2011-05-05 08:25:43How would I handle papers that have been updated - most recent, or both?
Alex C


Take for example McKitrick and Michaels 2004, "A test of corrections for extraneous signals in gridded surface temperature data" and the following erratum.  Should I include both, or would that be double counting?  My thinking was to include the most recent, but that leaves the problem of the erratum not including the full discussion on the main conclusions of the original paper.  Perhaps include both to the database to avoid this issue?

2011-05-07 15:30:49
Ari Jokimäki


I think it's ok to add both for now, but it might be good that we would have another category for these (erratums, comments, replies, conference papers,...). Another option would be to have more than one link for each document (abstract, full text, erratum, comment, reply, comment2, reply2, related conference article, related news article,...). That would take this to another level I think. :)