List of published discussions about open science on the meta

Question

Often questions can be speculative and many have been discussed in print or preprint elsewhere.

Should we make a list of such sources here on the meta for easy reference to help improve questions and answers? (For a Big List is probably not appropriate on the main site itself seeing how it's not really a concrete Q & A object.)

If yes, I'll start with an interesting more or less known one http://www.math.cmu.edu/~wn0g/future%20of%20sc.pub.pdf Especially since nowadays years later in fact many major writer has complete preprints of their books and papers (and those of others) on their university website.

Then of course http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/boai-10-recommendations

This post has been migrated from the Open Science private beta at StackExchange (A51.SE)

Comments

You're quite unclear here. What exactly are you trying to ask or propose?

This post has been migrated from the Open Science private beta at StackExchange (A51.SE)

---

A big list on the Meta of open science resources. See mathoverflow for examples of big lists. But they are no longer acceptable (because not really Q and A) but useful when constructing questions to ask or answering.

This post has been migrated from the Open Science private beta at StackExchange (A51.SE)

---

So having a site page with a list of resources to use as sources to answers and questions?

This post has been migrated from the Open Science private beta at StackExchange (A51.SE)

---

Yes, on the Meta.

This post has been migrated from the Open Science private beta at StackExchange (A51.SE)

---

What would the purpose of this be? I would appreciate it if you can format your post effectively (in-line links)

This post has been migrated from the Open Science private beta at StackExchange (A51.SE)

Answer 1

I am in complete disagreement. Having a list of resources on the meta site could possibly have a negative effect on any other possible site resources. A list would imply that these are the only authoritative resources that can be used to support a question or an answer. This would unfairly invalidate any answers that may actually be factually correct, but because their source is not in a list, the entire answer can be invalid.

This post has been migrated from the Open Science private beta at StackExchange (A51.SE)