Somehow I lost this thread - this is great, Finn, I agree that a
shared bibliographic resource need not be restricted to conferences,
journals, etc, although specific meta-reviews might be.
The main obstacle for this problem of reviewing WP lit seems to be
agreeing on a common method for assembling our disparate efforts into
something bigger. In another thread I echoed Reid's ideas about using
a wiki to accomplish this, a mediawiki instance would be ideal.
Andrea
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Finn Aarup Nielsen <fn(a)imm.dtu.dk> wrote:
1. Create a public Mediawiki instance.
2. Decide on a relatively standardized format of reviewing each paper
(metadata formats, an infobox, how to write reviews of each, etc.)
3. Upload your existing Zotero database into this new wiki (I would be
happy to write a script to do this).
4. Proceed with paper readings, with the goal that every single paper is
looked at by human eyes.
5. Use this content to produce one or more review articles.
There has been some talk of a wiki for papers - also on this list as far
as I remember. There is Bibdex (
http://www.bibdex.com/), AcaWiki
(
http://acawiki.org) and I have the "Brede Wiki"
(
http://neuro.imm.dtu.dk/wiki/). The AcaWiki use Semantic Mediawiki
(AFAIK) and I use MediaWiki templates. You can see an example here:
http://neuro.imm.dtu.dk/wiki/Putting_Wikipedia_to_the_test:_a_case_study
There is an infobox with citation information and sections on "related
studies" and "critique".
It is a question though whether such more general targeted wikis are
appropriate for composing a collaborative paper.
I have also begun a small Wikipedia review that I upload to our server
yesterday:
http://www2.imm.dtu.dk/pubdb/views/edoc_download.php/6012/pdf/imm6012.pdf
I think I will never be able to do an exhaustive review of all papers, but
my idea was to give an overview of as many aspect as possible. I think
that some research published outside journals and conferences are
interesting, e.g., surveys and some of the statistics performed by Erik
Zachte. I don't think that Pew's survey has be peer-reviewed, so
"just"
including journal and conference papers is in my opinion not quite
enough to give a complete picture.
/Finn
___________________________________________________________________
Finn Aarup Nielsen, DTU Informatics, Denmark
Lundbeck Foundation Center for Integrated Molecular Brain Imaging
http://www.imm.dtu.dk/~fn/ http://nru.dk/staff/fnielsen/
___________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
--
:: Andrea Forte
:: Assistant Professor
:: College of Information Science and Technology, Drexel University
::
http://www.andreaforte.net
--
:: Andrea Forte
:: Assistant Professor
:: College of Information Science and Technology, Drexel University
::
http://www.andreaforte.net