User:DGG/sandbox

PART One, Databases
This page gives a list of selected databases and search engines widely used in academic study or research at the college and professional level, For specific linformation about these systems, use the link for each; for general information, see the article, Academic databases and Search engines

List of academic databases and search engines

List
++---+++++---+++++---+++++---++++

PART Two, Librarianship
Library science or library and information science (abbreviated LIS) is the study of issues related to libraries and the information fields. The comibnation phrase, typically refer primarily to library science. This includes academic studies regarding how library resources are used and how people interact with library systems. These studies tend to be specific to certain libraries at certain times. The organization of knowledge for efficient retrieval of relevant information is also a major research goal of LIS. Basic topics in LIS include the acquisition, cataloging, classification, and preservation of library materials. In a more present-day view, a fervent outgrowth of LIS is information architecture. LIS should not be confused with information theory, the mathematical study of the concept of information, or information science, a field related to computer science and cognitive science.

Programs in LIS are interdisciplinary, the subjects taught overlap with the fields of computer science, various social sciences, statistics, and management.

Difference between Library Science and Librarianship
Library Science is sometimes considered distinct from librarianship. One proposed distinction is Theory vs. practice: aimilar to the difference between medicine and doctoring. In this schemne, the distinction made is that librarianship, the application of library science, comprises the practical services rendered by librarians in their day-to-day attempts to meet the needs of library patrons. An alternative scheme is to conside library science both the principles and the practice of the subject, while librarianship is librarianship {ref book Rubin}} a specialized term for the career aspects concerning the individual librarian, for training, status, and professional develepment itself.

There are those who do not see this distinction, and consider the words synonyms, with librarianship used when the longer phrase would seem clumsy. Key advanced textbooks and references books use the words indifferently, such as, such as the classic Busha's Research Methods in Librarianship. In this view, the theory and practice of library work have been integrated from the start: Melville Dewey and Charles C. Cutter were pioneers in both.

Many practicing librarians do not contribute to LIS scholarship but focus on daily operations of their own library systems. Other practicing librarians, particularly in academic libraries, do perform original scholarly LIS research and contribute to the academic end of the field.

Essentially all professional library jobs require an academic LIS degree as certification. In the United States, the certification usually comes from a Master's degree granted by an ALA-accredited institution; the educational program is basically the same for all segments of the professsion. In the United Kingdom, however, there have been moves to broaden the entry requirements to professional library posts, such that qualifications in, or experience of, a number of other disciplines have become more acceptable.{fact} For details, see Education for librarianship.

Repository (academic publishing)
add the links: [[Open Access [[self-archiving

Subject Repository
A subject repository is a real or virtual facility for the deposit of academic  publications, such as journal articles. in a particular subject. is called a subject repository; they can be organized by a government, a government department, or by a research institution, or be autonomous.The two best known are arXiv, for mathematics and physics articles or reports, and PubMed Central for biomedical journal articles.

Deposit of material in such a site may be mandatory fpor a certain group, such as a particular university's doctoral graduates in a thesis repository, or published papers from those holding grants from a particular government agency in a subject repository, or, sometimes, in their own institutional repository. Or it may be voluntary, as usually the case for technical reports at a university.

OAJ
Open access journals are scholarly journals that are available to the user "without financial or other barrier other than access to the internet itself." Some are subsidized, and some require payment on behalf of the author. The subsidized ones are financed by an academic institution or a government information center; those requiring payment are typically financed by money made available to researchers for the purpose from a public or private funding agency, as part of a research grant.

benefits
The primary advantage of open access journals is that the entire content is available to users everywhere regardless of affiliation with a subscribing library. This provides the general benefits of open access, which will benefit:
 * authors of such articles, who will see their papers more read, more cited, and better integrated into the structure of science
 * academic readers in general at institutions that cannot afford the journal, or where the journal is out of scope
 * researchers at smaller institutions, where their library cannot afford the journal
 * readers in general, who may be interested in the subject matter
 * the general public, who will have the opportunity to see what scientific reseach is about
 * taxpayers who will see the results of the research they pay for
 * patients and those caring for them, who will be able to keep abrest of medical research

types for articles
===history=== Many journals have been subsidized ever since the beginnings of scientific journals. It is common for those countries with developing higher educational and research facilities to subsidze the publication of the nation's scientific and academic researchers, and even to provide  for others to publish in such journals, to build up the prestige of these journals and their visibility. Such subsidies have sometimes been partial, to reduce the subscription price, or total, for those readers in the respective countries, but are now often universal.
 * subsidized open access journals===
 * paid-on-behalf-of-the-author open access journals

Electronic article
from article: electronic article Electronic articles are articles in scholarly journals or magazines that can be accessed via electronic transmission. The are a specialized form of electronic document, with a specialized content, purpose, format, metadata, and availability–they consist of individual articles from scholarly journals or magazines (and now sometimes popular magazines), they have the purpose of providing material for academic research and study, they are formatted approximately like printed journal articles, the metadata is entered into specialized databases, such as DOAJ or OACI as well as the databases for the discipline, and they are predominantly available through academic libraries and special libraries, generally at a fixed charge.

Electronic articles can be found as articles in online-only journals, as online versions of articles that appeared in printed journals, The term can also be used for the electronic versions of less formal publications, such as online archives, working paper archives from universities, government agencies, private and public think tanks and institutes and private websites. In many academic areas, specialized Bibliographic databasess are available to find their online content. ,

Most commercial sites are subscription-based, or allow pay-per-view access. Many universities subscribe to electronic journals to provide access to their students and faculty, and it is generally also possible for individuals to subscribe. An increasing number of journals are now available with open access, requiring no subscription. Most working paper archives and articles on personal homepages are free, as are collections in Institutional repositories and Subject repositories.

The most common formats of transmission are HTML, PDF and, in specialized fields like mathematics and physics, TeX and Postscript.

References:

 * an announcement at Liblicense-l, the standard international listserv for libraries and publishers on serials licensing, pricing, and supply.
 * National Electronic Article Repository proposal from the Association of Research Libraries
 * ACM format standards for electronic articles

See also:

 * Academic publishing
 * Bibliographic database
 * Open access journals

SPARC
SPARC - Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Corporation The given reason is: R1 and R3 -- page it points to no longer exists, and if it comes back, it should be "Coalition" not "Corporation" REDIRECT Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Corporation (cur) (last) 14:48, April 27, 2007 NapoliRoma (Talk | contribs) (190 bytes) (speedy req -- nonexistent and incorrect page name) (cur) (last) 22:27, April 26, 2007 Quuxplusone (Talk | contribs) (69 bytes) (moved SPARC - Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Corporation to Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Corporation)
 * Redirect:

Notability of scientists vs their science
<!-- Hey DGG (first off, congratulations on adminship). In this AfD you write "I cannot imagine that a paper written by a scientist could possibly be notable more than the scientist himself" which seems diametrically opposed to my thinking, so I thought I'd invite you to try entertaining it. If a scientist is notable (in the sense of passing WP:PROF) I would assume it is because their work is notable. Surely then they must be at least a degree more trivial than their work. For example, the Hershey-Chase experiment is a very important piece of science, which definitely belongs in an encyclopedia, but I'm not sure that Alfred Hershey or even more so Martha Chase are of the same level of notability. Similarly, Milikan's Oil-drop experiment important in a way that I just don't think the details of Robert Andrews Millikan's life are. Ditto Stanley Milgram's Obedience to Authority Study and Philip Zimbardo's Stanford prison experiment. In all these cases, the experimenters are certainly notable, but I think they are all less encyclopedic than their work. I guess this is what bothers me about the majority of the stubby little wikipedia entries for assorted professors, that their inclusion makes WP look like a cheap Whos-who unless their work is also encyclopedic. The writers of these bios seem disinterested in writing encyclopedic articles about their research topic, the benefit to WP of these articles does not extend to dissemination of knowledge about science, just the vanity, or vanity by proxy, of a puff-biography. Anyway, best of luck with the mop pushing. I'm certain that you'll do fine. Regards, Pete.Hurd 05:54, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, & I went back & adjusted the AfD comment,because you are right that I overgeneralized. ~


 * thanks, and you are right--I seem to have over-generalized in the rush of a single minor AfD, by not thinking of enough examples;-- but so have you:, (in my field) the example fails with people who make multiple important discoveries or who publish more than one important paper. As an extreme, consider Pauling: his applications of QMechanics to the chemical bond, and the method for finding the secondary structure of proteins were both important And a  very good case can be made that the discovery of the double helix was different because W&C solved it, than if Pauling had done so--the cultural impact was much greater. And Crick's life work in turn consists of much more than just this discovery, as does Watson's.  (In this I follow the historiographic approach of my advisor, Gunther Stent.)
 * More important, it's a question of proportion between the two: take Millikan--the experiment is more important than the details of his life, but the general outline of his career as a US physicist at the time was more important than the details of the experiment. What he proved is of course more important than either. I say he proved, you'd probably say his experiment proved. In most WP articles on people outside of science, there is a great tendency for the bio to be over detailed. In most WP articles on living scientists, I think it's the other way round, for lack of information. In the academic world outside of science, it is rare for a reputation to rest on a single book, although a single book may be representative.
 * In terms of organizing a general encyclopedia, I think the biographical approach is the more comprehensible to the general reader. What people are generally most interested in is people.
 * the question is what level of academics do we include. Again in a history-of-science approach, as exemplified by the mathematics Genealogy Project and similar work in chemistry, perhaps anybody who has had more than a trivial number of doctoral & post-doc students is notable. Stent qualifies--he had about 20 overall. I don't: I had one. Usually the level where one begins to have post-docs is associate professor.
 * think we should give the same depth of coverage as in other fields. I speculated on the N people page a while back that it should be some sort of percentage.
 * In practice, to avoid fighting each individual case, I think we should approach it like from schools: there is a clearly notable end (colleges) and a clearly non-notable (elementary schools) and having gotten these accepted we can try to come to the middle, and seem to be agreeing that most middle schools are not, and most HSs are. I don't personally thing most HSs are, but I'd be delighted to concede 10,000 HSs to keep out 50,000 JrHighSchools.  then we can write the articles instead of arguing about them. In our case, I'll gladly concede almost all Asst Profs, to get the full profs at research universities. (Obviously there are exceptions in any direction for all of these.) I'm thinking of the depts I know best as departments--Ecology and Chemistry at  Princeton and MolBio & Biochem at Berkeley, where I know the details of careers and people, and I would be prepared to make a case for each individual full professor there in terms of an encyclopedia-worthy career in purely scientific terms--in the sense that I could probably write an article on each discussing only the science, and in the practical sense that when they retire or die  they'll all of them get a full bio notice either in Biographic memoirs of the NAS or a festchrift, etc. I intend to try, btw.  But first I want to get the members of the NAS who dont have bios here--swome actually did and have had them deleted. would you say the same of Texas?  What I would like to try is setting out the issues in an essay together with you--an essay because we dont have to actually come to a single conclusion: call it Factors affecting the notability of scientists. ?~ -->

,
User:DGG, User_talk:DGG, /edits to ck, /pages to revisit, /people, /priorities. /std talk pp, /std art text, /to insert, /sandbox /projects, /AfDs, /WP Projects, /other wikis