Now that i understood. It was short, clear, and concise. Thank you

On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 8:12 AM, Bob the Wikipedian <
[email protected]> wrote:

> I read it several times before figuring out (maybe?) that this is a
> request that update the list of questions at [[WP:WD]]. That page looks
> rather...well, "outdated" is an understatement...
>
> However, it would seem to me that a researcher would generate questions
> to research by looking at the discussion sections of recent papers on
> the topic of Wikipedia. Usually in the discussion section, the author
> mentions something like "more research needs to be done on /x/ /topic/."
>
> God bless,
> Bob
>
> On 3/14/2011 11:28 PM, Elias Friedman wrote:
> > 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to