Difference between revisions of "Acknowledgements"
(first draft based on own thinking) |
(→Result) |
||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
{{discussion | {{discussion | ||
| − | | | + | |Statements= |
This object was developed as a collaborative work with the following contributions: | This object was developed as a collaborative work with the following contributions: | ||
* N.N. acted as a moderator and collected most of the scientific information during 2007-2008. | * N.N. acted as a moderator and collected most of the scientific information during 2007-2008. | ||
| Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
* The following contributors have made technical edits and improved grammar or style: Q.Q., R.R., S.S. | * The following contributors have made technical edits and improved grammar or style: Q.Q., R.R., S.S. | ||
* The Institute of T. funded the work (research grant #) | * The Institute of T. funded the work (research grant #) | ||
| − | | | + | |Resolution= Accepted. |
|Argumentation = | |Argumentation = | ||
{{defend|1|I participated in discussions that clearly improved the definition.|--P.P.}} | {{defend|1|I participated in discussions that clearly improved the definition.|--P.P.}} | ||
Revision as of 12:49, 16 November 2009
This page is a method.
The page identifier is Op_en2763 |
|---|
| Moderator:Nobody (see all) Click here to sign up. |
|
Give your opinion to the peer rating of the content of this page. |
| Upload data
|
<section begin=glossary />
- Acknowledgements is a particular discussion on the Discussion page of an object. It describes the contributions of each contributor of the object until the time when the acknowledgement is written. It also describes the resource contributors (such as research grants).
<section end=glossary />
Scope
How should the contributions of open assessors and other contributors be acknowledged in such a way that
- the process fulfils the criteria of open assessment, specifically open participation,
- the contributions are documented in a way that is accepted as a documentation of scientific merit,
- it is possible to make permanent documents out of the product and acknowledgements to be used in the same way as scientific articles?
Definition
Input
At least the following things are inputs to the process:
- An object that has been developed.
- Information from the history of the object about who contributed and what.
- Evaluation criteria for different kinds of contributions.
Output
The output describes who did and what in a way that is not disputed by any of the contributors.
Rationale
Acknowledgements must be some kind of a statement about who did and what. Therefore, it is easiest to make it in a form of a discussion that has the acknowledgement as its statement.
Result
Acknowledgement is a description of the cumulative work done for an object during its lifetime in Opasnet. It is located on the Talk page of the object. The statement has the following structure (example):
Statements: This object was developed as a collaborative work with the following contributions:
Resolution: Accepted. (A stable resolution, when found, should be updated to the main page.) |
| Argumentation:
←1: I participated in discussions that clearly improved the definition. --P.P. ⇤2 I participated in the discussions, too. I want my name in. --S.S.
|
