Call Search

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Friends Remembered
Survey Question

DX Cluster Spots

Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 [5]   Go Down
Author Topic: Peer review of articles before publication  (Read 35162 times)

Posts: 1169

« Reply #60 on: September 21, 2011, 02:46:56 PM »

I have published around 10 articles on eham in the last few years, my thoughts are that in my case, the technical antenna article responses actually, were for the most part, helpful a fair amount of the time. Had one article about phased verticals that had an incorrect formula that haunts me to this day on various sites but was pointed out to me and corrected further down in the postings.
I have learned to seperate the relevant responses from the internet tarzans that no one has ever heard on the air in my lifetime.
When a technical article is blatently misguided there are enough of us to respond respectfully to alert the author of his presentation.
Unfortunately an occasional new author will get bent out of shape and take peer critiqe personnaly. Too bad, get over it, Eham article readers are a tough bunch and if you publish, then be prepared to run the gamut from thoughful, insightful comments to the occasional jerk that has no life but posting non consequential drival wherever they can see themselves on line.
I think that any pre peer review is a laudable idea for truly technical presentations but I do not see the Eham editors having the time or inclination. The labeling of the article should be clearer as far as opinion vs technical.
My gripe is that a good portion of what passes for an article is often just a couple of paragraphs more fitting for a differant forum.
An article on Eham in my opinion shoud be one step below something I would read in print publication and that is my guidline when doing a submission.


Posts: 9749


« Reply #61 on: September 21, 2011, 05:55:43 PM »

Positive peer review is good for the author, the websites in question, and the hams who are seeking knowledge to
address a problem or question they might have. I don't see where censorship was being advocated, but rather
private correspondence with the author before publication for the sake of raising possible concerns with the
accuracy of the presentation.

That's exactly right. It would be good for everyone, especially authors.

Of course this will never be a peer reviewed journal. It will always be a Ham website. That doesn't preclude a pre-publication review system for articles.

Posts: 1454

« Reply #62 on: September 21, 2011, 06:24:34 PM »

All of the comments that have been posted since my last communication have been addressed previously on this string. If you want the answers to your questions, simply read the string from the beginning to end. I will not repeat myself for your amusement, nor will you wear me down starting off topic arguments. Indeed, this is a debate that I have already won, so what is the point?  Wink

If W8JI needs something to do and he and his followers feel strongly about the "peer review" issue, I would ask again why they don't get together and start their own on-line "peer reviewed" ham radio magazine that publishes only the technical articles they crave. To me, is more of a ham radio community site that welcomes and addresses all things related to ham radio in an informal setting. It is something to be enjoyed after work, not a second job. That is why it has been so successful and is the envy of many self-appointed "gurus" that lack the vision and perseverance to start a successful effort of their own. Instead, they try to find ways to jump on the bandwagon with no personal investment and bask in the limelight of others. If there is such a clamoring for a peer reviewed technical site, there would be no gamble. So when are we going to see it?  Grin      
« Last Edit: September 21, 2011, 06:54:48 PM by KI4SDY » Logged

Posts: 1169

« Reply #63 on: September 21, 2011, 08:11:11 PM »

The intent of the original post was simply that some really ill conceived and erronious information, usually about antennas and feed systems etc. are just dead wrong. As stated in my previous post something I wrote in an antenna article was wrong and now it shows up all over the internet, once it's out there in cyberspace, some really bad info can be floating around forever. Some of my eham articles have been published in newsletters, World Radio, Dx club postings around the world in a lot of languages, I welcome peer review, only wish that the one with the bad formula had that possibilty, as I said, Eham does not have the manpower or inclination to start that process, but I for one would be honored to have Tom review my next undertaking. I trust hams who actually have a real history on the air, and obvious hands on experience, and to be honest, I'd rather trust the judgement of someone who has demonstrated their abilities on the air, not the internet.

Posts: 1454

« Reply #64 on: September 21, 2011, 08:31:14 PM »

Why don't you just e-mail it to him before posting the article next time for review? He doesn't need a title to do volunteer work and with over 7,000 posts on, he obviously has plenty of spare time on his hands. Wink
« Last Edit: September 21, 2011, 08:57:11 PM by KI4SDY » Logged
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 [5]   Go Up
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!