User Tools

Site Tools


wiki:review_process

The review process

All articles in Encyclopedia Magnetica™ are created in three main steps.

Graphics: photos, drawings, diagrams

The authors of Encyclopedia Magnetica™ use every opportunity to take photos of various magnetic and electromagnetic devices. Most graphics created by the authors themselves are then released under free licence (CC-BY-3.0 or similar) so that the readers can freely use it (but there are also copyrighted materials, see: About Encyclopedia Magnetica).

As soon as these materials become available they are uploaded to Encyclopedia Magnetica™ so they can be accessed. However, writing the associated text is a much longer process so for some time there might be “articles” which contain just photos of the objects in question.

This is because we believe that having such photos available, even with just a single-line definition and without full description, is still more valuable to the users than not having any materials at all. These will be developed to full articles.

Writing stage

Commonly an article is written by one author. Larger/longer articles can be written by several people. In any case, the name of the author(s) is always given at the top of the page.

Encyclopedia Magnetica™ presents only information, which was already published and can be found in other sources. The details of these sources are always given at the bottom of each page, in the section titled References.

The first step towards quality of the information is taken at the writing stage. Any statement is based on some source of information, which is always given, even if the authors are experts in the topic to be described.

Many types of references are used:

  • published books
  • articles published in scientific and technical journals
  • trustworthy websites (manufacturers, universities, educational, etc.)
  • data sheets of materials, components and devices
  • photographs of actual devices
  • opinions of specialist obtained by the author(s) through direct contact with the specialist person (this information is also stated in the References, with the name of the specialist given openly)

In particular, a forum website is not deemed to be satisfactorily “trustworthy” source.

If a reliable source of information is not available, then the information will not be included in the article. In the viewpoint of the authors it is better to have the information incomplete, rather than incorrect. But of course, every effort is made to present the information as complete as possible.

Reviewing stage

Encyclopedia Magnetica™ is a secondary source of information, as is every other encyclopedia, almost by definition. Everything is based on other primary sources, which were scrutinised in some other way (editorial review for books, peer-review for scientific articles, experimental verification on data sheets, etc.)

Hence, the aim of a review in Encyclopedia Magnetica™ is to verify that indeed all the statements are supported by the appropriate references. Such a review is carried out by a person who was not directly involved in authoring the given article. This also helps in reducing any grammar and spelling mistakes made by the original authors.

The reviewers of some articles might be authors of others, and vice versa. In any case, the name of the author(s) and reviewer(s) of each article are given at the top of each page. All the articles are published immediately, even if they were not reviewed or even completed. Again, this is clearly stated at the top of the page.

reviewed by J. Leicht on 2013-01-22  

After the review, the given article can be subjected to further edition and expansion. If the edits are minor, so that at no point substantial changes to the meaning were made then no new review will be initiated. Minor changes can include: added or changed image, rewording of a sentence, grammar and spelling corrections, updating references (especially links to websites), deletion of any part of text or images, etc.

At the top of each article, also the current date is given, as well as the date of the review. This allows verification of the version of article (should it change later). At the bottom of each page a following information can be found:

al_value.txt · Last modified: 2014/07/12 21:29 by stan_zurek  

which states when the last edit was made.

Dates of access, review and last edit are not correlated. For instance, a well-written and reviewed article might be re-edited months later, because a new photo on the subject became available, or a simple type was corrected. Thus the “last edit date” being many months after the “review date” is completely irrelevant.

There is a page grouping all the reviewed articles.

All topics / categories / tags are listed here: List of all tags.

wiki/review_process.txt · Last modified: 2020/07/11 23:15 by stan_zurek

Privacy and cookie policy (GDPR, etc.)