4 ms·
The link should be changed to the DOI or a direct link to the journal article: - https://doi.org/10.1038/s41366-022-01211-2 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41366-022-
by murphyslab 4y ago
The link should be changed to the DOI or a direct link to the journal article:
- https://doi.org/10.1038/s41366-022-01211-2 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41366-022-01211-2
- https://www.nature.com/articles/s41366-022-01211-2 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41366-022-01211-2
Not sure why OP linked to this index. The article is Open Access, yet this intermediary site has a prominent "Buy article PDF →" link at the top which tries to sell it for $17. OA.mg seems like some kind of scam.
- neogodless 4y ago89% of the OP's comments contain a link to oa.mg So do most of their recent submissions. Presumably they have a vested interest in oa.mg selling access to papers. They previously linked to citationsy.com which came from the same team.
- murphyslab 4y agoOne would think the guideline applies here: > Please submit the original source. If a post reports on something found on another site, submit the latter. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- neogodless 4y agoI would think so. And as far as the way this user is using their account and HN > Please don't use HN primarily for promotion. It's ok to post your own stuff occasionally, but the primary use of the site should be for curiosity. (Of course by saying so, I'm breaking the guideline on insinuating the user is shilling.)
- MauranKilom 4y agoFor such cases, just email HN and describe the problem. It's both more effective (dang is guaranteed to see it) and disrupts the thread less.