[Open-access] [open-science] OKF at Open Repositories 2014

Fri Dec 6 17:30:09 UTC 2013

hi Daniel,

I argue that transitioning scholarly works to Wikimedia tools on a blanket basis is premature. Before this can happen, many questions need to be resolved. For example, is Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons etc. prepared to accept the full range of licensing options and to accommodate the kind of attribution required by scholars?

To state the obvious, Wikipedia's tradition of anonymity of authors is not compatible with the scholarly tradition of anonymity.The same is true of Wikipedia-style derivatives: anonymous editing by whoever is a very different tradition from the scholarly norms of citation.   Is Wikipedia planning to change its policy to accommodate scholarly authors?

Has anyone done research asking what scholars think of others taking their work and submitting it to Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons, etc., without asking further permission? I'm pretty sure that not even authors who deliberately use CC-BY licenses have really thought through what people might do with their works and whether they think this is okay or not. For example, it is only because I am a former Wikipedia editor that I can state with confidence that I consider it a poor use of my time to write works that can be readily changed by anyone else.

Didn't PLoS have an experiment with one of their journals involving automatic deposit of articles in Wikipedia? How is that going?

best,

--
Dr. Heather Morrison
Assistant Professor
École des sciences de l'information / School of Information Studies
University of Ottawa
613-562-5800 ext. 7634
http://www.sis.uottawa.ca/faculty/hmorrison.html
Heather.Morrison at uottawa.ca<mailto:Heather.Morrison at uottawa.ca>

On 2013-12-06, at 12:10 PM, Daniel Mietchen <daniel.mietchen at googlemail.com<mailto:daniel.mietchen at googlemail.com>>
 wrote:

On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 3:50 PM, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk<mailto:pm286 at cam.ac.uk>> wrote:
?? Why does it have to be a local institutional repo? This religious
insistence on Universities at the centre has held us back. I use to work for
Glaxo - where do I put my papers? Where do Cottagelabbers put them? The
fewer outlets (> 1 but small) the better. Options include:

* arXiv
* EuropePMC
* CKAN
* Wikipedia

and perhaps national libraries.
...

Why should we base the future on a system that clearly isn't (yet) working.
Given the choice of going to Wikipedia and
theUniversityOfNowhereIHaveHeardOf where would people want to go?

Wikipedia won't like a mass upload of academic papers but there is
discussion to use Wikimedia Commons and/ or Wikisource this way,
though it's not yet clear what to do with supplementary files in
formats not allowed on those platforms (e.g. doc and xls).
_______________________________________________
open-science mailing list
open-science at lists.okfn.org<mailto:open-science at lists.okfn.org>
http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-access/attachments/20131206/75ecb2e5/attachment-0002.html>