Re: Deposit without editor or quality checking

From: Stevan Harnad <harnad_at_ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 13:18:40 +0100

p On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, J.W.T.Smith wrote:

> We are coming under pressure to speed up the addition of new items to our
> repository by academics. We use the EPrints package which has a reviewing
> stage which means items are deposited in a review area and don't become
> visible in the public repository until they have been checked by an
> editor. It is being proposed that all depositors be allowed to move items
> into the public repository with any editing being done later.
>
> Does anyone already do this, i.e., allow direct deposit into the public
> repository without any editorial or quality control checking? If so has it
> caused any problems?
>
> John Smith, Administrator - Kent Academic Repository (KAR) University of
> Kent.

Yes, direct deposit without a checking phase is an infinitely better
policy. It is simpler, more satisfying to authors, and avoids needless
backlogs.

If you want to have a checking phase, it can be done in the background,
AFTER the item is deposited and already OA to all, and if there are any
problems, they can be conveyed to the author. But meanwhile the deposit
is immediately OA. (Users may also occasionally report problems with a
deposit, and that too can be conveyed to the author when the time comes.)

At Southampton, we started with a checking buffer, but we very soon
phased it out as an unnecessary and inefficient disincentive to authors.

The EPrints software is designed so you can easily configure it to
omit the checking phase.

Stevan Harnad
Received on Thu Sep 24 2009 - 19:45:37 BST