[PRE REVIEW]: overviewR - Easily Explore Your Data in R

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @cosimameyer (Cosima Meyer) Repository: https://github.com/cosimameyer/overviewR Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): master Version: v0.0.10 Editor: @samhforbes Reviewers: Pending Managing EiC: Arfon Smith

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/b161adf6c81cedb2bda1ae36b54c6ce0"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/b161adf6c81cedb2bda1ae36b54c6ce0/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/b161adf6c81cedb2bda1ae36b54c6ce0/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/b161adf6c81cedb2bda1ae36b54c6ce0)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @cosimameyer. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@cosimameyer if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). In addition, this list of people have already agreed to review for JOSS and may be suitable for this submission (please start at the bottom of the list).

Editor instructions

The JOSS submission bot @editorialbot is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @editorialbot can do for you type:

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello human, I'm @editorialbot, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks.

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@editorialbot commands

For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

Couldn't check the bibtex because branch name is incorrect: paper

[editorialbot]

Couldn't check the bibtex because branch name is incorrect: paper

[editorialbot]

:warning: An error happened when generating the pdf.

[arfon]

@editorialbot set master as branch

[editorialbot]

Done! branch is now master

[arfon]

@editorialbot check repository

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.09 s (980.3 files/s, 216145.8 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HTML                            34           1727            470           9116
R                               25            225            579           1970
Markdown                         6            369              0           1349
CSS                              3             99             48            428
Rmd                              4            317            854            423
JavaScript                       4             64             34            266
YAML                             7             35              6            237
TeX                              1             11              0            103
SVG                              1              0              1             11
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            85           2847           1992          13903
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 1167

[arfon]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:

[cosimameyer]

Possible reviewers (based on the list provided by editorialbot) are:

• njtierney
• jaeyk
• pmyteh
• josiahparry

[arfon]

@cosimameyer – thanks for your submission to JOSS. We're currently managing a large backlog of submissions and the editor most appropriate for your area is already rather busy.

For now, we will need to waitlist this paper and process it as the queue reduces. Thanks for your patience!

[cosimameyer]

@arfon, many thanks for the feedback and all the work you put into JOSS. I keep my fingers crossed that the backlog gets smaller 😊 I hope you have a nice summer and look forward to hearing from you!

[oliviaguest]

this might be an appropriate one for @samhforbes, so when he has his permissions to edit for JOSS up, might be good to ping him 😊

[oliviaguest]

@editorialbot invite @samhforbes as editor

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[samhforbes]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @samhforbes is now the editor

[cosimameyer]

Thanks for being the editor, @samhforbes 😊 I'm not sure how many reviewers are required but I had another look at the list and think they might be also a good fit (in addition to the ones I named above):

• gabett
• chrisaberson
• dhvalden
• nhtran93

[cosimameyer]

@editorialbot check references

[editorialbot]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.21105/joss.01509 is OK
- 10.32614/RJ-2019-033 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- https://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2021.1980498 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1093/jogss/ogac009 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix

[cosimameyer]

@editorialbot check references

[editorialbot]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1080/09557571.2021.1980498 is OK
- 10.1093/jogss/ogac009 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.01509 is OK
- 10.32614/RJ-2019-033 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[cosimameyer]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:

[samhforbes]

Thanks got submitting to JOSS @cosimameyer. I have been in touch with some possible reviewers, and will add them here as and when they accept the invitation. Until then I look forward to going through this process with you!

[cosimameyer]

@samhforbes thanks for the update - that sounds fantastic! I'm also looking forward to working on the process with you 🙂

[samhforbes]

Hi @jaeyk @pmyteh would either of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html Please note this is a public issue, and your responses will also be public.

[samhforbes]

Hi @josiahparry @nhtran93 would either of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html Please note this is a public issue, and your responses will also be public.