#repositories

[the-magiarcheologist]

Hogwarts Legacy Timeline

I've gone deep into research to try to put together a timeline of events that happened before the start of the game.

Ok, let's break it down! (I'll provide my sources for all of this)

And let's start with the most shocking: when anne gets cursed.

Almost everyone assumes (logically) that she got cursed sometime during the fourth year or the summer before the start of fifth year. But, in the book "The Art and Making Of Hogwarts Legacy" there is a short paragraph introducing Sebastian and here is what it says:

If we take this info as legit (and I think it is since that book was written by the people developping the game) then Anne has been suffering from that curse for far longer than anyone thought!

That also means that Ranrok opened the first repository over a year before our MC starts at Hogwarts and discovers ancient magic.

Before we start the mission 'It's all Gobbledegook" with Amit, Lodgok tells the MC that Ranrok orginally unearthed Bragbor's journals that had been long lost. From these journals, he discovered that wizards had hidden for 'repositories' full of magic that Bragbor had built for them. He knew all of this was connected to five names: Rackham, Fitzgerald, Bakar, Morganach and Rookwood. Ranrok then sent Lodgok to begin the search at Rookwood castle.

Sebastian also confirms that Goblins first arrived at Rookwood castle. Before we visit his sister, he tells MC: "No one has felt safe here since Ranrok's Loyalists took a peculiar interest in that castle over there - Rookwood castle."

Miriam was actually already at Rookwood castle, conducting her research on ancient magic, before the Goblins arrived. That is how Lodgok meets her. She had already found the container (with the portkey inside) and was studying it. (Lodgok tells us this after we complete the mission with Amit).

Other Goblins join Lodgok at Rookwood castle to search it. At this point, Rookwood must have joined hands with Ranrok and allowed the Goblins to tunnel under Rookwood castle to search for the repository. (We overhear Rookwood telling Ranrok: "I allowed you to tunnel under my family home!" when we first visit Rookwood castle to start the second trial from the Keepers).

The Goblins find the first repository and Ranrok is thrilled. That is when Lodgok tells him that he met Miriam and that he trusted her and allowed her to continue her research on the container independently. Lodgok does not really know what happens after that but we know that Ranrok eventually found her and killed her. So Miriam died sometime between Ranrok finding the first repository and the start of the fifth year.

The only other thing we know to try to piece together when Miriam died is that shortly before her death she first sent George Osric a letter warning him about Ranrok's activities (presumably she knew that he had accessed the first repository) and then "before [George] could respond" she also sent him the container. Since George himself says he had not had time to respond to her first letter before he received the container, that probably means only a few days went by between Miriam being worried about Ranrok's activities and when he found her and killed her. (We learn all of this from George Osric in the carriage going to Hogwarts.)

The other interesting thing is that George tells Prof. Fig that he had received Miriam's first letter (and the contained shortly after), "months ago". Rookwood sort of confirms this when he tells Ranrok that he spent "months and countless Ministry favours" locating the container (he says this when we overhear his conversation with Ranrok at Rookwood castle). So this means that Miriam died several months before september 1890.

This raises a lot of questions: Why did George Osric wait that long to tell Prof. Fig that he has received a mysterious container from his wife before her death? Also, why did Miriam send the container to George and not her husband? Were Prof. Fig and his wife estranged? Did Miriam not trust Prof. Fig? But that's the topic for another post I suppose...

Anyway, after Goblins started searching at Rookwood castle, they also started searching at other locations connected to the 5 names of the Keepers. (We know this, again, from Lodgok before we start the mission with Amit). That is when they arrived at Isidora's house. We don't know the exact timeline between them arriving at Isidora's home and the fire during which Anne got cursed. This could have happened before Ranrok found the first repository. But it happened after Ranrok and Rookwood started their alliance since Rookwood was at Isidora's house with the Goblins. So I think it happened after Ranrok had already found the first repository but we can't be sure.

Anyway that's all I've got! Have I forgotten something?

[here-be-dragons-and-whatnot]

Treat yoself to some free assets for Blender

This is probably old news to everyone but me, but there are some incredible free repositories to be found for Blender these days. These two in particular really stood out to me.

Poly Haven • Poly Haven

The Public 3D Asset Library

The library of 19,895 free models, materials, add-ons and brushes to create beautiful 3D artwork and 3D visualization. Explore now or downlo

[strathoa]

Strathprints: 20 Years of Open Access at Strathclyde

Alan Slevin, Scholarly Publications and Research Data Manager, 10 Oct 2025

Strathprints’ journey started in the early 2000s, when the University of Strathclyde saw the need for a central home for its research. Back then, open access was still in its infancy but Strathclyde was ready to take the leap.

The Early Days (2003–2008) By 2005, Strathprints was live running on EPrints, one of the earliest open repository platforms. At launch, it already held over 500 research outputs, from journal articles to PhD theses. By 2008, that number had grown to nearly 4,800 records, a sign that Strathclyde’s researchers were embracing open access. Early advocacy aimed to encourage more engagement with researchers and communicate progress to the repository community.

2005 archive snapshot

2005 homepage — simple metadata-driven layout

Integration and Momentum (2009–2013) As open access mandates gathered momentum, Strathprints became more than just a repository - it became part of Strathclyde’s research strategy.

Using Strathclyde’s signing of the Scottish Declaration on Open Access,  the first institutional deposit mandate was pushed through Senate, mentioned in this Strathprints presentation in 2009

In 2013, the University adopted Pure (Elsevier) as its Current Research Information System (CRIS). Instead of replacing Strathprints, the two were connected through a smart pipeline: Pure for research management, Strathprints for global visibility.

This decision preserved Strathprints’ strengths: embargo control, preservation workflows, and discoverability, while ensuring efficiency for researchers. Today, the connected Pure CRIS has passed 100,000 deposited outputs, making it a vast research management hub, with Strathprints as the primary outward-facing showcase. This system drives the workflows and compliance behind the scenes.

2013 archive snapshot

2013 interface showing Pure integration cues

Discovery, Growth and Grey Literature (2014–2019) Between 2014 and 2019, tools were added that made research easier to find and use:

CORE Recommender suggested related works.

SEO and schema.org enhancements boosted visibility in Google and beyond.

A new statistics dashboard let researchers see the reach of their work.

By 2019, downloads hit over half a million in a single year, showing how global audiences were engaging with Strathclyde’s work. Just as importantly, Strathprints became a champion for grey literature - theses, reports, working papers, and conference proceedings often overlooked elsewhere - ensuring the full breadth of research was visible.

2019 archive snapshot (abstract screenshot with CORE recommender and stats pages visible)

Preservation & Data Futures (2020–2022) With growth came responsibility for the preservation of research outputs. Strathprints integrated Archivematica to safeguard research for the long term, while deepening links with research data management (RDM) systems like StrathData and DataCite.

In 2021, downloads reached a record-breaking 845,656, proving that the appetite for open research had never been stronger.

Strathprints in the Rankings (2023–2025) Strathprints’ success is reflected Strathclyde’s global standing:

In the 2023 Leiden Ranking, Strathclyde was ranked 3rd in the world for the proportion of research outputs open access (91.7%).

In 2024, it rose to 4th globally, with 92.6% of outputs open.

Behind these rankings is a clear truth: Strathprints has been central to Strathclyde’s reputation as a leader in open access.

2024 archive snapshot (dashboard screenshot showing statistics & DOIs)

From Humble Beginnings to Cornerstone of Open Research

Today, Strathprints holds over 75,000 items, with more than 10 million downloads worldwide.

What started as a modest EPrints installation has become a cornerstone of Strathclyde’s open research ecosystem balancing technical innovation, policy compliance, and global accessibility.

Strathprints’ story is one of persistence, innovation, and community. It shows what happens when a university commits to openness not just in words, but in infrastructure, policy, and vision. And after 20 years, the story is still being written.

Strathprints People

The success of Strathprints rests on the combined dedication, expertise, and vision of multiple teams working behind the scenes over the years. At the heart of this effort are the Institutional Repository Support Assistants, whose tackling of a large workload and meticulous attention to detail have made the smooth processing of thousands of deposits possible. These staff manage the intake, verification, and metadata preparation of research outputs, ensuring that each deposit meets both open access standards and institutional requirements. Their careful work is the backbone that allows Strathprints to deliver content promptly and reliably to the global research community.

Complementing this effort are the skilled repository managers, who have exploited the open-source nature of the EPrints software to create a highly customized service. Through the thoughtful integration of important tools such as discovery, linking, and content recommendation systems they have enhanced both the functionality of the repository and the visibility of Strathclyde research. Their technical ingenuity ensures that Strathprints remains a flexible, future-proof platform capable of responding to emerging research and open access requirements.

Equally critical are the teams’ approach to policy and advocacy in a way that has been instrumental in advancing open access across the university. By rationalising OA policies, introducing innovative open research initiatives, and developing clear, efficient workflows, they have maximized compliance with funder mandates and institutional expectations. Their efforts extend beyond policy design and they engage directly with academics and senior management, promoting the value of open access and ensuring that Strathprints is recognised as a central component of Strathclyde’s research infrastructure.

Together, the teams who have supported Strathprints over the last 20 years have created an institutional repository which is much more than a simple archival service but more of a dynamic, community-centred hub for open research. The combined technical skill, operational diligence, and strategic advocacy have ensured that Strathprints is not only a repository of record but also a driver of research visibility, innovation, and institutional engagement with open science.

References

These references illustrate Strathprints' active participation in the global open access and scholarly communication communities, showcasing its contributions to research dissemination and repository development. This continues to the present with the current staff having important roles in the wider Open Research community and infrastructure.

Repository case history: University of Strathclyde Strathprints. Open Repositories Conference, Southampton 2008 https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/5790/

Strathprints case study  https://wiki.diglib.org/images/a/a6/Strathprints_Case_Study.pdf

(Greening Information Management (GIM) methods)

Why are repositories important? https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/41210/

Repository Impact and Usage

Strathprints Usage Review (2018): A blog post reviewing the usage statistics of Strathprints in 2018, providing insights into its reach and impact. strathoa.tumblr.com

Strathprints Usage in 2018: Another blog post analysing the usage patterns of Strathprints during 2018, highlighting trends and areas of growth. strathoa.tumblr.com

DigLib Wiki Case Study: A detailed case study on Strathprints, highlighting its development, challenges, and successes in promoting open access at the University of Strathclyde. DLF Wiki

CORE Blog Post: An article on the CORE blog discussing the implementation of the CORE Recommender in Strathprints, enhancing content discoverability and user engagement. CORE

Open Access and Repository Discoverability

Open Access @ Strathclyde Blog: A blog post discussing the efforts to enhance open access at Strathclyde, including the growth of Strathprints and its integration with various open access initiatives. strathoa.tumblr.com

Reviewing Repository Discoverability: A Tumblr post reviewing the strategies implemented to improve the discoverability of Strathprints, including metadata enhancements and integration with external platforms. strathoa.tumblr.com

Conference Presentations and Discussions

16th International Open Repositories Conference (OR2021): A presentation titled "The wee country that roared: supporting Open Access in Scotland through institutional repositories," highlighting Strathprints' role in Scotland's open access landscape. Strathprints

Leiden Rankings Presentation: A presentation focusing on the growth of institutional repositories in Scottish universities, including Strathprints, and their impact on open access. Strathprints

Assessment of Self-Archiving: A study evaluating the success of open access self-archiving in several well-known institutional repositories, including Strathprints, examining deposits and full-text availability. scholarship.libraries.rutgers.edu 

Proceedings of the Tenth Text Retrieval Conference: An author-produced version of a paper published in the proceedings, hosted on Strathprints, demonstrating its role in disseminating scholarly work. CORE

[erossiniuk]

Cloning all repositories from Azure DevOps

I will provide a script for cloning all repositories from Azure DevOps in an organisation with multiple projects and repositories using PowerShell. Scenario Often, I end up with a big mess in the repositories from a project at work. I want to download all the repositories again from a particular organisation. For example, I used to split my code into NuGet packages to manage the projects…

Cloning all repositories from Azure DevOps

[keatongamer]

KeatonGamer - Overview

he/him/his, indie game dev. KeatonGamer has 6 repositories available. Follow their code on GitHub.

i have changed my github account's username. you can still find my repositories under my new username.

[strathoa]

Do Strathclyde authors need to include the 2-line rights retention statement in the funding acknowledgements section of their manuscripts?

Pablo de Castro, Open Access Advocacy Librarian at U Strathclyde

Following the passing of the Strathclyde Institutional Rights Retention Policy (IRRP) by Senate a year ago, there have been a good number of presentations at various Strathclyde departments to explain what this policy entails and the workflows for their application. The policy came into force on 1 Jan 2024 (for manuscripts submitted on or after 1 Jan 2024 to be precise) and a report "The Strathclyde IRRP 12 months into the policy" will be shared at the start of 2025 showing the uptake of the policy by month, by Strathclyde department and by publisher.

In the meantime, certain lack of clarity has been reported on whether the 2-line rights retention statement below needs to feature on the funding acknowledgements section of manuscripts submitted for publication today.

It's not surprising that authors are unsure of this, as different institutions are applying different criteria around this requirement. A recently published post on the IRRP implementation at Sheffield Hallam states for instance that at this university they are requiring the inclusion of the 2-line RRS above in order to apply their IRRP. Other universities are also applying this more cautious approach to the adoption of rights retention strategy.

However, these decisions can be influenced by other factors such as the size of the institutional research support team in charge of chasing the manuscripts to which the IRRP will be applied (the smaller the team, the more cautious the approach for the sheer purpose of being able to identify the publications that should be targeted by the policy).

Moreover, "rights retention clauses" like the one shown below remove the need to include the 2-line rights retention statement altogether when the publisher has specifically agreed that they accept the application of the institutional policy.

So for Strathclyde authors, the guidance is at follows: you don't need to include the 2-line rights retention statement in your manuscript, but if you want to do it to be on the safe side you are very welcome to do so. The explanation for this guidance is provided below.

1. As a rule, Strathclyde authors do not need to include any rights retention statement on their manuscripts. This is so even if the UKRI Open Access policy (released in Aug 2021 and applicable to manuscripts submitted on or after 1 Apr 2022) says this statement should feature on the manuscripts for their funded papers.

2. Strathclyde authors do (as a rule) not need to include this statement because their submissions are already covered by the Strathclyde IRRP, which clearly states that the UKRI OA policy requirement to deposit a copy of the accepted manuscript (AAM) under no embargo period and a CC BY licence whenever Gold Open Access is not an option applies to all institutional research outputs. This is no specific policy decision for Strathclyde: all thirtysomething IRRPs adopted by UK universities (most of them research-intensive) at the time of writing state exactly the same intention.

3. The "as a rule" caveat is included above because in order for the Strathclyde IRRP to be applied by default the publisher needs to have been notified about the IRRP by the University. At Strathclyde we emailed the 100-odd main publishers for the aggregated research outputs for the university shortly after the IRRP was passed by Senate a year ago.

The issue is that there are hundreds of publishers out there, often discipline-specific publishers, and not every single one of them has been notified about the IRRP.

4. So then the question becomes "how do I know if the publisher whose title I am submitting my manuscript to has been notified about the passing of the Strathclyde IRRP?". The answer is "you may always ask us at [email protected]" – we haven't made public the list of notified publishers because this is a potentially sensitive information but the list exists and it's easy for us to confirm whether a specific publisher is included in it. Moreover, the list keeps growing as "new" publishers get notified when we see a just-accepted manuscript to which the IRRP should be applied.

5. And this latter action is the one that really matters. At Strathclyde we are trying to apply our IRRP in the least inconvenient way for our researchers, meaning they don't really need to ask us if a publisher is covered by the policy. Most publishers are covered anyway, but if a new one arises for a publication the author contacts us about while the manuscript is in the pipeline or whose just-accepted manuscript we come across, we will make sure the publisher is notified about the Strathclyde IRRP in time for the policy to be applied to the paper when it gets first released online.

6. This said, the "least inconvenient way" doesn't mean researchers being unaware of the policy and its application workflows (the screenshot below taken from an international webinar on the topic of rights retention shows a very low level of awareness of rights retention among academics as per the results of a survey; it's fair to state though that the survey was conducted among Italian researchers and that no Italian university has – yet – adopted an IRRP). Any Strathclyde researcher wishing to opt-out of the policy for any of their papers can easily do so (on a paper-specific basis) by just emailing the Open Access mailbox at [email protected]. Any Strathclyde researcher may also email us if they wish to know whether any of their accepted manuscripts has been made openly available embargo-free and under a CC BY licence in our Strathprints repository.

[luckybitch1]