Greetings, Fellow Wikipedia Researchers.
In creating a new journal one of the key issues is demonstrating
enough "paper pressure" that is high quality, but not suitable for
existing journals. Is there evidence that there is high quality
research in Wikipedia that is not suitable for existing journals, or
that is not receiving a fair hearing in the review process for those
journals?
I am an associate editor of ACM Transactions on the Web, which would
be a great place to publish high quality Wikipedia research that is
analytic or tools-based. For Wikipedia research that has a strong
user interface or ethnography component ACM Transactions on CHI would
be perfect. Wikipedia research that has both intelligent algorithms
and interfaces would be perfect for a new journal that ACM has just
approved called ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems.
(I'm co-Editor in Chief of the new ACM TiiS.)
So, while the idea of having an outlet for high quality Wikipedia
research to get published in journals is an excellent one, and would
certainly improve WikiSym as a research venue, rather than competing
with it, there already seem to be great outlets for most of the
relevant research.
Is there high quality Wikipedia research that should be published in
journals that is not suitable for these venues?
Best,
John