Hi R folks, After following this thread, I got curious, and tried to do a Web of Science search to see how many citations of R there are. It's a *mess*. Even limiting it to "R Core Team" as first author, there are so many variations in citation that WoS eventually gave up and told me that I couldn't add any more.
Google Scholar gives "Cited by 134011 - All 118 versions." I think trying to create a repository might also be a mess! But it's clear from this attempt that it's harder than it should be to consistently and clearly cite R, even with the handy citation() function, or there wouldn't be such a mess in WoS. Perhaps it's time to create a DOI for R itself, to help standardize the mess. (If there is a DOI, it doesn't show up in citation().) Versioning would be a slight pain, but according to Zenodo at least, they maintain a DOI for each version, and a master DOI. Also, of course, make sure your students and colleagues cite R and the R packages they use! The authors should be properly credited, and it makes it possible for interested people to see where and how the software is used. And if you want to support R financially, there are worse things to do than donate to the R Foundation. https://www.r-project.org/foundation/ Sarah --- Sarah Goslee http://www.numberwright.com ______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
