Re: Dinosaur Museum Journal

[Dinogeorge@aol.com]

In a message dated 9/6/02 6:16:43 PM EST, a_ekaterina@yahoo.com writes:

<< Is it just me or others who are a little puzzled by this mode of 
publishing such critical finds. >>

Well, as someone who usually self-publishes his own material, I can say that 
often you just don't want to be bothered with all the delays and rewrites. Or 
having to pay page rates for journal publication. Or having someone else 
introduce typographical errors (as happened with, e.g., Richardoestesia) into 
cleaner text. I like to do it my way, and I think so do Steve and Sylvia 
(their way).

Just for the record, Mesozoic Meanderings #1 and its supplements were not 
peer-reviewed, MM #2 both printings were loosely peer-reviewed (I sent out 
review copies to a number of paleontologists and incorporated their comments 
before printing), MM #3 was not peer-reviewed, the Ankylosaur Wall Chart was 
not peer-reviewed, Mesozoic Vertebrate Life #1 was not peer-reviewed, and 
Dinosaur Folios #1 was not peer-reviewed. I don't think peer review would 
have been of much use in those publications anyway. Historical Dinosaurology 
#1 (Stegosauria) was peer-reviewed but unfortunately I got stalled before I 
could incorporate the recommended changes (all quite good and relevant, by 
the way) and produce it; I had to move from Buffalo NY back to San Diego CA 
after which almost all my references became inaccessible. (And they still 
are, six years later.) Now it's out of date and cannot appear in anything 
like its original form; needs a complete rewrite. Bill Blows (a reviewer) has 
cited the HD #1 MS in some of his articles on British stegosaurs. Had I not 
gone after peer review for HD #1, I would have had just enough of an 
opportunity to publish it in Buffalo; but having to correct/update the text 
kept it just out of reach. Dunno which is better--publish with some minor 
errors or not publish at all.

If I get The Dinosaur Catalogue together, I will >definitely< solicit peer 
review. That baby I want to be as accurate as possible. Incidentally, in 
compiling it and cross-checking other dinosaur encyclopedias and 
compilations, I am finding quite a few little errata in them. Hope the 
authors don't get tired of hearing from me about those.