Task - Consistency check

[JonathanSchmidt1]

Steps:

0. Comment in the issue that you will correct publisher X.

1. Create your own branch.

2. Use Paolos code to find inconsistencies

3. Correct and add replies to the additional columns "Inconsistency" "Reason for Inconsistency" "Please add the text from the RDP that supports the correction below:" for each question: Possible replies to Inconsistency: Yes No

Reasoning for Inconsistency:

Text missing Language understanding Difficulty in matching information and question Other: free text

If you have any further suggestions/questions this is the place to discuss

[JonathanSchmidt1]

Royal chemistry society

[iloncaric]

AIP Publishing

[lukashoermann200]

APS, Taylor & Francis

[lukashoermann200]

I added my data to the CSV file since it was in a different file. APS is consistent

[lukashoermann200]

Taylor & Francis journals with inconsistencies:

• analytical_letters
• ferroelectrics
• international_journal_of_nanomedicine
• molecular_physics
• nanotoxicology

[lukashoermann200]

• ferroelectrics -> take encoding 116; Open Science Badges can be seen as RDP, but lends itself to misunderstanding
• international_journal_of_nanomedicine - > take encoding 259; referred to standard T&F policy
• nanotoxicology -> take encoding 115; -> Text missed by other encoding
• analytical_letters -> take encoding 269; molecular_physics -> take encoding 265; Same referenced text says data must be available at submission: "At the point of submission, you will be asked if there is a data set associated with the paper. If you reply yes, you will be asked to provide the DOI, pre-registered DOI, hyperlink, or other persistent identifier associated with the data set(s)."

[iloncaric]

AIP is consistent