I thank you all for your guidance and I see that whilst having students in teaching classes editing multiple subjects is ok, asking students to edit multiple topics about research in the same institution, topic etc is unlikely to be OK because they will be too close to the people involved and I agree this is A Bad Idea.
However just in the interest of being clear, with respect to the other things mentioned here, I was not talking about original research - only peer reviewed published papers - and never mentioned articles about "yourself/biography". I certainly wouldn't want anyone to even imagine I would consider such practices. On a more personal note I am a writer who was last employed as an academic many years ago. I take these issues seriously, which is why I came here to ask questions in the first place. I do believe the issues are not yet clear and need to be so. It is especially confusing when I see people referencing their own websites! With thanks Jen / Open Research Sent from my mobile > On 10 Jul 2014, at 20:05, Pine W <[email protected]> wrote: > > In general: > > 1. Citing your own academic work and/or adding an article on Wikipedia about > your work would be to introduce original research AND potentially COI, and > both of those are not ok. You could propose an edit on an article talk page > with an explanation that you are the researcher. > > 2. Editing an article about yourself would be COI. You could propose an edit > on the article talk page with the explanation that you are the subject of the > article. > > 3. Encouraging your students to add your or their research on Wikipedia would > be meatpuppetry, original research, and/or potentially COI, and any of those > is not OK. > > 4. Encouraging your students to edit your biography on Wikipedia would be > meatpuppetry and potentially COI, and both of those are not OK. A professor > did this in the past and was caught. > > When in doubt, I recommend writing on an article talk page, explaining your > relationship to the content that you are proposing to add, and writing a > draft of your proposed change for other editors to review. > > Pine > > >> On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Jon Beasley-Murray >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi: >> >> Your question was: "is there a way to count the contributions that a user >> has made *on behalf of* another particular user?" (my emphasis) >> >> And: "It seems to me that the way to overcome this roadblock is to introduce >> a way of counting the contributions made by a person (say, a research >> student, or a colleague) *on behalf of* a Professor." (again, my emphasis) >> >> Which rather sounds like a proxy, by any definition of that term. >> >> I would be strongly against encouraging such practices. >> >> Take care >> >> Jon >> >> On Jul 10, 2014, at 11:12 AM, Jennifer Gristock <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > >> > I too believe that the ideal approach is for academics to write about >> > other people's work: that is why my original question was about ways of >> > tracing/counting this. >> > >> > But if you're saying that a research student writing about other people 'a >> > work (plural, not singular ) is not advisable because they are somehow a >> > 'proxy', I must say I don't quite see it that way, but thank you for >> > helping me to see the multiple ways in which this could be construed. >> > >> > >> > Sent from my mobile >> > >> >> On 10 Jul 2014, at 18:21, Jon Beasley-Murray <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Jennifer: >> >> >> >> I would be very wary indeed of the model you're proposing, in which >> >> either individual researchers or their proxies insert their work into >> >> Wikipedia. We see enough of that already, and I would be concerned if >> >> there were any official (or even semi-official) encouragement of the >> >> practice. >> >> >> >> The issue is less conflict of interest (though that's true, too) as >> >> (self)promotion (which you seem to be actively encouraging) and undue >> >> weight. >> >> >> >> This is not to say that professors (academics, researchers) should not be >> >> writing in their areas of expertise. Of course they should! But perhaps >> >> a rule of thumb is that they should be writing about *other* people's >> >> work in that area, rather than their own. >> >> >> >> Take care >> >> >> >> Jon >> >> >> >>> On Jul 10, 2014, at 7:43 AM, Jennifer Gristock <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Greetings everyone. I'm still working on that system to encourage >> >>> university professors to contribute to Wikipedia, a system that is >> >>> concerned not through teaching, like the Education Programme, but >> >>> through research. >> >>> >> >>> I need some help. Can you tell me, in the Wikipedia API, is there a way >> >>> to count the contributions that a user has made on behalf of another >> >>> particular user? For example, a professor might ask a group of PhD >> >>> students to make contributions involving his/her research on various >> >>> Wikipedia pages, on his/her behalf. >> >>> >> >>> I have been frequently told (at the Teahouse and elsewhere) that >> >>> Professors are not allowed to contribute information about their own >> >>> published research papers on Wikipedia pages, because this would be >> >>> biased. (Which is rather a downer for the professor, because this means >> >>> they are forbidden to write about the things they are most passionate >> >>> and knowledgeable about.) >> >>> >> >>> If this is rule is true, then it must certainly be seen as a roadblock >> >>> to academic engagement with Wikipedia. If it isn't, then it is editors' >> >>> perception of the rule as true (as I have experienced) that is the >> >>> roadblock. >> >>> >> >>> It seems to me that the way to overcome this roadblock is to introduce a >> >>> way of counting the contributions made by a person (say, a research >> >>> student, or a colleague) on behalf of a Professor. So at the end of the >> >>> year, the Professor can say 'my research contributed to X edits on >> >>> Wikipedia' as easily as each individual student (who might contribute on >> >>> behalf of many academic researchers) can count their individual edits. >> >>> >> >>> Can the API accommodate this in some way? Perhaps through some sort of >> >>> 'project' code or something? >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Yours hopefully, >> >>> >> >>> Jenny Gristock (Open_Research) >> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPad >> >>> >> >>>> On 9 Jul 2014, at 22:40, LiAnna Davis <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> Hi all! >> >>>> >> >>>> I wanted to draw your attention to the Educator Training we'll be >> >>>> having as part of the Wikimania Pre-conference on August 7: >> >>>> >> >>>> https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Education_Pre-Conference/Educator_training >> >>>> >> >>>> The Educator Training is designed to give educators of all levels the >> >>>> knowledge they need to use Wikipedia or other Wikimedia projects as a >> >>>> teaching tool in their classrooms. The training is open to educators >> >>>> from any country, and Wikipedia editing experience is not required. >> >>>> >> >>>> If you're interested in attending or you know someone who is, please >> >>>> see the page for more information. I especially encourage anyone who's >> >>>> thought about getting a Wikipedia Education Program going in your >> >>>> country to attend, as you'll learn a lot about the different kinds of >> >>>> assignments students could do. >> >>>> >> >>>> LiAnna >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> -- >> >>>> LiAnna Davis >> >>>> Head of Communications and External Relations >> >>>> Wiki Education Foundation >> >>>> +1-415-770-1061 >> >>>> www.wikiedu.org >> >>>> >> >>>> Please note my new email address and update your contacts accordingly: >> >>>> [email protected] >> >>>> >> >>>> _______________________________________________ >> >>>> Education mailing list >> >>>> [email protected] >> >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> Education mailing list >> >>> [email protected] >> >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Education mailing list >> >> [email protected] >> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Education mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Education mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education > > _______________________________________________ > Education mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education
_______________________________________________ Education mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education
