tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5130549244386310434.post3130407250508534552..comments2023-09-16T02:09:53.331-04:00Comments on Ancient World Bloggers Group (AWBG): PD(Q) from Comments to a Post: What are we blogging for?Chuck Joneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12882192031767315365noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5130549244386310434.post-14004328942756317692008-02-12T14:27:00.000-05:002008-02-12T14:27:00.000-05:00In the case of something like that, it seems appro...In the case of something like that, it seems appropriate to just add a citation at the end during editing, or to just put the URL in the text for the paper version. <BR/>In the end the issue of being fair seems more important than being overly critical.Archaeologyknitshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05794096489720484803noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5130549244386310434.post-4267455586928307742008-02-12T13:56:00.000-05:002008-02-12T13:56:00.000-05:00Can I respond with some thoughts on citations? My ...Can I respond with some thoughts on citations? My '<A HREF="http://bsahistory.blogspot.com" REL="nofollow">History of the British School at Athens</A>' posting is drawing on electronic resources (e.g. <I>The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography</I>) so that the 'citation' is the formal link to the article (but only if you have access via Athens password!). Full citations will appear in the final printed version.David Gillhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13164794689385933318noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5130549244386310434.post-47230772555615345262008-02-12T12:45:00.000-05:002008-02-12T12:45:00.000-05:00Bill raises several good points.First we cannot pu...Bill raises several good points.<BR/><BR/>First we cannot put blogs onto paper, we can only put bits of them on and that's with varying success. Some posts can be lifted wholesale and put in PD(Q). Vodcasts obviously can't, and he's right in saying that hyperlinks occupy a big grey area. We'll need to talk over the exact mechanics, but if possible I think the PDF version should have embedded hyperlinks. They won't come out in the print version, nor will the colour photos. There's only so much can be done.<BR/><BR/>I also think I've been vague and woolly on what we put in. It's the inclusivity of weblogs which I like. When I'm reading someone else's work name and profession don't matter and anyone can comment on my site and the thing that matters is what's said, not who they are. I suspect that will change in the future and we'll have A-listers like there are in other blogging genres, but right now someone could start a weblog and be well-known within a month or two.<BR/><BR/>There's also immediacy in get something out, but that may say more than I'd like about my hedonism.<BR/><BR/>He's also right that if academics are the target audience then it's got to be meaningful to them. PD(Q) isn't going to replace weblogs and it's not meant to. It's a baited hook and for academics the bait is much more likely to be successful if it's meaningful to them rather than <A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXRH50fvHWA" REL="nofollow">a video of a hamster in a wheel</A> or a <A HREF="http://www.flickr.com/photos/alun/562327189/" REL="nofollow">LOLSphinx</A>.<BR/><BR/>Following Bill's comments, here's what I'd suggest.<BR/><BR/>1. Working papers. A good idea. It would be helpful to define what we mean by this for non-academics, so that it's clear that it's possible they could be writing something like this. Something which is an idea in progress and up for discussion.<BR/><BR/>2. Notes. I agree this is something we can do rapidly. Often it isn't possible to find a place for rapid publication, which many notes would benefit from.<BR/><BR/>3. Academic Commentary. This could be where we move into BPR3 territory. BPR3 is great for papers, but it's not so useful for book chapters or books. This I think is down to its science base and the scientists tend to think of books as textbooks, while the monograph is still important for historians and archaeologists. Plus not everyone can access every journal. This would be a handy way of signposting more interesting articles.<BR/><BR/>4. Commentary about Academia. It's said the AJA is going to be moved behind a paywall. If it happens, I think that would be a Bad Thing. I'm sure there's more to be said on Research Assessment Exercises and Teaching Quality Assessments in the UK. I'm sure there's similar issues elsewhere.<BR/><BR/>5. Pedagogy and Public engagement. If I write about teaching ancient history or archaeology, its been recommended I write for an Education journal. I don't see these in the Sackler when I'm there do I don't flip through them as often as I should. I like <A HREF="http://middlesavagery.wordpress.com/?s=mudbrick)" REL="nofollow">the mudbrick posts at Middle Savagery</A>. It's an interesting idea and one I might use in the future, but if she were to develop it and publish it, where would it go? My best guess would be Public Archaeology, which isn't something every library gets, which brings us back to point 3. Whether or not she'd want to develop it is another matter. I could foresee someone wanting to take it further and cite her though.<BR/><BR/>6. Related to this I'd like to see announcements of new websites, new tools and new photos. I might want to write something that could be useful about Yahoo! Pipes, but beyond ACN, I can't think of an outlet and even then the entry may be too short to be useful. This might be best handled as a round-up. (I just tried looking up the address of the Archaeological Computing Newsletter and it seems to have vanished from Glasgow's servers)<BR/><BR/>7. Reviews. Journals tend to review once and I can fully understand why, but we don't accept one review as the definitive opinion. Space is not an issue. I'd say thoughtful reviews of anything, even if its been reviewed a dozen times before should be welcome - if the reviewer is saying something new.<BR/><BR/>8. News Commentary. We've all seen news stories where the announcement leaves a huge unanswered question. We've also seen some of these stories accepted by others who may not be as familiar with the subject matter. A short commentary on the problems might have an effect on acceptance of an idea before everyone gets entrenched in their positions.<BR/><BR/>I think Bill is spot on with asking what is it for. If it is for academics then we should initially make sure we're hitting that target. That means that we cannot transfer everything and would be foolish to try. This is a shame in that it loses some of the essence of blogging. However the method of putting it together, the CC licensing and the rapidity of publishing will mean that it will reproduce some ot its slightly subversive spirit.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05905810895962354616noreply@blogger.com