Talk:Europe PubMed Central

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Academic Journals (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Academic Journals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Academic Journals on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
See WikiProject Academic Journals' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.
WikiProject Computational Biology (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computational Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computational Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
 
WikiProject Open (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon Europe PubMed Central is within the scope of WikiProject Open, a collaborative attempt at improving Wikimedia content with the help of openly licensed materials and improving Wikipedia articles related to openness (including open access publishing, open educational resources, etc.). If you would like to participate, visit the project page for more information.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Open Access (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon Europe PubMed Central is part of WikiProject Open Access, a collaborative attempt at improving the coverage of topics related to Open Access and at improving other articles with the help of materials from Open Access sources. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

I changed from "offers open access" to "offers free access". Open access is kind of a loaded term, but generally it means unlimited rights to use and reuse. Except for a very small subset of true OA content, most of UKPMC is licensed content that is free to download on a per-article basis, but without rights beyond that. Rakerman (talk) 23:03, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

European update[edit]

Hi,

I'm the engagement manager for UKPMC. I have made some updates to the current article.

We have recently announced that the European Research Council is joining UKPMC, and that because of increased European funder representation we will also be changing the name of the service from UKPMC to Europe PubMed Central (Europe PMC) from 1 Nov 2012.

Here are some details:

This will need some major changes to the article, and I have suggested some new text below:

The European Research Council (ERC) announced on 13 July 2012 that it will participate in the UKPMC open access repository service, joining 18 existing UK and European funders. The ERC becomes the third European funder to join UKPMC, following Telethon Italy and the Austrian Research Fund. As a result of this participation, the existing funders have agreed that the service will be rebranded as Europe PubMed Central (Europe PMC) by 1 November 2012. A key aim of this initiative is to extend the repository further and encourage other European funders of life sciences research to make the outputs of the research they fund freely available through Europe PMC.

Anna M Kinsey (talk) 13:11, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

  • I don't see the need to introduce this press-release text. Once ERC is mention on the list of participating organisations, it can simply be added to the list already in the article. As for the name change, once that has been effectuated, this article can be moved to the new name and the article adapted accordingly. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 13:30, 17 July 2012 (UTC)


I'm happy to leave these edits until they actually happen - I just wanted to be sure that I had signalled the coming changes so that it was known about it advance. Thanks for the advice.
Anna
Anna M Kinsey (talk) 12:30, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
On 1st November, UKPMC changed to Europe PubMed Central, now at europepmc.org. I would be grateful if the name of this article could be updated to reflect this change.
Thanks inn advance for your help.
Kind regards
Anna
Engagement Manager (talk) 14:50, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Updates required[edit]

Hi,

Thanks for welcoming me to Wikipedia!

There are some parts of the current UKPMC entry that are now out of date, and I'd like to work with the Wikipedia community to change these and make sure that the entry is representative of the current service.

I've included a draft below that modifies the text currently in the Service section of the entry to what I believe is a fair description of where the service is now, and I welcome input and advice around the wording and how to ensure the entry is updated. I also separated the information into 'Background' and 'Service', as it makes more sense to me this way, but happy to hear from others.

Some key points:

  • The service began initially as a mirror of PMC but is now more than that, both in terms of the content available to users and the functionality of the service.
  • PubMed Central Canada has since joined the PMC International repositories, and it seems appropriate to also mention them for completeness.
  • The future plans mentioned are no longer an accurate representation - the service has developed since this was written and UKPMC-specific features and enhanced content are now available (some briefly mentioned in the suggested 'new' Service section.
  • The contract to develop UKPMC is now led by EMBL-EBI, who deliver the service with the British Library and the University of Manchester.
  • The number of funders is now 18, not 8.
  • I have suggested a reference to the funders page on ukpmc that sets out the overarching open access mandate of the funders, with links to their own detailed open access policies - apologies as I don't think I've used the correct markup language for this.

Suggested text:

Background[edit]

UKPMC is based on the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) PubMed and PubMed Central. The UKPMC project was originally launched in 2007 as the first ‘mirror’ site to PMC, which aims to provide international preservation of the open and free-access biomedical and life sciences literature. It forms part of a network of PMC International[1] (PMCI) repositories that now also includes PubMed Central Canada. UKPMC has since grown from a simple ‘mirror’ of the PMC database to a standalone site developed in consultation with the research community[2].

The resource is managed and developed by the European Molecular Biology Laboratory-European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI), along with The British Library and The University of Manchester (Mimas and NaCTeM) on behalf of an alliance of 18 biomedical and life sciences research funders, led by the Wellcome Trust. The UKPMC funders group requires that articles describing the results of biomedical and life sciences research they have supported be made freely available in UKPMC within 6 months of publication to maximise the impact of the work that they fund[3].

Service[edit]

UKPMC provides free access to more than 2 million full-text biomedical research articles and more than 26 million citations from PubMed and AGRICOLA, patents from the European Patent Office and UK clinical guidelines[4]. Content is discoverable via an integrated full-text and abstract search, and is enriched by citation information and the application of text-mining approaches to provide enhanced subject matter, such as link-outs from the UKPMC collection to molecular and medical datasets[5]. The Grant Lookup facility enables anyone to search and retrieve information on around 40 000 grants awarded by the UKPMC funders.

In addition, UKPMC offers a manuscript submission system, UKPMC+, which allows scientists to submit their peer-reviewed research articles for inclusion in the UKPMC collection, and grant reporting tools – these features are currently restricted to the UKPMC funding agencies and the Principal Investigator (PI) on grants awarded by those funders.


Many thanks in advance for your help.

Anna

Anna M Kinsey (talk) 15:56, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Anna M Kinsey, Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia, and especially for realising your potential conflict of interest and putting the information on the Talk pages. That is completely the right way for you to add content to this particular article. I'm a bit busy right now, but please be patient and we'll go through your suggestions and add what is important and relevant :) Alexbateman (talk) 16:27, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
At first glance, the tone of the text looks reasonable to me - but would it be possible to get a few inline citations to support the text? (Particularly the changed bits). bobrayner (talk) 16:32, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi Alexbateman bobrayner

Thanks. I've added some references (2 and 5 are actually the same thing - I couldn't work out how to show this). They're not all original research articles, but they do take you to the source of the information. I hope this is helpful.

Best,
Anna
Anna M Kinsey (talk) 16:53, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi Anna M Kinsey, I've merged the text in, with modifications to tone down some of the language to make it more neutral. I also removed one or two bits that did not seem of high interest to readers. But otherwise its in relatively unscathed. Thanks for the contribution. BTW if you have a logo and add it to Wikimedia commons we can show that in the infobox. Alexbateman (talk) 17:27, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
As an aside, if it's not possible to release a logo with a relatively open license (which is what Wikimedia Commons would expect before you can upload) then I could just upload one here, for use only on this article, with a fair-use rationale. Image licensing can be a bit of a challenge for new editors! bobrayner (talk) 18:44, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks both (Alexbateman bobrayner) for your input and for adding the updated content to the entry.
You pre-empted a question about inserting a logo! So thanks - I just need to go away and check out the rights around that.
I understand your reasoning around the minor edits you made to my suggested text, however they raise a couple of concerns that I hope we can discuss here. In particular, 'Content is discoverable via an integrated full-text and abstract search', which was not included in the update, points to a key difference between UKPMC and PMC and PubMed - the latter are two separate resources, and for those readers who are aware of that, the absence of any mention of the UKPMC search could be misleading, or at least cause them to make an incorrect assumption about the service.
The second concern is removal of 'these features are currently restricted to the UKPMC funding agencies and the Principal Investigator (PI) on grants awarded by these funders'. This may lead readers to assume that all scientists could use the repository for their peer-reviewed research articles - this is definitely not the case, and is a question I'm asked a lot by scientists who want to make their research freely available but who are not funded by one of the UKPMC funders. There may be a better way of making the point in the entry, but I do feel that it needs to be made.
I'm very happy to hear your views on these points.
I'm going to be out of the office for the remainder of the day, so my apologies if I don't get back to you on anything straightaway.
Kind regards,
Anna
Anna M Kinsey (talk) 13:39, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. DrKiernan (talk) 12:11, 10 November 2012 (UTC)


UK PubMed CentralEurope PubMed Central – On 1st November, Europe PubMed Central (http://europepmc.org) replaced UK PubMed Central (http://ukpmc.ac.uk) - the UKPMC URL no longer functions but autoforwards to the Europe PMC domain. For more about the renaming see the press release and blog announcement among others.

I already updated links and mentions of UKPMC in the article body to Europe PMC - I didn't think this was contentious or a conflict of interest as they are purely factual changes, but apologies if it's felt this is not the case.

I tried to request the name change yesterday by adding to a previous comment, rather than using these move conventions that I've only just discovered - apologies for my lack of experience in doing this the correct way!

Best regards, Anna

Anna M Kinsey (talk) 12:24, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

  • Support WP:COMMONNAME sticklers might point out that the former name gets more Google hits, but it's difficult for me to think of a way we serve the interests of our readers by not keeping our article at a former name. Anna, I think your edits were fine, but I'm also going to add something about the name change and bold the old name. Especially while the article is still at the old name, this accords with our "principle of least astonishment." --BDD (talk) 17:16, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Support. This is a rather special case in which the new official name is certain to receive even faster common adoption than Google will show, owing to the nature of the topic. So there is no point in delaying the article title change. Andrewa (talk) 09:10, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
  1. ^ [1]
  2. ^ [2]
  3. ^ [3]
  4. ^ [4]
  5. ^ [5]