They already do (check what is *retracted* in their name). Kinda feels like putting a bandaid on a gunshot wound. Like with everything in academia, they should care much, much earlier, but there is no incentive to, esp. you can always throw researcher under the bus.

Last pass (I know, I know). Tbh, I don't think it will help you, I think it's more a function of peer review systems I work with (which shall remain nameless because it would be telling).

Just wanted to say my password manager deals with the peer review systems I need to use quite well.

Also, we took away free text response to invitation to review because James kept asking for money.

I take it back, @jamesheathers.bsky.social, you did perfectly good job being crotchety on your own.

Well you're in luck. I'm in holidays, so plenty of time to think of even more reasons. And I was there when explaining why nothing can ever be done was invented, so you know I can deliver.

Haven't listened yet but already excited to hear how do you propose we do this in a way that works and is apparently fast (just about only way to be 100% sure of identity is to ask for a copy of a passport, or in absence - birth certificate).

I did enjoy the ouroboros nature of this exchange tho.

Bud, you first replied to the post with that link :P

You're just jealous now that a moth paper is that popular.

I generally find all of this an interesting exercise that mostly shows that (a) referencing tools cannot deal with fairly simple problems, and (b) ppl are lazy.

And then there are also lazy *and* bad, which is where this can be helpful.

Takes article number and treats as a page number? Should be easy to confirm looking at other years (someone please do the work 🙏🙏🙏). I also wonder how referencing tools deal with other online only jrnls that do assign page numbers (I thought P1 did, but doesn't look like it).

There will be more papers like this for somewhat similar reasons (not all is papermill adjacent though). See e.g. arxiv.org/pdf/2511.01675

Well, best I can describe the issue in shorthand. Was explained some time ago at forbetterscience.com/2023/07/31/t...

This one. Is cited highly because of indexing error, though I'm sure some citations are legitimate.

Ok but how much Big Journal is paying you to say that? 😜😜

And their importance to their work etc. So I guess you don't want a checklist, you just want a list, no? 4/4 (Not sure I explained myself well.)

Which may be irrelevant because I don't think you mean checklist the same way here. I'm thinking: a simplified decision tree that leads to a clear go-nogo decision. You mean (I think) a list of criteria that can help people make decision either way based on how they feel about those criteria 3/

But there is a reason why Checklist Manifesto doesn't have a solid consistent implementation of reporting checklist as an example, and that's because one doesn't exist. 2/

Tbf, I was being facetious. My opinion on checklists is on the record, not even that long ago. Familiar with the book, too (reminds me, I lent my copy to someone and need to ask to get it back) 1/

bsky.app/profile/edit...