Hi everybody,
with CSCW just concluded and conferences like CHI and WWW coming up we have a good set of papers to review for the February issue of the Research Newsletter [1]
Please take a look at: https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/WRN201402 and add your name next to any paper you are interested in reviewing. As usual, short notes and one-paragraph reviews are most welcome.
Instead of contacting past contributors only, this month we’re experimenting with a public call for reviews cross-posted to analytics-l and wiki-research-l. if you have any question about the format or process feel free to get in touch off-list.
Dario Taraborelli and Tilman Bayer
Dario, what's the timeframe for writing reviews so they can get into the signpost in time. 25th?
Maximilian Klein Wikipedian in Residence, OCLC +17074787023
________________________________________ From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org on behalf of Dario Taraborelli dtaraborelli@wikimedia.org Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 8:11 AM To: A mailing list for the Analytics Team at WMF and everybody who has an interest in Wikipedia and analytics.; Research into Wikimedia content and communities Subject: [Wiki-research-l] Upcoming research newsletter: new papers open for review
Hi everybody,
with CSCW just concluded and conferences like CHI and WWW coming up we have a good set of papers to review for the February issue of the Research Newsletter [1]
Please take a look at: https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/WRN201402 and add your name next to any paper you are interested in reviewing. As usual, short notes and one-paragraph reviews are most welcome.
Instead of contacting past contributors only, this month we’re experimenting with a public call for reviews cross-posted to analytics-l and wiki-research-l. if you have any question about the format or process feel free to get in touch off-list.
Dario Taraborelli and Tilman Bayer
[1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Newsletter _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Hi Max,
yes, we're co-publishing with the Signpost, so the ultimate deadline is the Signpost's actual publication time. Its formal publication date is this Wednesday (the 26th) UTC, although actual publication might take place several hours or even a few days later. Thanks for signing up to review the "Editor's Biases" paper, I'm looking forward to reading your summary!
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Klein,Max kleinm@oclc.org wrote:
Dario, what's the timeframe for writing reviews so they can get into the signpost in time. 25th?
Maximilian Klein Wikipedian in Residence, OCLC +17074787023
From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org on behalf of Dario Taraborelli dtaraborelli@wikimedia.org Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 8:11 AM To: A mailing list for the Analytics Team at WMF and everybody who has an interest in Wikipedia and analytics.; Research into Wikimedia content and communities Subject: [Wiki-research-l] Upcoming research newsletter: new papers open for review
Hi everybody,
with CSCW just concluded and conferences like CHI and WWW coming up we have a good set of papers to review for the February issue of the Research Newsletter [1]
Please take a look at: https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/WRN201402 and add your name next to any paper you are interested in reviewing. As usual, short notes and one-paragraph reviews are most welcome.
Instead of contacting past contributors only, this month we're experimenting with a public call for reviews cross-posted to analytics-l and wiki-research-l. if you have any question about the format or process feel free to get in touch off-list.
Dario Taraborelli and Tilman Bayer
[1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Newsletter _______________________________________________ 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
Thanks, Dario, Tilman!
I was wondering whether it would be helpful to add reviewer names/usernames to individual signpost reviews. I was struck while reading a review of a paper on Signpost recently that I felt like the reviewer was inserting some very opinionated statements about the article rather than the regular summaries. While I don't think that this is a problem necessarily (although I wish that they were a bit more informed about the topic and social science research in general), I do think it can be problematic to have these comments unattributed. Would be interested to hear what others think...
Best, Heather.
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk Doctoral Programme EthnographyMatters http://ethnographymatters.net | Oxford Digital Ethnography Group http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/research/projects/?id=115 http://hblog.org | @hfordsa http://www.twitter.com/hfordsa
On 25 February 2014 05:26, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi Max,
yes, we're co-publishing with the Signpost, so the ultimate deadline is the Signpost's actual publication time. Its formal publication date is this Wednesday (the 26th) UTC, although actual publication might take place several hours or even a few days later. Thanks for signing up to review the "Editor's Biases" paper, I'm looking forward to reading your summary!
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Klein,Max kleinm@oclc.org wrote:
Dario, what's the timeframe for writing reviews so they can get into the
signpost in time. 25th?
Maximilian Klein Wikipedian in Residence, OCLC +17074787023
From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org <
wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org> on behalf of Dario Taraborelli dtaraborelli@wikimedia.org
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 8:11 AM To: A mailing list for the Analytics Team at WMF and everybody who has
an interest in Wikipedia and analytics.; Research into Wikimedia content and communities
Subject: [Wiki-research-l] Upcoming research newsletter: new papers open
for review
Hi everybody,
with CSCW just concluded and conferences like CHI and WWW coming up we
have a good set of papers to review for the February issue of the Research Newsletter [1]
Please take a look at: https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/WRN201402 and
add your name next to any paper you are interested in reviewing. As usual, short notes and one-paragraph reviews are most welcome.
Instead of contacting past contributors only, this month we're
experimenting with a public call for reviews cross-posted to analytics-l and wiki-research-l. if you have any question about the format or process feel free to get in touch off-list.
Dario Taraborelli and Tilman Bayer
[1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Newsletter _______________________________________________ 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
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications) Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Hi Heather,
that's a cool idea, and we have actually been considering something like this already. While the names of the reviewers are prominently displayed in the byline on top (and also, many readers of the Signpost and the newsletter are of course experienced in reading version histories), showing them next to each review might be make attribution easier. We just haven't found the time to implement it yet, like with many other things for the newsletter. You are welcome to figure out a suitable format and add these attributions in the upcoming issue, let's follow up offlist if more information is needed.
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 1:11 AM, Heather Ford hfordsa@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks, Dario, Tilman!
I was wondering whether it would be helpful to add reviewer names/usernames to individual signpost reviews. I was struck while reading a review of a paper on Signpost recently that I felt like the reviewer was inserting some very opinionated statements about the article rather than the regular summaries. While I don't think that this is a problem necessarily (although I wish that they were a bit more informed about the topic and social science research in general), I do think it can be problematic to have these comments unattributed. Would be interested to hear what others think...
Best, Heather.
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme EthnographyMatters | Oxford Digital Ethnography Group http://hblog.org | @hfordsa
On 25 February 2014 05:26, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi Max,
yes, we're co-publishing with the Signpost, so the ultimate deadline is the Signpost's actual publication time. Its formal publication date is this Wednesday (the 26th) UTC, although actual publication might take place several hours or even a few days later. Thanks for signing up to review the "Editor's Biases" paper, I'm looking forward to reading your summary!
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Klein,Max kleinm@oclc.org wrote:
Dario, what's the timeframe for writing reviews so they can get into the signpost in time. 25th?
Maximilian Klein Wikipedian in Residence, OCLC +17074787023
From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org on behalf of Dario Taraborelli dtaraborelli@wikimedia.org Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 8:11 AM To: A mailing list for the Analytics Team at WMF and everybody who has an interest in Wikipedia and analytics.; Research into Wikimedia content and communities Subject: [Wiki-research-l] Upcoming research newsletter: new papers open for review
Hi everybody,
with CSCW just concluded and conferences like CHI and WWW coming up we have a good set of papers to review for the February issue of the Research Newsletter [1]
Please take a look at: https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/WRN201402 and add your name next to any paper you are interested in reviewing. As usual, short notes and one-paragraph reviews are most welcome.
Instead of contacting past contributors only, this month we're experimenting with a public call for reviews cross-posted to analytics-l and wiki-research-l. if you have any question about the format or process feel free to get in touch off-list.
Dario Taraborelli and Tilman Bayer
[1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Newsletter _______________________________________________ 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
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications) Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
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
Great idea Heather,
I will add my name to my review. Do you know any other review sites that aggregate in a wiki way that we could emulate?
Maximilian Klein Wikipedian in Residence, OCLC +17074787023
________________________________________ From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org on behalf of Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 9:16 AM To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities Cc: A mailing list for the Analytics Team at WMF and everybody who has an interest in Wikipedia and analytics. Subject: Re: [Wiki-research-l] Upcoming research newsletter: new papers open for review
Hi Heather,
that's a cool idea, and we have actually been considering something like this already. While the names of the reviewers are prominently displayed in the byline on top (and also, many readers of the Signpost and the newsletter are of course experienced in reading version histories), showing them next to each review might be make attribution easier. We just haven't found the time to implement it yet, like with many other things for the newsletter. You are welcome to figure out a suitable format and add these attributions in the upcoming issue, let's follow up offlist if more information is needed.
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 1:11 AM, Heather Ford hfordsa@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks, Dario, Tilman!
I was wondering whether it would be helpful to add reviewer names/usernames to individual signpost reviews. I was struck while reading a review of a paper on Signpost recently that I felt like the reviewer was inserting some very opinionated statements about the article rather than the regular summaries. While I don't think that this is a problem necessarily (although I wish that they were a bit more informed about the topic and social science research in general), I do think it can be problematic to have these comments unattributed. Would be interested to hear what others think...
Best, Heather.
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme EthnographyMatters | Oxford Digital Ethnography Group http://hblog.org | @hfordsa
On 25 February 2014 05:26, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi Max,
yes, we're co-publishing with the Signpost, so the ultimate deadline is the Signpost's actual publication time. Its formal publication date is this Wednesday (the 26th) UTC, although actual publication might take place several hours or even a few days later. Thanks for signing up to review the "Editor's Biases" paper, I'm looking forward to reading your summary!
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Klein,Max kleinm@oclc.org wrote:
Dario, what's the timeframe for writing reviews so they can get into the signpost in time. 25th?
Maximilian Klein Wikipedian in Residence, OCLC +17074787023
From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org on behalf of Dario Taraborelli dtaraborelli@wikimedia.org Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 8:11 AM To: A mailing list for the Analytics Team at WMF and everybody who has an interest in Wikipedia and analytics.; Research into Wikimedia content and communities Subject: [Wiki-research-l] Upcoming research newsletter: new papers open for review
Hi everybody,
with CSCW just concluded and conferences like CHI and WWW coming up we have a good set of papers to review for the February issue of the Research Newsletter [1]
Please take a look at: https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/WRN201402 and add your name next to any paper you are interested in reviewing. As usual, short notes and one-paragraph reviews are most welcome.
Instead of contacting past contributors only, this month we're experimenting with a public call for reviews cross-posted to analytics-l and wiki-research-l. if you have any question about the format or process feel free to get in touch off-list.
Dario Taraborelli and Tilman Bayer
[1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Newsletter _______________________________________________ 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
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications) Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
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
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications) Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
_______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Hi Max :)
Thanks for adding your name to the review! Not quite sure I understand your question about other wiki sites that we could emulate? The research newsletter is pretty much single author per review so it's not really done in a 'wiki way' (e.g. by many authors producing a single review) other than using wiki software so I don't think anything is needed other than simply adding the byline next to the headline of the review as well as to at the top of the newsletter as per current practice.
I'm thinking that these bylines wouldn't be needed for the snippets but rather for the more significant reviews.
What do you think?
Or were you asking about other methods of actually producing the signpost?
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk Doctoral Programme EthnographyMatters http://ethnographymatters.net | Oxford Digital Ethnography Group http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/research/projects/?id=115 http://hblog.org | @hfordsa http://www.twitter.com/hfordsa
On 25 February 2014 20:35, Klein,Max kleinm@oclc.org wrote:
Great idea Heather,
I will add my name to my review. Do you know any other review sites that aggregate in a wiki way that we could emulate?
Maximilian Klein Wikipedian in Residence, OCLC +17074787023
From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org < wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org> on behalf of Tilman Bayer < tbayer@wikimedia.org> Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 9:16 AM To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities Cc: A mailing list for the Analytics Team at WMF and everybody who has an interest in Wikipedia and analytics. Subject: Re: [Wiki-research-l] Upcoming research newsletter: new papers open for review
Hi Heather,
that's a cool idea, and we have actually been considering something like this already. While the names of the reviewers are prominently displayed in the byline on top (and also, many readers of the Signpost and the newsletter are of course experienced in reading version histories), showing them next to each review might be make attribution easier. We just haven't found the time to implement it yet, like with many other things for the newsletter. You are welcome to figure out a suitable format and add these attributions in the upcoming issue, let's follow up offlist if more information is needed.
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 1:11 AM, Heather Ford hfordsa@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks, Dario, Tilman!
I was wondering whether it would be helpful to add reviewer
names/usernames
to individual signpost reviews. I was struck while reading a review of a paper on Signpost recently that I felt like the reviewer was inserting
some
very opinionated statements about the article rather than the regular summaries. While I don't think that this is a problem necessarily
(although
I wish that they were a bit more informed about the topic and social
science
research in general), I do think it can be problematic to have these comments unattributed. Would be interested to hear what others think...
Best, Heather.
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme EthnographyMatters | Oxford Digital Ethnography Group http://hblog.org | @hfordsa
On 25 February 2014 05:26, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi Max,
yes, we're co-publishing with the Signpost, so the ultimate deadline is the Signpost's actual publication time. Its formal publication date is this Wednesday (the 26th) UTC, although actual publication might take place several hours or even a few days later. Thanks for signing up to review the "Editor's Biases" paper, I'm looking forward to reading your summary!
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Klein,Max kleinm@oclc.org wrote:
Dario, what's the timeframe for writing reviews so they can get into
the
signpost in time. 25th?
Maximilian Klein Wikipedian in Residence, OCLC +17074787023
From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org on behalf of Dario
Taraborelli
dtaraborelli@wikimedia.org Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 8:11 AM To: A mailing list for the Analytics Team at WMF and everybody who has an interest in Wikipedia and analytics.; Research into Wikimedia content and communities Subject: [Wiki-research-l] Upcoming research newsletter: new papers
open
for review
Hi everybody,
with CSCW just concluded and conferences like CHI and WWW coming up we have a good set of papers to review for the February issue of the
Research
Newsletter [1]
Please take a look at: https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/WRN201402 and add your name next to any paper you are interested in reviewing. As
usual,
short notes and one-paragraph reviews are most welcome.
Instead of contacting past contributors only, this month we're experimenting with a public call for reviews cross-posted to
analytics-l and
wiki-research-l. if you have any question about the format or process
feel
free to get in touch off-list.
Dario Taraborelli and Tilman Bayer
[1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Newsletter _______________________________________________ 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
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications) Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
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
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications) Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
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