Sciwheel is part of F1000Research or not, so the reference does not support your claim -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 04:37, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@65.92.246.142: Understood that Wikipedia also covers history as well as maintains accurate information. The service 'Sciwheel' is not provided by F1000 now. It is a service provided by Sciencenow Group. Please refer to below two sources:

  • Bulleted list item

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitek_Tracz - According to this wikipedia page, "In January 2020, F1000 Research was acquired by Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa Company. Sciencenow Group continues to offer the literature evaluation service, now branded Faculty Opinions, alongside Sciwheel, a reference management solution."

  • Bulleted list item

https://sciencenow.com/ - According to Sciencenow's website, Sciwheel is one of Sciencenow group's services providing "a rich suite of tools to help with writing, collaborating, reference management and preparation for publishing in the journal of your choice."

This service is provided by another company, so I've requested to delete it on an F1000 wikipedia article.

Larry.leung.f1000 (talk) 14:27, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:F1000_(publisher)&oldid=1073205271"