Scholarpedia talk:Assistant Editor/Identify Original Authors

Acknowledgment for Identifying Accepted Author/Article

Here (for now) is where we can discuss how to properly acknowledge assistant editors who suggested Author/Article pairs that get accepted.

I (JPSalisbury) don't have any strong convictions presently about this and would rather leave it open to the suggestions of others. I did, however, have a question regarding the scholar index. In the scholar index points reward scheme:

+1. Nomination of the candidate who eventually accepts the responsibility to write the article.

Was this meant to apply to identification of Author/Article pairs that get accepted? I only ask because I think identifying an entirely new article might be worth another point or two. I know I should probably be more concerned with acknowledgment on the article page but who doesn't love getting points? --JPSalisbury

For now, I've been quite satisfied from my learning experience. I have no strong convictions either, but I think the acknowledgment aspect of our work should be global, that is, all the projects should be considered. -- Nemri 18:16, 17 January 2008 (EST)

(Eugene) If you can come up with the acknowledgement solution, I can implement it. Of course, all your suggestions are in the history (of this page, of the article, etc.), but if there is any way I can make the acknowledgement more visible, I would be glad to do that.

Probably, the best way is to create a new article, e.g., Algorithm, and to fill out the info there (which will be read by a script). Then the acknowledgement will be in the history, which will show who created the article. Also, as the author accepts, the server may adjust the Scholar Index of the corresponding person.

Make sure you put valid emails. It is easy to say "let us invite Gorbochev for the article USSR"; it is much mroe difficult to find the valid email to send the invitaion. For example, Knuth does not have an email at all, so even though I am a big fan of his 3 books, there is no way we can invite him to be an author/curator of Scholarpedia. Do you have any friends at Standford who can come and talk to him in person?

Comments on suggestions

Old comments deleted;

• Knuth is nominated for algorithm
• Elie Bienenstock invited for synfire braids.
• another person was invited for the information theory (from the Encyclopedia of Telecommunications).
• Eugene can wait with the "Polychronization" article. This is not such a big topic.
• Jorma Rissanen was invited for Minimum Description Length
• Friedemann Pulvermüller for "Language and the brain"? Not clear this is the best person.
• Wolfram will be invited for "MATEMATICA"
• Bibel invited for connection method

This report will be deleted in a week or so. Izhikevich

What about Levenshtein, Golomb and all the others removed, all invited too?... -- Nwerneck 22:35, 11 March 2008 (EDT)

YES (see 'recent changes'). Anil Seth will handle the "zombie" article. Izhikevich

My next suggestion would be the "Extensions of the H-H-model" by Hugh Wilson in his paper "Simplified Dynamics of Human and Mammalian Neocortical Neurons". The problem here is the "non-uniqueness" of "Wilson model". Does anybody know a good title which is commonly used in neuroscience? --Fhauser 16:41, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

Invitational Limbus

There are some names commented, it would be nice to state here why they remain there...

Wolfram and President Gorby will wait a bit. The Churchlands will be approached by other means.

Scope of Suggestions

I would like to get some clarification regarding the scope of the suggestion of authors we make here.

It seems that recently we somewhat deviated from the scope of the four encyclopedias existing so far. Of course, computational intelligence and computer science are overlapping quite a bit, and being a graduated computer scientist myself, there are alot of topics I would be glad to get my hands on any minute now. However, I've so far tried to stick to the articles already named, but not assigned, in at least one of the four encyclopedias. This is not to say that I dislike the suggestions, the opposite is true (in fact, I have experienced the same difficulties trying to find an email address for Peter Naur just today, hoping I could nominate him for "Algorithm" and suggest him for the BNF).

So, do we have green light to suggest whatever comes to our mind and adheres to the criteria Eugene mentioned several times before, or should we restrict our suggestions to the the scope of the encyclopedias? --Bouchain 17:31, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

My understanding is that the only limits we have is to avoid for the moment the humanities, and stick to exact sciences and biology... At least none of my suggestions on quantum physics were rejected. Higgs mechanism, for example, does not belong to any of the four encyclopedias. They don't have to be listed there to exist... -- Nwerneck 19:42, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

User 5 (Assistant Editor): On sending e-mails

The question from Bouchain above made me think of something I wasn't aware of...

Sometimes when we can't find the address of an author, we can write to institutions asking for one. But we should avoid sending more then one e-mail from a different editor. We should let a warning at the page, when we don't know the address, saying that we have already tried to contact who@such.and.such regarding that specific researcher... In fact, we should let a warning before, as a mutex mechanism!...

How are we going to do this? For example, I didn't try to contact regarding Wirth and Naur yet, but I believe I already wrote inquiring about Eliahu (must check). Also, when Bouchain said he looked out for Naur's, I thought he might perhaps have written his college, so I shouldn't write again. How are we going to signal that in the page? -- Nwerneck 20:05, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Good point. In my opinion, the easiest solution is to bcc: the emails to the assistant editors in this project (I think we're the only ones who need to find out email addresses). The email address is then in the system somewhere, be it in the suggestion box, the nomination entry, the user page, whatever. In rare cases where it doesn't find its way into the system, the email address should be -- as a nice gesture for assistant editors who might look for the same person -- noted in the project page for future reference.

Oh, and I haven't tried to contact Copenhagen yet. So go ahead and keep me up-to-date. --Bouchain 20:22, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

User 5 (Assistant Editor): E-mailing the suggestions

Even if we start to send the suggestions by e-mail, I would like to keep this page or something similar to it. I often get ideas of people to invite or subjects to look for when looking at other people's suggestions. Plus, we can keep the names of people we couldn't find the e-mail, and other editors can help looking for it... -- Nwerneck 13:57, 30 March 2008 (EDT)