Talk:Research peer review

From Citizendium
Revision as of 09:26, 23 December 2010 by imported>Howard C. Berkowitz (Very relevant to current EC discussion)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This article is a stub and thus not approved.
 Main Article
 Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
Audio [?]
Video [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition:  Evaluation by experts of the quality and pertinence of research or research proposals of other experts in the same field. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup categories:  Library and Information Science and Health Sciences [Editors asked to check categories]
 Talk Archive:  none  English language variant:  American English

Related work

This is quite relevant to current expertise discussions of the EC, internally and with some other Citizens. In the broadest sense, there may be appropriate forms of peer review at CZ. Some of the discussions deal with rational ways in which a wise reviewer, who has not spent a career on the distal part of the left bundle branch, still may make useful comments on an article.

Separate matter -- could you update the email in your profile, and/or send me an email from your current working address? I had it but lost it. Howard C. Berkowitz 15:26, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:Research_peer_review&oldid=448943"