[PRE REVIEW]: wisdom_of_crowds: A Python package for social-epistemological network profiling

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@cvklein<!--end-author-handle-- (Colin Klein) Repository: https://github.com/cvklein/wisdom-of-crowds Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: v1.01 Editor: Pending Reviewers: Pending Managing EiC: Kevin M. Moerman

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/fa1d727ba7b561ebde5982c363ccf401"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/fa1d727ba7b561ebde5982c363ccf401/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/fa1d727ba7b561ebde5982c363ccf401/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/fa1d727ba7b561ebde5982c363ccf401)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @cvklein. Currently, there isn't an JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@cvklein if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). In addition, this list of people have already agreed to review for JOSS and may be suitable for this submission (please start at the bottom of the list).

Editor instructions

The JOSS submission bot @editorialbot is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @editorialbot can do for you type:

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello human, I'm @editorialbot, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks.

:warning: JOSS reduced service mode :warning:

Due to the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, JOSS is currently operating in a "reduced service mode". You can read more about what that means in our blog post.

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@editorialbot commands

For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.18 s (71.9 files/s, 13170.7 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Markdown                         4            302              0            746
Python                           2            182            288            565
TeX                              1              9              0             65
YAML                             2             11             33             49
Jupyter Notebook                 1              0             99             26
Bourne Shell                     1              0              0              5
SVG                              2              0              0              2
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            13            504            420           1458
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 947

[editorialbot]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- None

MISSING DOIs

- 10.3366/epi.2011.0012 may be a valid DOI for title: A simulation approach to veritistic social epistemology
- 10.1016/j.ipl.2008.10.014 may be a valid DOI for title: Efficient algorithms for clique problems
- 10.1016/0378-8733(86)90006-7 may be a valid DOI for title: Cumulated social roles: The duality of persons and their algebras
- 10.4324/9781351107532-49 may be a valid DOI for title: Humility in social networks

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@cvklein thanks for this submission. I am the AEiC on call this week. I have just flagged this work for additional scope review. This is because of the relatively small size of this work. We will therefore determine if this work conforms with out "substantial scholarly effort criteria". This scope review will take about 2 weeks to complete.

[kthyng]

Hi @cvklein and thanks for your submission. Unfortunately the editorial board determined that it is too small to be in scope. 1000 lines of code is where it gets tricky to get over the bar and this package is just too small. However, we do offer some guidance on getting credit for your software here if you're interested: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/submitting.html#other-venues-for-reviewing-and-publishing-software-packages

[kthyng]

@editorialbot reject

[editorialbot]

Paper rejected.