6,480
edits
Talk:Scientific Blackpill: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
no edit summary
mNo edit summary |
|||
| Line 77: | Line 77: | ||
DOI is linked in that same page, it's: | DOI is linked in that same page, it's: | ||
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ehb.2018.03.003 | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ehb.2018.03.003 | ||
--previously unsigned comment by [[:User:Eth]] | |||
: Excellent idea, but it would require a bit of work. Will hopefully be done eventually. Was originally going to suggest this myself, but forgot. [[User:Altmark22|Altmark22]] ([[User talk:Altmark22|talk]]) 19:17, 31 December 2019 (UTC) | : Excellent idea, but it would require a bit of work. Will hopefully be done eventually. Was originally going to suggest this myself, but forgot. [[User:Altmark22|Altmark22]] ([[User talk:Altmark22|talk]]) 19:17, 31 December 2019 (UTC) | ||
:: Unfortunately it's not straight forward to convert URLs to DOIs: https://www.crossref.org/blog/urls-and-dois-a-complicated-relationship/ But I do not think this is a huge issue as it is unlikely for these URLs to become invalid anytime soon and if they do they can easily be retrieved by authors, year and title. More worried about our sloppy refs elsewhere in the Wiki where we only cite URLs. [[User:Bibipi|Bibipi]] ([[User talk:Bibipi|talk]]) 22:56, 31 December 2019 (UTC) | :: Unfortunately it's not straight forward to convert URLs to DOIs: https://www.crossref.org/blog/urls-and-dois-a-complicated-relationship/ But I do not think this is a huge issue as it is unlikely for these URLs to become invalid anytime soon and if they do they can easily be retrieved by authors, year and title. More worried about our sloppy refs elsewhere in the Wiki where we only cite URLs. [[User:Bibipi|Bibipi]] ([[User talk:Bibipi|talk]]) 22:56, 31 December 2019 (UTC) | ||
:: Would also be a good idea to start replacing links to key non peer-reviewed news articles and the like with archived links. They are at a much higher risk for link rot than links to sciencedirect and so on. Some of those sections have very valuable info. [[User:Altmark22|Altmark22]] ([[User talk:Altmark22|talk]]) 23:36, 1 January 2020 (UTC) 23:23, 1 January 2020 (UTC) | :: Would also be a good idea to start replacing links to key non peer-reviewed news articles and the like with archived links. They are at a much higher risk for link rot than links to sciencedirect and so on. Some of those sections have very valuable info. [[User:Altmark22|Altmark22]] ([[User talk:Altmark22|talk]]) 23:36, 1 January 2020 (UTC) 23:23, 1 January 2020 (UTC) | ||