Thank you to everyone who responded with feedback on the Op Cit proposal. This post clarifies, defends, and amends the original proposal in light of the responses that have been sent. We have endeavoured to respond to every point that was raised, either here or in the document comments themselves.
We strongly prefer for this to be developed in collaboration with CLOCKSS, LOCKSS, and/or Portico, i.e. through established preservation services that already have existing arrangements in place, are properly funded, and understand the problem space.
I’m pleased to share the 2023 board election slate. Crossref’s Nominating Committee received 87 submissions from members worldwide to fill seven open board seats.
We maintain a balance of eight large member seats and eight small member seats. A member’s size is determined based on the membership fee tier they pay. We look at how our total revenue is generated across the membership tiers and split it down the middle. Like last year, about half of our revenue came from members in the tiers $0 - $1,650, and the other half came from members in tiers $3,900 - $50,000.
https://doi-org.turing.library.northwestern.edu/10.13003/c23rw1d9
Crossref acquires Retraction Watch data and opens it for the scientific community Agreement to combine and publicly distribute data about tens of thousands of retracted research papers, and grow the service together
12th September 2023 —– The Center for Scientific Integrity, the organisation behind the Retraction Watch blog and database, and Crossref, the global infrastructure underpinning research communications, both not-for-profits, announced today that the Retraction Watch database has been acquired by Crossref and made a public resource.
Today, we are announcing a long-term plan to deprecate the Open Funder Registry. For some time, we have understood that there is significant overlap between the Funder Registry and the Research Organization Registry (ROR), and funders and publishers have been asking us whether they should use Funder IDs or ROR IDs to identify funders. It has therefore become clear that merging the two registries will make workflows more efficient and less confusing for all concerned.
The Metadata Manager tool is in beta and contains many bugs. It’s being deprecated at the end of 2021. We recommend using the web deposit tool as an alternative, or the OJS plugin if your content is hosted on the OJS platform from PKP.
Metadata Manager (beta) offers a way to deposit and update metadata for journal articles for both single and multiple deposits.
You’ll now see your Metadata Manager workspace. This is where all deposits occur, both new deposits and updates to content you’ve already registered with Crossref. To return to this view at any time, click Home at the top of the screen.
Your workspace holds your list of publications, and it will be blank when you first log in. As you add the publications you want to manage to Metadata Manager, they’ll start collecting on this screen.
You can add new publications and edit existing publications you have previously submitted to our system from your workspace. You can also click into each publication and add or edit articles against them.
The home button - Return to the overview of all your publications by clicking Home.
Deposit history - See your previous deposits made via Metadata Manager (excludes deposits via other deposit methods such as HTTPS POST, or the web deposit form).
To deposit - Shows items for which you’ve entered information, but have not yet deposited with us. The number next to To deposit shows how many records are awaiting deposit.
Your username - Shows the credential you’ve used to log in. Click the down arrow to access account functions, log out, and view a tutorial of Metadata Manager.
Search publication - This search bar allows you to find and add publications to your workspace. You can search by title name or title-level DOI.
New publication - This section allows you to create a new journal and add it to your workspace.
Page owner: Sara Bowman | Last updated 2022-July-22
