Here are some things I came across while going through the workflow in preparation for the workshop tomorrow. Some of these are admittedly subjective :)
Phase 1 - Study design
[ ] indicate not to initialize the new Github repo with README, .gitignore and license?
[x] insert a commit/push step after step 3 to push the repo structure to remote?
(this can also have the benefit of explaining commit/push separate from creating a release in step 4 (preregistration))
Phase 2 - Analysis and writing
[x] step 8 save the data - add a remark that a codebook gets generated as part of the output of the function? (so people are not confused by the extra files added)
[ ] [Not a quick edit] In Manuscript.Rmd, separate the top code chunck into a first chunk setting overall chunk options and loading worcs, and a second chunk with load_data() and notify_synthetic(), both commented out, with instructions? I think this would be more clear for first users (also to include notify_synthetic here rather than instruct users to add it themselves)
[x] Step 11 - include a link to the vignette on citation?
Phase 3 - Submission and publication
[ ] Step 13: Instructions around the checklist are not clear to me.
The checklist is not automatically created as file in the repo, which may be intentional, but in that case, would it be helpful to instruct creating it as a variable, rather than just running the function?
worcs::checklist gives a namespace error.
running check_worcs in my trial run does not modify Readme as suggested in the instructions.
[ ] Step 17: The link can be masked for blind review - include instructions how to do this? (or do you just mean manually removing it before rendering a version for blind review?)
Here are some things I came across while going through the workflow in preparation for the workshop tomorrow. Some of these are admittedly subjective :)
Phase 1 - Study design
Phase 2 - Analysis and writing
Phase 3 - Submission and publication