In his response to The Genealogical Adam at the Dabar Conference, Jack Collins cited an insightful blog by Jon Garvey on Original Sin, as if it was a journal article. I have been wondering about the significance of this footnote citation for two months. One of the strange realities of the conversation between theology and science is…
The discussion here is important too: The Opportunities of Digital Dialogue.
Insightful. By analogy it would be similar to a science conference where not only the presented papers were published, but all the conversations in the breaks were recorded and published with them with equal weighting. It would contain a few useful insights, but the majority wouldn’t. By the way, I’m new here and am already deeply impressed by the humility you show in admitting a mistake and rectifying it.
Welcome to the forum @DarrenG. We are glad to have you.
I make a lot of mistakes. So you will see my humility displayed uncomfortably commonly. So, thanks for the kind comment.
I agree, which is why we won’t give DOI’s to every forum thread. Some, however, will require them.
No. tell me all about it (and how I can spot which blogs are important to the world!)
EDIT - just seen your cross-post at The Hump. Will gen up.
Looks good. I particularly like the idea that a scholar can request a DOI from another’s work. Count me in.
Is there a standard way of citing these in articles?
I officially request a DOI for your Original Sin article, your first reference to the 2004 Nature paper on genealogical ancestry, the series you did on Sailhammer and a Genealogical Adam, and any other key articles you think are important for me to cite.
PS: What cross post? Do you mean a link?
Yes. The process, for you should be:
Make a PDF of the article, including or not including comments (as you wish).
Upload PDF to Zenodo, fill out meta data, and publish (include it in the Peaceful Science “community” there).
Include the DOI (and link) in the original article, either at end or beginning, so people who read it know how to cite DOI.
Then cite away. For example, my Sapientia article is here: A Genealogical Adam and Eve in Evolution. Scroll down and you will see citation models on the right panel. Click the DOI icon to get HTML code too.
I can cite it in a Bibliography as:
S. Joshua Swamidass. (2017). A Genealogical Adam and Eve in Evolution. Sapientia. A Genealogical Adam and Eve in Evolution
There is HTML, markdown, restructured Text methods of citing too. Using the Markdown code, I can even add it to discourse with this code, copied from Zenodo:
[](https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1328264)
That renders like this: 
This link is guaranteed to work forever, and is also a good way of doing archival references: A Genealogical Adam and Eve in Evolution
So let me know if you need help. I absolutely do want the DOI’s just mentioned too. Can you help me out?
Wow, that is really cool. I think this could be very useful for those of us at that are at teaching institutions, where our contributions are less likely to be a string of journal articles but we want to show engagement with other scholars.
If a forum topic or blog post comes up you want to cite, let me know and I’ll make a DOI.
If you write something elsewhere, and think it will be helpful to us, make the DOI and add it to the Peaceful Science community in Zenodo. You can announce it here too. Credit is important, especially for those of us in academia. Present this to your peers as an interdisciplinary micropublishing effort. I will not likely to be enough to get tenure on its own, but it will hopefully give you credit.
Dumb question #436: what does DOI stand for?
Digital Object Identifier. Read the original post:
Will work on this after the weekend when the grandchildren have decamped to Cornwall. We should have a whole week of non-interruptions!
As long as we are talking about this, @Jordan and @jongarvey I recommend you also get ORCID identifiers for yourselves as well, as these can be used to identify you as authors:
For any forum in which you participate, if you would like to be identified as a contributor/author, let me know. In general, for forum discussions, I will only identify those who specifically request it to be authors.
Well, five uploads done: those you requested, and a couple of bonus tracks.
Can you put a narrative here of how these are connected, with DOIs?
I see all kinds of interesting things appear simply by posting the URL!
@Jongarvey, would consider renaming the Adam and MRCA Studies post? You can keep the same link, but MRCA is going to create confusion.
Josh, I was dubious about doing that, because the only real value of linking to the piece at all is to do with its being an early mention of the theory, warts and all. I got the “MRCA” thing either from Opderbeck or Rohde, so that’s how the paper-trail runs.