Is there any way to validate refbacks so that only good refbacks For example, we normally get refbacks like those listed below…but we are also getting a bunch of random/food/porn/etc refbacks.
2013-07-25 60 https://www.google.com/ Preliminary data on a new opioid risk assessment measure: The Brief Risk Interview — New Edit | Delete
2013-07-28 5 https://www.google.com/ Use of tincture of opium compared to oral morphine for the treatment of neonatal abstinence syndrome — New Edit | Delete
2013-07-30 37 https://www.google.com/ Comparison of efficacy between buprenorphine and tramadol in the detoxification of opioid (heroin)-dependent subjects — New Edit | Delete
2013-07-31 56 https://www.google.com/ Hypoglycemia during rapid methadone dose escalation — New Edit | Delete
2013-07-31 152 https://www.google.com/ Review article. Pharmacokinetic evaluation of hydrocodone/acetaminophen for pain management — New Edit | Delete
Hi @radjr, hi @asmecher, I would like to share some notes on refbacks:
there should be a possibility to manage them as a Journal Manager or editor, since often authors don’t check them (not to mention journals were authors don’t submit directly in OJS)
is there the possibility to clean past refbacks via exclusion list?
and on the exclusion list:
the default list doesn’t work any more, since it miss every “https”
it is not so clear that the hashes (#) are necessary, at first I thought the strings were commented
(I am not so sure about it) apparently the slash need to be escaped, for example: