Sad to say, I only read about a quarter of it before I gave up too.
Sent from my Droid2 Elias Friedman A.S., CCEMT-P אליהו מתתיהו בן צבי [email protected] On Mar 15, 2011 12:25 AM, "I Love Plankton" <[email protected]> wrote: > TL;DR wall of text amirite? > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 9:40 PM, Chitu Okoli <[email protected] >wrote: > >> [Apologies for cross-posting; this same e-mail is being sent to >> wikipedia-l, WikiEN-l and foundation-l] >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> We are a research group conducting a systematic literature review on >> Wikipedia-related peer-reviewed academic studies published in the English >> language. (Although there are many excellent studies in other languages, we >> unfortunately do not have the resources to systematically review these at >> any kind of acceptable scholarly level. Also, our study is about Wikipedia >> only, not about other Wikimedia Foundation projects. However, we do include >> studies about other language Wikipedias, as long as the studies are >> published in English.) We have completed a search using many major databases >> of scholarly research. We've posted separate messages to wiki-research-l >> related to this literature review. >> >> We have identified over 2,100 peer-reviewed studies that have "wikipedia", >> "wikipedian", or "wikipedians" in their title, abstract or keywords. As this >> number of studies is far too large for conducting a review synthesis, we >> have decided to focus only on peer-reviewed journal publications and >> doctoral theses; we identified 638 such studies. In addition, we identified >> around 1,500 peer-reviewed conference articles. >> >> We hope that our review would provide useful insights for both wikipedians >> and researchers. (Although we know that most Wikipedia researchers are also >> wikipedians, we define wikipedian or "Wikipedia practitioner" here as >> someone involved in the Wikipedia project who is not also a scholarly >> researcher.) In particular, here is a list of some of the research questions >> we are investigating in our review that are particularly pertinent to >> wikipedians (you can check wiki-research-l for the full set of research >> questions): >> >> 1. What high-quality research has been conducted with Wikipedia as a major >> topic or data source? As mentioned in the introductory e-mail, we have >> already identified over 2,100 studies, though we will only analyze 638 of >> them in depth. We will group the articles by field of study. >> >> 2. What research questions have been asked by various sources, both >> academic scholarly and practitioner? We want to know both the subjects that >> the existing research has covered, and also catalogue key questions that >> practitioners would like to be answered, whether or not academic research >> has broached these questions. Also, we categorize the research questions >> based on their purposes. >> >> 6. What conclusions have been made from existing research? That is, what >> questions from RQ2 have been answered, and what are these answers? >> >> 7. What questions from RQ2 are left unanswered? (These present directions >> for future research.) >> >> >> Regarding our RQ2, on the research questions that have been asked, we want >> to identify not only the research questions that we extract from the >> articles, but also what questions are of interest that have not been >> studied. For this, we have identified a few banks of Wikipedia-related >> research questions. >> >> We are most of all interested in questions that wikipedians are asking, >> other than what researchers are asking. There is an old list of research >> questions or goals at >> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Research_Goals; these >> questions are about Wikimedia Foundation projects in general, though >> Wikipedia is of course included. Could you please review this list and >> update that page directly with any additional questions? Alternately, you >> could reply us directly, and we could update the list. >> >> Another bank of questions we have identified is more directed towards >> academics and researchers: >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Wikidemia#Research_Questions . >> We have asked the wiki-research-l subscribers to update that list. We will >> draw from both lists for our bank of research questions. >> >> Thanks for your help. >> >> Chitu Okoli, Concordia University, Montreal, Canada >> ( >> http://chitu.okoli.org/professional/open-content/wikipedia-and-open-content.html >> ) >> Arto Lanamäki, University of Agder, Kristiansand, Norway >> Mohamad Mehdi, Concordia University, Montreal, Canada >> Mostafa Mesgari, Concordia University, Montreal, Canada >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikipedia-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l >> > _______________________________________________ > Wikipedia-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
