[open-science] Reviewer's Oath for Open Science

Thu Oct 23 15:48:15 UTC 2014

(or is it (xv): numbering seems a bit confused).

> On 23 Oct 2014, at 16:47, Nicholas Barnes <nb at climatecode.org> wrote:
> 
> This is all good.  What is the word “central” doing in point (xiv)?
> 
>> On 17 Oct 2014, at 10:41, Jenny Molloy <jenny.molloy at okfn.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi All
>> 
>> I attended a workshop recently at The Genome Analysis Centre (TGAC, Norwich, UK) on open science and reproducibility [1]. One of the outputs was a paper extending Mick Watson's reveiwer's oath [2] to encompass more detail around reproducibility and open peer review.
>> 
>> The paper is now up as a preprint [3]. Comments are very much welcome, it is planned for publication in F1000 Research during OA week and we hope to get some good feedback by then so any modifications can be made before it is formally published.
>> 
>> Jenny
>> 
>> [1] http://www.tgac.ac.uk/allbio-open-science-reproducibility-best-practice-workshop/
>> [2] http://biomickwatson.wordpress.com/2013/02/11/the-reviewers-oath/
>> [3] https://zenodo.org/record/12273
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> open-science mailing list
>> open-science at lists.okfn.org
>> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science
> 
> -- 
> Nick Barnes
> Director, Climate Code Foundation
> 

-- 
Nick Barnes
Director, Climate Code Foundation