Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

Indeed... there is no wikiversity phd. Nor is one planned in the near future in any language, as far as I know. Getting WV courses onto accredited platforms seems like a step towards alignment (or perhaps first: working w/ an existing set of accredited courses and getting their materials onto WV

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

Hi Amirouche, It's definitely possible to write articles in WikiJournals without a PhD ( example ). External peer reviewers are invited in the same way whether the author is some top prof or an undergrad. I definitely think that WikiJournal articles can be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

Hello, I am new to the mailing list and more generaly on wikipedia as contributor and as student in wikiversity. I did not know about WikiJournals as part of Wikiversity. My only remark will be that the wikiveristy PhD program is in poor shape. I was lost in the various tools I had to use and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

Nice work. It will take time, but keep it up. On Thu., Jun. 6, 2019, 10:05 p.m. Thomas Shafee, wrote: > Some more notes, responses and thoughts on the topics raised above! > > *Impact and reach* > I fully agree that impact factor is of primary importance to many > researchers. However, many

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

Some more notes, responses and thoughts on the topics raised above! *Impact and reach* I fully agree that impact factor is of primary importance to many researchers. However, many grants that fund research also have started looking for evidence that researchers are making genuine efforts in

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

Il giorno mer 5 giu 2019 alle ore 12:00 John Erling Blad ha scritto: > > > One reason; reach. > > > > > > > In academia reach -per se- is not a big deal, while impact is. > > Reach leads to impact. You can't get impact without reach, but reach > in non-scientific communities does not necessarily

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

> > One reason; reach. > > > > In academia reach -per se- is not a big deal, while impact is. Reach leads to impact. You can't get impact without reach, but reach in non-scientific communities does not necessarily turn into reach in scientific communities. > At nowiki we vere approached some

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

Thanks anyone of the interesting replies! Il giorno lun 3 giu 2019 alle ore 17:03 John Erling Blad ha scritto: > One reason; reach. > In academia reach -per se- is not a big deal, while impact is. At nowiki we vere approached some years ago by a > university about publishing cutting edge

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

Such translation of CC content is pretty much unpreventable and can be a benefit or a drawback depending on the author's own opinion. From the point of view of an official 'version of record' (i.e. what the doi points to) the authors would be named along with attribution of all contributors. If

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

When we publish CC BY SA on Wikipedia, we allow translation into other languages without having any control over the translations (but we require our name to be attached in some fashion). So right now we do all the time. Most of my academic publications are CC BY which is even more permissive.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

On Mon, 3 Jun 2019 at 18:46, James Heilman wrote: > Wiki Journals use CC BY SA. We do not support or want to us ND as that > would prevent translation into other languages. That is why I disagree with > Plan S's move to allow ND. > So part of the offer is that an author's article may be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

In response to a few of the earlier questions (apologies for the delays): *Quality control* There are a few mechanisms in place for quality control: - Standard academic processes of external peer reviews which for wikijournals are all public (journals such as PLOS are moving in the same

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

How often do you expect a scientific article to be translated? On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 7:46 PM James Heilman wrote: > > Wiki Journals use CC BY SA. We do not support or want to us ND as that > would prevent translation into other languages. That is why I disagree with > Plan S's move to allow ND.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

But to clarify, the intent is to be Plan-S compliant from what I understand. James On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 11:46 AM James Heilman wrote: > Wiki Journals use CC BY SA. We do not support or want to us ND as that > would prevent translation into other languages. That is why I disagree with > Plan

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

Wiki Journals use CC BY SA. We do not support or want to us ND as that would prevent translation into other languages. That is why I disagree with Plan S's move to allow ND. James On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 9:08 AM Vi to wrote: > En.wikiversity user I'm dealing with was a custodian (in other words

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

En.wikiversity user I'm dealing with was a custodian (in other words a well established user within the community). Keeping it short my main concern is: we are a naturally democratic community, while the science cannot be. Also, we've been attracting low quality "research" for years. Vito Il

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

Do editing in a non-indexed draft space and then move the articles into an indexed mainspace after passing peer review. I guess a "WikiJournal" should be CC-ND by default. Authors should be able to relax the license. If others are allowed to edit then the license should be forced to CC-by-SA.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

One reason; reach. At nowiki we vere approached some years ago by a university about publishing cutting edge research in fish farming. We could not publish their work because some claimed it to be "original research". Sure it was, and it was darn good original research too. I don't think that was

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

Ok. Works might not be accepted if people outside a well-defined group contributes to the work. On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 3:50 PM Thomas Shafee wrote: > > So at the moment, there is no locking of any sort. However, but it's noted > that once an article is assigned a doi, that meaning-changing edits

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

The peer review process and the editors of the journals in question. This is the same mechanism that prevents gibberish from getting into all peer reviewed literature. J On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 6:30 AM Vi to wrote: > In years I've seen countless attempts to put gibberish on our projects > which

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

What is the objection in principle to ND licencing? If you publish a paper detailing your experiments on apricot kernels as a cure for cancer with a conclusion that they are completely worthless, and give it a BY licence, I can now "remix" it, that is publish exactly the same material, except

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

James It already is Plan-S compliant :-) Unfortunately Plan-S requires rather more than a conformant licence. It also imposes strict conditions on business models and editorial practices, not all of which have yet been completely finalised: see

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

So at the moment, there is no locking of any sort. However, but it's noted that once an article is assigned a doi, that meaning-changing edits would be re-reviewed and an updated doi minted by from crossref's crossmark service along the lines of this

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

In years I've seen countless attempts to put gibberish on our projects which were eventually defeated by the "no original research" principle. Even en.wikiversity struggled with a now banned user (and his friends/enablers) pushing lots of gibberish about cold fusion, paranormal and Wikimedia user

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

How do you handle lock down of articles? That is only listed authors should write a given article, so you can't allow random user edit access as it is today. Jeblad man. 3. jun. 2019, 04.16 skrev Thomas Shafee : > Yes, we put together a little checklist back in round one (*link* > < >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

Yes, we put together a little checklist back in round one (*link* ). Initially there were a few items that are currently not achieved (e.g. JATS-compliant XML formatting). The revised Plan_S has

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

It already is Plan-S compliant :-) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_S#Licensing_and_rights Plan-S unfortunately is looking at allowing ND content. James On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 8:14 AM Mister Thrapostibongles < thrapostibong...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thomas > > Is it intended that the journals

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project

Thomas Is it intended that the journals should be Plan-S compliant? Thrapostibongles On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 9:01 AM Thomas Shafee wrote: > Hello Wikipedians, > > Over the last few years, the WikiJournal User Group > has been building >