Reviewers' Guide
Creators:
Tom Elliott
Copyright © The Contributors. Sharing and remixing permitted under terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License (cc-by).
Last modified
Jan 30, 2013 04:35 PM
The basic things a Pleiades reviewer or editor should check before publishing or checking in changed/new content.
Does the suggestion appear to be complicated, problematic, or otherwise "soupy?"
For example, does it involve contested Name associations? If so, surface the suggestion to the rest of the college of editors and reviewers along with a one-to-two sentence summary of the argument or problem. Go ahead and check the following issues first, as applicable.
If a new or updated Place is provided...
- Avoid use of abbreviations and Latin feature type strings in Titles. E.g., expand "M." to "Mons"; replace "fl." with " River".
- Will the Description be helpful in identifying the place and disambiguating it from other similarly named places when encountered in a search result list, landing-page map, or third-party website?
- Is the Place Type (a.k.a. Place Category) accurate?
- If Connections are indicated, do they make sense? See "What are 'connections?'" for more guidance.
If a new or updated Location is provided...
- Does the suggestion make sense on the map and in Google Earth?
- We prefer Locations of archaeological remains visible in publicly available satellite imagery. So "location of the Roman theatre" or "location of Trajan's Arch" are good candidates for Locations. A center point of the modern village, ancient site or visible archaeological remains should be used only as a fallback option when something more specific and identifiable cannot be used.
- Titles should be appropriately descriptive and avoid including punctuation (see examples in previous bullet).
- Ideally, all Locations have at least one Reference with a Citation Type = "cites" indicating a source used to help find or identify the Location (i.e., "this Pleiades Location cites XYZ"). If coordinates were sourced directly from Wikipedia or GeoNames, then such a reference must be included. When Locations are sourced from, or follow other resources, a short statement to this effect should be included in the Description.
- An appropriate Positional Accuracy Assessment is required.
- If Location is for the remains of a built structure, one or more Temporal Attestations for the period of active use must be provided. Locations of long-lasting physical features (e.g., mountain peaks) do not require dates.
If a new or updated Name is provided...
- Name as Attested is highly desired, but not required. If such an "attested form" is provided, it must be transcribed from a historical source or based on reasoned argument (if witnesses are thought to be corrupt or fragmentary). The Name as Attested must be in the correct Unicode script.
- If the Name is historical/ancient, or if not common knowledge online, then a Reference with Citation Type = "Cites as Evidence" or "Cites" must be provided. The former value indicates the name is transcribed from the historical source indicated in the Reference. The latter value indicates that the modern literature cited in the Reference provides interpretation or argument regarding the form and interpretation of the name.
- Are language and script designations correct?
- Only basic Roman characters (a-z, A-Z) and common accents for transliteration/Romanization schemes are allowed in Romanized Name(s) field. Multiple transliterations/Romanizations are permitted; these must be separated by commas. We prefer that a transliteration/Romanization without accents be the first in the list.
- At least one appropriate Temporal Attestation must be provided; these should at the very least match the period of composition or coverage of any ancient or historical sources cited (or "Modern" in the case of a current, modern name).
General issues
- All References must conform to the Citation Guide and employ the correct Citation Type (see Citation of External Resources for guidance).