anisa-hawes
commented
3 months ago Hello @hawc2,
This lesson's sustainability + accessibility checks are now complete, and I'm preparing to stage this lesson for publication.
- [x] new authors' bios for
ph_authors.yml+ update to AWC's bio - [x] copyright agreement received
- .md file: /en/drafts/originals/text-mining-youtube-comments.md
- images: /images/text-mining-youtube-comments
- assets: /assets/text-mining-youtube-comments
- original avatar: /gallery/originals
- gallery avatar: /gallery
Promotion:
- [x] Template announcement posts
- [ ] Prepare evergreen posts – @hawc2, could you please provide x2 posts for future promotion via our social media channels? You can add these directly to the
ph-evergreens-twitter-xspreadsheet that has been shared with you, or email them to Charlotte by email.
Publisher's post-publication tasks:
- [x] Add lesson slug to the Annual Count of Published Lessons
- [x] Update the ph_data folder in the ph-contributors repository
nlgarlic
The Programming Historian has received the following tutorial “Text Mining YouTube Comment Data with Wordfish in R” by @hawc2, @jantsen, and @nlgarlic. This lesson is now under review and is available here:
http://programminghistorian.github.io/ph-submissions/en/drafts/originals/text-mining-youtube-comments
Please feel free to use the line numbers provided on the preview if that helps with anchoring your comments, although you can structure your review as you see fit.
I will act as editor for the review process. My role is to solicit two reviews from the community and to manage the discussions, which should be held here on this forum. I have already read through the lesson and provided feedback, to which the author has responded.
Members of the wider community are also invited to offer constructive feedback which should post to this message thread, but they are asked to first read our Reviewer Guidelines (http://programminghistorian.org/reviewer-guidelines) and to adhere to our anti-harassment policy (below). We ask that all reviews stop after the second formal review has been submitted so that the author can focus on any revisions. I will make an announcement on this thread when that has occurred.
I will endeavor to keep the conversation open here on Github. If anyone feels the need to discuss anything privately, you are welcome to email me.
Our dedicated Ombudsperson is (Ian Milligan - http://programminghistorian.org/en/project-team). Please feel free to contact him at any time if you have concerns that you would like addressed by an impartial observer. Contacting the ombudsperson will have no impact on the outcome of any peer review.
Anti-Harassment Policy
This is a statement of the Programming Historian’s principles and sets expectations for the tone and style of all correspondence between reviewers, authors, editors, and contributors to our public forums.
The Programming Historian is dedicated to providing an open scholarly environment that offers community participants the freedom to thoroughly scrutinize ideas, to ask questions, make suggestions, or to requests for clarification, but also provides a harassment-free space for all contributors to the project, regardless of gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, age or religion, or technical experience. We do not tolerate harassment or ad hominem attacks of community participants in any form. Participants violating these rules may be expelled from the community at the discretion of the editorial board. Thank you for helping us to create a safe space.