The humor:
I’m making great headway in looking at “the other 4,100+”–journals in DOAJ as of May 2015 that aren’t included in my interim full-2014 Gold OA report. (I’m almost halfway through, and now do anticipate finishing before mid-September; more on that later)
Chrome’s translation features (based on Google Translate) are critical to my ability to do this. Generally, it’s doing a fine job.
But then there was this–a screen capture from the translated version of an Open Journal Systems interface for a Persian journal:
I’m roughly 99.9% certain that Chrome provided an accurate word-for-word Persian-to-English translation.
The non-update:
If you’re waiting for the August 2015 issue of Cites & Insights, you’ll have a long wait–if there is a separate August issue at all, it will probably appear in late August; a combined August/September issue is more likely.
Meanwhile, I can suggest a couple of recent issues to keep you going…but first, a little background on first-month (or first 25-to-27-day) readership figures. Here’s what I see for this year so far:
- January 2015 (“The Third Half” of the DOAJ study): 1,694 downloads in December 2014
- February 2015 (Deathwatch 2015! and Copyright Extremism): 533 downloads in January 2015
- March 2015 (more about OA journals, Ebooks & Pbooks): 1,025 downloads in February 2015
- April 2015 (the economics of OA): 1,771 downloads in March 2015
- May 2015 (FriendFeed and Twitter): 664 downloads in April 2015
- June 2015 (Who Needs Open Access, Anyway?–and notes on counting articles): 1,044 downloads in May 2015
- July 2015 (Thinking About Libraries and Access, also A Few Words): 365 downloads in June 2015
I was hoping to see a little discussion engendered by Thinking About Libraries and Access, maybe even a little controversy. I wasn’t expecting to see a huge drop in readership, at least not that much of a drop. I figure 500+ first-month readership is doing OK, 700+ doing well, 1,000+ doing great.
So I’ll suggest that you might want to read the current issue–the whole thing (I surely could use a little more support for the more complete 2014 DOAJ overview), but especially the central essay.
Otherwise…well, maybe the February issue. The May issue probably got the readership it deserves. (It’s up to 1,094 downloads as of June 30, and anything over 700 in the first year makes me pretty happy on that count. For that matter, the February issue’s up to 900 downloads.)
Meanwhile, back to the survey…
