University of Glasgow

Roderic Page

![Logo](http://lh6.ggpht.com/_Gct8lVAxKqQ/TdovRMjLHrI/AAAAAAAAA4o/eY9LNLtx6Q0/logo.gif?imgmax=800){border="0"
width="130" height="60" style="float:right;padding:8px;"}My article
describing [BioStor](http://biostor.org) --- \"Extracting scientific
articles from a large digital archive: BioStor and the Biodiversity
Heritage Library\" --- has finally seen the light of day in *BMC
Bioinformatics*
([doi:10.1186/1471-2105-12-187](http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-12-187),
the DOI is not working at the moment, give it a little while to go live,
meantime [you can access the article
here](http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2105/12/187)).  
  
Getting this article published was more work than I expected. There
seems to be an inverse correlation between how important I think the
work is and how easy it is to get published --- the more straightforward
I think the article is the more work it is to convince the referees of
its merits. Of course, it may be that my judgement of the article\'s
merits influences how much effort I put into making the manuscript as
rigorous and clear as possible. And perhaps having a blog has spoiled
me, I really struggle with the notion that it takes months to publish a
paper, especially as most of the intellectual debate involved (i.e., the
refereeing process) is behind closed doors, compared to the open and
immediate nature of commentary on a blog post.  
  
However, despite my frustrations with the referring process, there\'s no
doubt that it did improve the manuscript (you can see the original
version at Nature Precedings,
[hdl:10101/npre.2010.4928.1](http://hdl.handle.net/10101/npre.2010.4928.1)).  
  
With the publication of this article, and last week\'s [conversation
with Anurag Acharya and Darcy Dapra about getting BioStor indexed by
Google Scholar](http://twitter.com/rdmpage/status/71261954852929536), it
has been a good few days for [BioStor](http://biostor.org).  
  
  
  


My article describing BioStor — "Extracting scientific articles from a large digital archive: BioStor and the Biodiversity Heritage Library" — has finally seen the light of day in
<em>
 BMC Bioinformatics
</em>
(doi:10.1186/1471-2105-12-187, the DOI is not working at the moment, give it a little while to go live, meantime you can access the article here).  Getting this article published was more work than I expected.

BioStor article published (finally)

![\_\_logo\_\_1.jpg](http://lh5.ggpht.com/_Gct8lVAxKqQ/TZTf0VHfdsI/AAAAAAAAA4Y/Eh2-sZqWCcw/__logo__1.png?imgmax=800){border="0"
width="322" height="37" align="right"}  
My paper describing the mapping between NCBI and Wikipedia has been
published in [PLoS Currents: Tree of
Life](http://knol.google.com/k/plos/plos-currents-tree-of-life/28qm4w0q65e4w/46).
You can see the paper
[here](http://knol.google.com/k/roderic-d-m-page/linking-ncbi-to-wikipedia-a-wiki-based/16h5bb3g3ntlu/2).
It\'s only just gone live, so it\'s yet to get a PubMed Central number
(one of the nice features of PLoS Currents is that the articles get
archived in PMC).  
  
Publishing in PLoS Currents: Tree of Life was a pleasant experience. The
Google Knol editing environment was easy to use, and the reviewing
process quick. It\'s obviously a new and rather experimental journal,
and there are a few things that could be improved. Automatically looking
up articles by PubMed identifier is nice, but it would also be great to
do this for DOIs as well. Furthermore, the PubMed identifiers aren\'t
displayed as clickable links, which rather defeats the point of having
references on the web (I\'ve added DOI links to the articles wherever
possible). But, minor grumbles aside, as a way to get an Open Access
article published for free, and have it archived in PubMed Central, PLoS
Currents is hard to beat. What will be interesting is whether the
article receives any comments. This seems to be one area online journals
haven\'t really cracked --- providing an environment where people want
to engage in discussion.


My paper describing the mapping between NCBI and Wikipedia has been published in PLoS Currents: Tree of Life. You can see the paper here. It's only just gone live, so it's yet to get a PubMed Central number (one of the nice features of PLoS Currents is that the articles get archived in PMC).  Publishing in PLoS Currents: Tree of Life was a pleasant experience. The Google Knol editing environment was easy to use, and the reviewing process quick.

Messaggi di Rogue Scholar

BioStor article published (finally)

Paper on NCBI and Wikipedia published in PLoS Currents: Tree of Life