[WikiEN-l] Low citation quality in BLP articles

[WJhonson at aol.com]

In a message dated 1/7/2009 2:46:30 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
dgoodmanny at gmail.com writes:

Hard  cover bios from academic publishers are invariably peer reviewed,
usually  by three consultants, as well as the usually expert  editorial
staff.>>


---------------------
Hard cover bios from commericial publishers are not "peer reviewed" and I  
seriously doubt even academic publishers submit them to "peer" review in the  
proper sense.
 
They are sometimes sent as gratis copies to editors of small magazines and  
so on, to solicit back-cover comments.  But there is no requirement, not  
intent, to modify the contents of the project *based* on any of those  comments.
 
The in-house editors are not validating or verifying the contents of the  
work, they are checking the English usage and so on, just as editors at  
commercial houses do.  Looking for obvious blunders, is not the same as a  critique on 
the thesis itself.
 
That's not the same as "peer" review at all, in the sense that we are using  
it for the hard sciences.
 
Will Johnson
 
 
**************New year...new news.  Be the first to know what is making 
headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026)