Ten days ago Information Standards Quarterly (ISQ) published a special issue on altmetrics. I was the guest editor for the five altmetrics articles, and in the editorial that I titled Altmetrics have come of age I argued that
We no longer need to talk about whether it is possible to reliably collect altmetrics, or whether this is valuable information that can complement citations and usage statistics.
Unfortunately Wikipedia - which is of course an important source of altmetrics information and was also mentioned in the editorial - doesn’t think so. When you try to go to the Altmetrics page on the English Wikipedia, you get this:
In other words, you are redirected to a short section on the Impact Factor page. I would go and start an altmetrics (and article-level metrics) page, but with my professional involvement in altmetrics it is difficult to write from a neutral point of view, one of the core Wikipedia policies.
Differences between ORCID and DataCite Metadata
One of the first tasks for DataCite in the European Commission-funded THOR project, which started in June, was to contribute to a comparison of the ORCID and DataCite metadata standards. Together with ORCID, CERN, the British Library and Dryad we looked at how contributors, ...
The DataCite MDC Stack
In May, the Make Data Count team announced that we have received additional funding from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation for work on the Make Data Count (MDC) initiative. This will enable DataCite to do additional work in two important areas:Implement ...
Using Jupyter Notebooks with GraphQL and the PID Graph
Two weeks ago DataCite announced the pre-release version of a GraphQL API [Fenner (2019)]. GraphQL simplifies complex queries that for example want to retrieve information about the authors, funding and data citations for a dataset with a DataCite DOI. ...