[PRE REVIEW]: cryptotrackr: An R Interface to Crypto Data Sources

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@TrevorFrench<!--end-author-handle-- (Trevor French) Repository: https://github.com/TrevorFrench/cryptotrackr Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): joss Version: v1.2.0 Editor: Pending Reviewers: Pending Managing EiC: Olivia Guest

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/f68c8f1a5a57d9117b67f264bf7de699"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/f68c8f1a5a57d9117b67f264bf7de699/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/f68c8f1a5a57d9117b67f264bf7de699/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/f68c8f1a5a57d9117b67f264bf7de699)

Author instructions

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

@TrevorFrench if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). You can search the list of people that have already agreed to review and may be suitable for this submission.

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.

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=0.03 s (1240.8 files/s, 103080.9 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R                               35            281           1526           1341
Markdown                         3             36              0             94
TeX                              1              2              0             24
YAML                             1              1              0             18
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            40            320           1526           1477
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 304

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.21105/joss.00402 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

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:

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

dtrackr: An R package for tracking the provenance of data Submitting author: @robchallen Handling editor: @ajstewartlang (Active) Reviewers: @debruine, @craig-willis Similarity score: 0.8420

finreportr: Financial Data from U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Submitting author: @sewardlee337 Handling editor: @arfon (Active) Reviewers: @jsta Similarity score: 0.8270

covid19.analytics: An R Package to Obtain, Analyze and Visualize Data from the 2019 Coronavirus Disease Pandemic Submitting author: @mponce0 Handling editor: @fboehm (Active) Reviewers: @LogIN-, @JDRomano2 Similarity score: 0.8198

Rdataretriever: R Interface to the Data Retriever Submitting author: @henrykironde Handling editor: @fboehm (Active) Reviewers: @rmhogervorst, @jsgalan Similarity score: 0.8198

academictwitteR: an R package to access the Twitter Academic Research Product Track v2 API endpoint Submitting author: @cjbarrie Handling editor: @danielskatz (Active) Reviewers: @medewitt, @JosiahParry Similarity score: 0.8145

⚠️ Note to editors: If these papers look like they might be a good match, click through to the review issue for that paper and invite one or more of the authors before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[oliviaguest]

@jbytecode do you have capacity for this? ☺️

[oliviaguest]

@editorialbot query scope

[editorialbot]

Submission flagged for editorial review.

[danielskatz]

@oliviaguest - can you say why you asked for a scope review?

[oliviaguest]

@danielskatz apologies it slipped my mind as it was in discussion with @jbytecode (who might be able to add to what I am saying). I see the codebase is mostly wrapping functions and so maybe falls under "“Minor utility” packages, including “thin” API clients, and single-function packages are not acceptable." Hope this helps!

[oliviaguest]

Dear @TrevorFrench, I am sorry to say that the scope review was not passed, and your paper cannot be reviewed. I hope you think of JOSS for the next appropriate paper, and I am sorry you cannot proceed to review at this point.

[oliviaguest]

@editorialbot reject

[editorialbot]

Paper rejected.