Most academic researchers do a pretty good job of adding their most
important work to pertinent articles, and we should try to encourage
them to do better. The problem comes with the all-to-easy trap of
self-promotion and advocacy, and when that goes wrong, in maybe 10-20%
of such cases, it makes a mess large enough for most policy-oriented
editors to take a dim view of all such additions. But if those editors
took a closer look at the good COI contributions, I suspect they would
temper their views, so maybe we need to highlight a list of examples
of the good and bad way to go about adding one's work, and distribute
that more formally?
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 12:17 AM, Jennifer Gristock <gristock(a)me.com> wrote:
Thanks to everyone who has contributed to the discussion so far (on citing
one's own research in an article.)
I would echo Leigh's point about advice to potential editors being mixed: in
June, for example, The advice at the Teahouse was that an academic ought to
confine contributions regarding their own research papers to the Talk page
of a topic or alternatively to write about a topic without citing
themselves. Quite how you do that if your work is new I am not sure.
This [in my view, peculiar] perspective, that citing yourself is a COI, is a
million miles away from Pau's [in my view, sensible] advice that
First, COI is related to editing Wikipedia in your own interests or in the
interests of your external relationships. It does not forbid obviously
writing about the things you're an expert on. If you are able to separate
these two things, you're allowed to do it.
I would be much obliged if those who agree with Pau could +1 his email (or
this one) so that I can be sure that the whole system I am attempting to
design, - which involves academics and their students contributing
information from their own research and citing it - does not by definition
forbidden because of COI.
Many thanks
Jenny (Open_Research)
Advice given quote:
"Bearing in mind the conflict of interest issues raised above, it would be
acceptable if you went to an article's talk page and mentioned that a new
piece of academic research on the topic is available, providing relevant
information. This would allow interested editors to read your work and, if
warranted, integrate it into existing pages. Additionally, if you're an
academic with expertise in a field, I would strongly encourage you to work
on improving articles relevant to your area of interest (steering clear of
citing yourself). Keihatsu talk
19:40, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
On 10 Jul 2014, at 16:28, Pau Cabot <paucabot(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Jennifer,
First, COI is related to editing Wikipedia in your own interests or in the
interests of your external relationships. It does not forbid obviously
writing about the things you're an expert on. If you are able to separate
these two things, you're allowed to do it.
Related to the tracking of the alumni, I did it by creating a page where
there were listed my students' constributions, so I could easily keep track
of their progress. To count their editions, you can use this tool, which
counts all user contributions, but it does not matter as usually the only
editions that pupils make are the ones related to the project.
In addition, if the aim of getting editions done by alumni is due to COI
issues, I think it's not the solution. The problem does not depend on the
user that makes the edits but on the intention of the edits.
Pau.
2014-07-10 16:43 GMT+02:00 Jennifer Gristock <gristock(a)me.com>om>:
Greetings everyone. I'm still working on that system to encourage
university professors to contribute to Wikipedia, a system that is concerned
not through teaching, like the Education Programme, but through research.
I need some help. Can you tell me, in the Wikipedia API, is there a way to
count the contributions that a user has made on behalf of another particular
user? For example, a professor might ask a group of PhD students to make
contributions involving his/her research on various Wikipedia pages, on
his/her behalf.
I have been frequently told (at the Teahouse and elsewhere) that
Professors are not allowed to contribute information about their own
published research papers on Wikipedia pages, because this would be biased.
(Which is rather a downer for the professor, because this means they are
forbidden to write about the things they are most passionate and
knowledgeable about.)
If this is rule is true, then it must certainly be seen as a roadblock to
academic engagement with Wikipedia. If it isn't, then it is editors'
perception of the rule as true (as I have experienced) that is the
roadblock.
It seems to me that the way to overcome this roadblock is to introduce a
way of counting the contributions made by a person (say, a research student,
or a colleague) on behalf of a Professor. So at the end of the year, the
Professor can say 'my research contributed to X edits on Wikipedia' as
easily as each individual student (who might contribute on behalf of many
academic researchers) can count their individual edits.
Can the API accommodate this in some way? Perhaps through some sort of
'project' code or something?
Yours hopefully,
Jenny Gristock (Open_Research)
Sent from my iPad
On 9 Jul 2014, at 22:40, LiAnna Davis <lianna(a)wikiedu.org> wrote:
Hi all!
I wanted to draw your attention to the Educator Training we'll be having
as part of the Wikimania Pre-conference on August 7:
https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Education_Pre-Conference/Educator_…
The Educator Training is designed to give educators of all levels the
knowledge they need to use Wikipedia or other Wikimedia projects as a
teaching tool in their classrooms. The training is open to educators from
any country, and Wikipedia editing experience is not required.
If you're interested in attending or you know someone who is, please see
the page for more information. I especially encourage anyone who's thought
about getting a Wikipedia Education Program going in your country to attend,
as you'll learn a lot about the different kinds of assignments students
could do.
LiAnna
--
LiAnna Davis
Head of Communications and External Relations
Wiki Education Foundation
+1-415-770-1061
www.wikiedu.org
Please note my new email address and update your contacts accordingly:
lianna(a)wikiedu.org
_______________________________________________
Education mailing list
Education(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education
_______________________________________________
Education mailing list
Education(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education
_______________________________________________
Education mailing list
Education(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education
_______________________________________________
Education mailing list
Education(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education