The model for this is WP:Book sources, though this relies upon the
user selecting the appropriate places to look, rather than guiding
him.

On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Jodi Schneider <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 21 Jul 2010, at 19:47, Brian J Mingus wrote:
>
>  Finn,
> I'm not a fan of including a portion of the the title for a couple of
> reasons. First, it's not required to make the key unique. Second, it makes
> the key longer than necessary. Third, the first word or words from a title
> are not guaranteed to convey any meaning.
> Regarding a Reference: namespace, I can see how this has some utility and
> why projects have moved to it. However, I consider it a stopgap solution
> that projects have implemented when what they really want is a proper wiki
> for citations. Here are a few quick things that you can't do (or would have
> to go out of your way to do) with just a Reference namespace that you can do
> with a wiki dedicated to all the world's citations:
> - Custom reports that are boolean combinations of citation fields, ala SMW.
> This requires substantive new technology as SMW doesn't scale.
> - User bibliographies which are a logical subset of all literature ever
> published.
>
> Not sure why a Reference namespace couldn't do this.
>
> - Conduct a search of the literature.
>
> Or this  (you can search just one namespace)
>
> - A new set of policies that are not necessarily NPOV, regarding the
> creation of articles that discuss collections of literature (lit review-like
> concept). The content of these policies will emerge over years with the help
> of a community. These articles could, for instance, help people who are
> navigating a new area of a literature avoid getting stuck in local minima.
> It could point out the true global context to them. It could point out
> experimenter biases in the literature; for example, a recent article was
> published where it was found that citation networks in academic literature
> can have a tendency to form based on the assumption of authority, when in
> fact that authority is false, bringing a whole thread of publications into
> doubt.
>
> I'm not sure that literature reviews belong in the same wiki as citations.
> That's definitely a different namespace. :)
>
> - Create wiki articles about individual sources.
>
> This might or might not be the same wiki -- but that could be interesting.
> I could imagine a page for a journal being pulled in from several sources:
> the collection of citations in the wiki for that journal, RSS from the
> current contents (license permitting), a Wikipedia page about the journal
> (if it exists), a link to author guidelines/submission info, open access
> info from SHERPA/ROMEO, .... In this vision, very little of the content
> "lives" in this wiki itself. Rather, it's templated from numerous other
> places.... Perhaps in the way "buy this book" links are handled in
> librarything -- there are numerous external links which can be activated
> with a checkbox, and some external content that is pulled in based on
> copyright review.
>
> While I am not dedicated to any of these things happening, I also do not
> wish to rule them out. The hope is that a new community will emerge around
> the project and guide it in the direction that is most useful. My hope in
> this thread is that we can identify some of the most likely cases and
> imagine what it will be like, so that we can convey this vision to the
> Foundation and they can get a sense of the potential importance of the
> project.
>
> Scoping is a big problem, I think -- because it would help to have a vision
> of which of several related tasks/endpoints is primary.
> I think an investigation of what fr.wikipedia is doing would be really
> useful -- does anybody edit there, or have an interest in digging into that?
> Questions might include: What is the reference namespace doing? What isn't
> it doing, that they wish it would? Did they consider alternatives to a
> namespace? How is maintenance going? Do they see the reference namespace as
> longstanding into the future, or as a stopgap?
> -Jodi
> _______________________________________________
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
>



-- 
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG

_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Reply via email to