Matches in Nanopublications for { ?s <https://w3id.org/linkflows/reviews/hasCommentText> ?o ?g. }
- comment hasCommentText "no modification requested" assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "The provenance of this nanopublication should be a FormalizationActivity and all the fields should be filled in in an appropriate manner: the link to the article, formalization author orcid, the exact quote from the article that contains the scientific claim." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "The qualifier should be "frequently" instead of "generally"." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "I would add a skos:related class with "metabolic abnormality" if such class exists." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "This issue has been resolved as indicated." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "I have updated the class to refer to more appropriate wikidata class" assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "Addressed in previous correction" assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "This has been corrected." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "Thank you for the comment." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "Thank you for your suggestion which has been implemented." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "Thank you for the suggestion which was implemented." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "Thank you for your suggestion which has been implemented." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "Changed according to suggestion." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "Replaced by new class." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "The publication is about overlapping genes in the disease networks of CAKUT and in the vitamin A targets. There is no causality involved." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "Changed according to suggestion." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "Changed according to suggestion." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "I agree" assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "no change required" assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "agreed. nothing to change" assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "Looking at this again, I think this formalization can be made more precise (and in a way simpler) by not using the universal context, but instead biodiversity data (Q28946370) as context and data reuse (Q58023280) as object." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "updated to reflect ecm binding as a property of the cancer cell" assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "Publication link included" assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "There is now!" assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "Class updated" assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "I agree" assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "Thank you for your suggestion, which was addressed." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "In another review comment (http://purl.org/np/RALWxVELKuqrkcO9ud2eXr0E2-ot5bl-0NpOIQi1ktrgI) it is specified that this naming is ok." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "Thank you." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "Thank you." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText ""autosomal recessive disorder" has been added as "genetic disorder" to declare the context of the assertion" assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "I agree that the object 'ERAD pathway' is not the appropiate. I addressed this minting a new class 'dysfunction of ERAD pathway' which is more accurate." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "I agree and I changed the provenance using the 'Generated by a formalization activity' template accordingly." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "This is just a test with a long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long comment." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "I think the article is relevant for the (intended) audience of FAIR Connect. It is well-written and mostly clear, although some concepts may be expanded, as they are not straightforward for data stewards at the beginning of their career. As also suggested by the other reviewer, it could be useful to add a section reporting more practical examples. I also added some comments in the text and edited the text where I felt necessary, but please feel free to ignore changes if I misunderstood." assertion.
- comment hasCommentText "Nice article on a really nice, relevant topic. Here and there the structure/argument could be strengthened a bit, I made some suggestions for that (please ignore if not useful). Not sure how/if you can use it, but at Radboud uni (my previous jobs), we actually started DMPs that reflect this process, not so much with regard to FAIR but regarding what the researcher is expected to do according to the RDM policy of his/her faculty. The DMP included pre-given answers but with blank spots for details and indeed room to deviate if explained. If you are curious, I can bring you into contact with my Radboud uni successor to explore." assertion.