Hoi,
Free licenses are not always possible, it is not as if a single scientist
is the only one signing a paper and determining the license. What helps a
LOT is for scientists to be open about their work, have a public ORCiD
record so that we can import the data in Wikidata (the vagaries of Wikidata
permitting).
That is the start. We can then add papers for for instance a Willem Hanekom
a prolific scientist working on a TBC vaccin, a member of the South African
Academy of Science who works for the Gates Foundation.. (by inference we
learn the science that is in the Gates Foundation).
Thanks,
GerardM
On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 10:02, Federico Leva (Nemo) <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Kerry Raymond, 04/12/19 08:52:
> > I think if we want to turn around academic perception, we need to:
> >
> > 1. make academics welcome on Wikipedia (apart from the usual conflict of
> interests)
>
> Yes, but I would argue the easiest and most impactful way for academics
> to help Wikipedia is to release their works with a free license. It's
> gratis and only takes a few minutes with proper tools:
> https://dissem.in/
>
> https://blog.okfn.org/2017/10/26/how-wikimedia-helped-authors-make-over-3000-articles-green-open-access-via-dissemin/
>
> In an ideal world the two things are not incompatible or even in
> competition, but in practice you're likely to have limited attention and
> time from an academic so you probably have to prioritise.
>
> Federico
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
