Idea: Add CITATION.cff file for Dataverse

[DS-INRAE]

Dataverse is supporting FAIR principles for its dataset, it would be great if it was also as FAIR as possible as a software and easier to cite !

Overview of the Feature Request
Add a citation file in the repository to be able to cite it more easily from Github :

Image from https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/managing-your-repositorys-settings-and-features/customizing-your-repository/about-citation-files

Any brand new behavior do you want to add to Dataverse?
Add a CITATION.cff file to the Dataverse GitHub repository

Potential issues/discussion

• How to get the list of authors ? Should it include the whole list of contributors ?
• Updates : an update per release would be both sufficient and the easier to maintain, would it be acceptable for all ?

[pdurbin]

@DS-INRA thanks, I think we should have a CITATION.cff too.

Should whatever we cite have a DOI? I'm asking because at https://dataverse.org/about we ask people to use the following citation...

Gary King. 2007. “An Introduction to the Dataverse Network as an Infrastructure for Data Sharing.” Sociological Methods and Research, 36, Pp. 173–199.

... but there's no DOI.

Also, @atrisovic created this PR to create a CITATION.cff and I request a review from you:

• add citation.cff file #9607

[DS-INRAE]

Thanks for linking the issue and PR that I somehow missed !
I think a DOI would be nice too for the persistent redirection, it can be added to the file when minted.

[DS-INRAE]

Could Harvard mint the said DOI ? GDCC would alos be a good candidate to do so.

[qqmyers]

Is this what should be cited: https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124107306660 ?

[DS-INRAE]

I'dc be more in favor of a dedicated DOI with the Software type because even if this ones introduces Dataverse, it is a document about the software :) .

[pdurbin]

Is this what should be cited: https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124107306660 ?

@qqmyers thanks! It's funny. You're reminding me that I tracked down that DOI back in May and @atrisovic had it in the original version of her PR at #9607. Then she took it out and I forgot it existed. Here's some discussion from that PR between her and @poikilotherm:

My take is that @qqmyers is right. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124107306660 is the DOI for the paper we tell people to cite, so I assume we should go with that. 🤷 We should probably update https://dataverse.org/about with that DOI as well.