A 2013 factoid sheet (Ѻ) on peer review; showing, interestingly, that only one of Albert Einstein's papers was formally peer-reviewed. The classic case of informal peer review would be the famous "Gibbs mailing list" a detailed ordering of who Willard Gibbs sent each of his famous papers to. [6] |
“I suppose there hath been done me no unkindness, but I could wish I had met with no rudeness in some other things. And therefore I hope you will not think it strange if to prevent accidents of that nature for the future I decline that conversation which hath occasioned what is past.”
The strict “peer-review”, for-profit, articles written-by-experts, envisioned Nupedia, prior to going “went belly-up” (Ѻ) in 2003, managed to produce, in its 36 month existence span, only 24 articles, a rate of 8 articles/year; which jumped to a rate of 5-million articles being written in a 10-year span, a rage of 500,000 articles per year, in the decade to follow. |
The article icon and description for the first open beta wiki peer review, which seemed to work out smoothly overall, with tensions and objections quickly been voiced in threads and publicaly-posted emails. |
“Thank you very much for entering my article into the beta review process. I read the constructive reviewer’s comments and really I think the “beta review process” is interesting (Oct 31)” and “At first, I would like to thank you and the reviewers for taking the time and effort to review the manuscript. I would also like to thank the reviewers for their professional approach, detailed evaluation and the valuable comments (Nov 20).”