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

Reply via email to