Re: [Wiki-research-l] Transferring CC-BY scientific literature into WP

2019-04-18 Thread Timothy Wood 
Bumping to cc Yann on the thread as an experienced Wikisource user.

V/r
TJW/GMG

On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 8:29 PM Jack Park  wrote:

> This sounds right to me. I suspect this might be the first time I posted
> here, but Stuart's comment makes sense. There really are several entities,
> such as the activities of Paul Allen's institute's work in AI and
> scholarship; but, if Wikipedia is to tie in with these cc-by research
> documents, it seems to me that many of those documents are about topics
> already in Wikipedia; linking to them, updating the Wikipedia topic to
> reflect new information by way of deep interoperability and machine reading
> techniques makes sense.
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 3:25 PM Stuart A. Yeates 
> wrote:
>
> > Given that there are organisations already organised, funded and
> > operating to preserve and promote open-access research, we might want
> > to think about focusing on getting deep interoperability with them,
> > rather than sucking all the content into Wikisource, where we can't
> > provide half the functionality that they can.
> >
> > cheers
> > stuart
> > --
> > ...let us be heard from red core to black sky
> >
> > On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 09:47, Timothy Wood 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > This looks like a job for Wikisource. If nothing else, so long as we
> can
> > > verify their CC licensing is compatible, we can archive and preserve
> them
> > > in perpetuity on WS. Unfortunately I've scarcely contributed to WS
> > > personally. I've reached out to a WS admin that I know from Commons.
> When
> > > they reply I'll cc them on this thread.
> > >
> > > V/r
> > > TJW/GMG
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 4:47 PM Alexandre Hocquet <
> > > alexandre.hocq...@univ-lorraine.fr> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 17/04/2019 22:36, Stuart A. Yeates wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 08:29, Alexandre Hocquet wrote:
> > > > >> what? then a lot of wikipedia
> > > > >> articles should be labelled as {{secondary sources needed}})
> > > > > Exactly. Sourcing as a whole across wikipedia already relies too
> > > > > heavily on primary sources. I regularly tag articles as such.
> > > >
> > > > Well, fair enough then. Good luck for your crusade, and thanks for
> your
> > > > interesting views about what constitutes primary, secondary and
> > > > tertiary. I guess I now have an answer about how much sympathy my
> > > > suggestion would bring.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > ***
> > > > Alexandre Hocquet
> > > > Archives Henri Poincaré & Science History Institute
> > > > alexandre.hocq...@univ-lorraine.fr
> > > > https://www.sciencehistory.org/profile/alexandre-hocquet
> > > >
> > https://poincare.univ-lorraine.fr/fr/membre-titulaire/alexandre-hocquet
> > > > ***
> > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > > > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> > > >
> > > ___
> > > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> >
> > ___
> > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> >
> ___
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Transferring CC-BY scientific literature into WP

2019-04-17 Thread Jack Park 
This sounds right to me. I suspect this might be the first time I posted
here, but Stuart's comment makes sense. There really are several entities,
such as the activities of Paul Allen's institute's work in AI and
scholarship; but, if Wikipedia is to tie in with these cc-by research
documents, it seems to me that many of those documents are about topics
already in Wikipedia; linking to them, updating the Wikipedia topic to
reflect new information by way of deep interoperability and machine reading
techniques makes sense.


On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 3:25 PM Stuart A. Yeates  wrote:

> Given that there are organisations already organised, funded and
> operating to preserve and promote open-access research, we might want
> to think about focusing on getting deep interoperability with them,
> rather than sucking all the content into Wikisource, where we can't
> provide half the functionality that they can.
>
> cheers
> stuart
> --
> ...let us be heard from red core to black sky
>
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 09:47, Timothy Wood 
> wrote:
> >
> > This looks like a job for Wikisource. If nothing else, so long as we can
> > verify their CC licensing is compatible, we can archive and preserve them
> > in perpetuity on WS. Unfortunately I've scarcely contributed to WS
> > personally. I've reached out to a WS admin that I know from Commons. When
> > they reply I'll cc them on this thread.
> >
> > V/r
> > TJW/GMG
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 4:47 PM Alexandre Hocquet <
> > alexandre.hocq...@univ-lorraine.fr> wrote:
> >
> > > On 17/04/2019 22:36, Stuart A. Yeates wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 08:29, Alexandre Hocquet wrote:
> > > >> what? then a lot of wikipedia
> > > >> articles should be labelled as {{secondary sources needed}})
> > > > Exactly. Sourcing as a whole across wikipedia already relies too
> > > > heavily on primary sources. I regularly tag articles as such.
> > >
> > > Well, fair enough then. Good luck for your crusade, and thanks for your
> > > interesting views about what constitutes primary, secondary and
> > > tertiary. I guess I now have an answer about how much sympathy my
> > > suggestion would bring.
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > ***
> > > Alexandre Hocquet
> > > Archives Henri Poincaré & Science History Institute
> > > alexandre.hocq...@univ-lorraine.fr
> > > https://www.sciencehistory.org/profile/alexandre-hocquet
> > >
> https://poincare.univ-lorraine.fr/fr/membre-titulaire/alexandre-hocquet
> > > ***
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> > >
> > ___
> > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
> ___
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Transferring CC-BY scientific literature into WP

2019-04-17 Thread Timothy Wood 
Well, we do have some things going for us that they might not, like a
translation regime. But I wouldn't pretend to know half of the
functionality that we can actually provide given that the papers are
properly integrated into Wikidata.

On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 6:25 PM Stuart A. Yeates  wrote:

> Given that there are organisations already organised, funded and
> operating to preserve and promote open-access research, we might want
> to think about focusing on getting deep interoperability with them,
> rather than sucking all the content into Wikisource, where we can't
> provide half the functionality that they can.
>
> cheers
> stuart
> --
> ...let us be heard from red core to black sky
>
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 09:47, Timothy Wood 
> wrote:
> >
> > This looks like a job for Wikisource. If nothing else, so long as we can
> > verify their CC licensing is compatible, we can archive and preserve them
> > in perpetuity on WS. Unfortunately I've scarcely contributed to WS
> > personally. I've reached out to a WS admin that I know from Commons. When
> > they reply I'll cc them on this thread.
> >
> > V/r
> > TJW/GMG
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 4:47 PM Alexandre Hocquet <
> > alexandre.hocq...@univ-lorraine.fr> wrote:
> >
> > > On 17/04/2019 22:36, Stuart A. Yeates wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 08:29, Alexandre Hocquet wrote:
> > > >> what? then a lot of wikipedia
> > > >> articles should be labelled as {{secondary sources needed}})
> > > > Exactly. Sourcing as a whole across wikipedia already relies too
> > > > heavily on primary sources. I regularly tag articles as such.
> > >
> > > Well, fair enough then. Good luck for your crusade, and thanks for your
> > > interesting views about what constitutes primary, secondary and
> > > tertiary. I guess I now have an answer about how much sympathy my
> > > suggestion would bring.
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > ***
> > > Alexandre Hocquet
> > > Archives Henri Poincaré & Science History Institute
> > > alexandre.hocq...@univ-lorraine.fr
> > > https://www.sciencehistory.org/profile/alexandre-hocquet
> > >
> https://poincare.univ-lorraine.fr/fr/membre-titulaire/alexandre-hocquet
> > > ***
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> > >
> > ___
> > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
> ___
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Transferring CC-BY scientific literature into WP

2019-04-17 Thread Stuart A. Yeates 
Given that there are organisations already organised, funded and
operating to preserve and promote open-access research, we might want
to think about focusing on getting deep interoperability with them,
rather than sucking all the content into Wikisource, where we can't
provide half the functionality that they can.

cheers
stuart
--
...let us be heard from red core to black sky

On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 09:47, Timothy Wood  wrote:
>
> This looks like a job for Wikisource. If nothing else, so long as we can
> verify their CC licensing is compatible, we can archive and preserve them
> in perpetuity on WS. Unfortunately I've scarcely contributed to WS
> personally. I've reached out to a WS admin that I know from Commons. When
> they reply I'll cc them on this thread.
>
> V/r
> TJW/GMG
>
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 4:47 PM Alexandre Hocquet <
> alexandre.hocq...@univ-lorraine.fr> wrote:
>
> > On 17/04/2019 22:36, Stuart A. Yeates wrote:
> > > On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 08:29, Alexandre Hocquet wrote:
> > >> what? then a lot of wikipedia
> > >> articles should be labelled as {{secondary sources needed}})
> > > Exactly. Sourcing as a whole across wikipedia already relies too
> > > heavily on primary sources. I regularly tag articles as such.
> >
> > Well, fair enough then. Good luck for your crusade, and thanks for your
> > interesting views about what constitutes primary, secondary and
> > tertiary. I guess I now have an answer about how much sympathy my
> > suggestion would bring.
> >
> >
> > --
> > ***
> > Alexandre Hocquet
> > Archives Henri Poincaré & Science History Institute
> > alexandre.hocq...@univ-lorraine.fr
> > https://www.sciencehistory.org/profile/alexandre-hocquet
> > https://poincare.univ-lorraine.fr/fr/membre-titulaire/alexandre-hocquet
> > ***
> >
> > ___
> > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> >
> ___
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Transferring CC-BY scientific literature into WP

2019-04-17 Thread Alexandre Hocquet 

On 17/04/2019 22:36, Stuart A. Yeates wrote:

On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 08:29, Alexandre Hocquet wrote:

what? then a lot of wikipedia
articles should be labelled as {{secondary sources needed}})

Exactly. Sourcing as a whole across wikipedia already relies too
heavily on primary sources. I regularly tag articles as such.


Well, fair enough then. Good luck for your crusade, and thanks for your 
interesting views about what constitutes primary, secondary and 
tertiary. I guess I now have an answer about how much sympathy my 
suggestion would bring.



--
***
Alexandre Hocquet
Archives Henri Poincaré & Science History Institute
alexandre.hocq...@univ-lorraine.fr
https://www.sciencehistory.org/profile/alexandre-hocquet
https://poincare.univ-lorraine.fr/fr/membre-titulaire/alexandre-hocquet
***

___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Transferring CC-BY scientific literature into WP

2019-04-17 Thread Stuart A. Yeates 
On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 08:29, Alexandre Hocquet
 wrote:

> what? then a lot of wikipedia
> articles should be labelled as {{secondary sources needed}})

Exactly. Sourcing as a whole across wikipedia already relies too
heavily on primary sources. I regularly tag articles as such.

cheers
stuart
--
...let us be heard from red core to black sky

___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Transferring CC-BY scientific literature into WP

2019-04-17 Thread Alexandre Hocquet 

On 17/04/2019 21:56, Leila Zia wrote:


On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 12:50 PM Stuart A. Yeates > wrote:


Wikipedia is a tertiary source, built from secondary sources. Journal
articles which contain innovative research or new contributions are
primary sources. Review articles are secondary sources.
I need some education here, please: What about Wikisource? Isn't the 
project targeted at primary sources? 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikisource#What_is_Wikisource?


Well, if you regard the idea as to massively and automatically import 
scientific literature into an encyclopaedia, I guess your points are valid.


But it is not what I'm advocating for, here. My point is that there is a 
lot of wikipedia-useful information within academic papers that could be 
re-used. Think about reviews : their purpose is actually to be a 
tertiary synthesis based on secondary sources. Think about the 
"Introduction" sections of papers : there are supposed to perform a 
survey of existing literature. Think about some papers in some academic 
fields in the Human sciences that are actually entirely built on 
previous litterature.


I'm not saying that it would be useful to uncritically import, I'm 
saying that we could benefit from some of this material, and that 
instead of rejecting it as mere self-promotion, or condemning the entire 
scientific literature as being "primary" (what? then a lot of wikipedia 
articles should be labelled as {{secondary sources needed}}) we should 
learn how to re-use it eficiently.





--
***
Alexandre Hocquet
Archives Henri Poincaré & Science History Institute
alexandre.hocq...@univ-lorraine.fr
https://www.sciencehistory.org/profile/alexandre-hocquet
https://poincare.univ-lorraine.fr/fr/membre-titulaire/alexandre-hocquet
***

___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Transferring CC-BY scientific literature into WP

2019-04-17 Thread Leila Zia 
On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 12:50 PM Stuart A. Yeates  wrote:

> Wikipedia is a tertiary source, built from secondary sources. Journal
> articles which contain innovative research or new contributions are
> primary sources. Review articles are secondary sources.
>

I need some education here, please: What about Wikisource? Isn't the
project targeted at primary sources?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikisource#What_is_Wikisource?

Thanks,
Leila
___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Transferring CC-BY scientific literature into WP

2019-04-17 Thread Alexandre Hocquet 

On 17/04/2019 20:36, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:

Alexandre Hocquet, 17/04/19 20:40:
My point is : as it can be imagined that the number of CC-BY 
scientific papers will likely sky-rocket in the next years, would not 
it be relevant to try to organise "CC-BY scientific papers" driven 
edit-a-thons


Importing text and images from freely licensed papers to Wikimedia wikis 
is a common practice. Several initiatives exist to further spread it. 
Wikimedia entities have stressed the importance of "libre open access" 
(free licenses) for over a decade now.


I do not doubt that the inclination and the infrastructure exist on the 
Wikimedia side. My point is that the number of compatible academic 
papers is on the verge of increasing exponentially in the next few years 
and that people involved in higher education should be aware of that 
potentiality, be they scholars or (crucially) librarians.





--
***
Alexandre Hocquet
Archives Henri Poincaré & Science History Institute
alexandre.hocq...@univ-lorraine.fr
https://www.sciencehistory.org/profile/alexandre-hocquet
https://poincare.univ-lorraine.fr/fr/membre-titulaire/alexandre-hocquet
***

___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Transferring CC-BY scientific literature into WP

2019-04-17 Thread Samuel Klein 
A wikisource toolchain for importing articles would be wonderful.
There is no equivalent place for public comments, categorization, and dense
internal linking across such texts.

On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 2:36 PM Federico Leva (Nemo) 
wrote:

> Alexandre Hocquet, 17/04/19 20:40:
> > My point is : as it can be imagined that the number of CC-BY scientific
> > papers will likely sky-rocket in the next years, would not it be
> > relevant to try to organise "CC-BY scientific papers" driven edit-a-thons
>
> Importing text and images from freely licensed papers to Wikimedia wikis
> is a common practice. Several initiatives exist to further spread it.
> Wikimedia entities have stressed the importance of "libre open access"
> (free licenses) for over a decade now.
>
> When we rewrote the terms of use in 2009, we made sure to make such
> imports easy:
> 
>
> Many local explanations and tools also exist, like:
> <
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copying_text_from_other_sources#Can_I_copy_from_open_license_or_public_domain_sources
> ?>
>
> The biggest import happened on Wikimedia Commons:
> 
>
> Larger imports of text have been discussed several times, mostly for
> Wikisource:
> <
> https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:WikiProject_Open_Access/Programmatic_import_from_PubMed_Central/Draft_RfC
> >
>
> Federico
>
> ___
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>


-- 
Samuel Klein  @metasj   w:user:sj  +1 617 529 4266
___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Transferring CC-BY scientific literature into WP

2019-04-17 Thread Federico Leva (Nemo) 

Alexandre Hocquet, 17/04/19 20:40:
My point is : as it can be imagined that the number of CC-BY scientific 
papers will likely sky-rocket in the next years, would not it be 
relevant to try to organise "CC-BY scientific papers" driven edit-a-thons


Importing text and images from freely licensed papers to Wikimedia wikis 
is a common practice. Several initiatives exist to further spread it. 
Wikimedia entities have stressed the importance of "libre open access" 
(free licenses) for over a decade now.


When we rewrote the terms of use in 2009, we made sure to make such 
imports easy:



Many local explanations and tools also exist, like:


The biggest import happened on Wikimedia Commons:


Larger imports of text have been discussed several times, mostly for 
Wikisource:



Federico

___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l