Thanks anyone of the interesting replies! Il giorno lun 3 giu 2019 alle ore 17:03 John Erling Blad <jeb...@gmail.com> 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 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 a single occurence, other communities has > probably had similar questions. > On Wikipedia you have no means to tell what is a good research, anyway. Il giorno mar 4 giu 2019 alle ore 03:20 Thomas Shafee < thomas.sha...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > > - Accountability to the academic community - indexing by cope > <https://publicationethics.org/misconduct>, doaj <https://doaj.org>, > pubmed <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/>, scopus > <https://www.scopus.com/search/form.uri?display=basic>, web of science > <https://clarivate.com/products/web-of-science/>, free journal network > <https://freejournals.org> etc all require *extensive *external > auditing > of processes. Each journal has to apply for these individually and they > are > challenging to gain and retain. > Yup, indexing is definitely needed, though challenging. > 3. Cynical academics may be drawn by the likely high impact that the > journal will likely get form publishing a lot of broad review articles > and > the exposure of those through wikipedia > I'm not sure it would be auspicable to cite "our journal" on Wikipedia, also it may boost COI. > - It could be a way to peer review parts of wikidata (e.g. whether > the Drug interactions (P769) property set is up to date, and what > references should support any additions) > That's way interesting, though some mechanism of automatic update would have the drawback of making some papers incoherent. > *Democracy* > So far the only inherently undemocratic part of the project has been the > strict requirements on the peer reviewers. > Our inner "gerarchy" is somehow based upon committment/process knowledge rather than competence in specific fields. While academia is (well, should be) exactly the opposite, both systems works where they are supposed to work, I hope they'll work the same if mixed up! Translation is a complex issue. Using English as the lingua franca for science deeply boosted internationalisation of research, but also added an extra requirement for researchers. Translation also adds a non negligible delay in information spread. I, for one, don't judge scientific article worth translation, but I wouldn't oppose it. I think the ND in plan-S is meant to address the plagiarism (also self-plagiarism) problem/fears. Vito Il giorno mer 5 giu 2019 alle ore 07:27 Thomas Shafee < thomas.sha...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > 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 there are translations, they'd likely be marked as > somethign like "adapted by translators XYZ from article XYZ by original > authors XYZ under a CC-BY license", though details would need to be decided > if it came up. See this 2008 article > <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2268932/> for some ideas > floated previously floated. I'll admit I've limited knowledge of > translation practices though, so the project would need advice! > > For some existing Wikipedia-based examples: > > - PLOS article > < > https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002803 > > > and > uk.wp page > < > https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B1%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%BD%D0%B5_%D0%B1%D0%B0%D1%94%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B5_%D0%BE%D0%B1%D1%87%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8F > > > - PLOS article > < > https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004095 > > > and es.wp page > < > https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infiriendo_transferencia_gen%C3%A9tica_horizontal > > > > > Thomas > > On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 at 12:48, James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > 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. > > > > James > > > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 7:27 PM Thomas Townsend <homesec1...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 3 Jun 2019 at 18:46, James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com> 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 translated into > > > other languages without the original author having any say in the > > process? > > > Surely you would not permit your own articles to be republished in > > another > > > language with your name still on them and your having no control over > > what > > > the translation says in your name? > > > > > > The Turnip > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > > > -- > > James Heilman > > MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
