Forwarded as requested:
From: Raymond Leonard <[email protected]>
To: "Wikimedia & GLAM collaboration [Public]" <[email protected]>
Cc: Open Access discussions <[email protected]>, "Wikimedia
& Libraries" <[email protected]>,
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2014 16:08:27 -0800
Subject: Re: [GLAM] [OpenAccess] New Wikipedia Library Signups: Free
Research Accounts!
Folks,
Even though I know most of cringe when we find a source that is behind a
paywall, I think that we should treat it as marginally better than a
offline source. For those, Wikipedia:Offline sources states "Wikipedia's
reliable sources guideline states that articles should be sourced with
reliable, third-party, published sources. Even though Wikipedia is an
online encyclopedia, there is no distinction between using online versus
offline sources." (Source emphasis, not mine)
This is what I do for such citations.
I add "{{closed access}} " (including that space) before the
citation template.
I set the parameter |subscription=yes
If there is an OCLC # available, I set the parameter |oclc= so that
a reader can go find the print source in a library.
If it is appropriate to include the parameter |issn= along with or
instead of the |oclc= parameter, then I use that.
For some universities, colleges, & libraries, access to some online
database will be free to their students / faculty / staff / patrons, so
there definitely is a value to including to URL or DOI for those cases.
Yours,
Peaceray
--
User:Peaceray
On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Mitar <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi!
This reminds me of ugly practices of proprietary software companies
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
