Wikipedia:Annual Reviews

The Wikipedia Library

Annual Reviews
Sign up for free access to Annual Reviews (Accounts available)

Account Coordinator: The Wikipedia Library team - Apply now to help!

Annual Reviews is a publisher of review articles in the sciences and social sciences. Its articles cover major topics in each subject area every few years, with other special topics appearing occasionally. For more information see their website. This partnership provides access to their Biomedical Life collection.

There are up to 100 one-year accounts available to Wikipedians through this partnership.

Requirements[edit]

• You have your preferences enabled to receive email messages on English Wikipedia or on your home wiki linked from your application; (see Special:Preferences)
• You have an account that is a minimum of 6 months old
• You have a minimum of 500 edits to the encyclopedia
• You do not already have access to this resource through another library or institution

If you don't quite meet the experience requirements but think you would still be a strong candidate for access, feel free to apply and you may be considered

Expectations[edit]

Approved editors may

• Search, view, retrieve, and display portions of restricted content;
• Electronically save portions of restricted content;
• Print out single copies of portions of restricted content;

Approved editors will not

• Share their account logins or passwords with others, or sell their access to other parties
• Mass scrape or mass download Annual Reviews content
• Systematically make printed or electronic copies of multiple extracts of restricted content available for any purpose.
• Datamine metadata without permission, in order, for instance, to use metadata for auto-created stub articles.
• Violate any terms and conditions which appear on the particular pages of the Annual Reviews website they are accessing.

Private and confidential information

• By applying to the Program, you understand and agree that your name and email address may be shared with representatives of the Wikimedia Foundation, The Wikipedia Library, and Annual Reviews. Wikipedia Library organizers contracted under the Wikimedia Foundation will abide by the Wikimedia Foundation privacy policy and associated confidentiality agreements. Volunteer representatives of the Wikipedia Library are neither employees nor contractors of the Wikimedia Foundation (or Annual Reviews), but they have signed confidentiality agreements with the Wikimedia Foundation with regards to the personal information they may handle for the Wikipedia Library.

Citation[edit]

External video

Search tutorial from BYUI Libraries

• Editors should always provide original citation information in addition to linking to Annual Reviews resources, per WP:V and WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT.
• Editors should not provide bare links to restricted Annual Reviews pages
• Note (subscription required) in the citation, where appropriate
• Respect the copyright of Annual Reviews, in accordance with Wikipedia's copyright policy and their terms of use
• Cite resources in line with the citation examples provided below or with the examples provided by Annual Reviews

Note that citation styles vary by article; editors can use the style most appropriate to the articles they are working with so long as the citations are complete.

Example

{{cite journal|last1=Hotez|first1=Peter J.|last2=Bottazzi|first2=Maria Elena|last3=Strych|first3=Ulrich|title=New Vaccines for the World's Poorest People|journal=Annual Review of Medicine|date=20 February 2015|volume=67|issue=1|doi=10.1146/annurev-med-051214-024241}} {{subscription required|via=Annual Reviews}}

• Hotez, Peter J.; Bottazzi, Maria Elena; Strych, Ulrich (20 February 2015). "New Vaccines for the World's Poorest People". Annual Review of Medicine. 67 (1). doi:10.1146/annurev-med-051214-024241.   – via Annual Reviews (subscription required)

Further participation[edit]

You can help The Wikipedia Library share this partnership:

• Add {{Wikipedia:Annual Reviews/Userbox}} to your user boxes. This helps us share our project with other experienced users.

Apply[edit]

What to expect with TWL account processing
	Make sure to read this before sending emails to account coordinators inquiring about your account status. Our current average account distribution cycle (from sign up to account access), is 27 days. We are working on improving this. Step 1: Application screening We will begin screening applicants within a few weeks of opening applications, usually as the number of applications approaches or exceeds the number of accounts available. At that time the account coordinator will place an {{Approved}} ( Approved), {{Unapproved}} ( Not approved)or {{ToBeDone}} ( Pending or waitlisted) status to your account. If you signed up after the initial call for applicants, process may not happen immediately if accounts are not available. Step 2: Email and Google Form After you have received approval for an account, you will be contacted via a Wikipedia email from the account coordinator; be sure to check your spam folder. The email will contain instructions for filling out a Google form with the required information for access. Step 3: Waiting for partners to activate accounts There are several steps of subsequent processing, including waiting for a batch of users to submit information, emailing partners, and waiting for partners to activate accounts. Expect this process to take as long as two weeks; we try to make it take less time, but there are a lot of variables at play. Step 4: Using access Once the account is activated either the volunteer coordinator or the partner will send you an email with access information. Follow the given instructions, and make sure to actively use your access to improve Wikipedia content! Changes coming soon We recognize this process can be frustrating and take a while: we think so too. We are in the process of developing a digital tool to make this process more user friendly and make it easier for us to give you access to partners. Interested in helping process accounts or coordinate Wikipedia Library activities? Apply at Wikipedia:TWL/Coordinators/Signup to become a volunteer account coordinator.
Stuck or need help? Try our IRC channel #wikipedia-library

Add yourself at the bottom of the list with a line starting with #{{user8|USERNAME|Project=code}} (eg. {{user8|Example|Project=en}}) followed by an explanation of why you would like access to this resource. It is a good idea to include in your application text your editing areas benefited by access and examples of your commitment to content creation.

1. Keilana (talk · contribs · central auth · count · email) I write extensively in biology and medicine and would love to have access - my university does not give me access to about half of the Biology/Life sciences reviews which unfortunately includes the ones I'd like to use. Keilana (talk) 23:30, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

   @Keilana: Approved Expect an email shortly with further details. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:53, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

2. Everymorning (talk · contribs · central auth · count · email) I often edit medical articles and have been for a year or two, esp. in fields of public health, so I would really like to have access to all the Annual Reviews journal (especially Annual Review of Public Health, but others too). Everymorning (talk) 20:07, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

   @Everymorning: Approved Expect an email shortly with further details. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:53, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

3. WhatamIdoing (talk · contribs · central auth · count · email) In 2014, I was in the top 50 editors for total number of edits to medicine-related articles, and I don't have access to this journal any other way. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:28, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

   @WhatamIdoing: Approved Expect an email shortly with further details. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:53, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

4. Hzh (talk · contribs · central auth · count · email) I edit on a wide variety of topics, but of my close to 40k edits, only around 2,500 edits are science related, and I like to see that number increased because I believe I can contribute more to many pages that need improving. Having access to the Annual Reviews series will help as I no longer have access to many academic journals, including the Annual Reviews journals. I specialise in biochemistry, molecular biology, structural biology and biophysics. Hzh (talk) 16:59, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

   @Hzh: Approved Expect an email shortly with further details. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:27, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

5. Queeste (talk · contribs · central auth · count · email) I write in the Dutch Wikipedia since 2009 and I'm interested in the psychology-reviews. --Queeste (talk) 20:28, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

   @Queeste: Approved Expect an email shortly with further details. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:15, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

6. Espresso Addict (talk · contribs · central auth · count · email) I've been an editor on en-wiki for 9 years, with ~27k manual edits, ~225 article creations & ~90 DYKs. I edit in various biological and medical areas, but am frequently hampered by my lack of access to medical/science journals. Review journals would be especially useful to comply with the referencing standards for medical articles. Espresso Addict (talk) 21:34, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

   @Espresso Addict: Approved Expect an emails shortly with further details. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:15, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

7. Meloe (talk · contribs · central auth · count · email) My area of interest is biology and ecology. I´m interested in Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics and Annual Review of Entomology, which are main sources for my topics, but others would come handy, too.--Meloe (talk) 08:15, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

   @Meloe: Approved Expect an email shortly with further details. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:16, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

8. kdammers (talk · contribs · central auth · count · email) I have been editing Wik en, se, es, and de for almost ten years. One of my areas of interest is osteohistology, along with other archaeological topics that relate to taphonomy, and biology. Kdammers (talk) 18:15, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

   @Kdammers: Approved Expect an email shortly with further details. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:20, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

9. Themidget17 (talk · contribs · central auth · count · email) I'm a little shy of the 500 edits requirement, in spite of having registered for an account over a year ago. However, I contribute the most to medical articles, and this type of access would be very useful. Themidget17 (talk) 04:48, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

   @Themidget17: Approved Expect an email shortly with further details. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:48, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

10. WeijiBaikeBianji (talk · contribs · central auth · count · email) Thanks for setting up access to Annual Reviews. I'll see what the scope of this subset of the journals is--I expect it will be useful for editing articles on common diseases, for sure, and perhaps for editing articles on human genetics and maybe even psychology. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (Watch my talk, How I edit) 01:16, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

    @WeijiBaikeBianji: Approved Expect an email shortly with further details. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:46, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

11. Dcirovic (talk · contribs · central auth · count · email) Thanks for setting up access to Annual Reviews. I have been involved with several Wikipedia projects since 2010. My contributions are primarily concerned with chemistry and biology. Having access to some of these journals (i.e.: Annual Review of Biochemistry, Annual Review of Biophysics, Annual Review of Cell and Developmental Biology, Annual Review of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering) would make me more productive. --Dcirovic (talk) 23:39, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

    @Dcirovic: Approved Expect an email shortly with further details. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:12, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

12. AFlorence (talk · contribs · central auth · count · email) --Florence (talk) 18:46, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

    @AFlorence: Approved Expect an email shortly with further details. Nikkimaria (talk) 11:59, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

13. A.M.Z.A (talk · contribs · central auth · count · email) A.M.Z.A ^Talk 11:05, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

    Hi AMZA, it doesn't look like you've done much medical editing - can you explain why you need this resource? Nikkimaria (talk) 14:32, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

    @Nikkimaria: Hi, I am in these fields (medicine and biology) i have expertise. And I can help improve these articles.Thanks.A.M.Z.A ^Talk 15:55, 24 December 2016 (UTC)