> I really like the idea of some kind of annual award. > If someone puts it together before Wikimania, I can put it into the closing ceremony?
*Edward Saperia* Conference Director Wikimania London <http://www.wikimanialondon.org/> email <[email protected]> • facebook <http://www.facebook.com/edsaperia> • twitter <http://www.twitter.com/edsaperia> • 07796955572 133-135 Bethnal Green Road, E2 7DG > On 2 July 2014 10:15, Aaron Halfaker <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Given that it seems we agree with Poitr's desire for research about >> Wikipedia to lead to useful tools an insights that can be directly applied >> to making Wikipedia and other wikis better, what might be a more effective >> strategy for encouraging researchers to engage with us or at least release >> their work in forms that we can more easily work with? >> >> Here's a couple of half-baked ideas: >> >> - *Wiki research impact task force* -- contacts authors to encourage >> them to release code/datasets/etc. and praise them publicly when they do >> -- >> could be part of the work of newsletter reviewers. There are many >> researchers on this list who work directly with Wikimedians to make sure >> that their research has direct impact and their awesomeness is worth our >> appreciation and public recognition. >> - *Yearly research award* -- for the most directly impactful research >> projects/researchers similar to >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikimedia_France_Research_Award. >> One of the focuses of the judging could be the direct impact that the >> work >> has had. >> >> -Aaron >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 7:05 AM, Heather Ford <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Apologies. You're right, Han-Teng. The reviewer looks to be Piotr >>> Konieczny who I think is on this mailing list? >>> >>> Heather Ford >>> Oxford Internet Institute <http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk> Doctoral Programme >>> EthnographyMatters <http://ethnographymatters.net> | Oxford Digital >>> Ethnography Group <http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/research/projects/?id=115> >>> http://hblog.org | @hfordsa <http://www.twitter.com/hfordsa> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 2 July 2014 12:58, h <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Heather, I am not sure who contribute that. Probably not Nemo. If this >>>> issue of newsletter is correctly attributed, the contributors include: Taha >>>> Yasseri, Maximilian Klein, Piotr Konieczny, Kim Osman, and Tilman Bayer. My >>>> suggestion is only a personal one, and I am not sure if it is against >>>> policies to make a few edits once the newsletter is out. >>>> >>>> Thanks again to the contributors of the newsletter, my life is a bit >>>> easier and more interesting because of your work. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 2014-07-02 15:35 GMT+07:00 Heather Ford <[email protected]>: >>>> >>>> +1 Thanks for your really thoughtful comments, Joe, Han-Teng. >>>>> >>>>> Nemo, would you be willing to add a note to the review and/or >>>>> contacting the researcher? >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> Heather. >>>>> >>>>> Heather Ford >>>>> Oxford Internet Institute <http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk> Doctoral >>>>> Programme >>>>> EthnographyMatters <http://ethnographymatters.net> | Oxford Digital >>>>> Ethnography Group <http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/research/projects/?id=115> >>>>> http://hblog.org | @hfordsa <http://www.twitter.com/hfordsa> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 2 July 2014 05:17, h <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> The tone of the sentence in question >>>>>> >>>>>> 'it is disappointing that the main purpose appears to be >>>>>> completing a thesis, with little thought to actually improving >>>>>> Wikipedia' >>>>>> >>>>>> could have been written as >>>>>> >>>>>> 'It would be more useful for the Wikipedia community of practice >>>>>> if the author discussed or even spelled out the implications of the >>>>>> research for improving Wikipedia". >>>>>> >>>>>> This suggestion is based on my own impression that [Wiki-research-l] >>>>>> has mainly two groups of readers: community of practice and community of >>>>>> knowledge. It is okay to have some group tensions for creative/critical >>>>>> inputs. Still, a neutral tone is better for assessment, and an >>>>>> encouraging >>>>>> tone might work a bit better to encourage others to fill the *gaps* (both >>>>>> practice and knowledge ones). >>>>>> >>>>>> Also, the factors such as originally intended audience and word >>>>>> limits may determine how much a writer can do for *due weight* (similar >>>>>> to >>>>>> [[WP:due]]). If the original (academic) author failed to address the >>>>>> implications for practices satisfactory, a research newsletter >>>>>> contributor >>>>>> can point out what s/he thinks the potential/actual implications are. (My >>>>>> thanks to the research newsletter's voluntary contributors for their >>>>>> unpaid work!) >>>>>> >>>>>> While I understand that the monthly research newsletter has its >>>>>> own perspective and interests different from academic newsletters, it >>>>>> does >>>>>> not sacrifice the integrity of the newsletter to be gentle and specific. >>>>>> I >>>>>> would recommend a minor edit to the sentence as the the newsletter could >>>>>> be >>>>>> read by any one in the world, not just the Wikipedians. It is >>>>>> public/published for all readers, and thus please do not assume the >>>>>> readers >>>>>> know the context of Wikipedia research. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best, >>>>>> >>>>>> han-teng liao >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 2014-07-01 19:37 GMT+07:00 Heather Ford <[email protected]>: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks so much for the newsletter [1]! Always a great read... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But have to just say that comments like this: 'it is disappointing >>>>>>> that the main purpose appears to be completing a thesis, with >>>>>>> little thought to actually improving Wikipedia' [2] are really harsh >>>>>>> and a >>>>>>> little unfair. The student is studying Wikipedia - they can hardly only >>>>>>> be >>>>>>> interested in completing their thesis. We need to remember that >>>>>>> researchers >>>>>>> are at very different stages of their careers, they have very different >>>>>>> motivations, and different levels of engagement with the Wikipedia >>>>>>> community, but that *all* research on Wikipedia contributes to our >>>>>>> understanding (even if as a catalyst for improvements). We want to >>>>>>> encourage more research on Wikipedia, not attack the motivations of >>>>>>> people >>>>>>> we know little about - particularly when they're just students and >>>>>>> particularly when this newsletter is on housed on Wikimedia Foundation's >>>>>>> domain. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>> Heather. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Newsletter/2014/June >>>>>>> [2] >>>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Newsletter/2014/June#.22Recommending_reference_materials_in_context_to_facilitate_editing_Wikipedia.22 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Heather Ford >>>>>>> Oxford Internet Institute <http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/> Doctoral >>>>>>> Programme >>>>>>> EthnographyMatters <http://ethnographymatters.net/> | Oxford >>>>>>> Digital Ethnography Group >>>>>>> <http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/research/projects/?id=115> >>>>>>> http://hblog.org | @hfordsa <http://www.twitter.com/hfordsa> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Wiki-research-l mailing list >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Wiki-research-l mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Wiki-research-l mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Wiki-research-l mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wiki-research-l mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wiki-research-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l >> >> > > > -- > Oliver Keyes > Research Analyst > Wikimedia Foundation > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki-research-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l > >
_______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
