Talk:Repository (publishing)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Info about the topic of.....[edit]

Thesis repository

--222.64.223.168 (talk) 02:55, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

--222.64.223.168 (talk) 02:57, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

--222.64.223.168 (talk) 02:59, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lists[edit]

--222.64.223.168 (talk) 03:25, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

--222.64.223.168 (talk) 03:39, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

--222.64.223.168 (talk) 04:45, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

--222.64.223.168 (talk) 04:59, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

--222.64.223.168 (talk) 05:11, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

--222.64.223.168 (talk) 05:43, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

--222.64.223.168 (talk) 06:02, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that thesis repositories exist. You could either write a paragraph for this article, or (if you login) start an article in your userspace. For now, I removed Thesis repository from the see also section; it's already linked inline, and we don't want redlinks (for pages that don't exist) in the See also section (see Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(layout)#See_also_section). If you want feedback on a draft, or have questions about editing, let me know! Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 10:16, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CiteSeerX[edit]

CiteSeerX doesn't fit my conceptualization of a repository; people don't intentionally deposit things there. Rather, it harvests them from elsewhere, so it seems to me more like a database. What do you think? Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 10:01, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, CiteSeerX is more of a search engine. It indexes, it does not take deposits. Removing the sentence. Phette23 (talk) 23:38, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss at Talk:Institutional_repository#Merger_with_Repository_.28publishing.29. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 17:00, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to carry out this merger (see discussion), by moving relevant information from this article into the Institutional repository and Disciplinary repository articles. - Lawsonstu (talk) 13:26, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This has now been done. Repository (publishing) has been merged and re-directs to Institutional repository. I know they are not equivalent, so the re-direct doesn't make perfect sense, but it was the best action i could think of. - Lawsonstu (talk) 21:11, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indiscriminate Red Links[edit]

This article had tons of red links for no good reason, often simple misspellings or phrases that could easily be pointed at other articles. I'm going to try to clean it up but forgive me if I miss something. Phette23 (talk) 23:36, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]