GEN-MEDIEVAL-L ArchivesArchiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2004-11 > 1101694588
From: Peter Stewart <>
Subject: Re: Robert Holand was Re: Review of Plantagenet Ancestry: MayflowerDescendant
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 02:16:28 GMT
References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <41aa704b@news.ColoState.EDU>
Todd A. Farmerie wrote:
> Bryant Smith wrote:
>> There, again, the editor of TAG tells us that there will be two
>> reviews of
>> Richardson's book by real "experts," one in his mag and another in
>> journal, but that the names of these "experts" must be withheld.
> This is common in all publishing. To release the name of a reviewer in
> advance would allow pressure to be placed on her or him. Were I to know
> who was reviewing a book for TAG, I could try to influence the review
> (or simply harass the reviewer by sending an email virus or something).
> It is to protect the integrity of the process that the names of
> reviewers are usually withheld until the time of publication.
Another problem with divulging the names of reviewers in advance of
publication is that the editors would be placed in a quite invidious
posiiton if for any reason they were not satisfied later that the
articles were up to standard, whether positive, negative or neutral
about the book itself. In some cases there may be a need for delay, for
revision or even for a new commission.
It's predictable enough that TAG and NEHGR will publish reviews of PA3,
and it goes without saying that these will be written by people whom the
editors consider to be experts.
David Greene has quite appropriately posted the extra information that
the review in TAG will "probably appear in the October or January
issue". There can be nothing ethically amiss with his telling the
|Re: Robert Holand was Re: Review of Plantagenet Ancestry: MayflowerDescendant by Peter Stewart <>|