Lodewijk, Sydney, Hilda, I think I'm going to need lots of support to pull this off. BMJ are not publishing the reviewed version - we are, by pointing to the relevant diff in the article's history. I'd like us to offer the reader a much nicer presentation of the reviewed article than that, which means Wikimedia hosting a "fair copy" (like normal articles published on publishers' websites).
I'd also like us to point the reader to a diff between the reviewed version and the current version that doesn't have all the wiki markup - basically a diff that the average reader will easily parse. This will only happen if we can demonstrate solid support from the Wikipedia med community. I intend outlining this at the conference, if I get a slot in the Sunday afternoon unconference. I don't suppose you guys might be able to drop everything and turn up at the inaugural Wikipedia Science Conference in London on 2-3 September, is there? :o) On 15 Aug 2015 1:05 am, "Anthony Cole" <ahcole...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've just come out of the second teleconference with fellow WPMEDF board > member Jake Orlowitz, and Fiona Godlee and Peter Ashman of BMJ. > > BMJ has offered to provide expert peer-review of up to 10 of our medical > articles. We can choose the articles and can submit them at our own pace. > I'll post the details at English Wikipedia's Wikiproject Medicine talk page > on Monday or Tuesday - I'm very busy the next 48 hours. Have a great > weekend everyone. > > > -- > Anthony Cole <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Anthonyhcole> > > >
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Medicine mailing list Wikimedia-Medicine@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-medicine