17
edits
Changes
Talk:Scientific data withholding (view source)
Revision as of 15:25, April 1, 2007
, 15:25, April 1, 2007Editorial in Nature Cell Biology
I thought that the Shelby Amendment from about 1999 required federal research grants to require that the data be made available. Why nothing about it? [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 02:12, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
I thought that the Shelby Amendment from about 1999 required federal research grants to require that the data be made available. Why nothing about it? [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 02:12, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
: In the wikipedia article on [[Scientific data archiving]], I covered the NSF policy on archiving. I don't know much about the history or how the policy came to be adopted. Was there a particular event that spawned the legislation? If you are able to add something of interest, please do. Personally, I think data archiving and its opposite, data withholding, should be discussed in the same article. But the data withholding portion became controversial on Wikipedia because I insisted on using the textbook description of it as "pseudoscience." I thought it better to split the two concepts because data archiving is of general interest and should not be controversial at all. I am going to rewrite the data archiving article to remove anything controversial. [[User:RonCram|RonCram]] 05:36, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
: In the wikipedia article on [[Scientific data archiving]], I covered the NSF policy on archiving. I don't know much about the history or how the policy came to be adopted. Was there a particular event that spawned the legislation? If you are able to add something of interest, please do. Personally, I think data archiving and its opposite, data withholding, should be discussed in the same article. But the data withholding portion became controversial on Wikipedia because I insisted on using the textbook description of it as "pseudoscience." I thought it better to split the two concepts because data archiving is of general interest and should not be controversial at all. I am going to rewrite the data archiving article to remove anything controversial. [[User:RonCram|RonCram]] 05:36, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
==Editorial in Nature==
''Sharing materials: It is long established that scientific data are only meaningful if and when they are reproduced independently by other laboratories. Furthermore, the unrestricted sharing of materials and data is clearly essential for the community as a whole to build on knowledge. Without the free exchange of ideas and reagents, scientifi c progress would grind to an abrupt halt. Although almost everyone shares these fundamental academic ideals in principle, all too oft en concerns about competition and fi nancial ties dampen enthusiasm for sharing. As a result, we have now issued expanded guidelines on this topic (http://www.nature.com/ncb/about/ed_policies/index.html).'' [http://www.nature.com/ncb/journal/v7/n3/pdf/ncb0305-203.pdf][[User:RonCram|RonCram]] 11:25, 1 April 2007 (EDT)