Issue 13792

Citation guidelines not complete

Reporter: thirsch
Assignee: kbraak
Type: Feedback
Summary: Citation guidelines not complete
Description: The 'How to Cite' text on occurrence detail pages does not follow the current guidance, e.g. no mention of GBIF. Needs discussion and resolution through Vishwas.
Priority: Blocker
Resolution: Fixed
Status: Closed
Created: 2013-09-07 08:57:30.135
Updated: 2013-10-02 12:42:56.436
Resolved: 2013-10-02 12:36:35.166

Attachment Screen Shot 2013-10-02 at 12.37.50 PM.png

Created: 2013-09-07 09:31:26.228
Updated: 2013-09-07 09:31:26.228
Please ask Vishwas also to review species citations incl both original source names as well as generated GBIF backbone names:

The Catalogue of Life version of that genus for example is not correct currently:

It needs to be a 3 parted citation with the CoL, the source GSD and if existing the latest scrutifier alias accordingTo.
For example "Petersen A.P." for

Comment: see also related issues above
Created: 2013-09-07 09:31:35.458
Updated: 2013-09-07 09:34:22.621

Author: vchavan
Created: 2013-09-27 10:32:15.511
Updated: 2013-09-27 10:32:15.511
GBIF recommended guidelines for (a) resource owners or custodians or data publishers and (b) for users of data through GBIF portal are provided in the document available at It is a matter of implementing these strings so that part of the resource citation is generated automatically, and also the user citation is generated automatically.

Suggest that we have a brief meeting with the developer dealing with implementation of this - so that rationale and ways or approaches  to 'build string' can be elaborated. I suggest that we schedule a meeting to discuss this.


Comment: [] says:decisions needed on citations in the next coordination meeting
Created: 2013-09-27 11:19:43.066
Updated: 2013-09-27 11:19:43.066

Comment: Can it wait until next Friday or do we need a decision more imminently? Could prob fix it in 10 mins with Donald.
Created: 2013-09-27 11:33:53.23
Updated: 2013-09-27 11:33:53.23

Created: 2013-09-30 14:16:28.589
Updated: 2013-09-30 14:16:28.589
Recommendation after consultation with Donald for initial implementation, pending further developments on citation:

For Occurrence detail AND Dataset detail pages:

: ,  (accessed via GBIF portal, /dataset/UUID, on xx/xx/xxxx)
 e.g. Artdatabanken: Artdata, 2013  (accessed via GBIF portal,, on 30/09/2013)

I see no urgent need to change the current recommended citations on species pages.


Comment: Any citation change to species pages, in particular if they come from a non GBIF backbone source?
Created: 2013-10-01 10:50:20.737
Updated: 2013-10-01 10:50:20.737

Comment: Not for first deploy, no time to review this and it is not critical
Created: 2013-10-01 10:55:54.875
Updated: 2013-10-01 10:55:54.875

Created: 2013-10-01 12:14:22.13
Updated: 2013-10-01 12:14:22.13
Well, I think it is quite critical for records from the catalogue of life at least.
I am going to implement a hack that will comply to their requirements citing all 3 main parties involved on their side: the CoL itself, the actual GSD source and also the individual taxonomist that did the work aka the latest scrutinizer.

Comment: OK you have specialist knowledge of that side so I am happy for you to proceed
Created: 2013-10-01 12:26:20.368
Updated: 2013-10-01 12:26:20.368

Created: 2013-10-01 15:22:00.561
Updated: 2013-10-01 15:22:00.561
Update: For the Catalog of Life a species page like now reads:

Thomomys bottae (Eydoux and Gervais, 1836) In: Catalogue of Life. Information for this taxon was derived from ITIS Global: The Integrated Taxonomic Information System in the Catalogue of Life, Patton J. L..

Accessed via http://localhost:8080/species/125867898 on 2013-10-01

Comment: That seems fine Markus. Once Kyle has implemented the dataset citation change we can close this issue.
Created: 2013-10-01 15:31:49.306
Updated: 2013-10-01 15:31:49.306

Created: 2013-10-01 16:24:35.419
Updated: 2013-10-01 16:24:35.419
Just for the record. I have been looking at dataset citations in the registry and roughyl a third is either temporary crap or a cryptic collection code. Things like:
 - (see website)
 - In progress

Alternatively we could provide both the GBIF and the original citation, does that make any sense at all?

Created: 2013-10-02 09:49:27.331
Updated: 2013-10-02 09:49:27.331
Change committed last night by Markus:

See this example page showing the 2 citations (auto-generated and user-supplied):

It has been suggested we change "PUBLISHER WISHES TO BE CITED AS" to "Citation provided by publisher"

Please provide your feedback, and we'll change accordingly. Thanks

Created: 2013-10-02 09:59:25.305
Updated: 2013-10-02 09:59:25.305
Agree with the suggested change of wording.

One remaining issue with the example given: the url for the dataset appears not to be clickable

Comment: Can I please confirm this is desired, since the url would just link to the same page. Thanks
Created: 2013-10-02 10:21:08.868
Updated: 2013-10-02 10:21:08.868

Created: 2013-10-02 10:24:00.946
Updated: 2013-10-02 10:24:00.946
OK good point - and I guess if anyone cuts and pastes it will automatically generate a url. So ignore that, keep as it is.


Created: 2013-10-02 10:44:46.146
Updated: 2013-10-02 10:44:46.146
No problems.

One more issue. The section heading name "Usage & legal issues" has likely been agreed upon (see )

I have received a proposal to change this to "Citation and licensing". Should we keep the old heading, or change it? Thanks

Comment: Can I ask who the request was from? I agree the suggested wording is better - I am not aware of discussion of the previous wording.
Created: 2013-10-02 10:56:16.903
Updated: 2013-10-02 10:56:16.903

Comment: [] made the request. [] do you have any opinion about changing the title "Usage & legal issues" to "Citation and licensing"?
Created: 2013-10-02 11:00:43.899
Updated: 2013-10-02 11:00:43.899

Created: 2013-10-02 11:08:23.054
Updated: 2013-10-02 11:09:25.472
Happy to change that - its in the new macro in a single place now.

There is also a section "rights" that could show up in case the EML has some IPRights given or the individual occurrence or secies record has that

Comment: Ok, applied both "Citation provided by publisher" and "Citation and licensing" now, keeping the URL as plain text
Created: 2013-10-02 11:12:57.53
Updated: 2013-10-02 11:12:57.53

Created: 2013-10-02 12:34:32.7
Updated: 2013-10-02 12:34:32.7
Closing this issue as the Canadensys one is fixed, and the decision is made to leave occurrence and species pages untouched.

The Canadensys example now shows the same as the IPT and the data paper:

  GBIF portal:  (this will be intermittently available today due to releases)
  Canadensys IPT:
  Data paper:


Comment: Please open new specific issues for Citation problems instead of reopening this issue, and provide specific links to external documents for example.
Created: 2013-10-02 12:36:35.199
Updated: 2013-10-02 12:36:35.199

Comment: Screenshot of citation section attached showing how the section will look for GB20.
Created: 2013-10-02 12:42:31.077
Updated: 2013-10-02 12:42:31.077