I thought AFT was an attempt to engage readers not Subject Matter Experts.

In my experience two of our most effective ways to outreach to those experts who are not already in the community are the GLAM program and potentially the education program.

This was one of the areas that Johnbod explored in his time as Wikimedians in Residence at Cancer Research UK. You might want to talk to him as to how that went and the extent to which it could be replicated. The focus of a lot of residents has been more on getting openly licensed digital material, but I don't see why we couldn't have more residencies focussed on expert review, providing of course that the articles in that area are already at a stage worthy of review.

On 23 May 2016 at 18:34, Pine W <wiki.pine@gmail.com> wrote:

Another article on the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. [1] I wonder, could any of the practices described here be implemented on Wikipedia in a way that would be helpful? WMF tried to engage SMEs through the now mothballed AFT, and I believe that there is an ongoing effort to get SME comments with the assistance of a bot facilitating communications from SMEs to article talk pages (Aaron, do you remember the name of that project, and if so could we get an update about it?)

Thanks,

Pine

[1] http://qz.com/480741/this-free-online-encyclopedia-has-achieved-what-wikipedia-can-only-dream-of/

_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l