Ho creato http://wiki.wikimedia.it/wiki/Associazione:Open_access#2017 per cominciare a metterci alcuni appunti sulla mia campagna di comunicazione ai ricercatori (scrivere agli autori di 40k articoli usati in Wikipedia perché li archivino in accesso aperto), altrimenti restano solo nella mia memoria e in qualche messaggio privato.
Se vi ricordate qualche altra pagina rilevante e avete un minuto, aggiungetela alla categoria: http://wiki.wikimedia.it/wiki/Categoria:Open_access
Nemo
Ahem sorry, this was meant for the Italian list of course. :) Context in English: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Wikipedia_Library#Poke_authors_via_...
Nemo
As a reminder of the link I sent earlier:
Federico Leva (Nemo), 28/05/2017 12:15:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Wikipedia_Library#Poke_authors_via_...
This is going on, thanks to oaDOI/Dissemin improvements and some committed Wikimedia Italia members. Updates will continue in https://github.com/dissemin/dissemin/issues/251
If you want to help, apart from suggestions on messaging improvements, here are some issues I found with the various OAI-PMH endpoints and metadata crawlers: https://github.com/dissemin/dissemin/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=False%20is%... https://github.com/Impactstory/oadoi/issues
Especially Wiley has a really poor coverage in their OAI-PMH endpoint it seems.
Nemo
Federico, This is great news! You are showing the way. I look forward to many more such initiatives, not just in Wikipedia, but anywhere people look for access to knowledge. The "brand" of Wikipedia is all about having "every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge". There are many organizations, commercial and otherwise, that espouse a commitment to "open". Finally you (and the shoulders you are standing on) are showing how we can systematically message authors to share. This has the real possibility of breaking the monopoly control and pricing of access to knowledge.
Good job.
-john dove
_________________ John G. Dove, personal e-mail JohnGDove@gmail.com
Check out my latest post on LinkedIn: Not all Open Content is fully Discoverable https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/all-open-content-discoverable-john-dove?
On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 4:49 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
As a reminder of the link I sent earlier:
Federico Leva (Nemo), 28/05/2017 12:15:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Wikipedia_Library#P oke_authors_via_Dissemin
This is going on, thanks to oaDOI/Dissemin improvements and some committed Wikimedia Italia members. Updates will continue in https://github.com/dissemin/dissemin/issues/251
If you want to help, apart from suggestions on messaging improvements, here are some issues I found with the various OAI-PMH endpoints and metadata crawlers: https://github.com/dissemin/dissemin/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q =False%20is%3Aissue%20is%3Aopen%20 https://github.com/Impactstory/oadoi/issues
Especially Wiley has a really poor coverage in their OAI-PMH endpoint it seems.
Nemo
Federico,
This is a really neat initiative and brings together a lot of thinking around oa repositories, indexes, apis, citation practices, and author engagement.
I have one request if you don't mind...
*Could you share the email text that you're using to send to authors with this group?*
I am not concerned if publishers don't like this project, but I wouldn't want them to be upset* just because* language gave them a misunderstanding about how Wikipedia treats copyright (which is we treat it appropriately, and share freely whenever possible).
Thank you, Jake Orlowitz Wikipedia Library
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 9:15 AM John G. Dove johngdove@gmail.com wrote:
Federico, This is great news! You are showing the way. I look forward to many more such initiatives, not just in Wikipedia, but anywhere people look for access to knowledge. The "brand" of Wikipedia is all about having "every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge". There are many organizations, commercial and otherwise, that espouse a commitment to "open". Finally you (and the shoulders you are standing on) are showing how we can systematically message authors to share. This has the real possibility of breaking the monopoly control and pricing of access to knowledge.
Good job.
-john dove
John G. Dove, personal e-mail JohnGDove@gmail.com
Check out my latest post on LinkedIn: Not all Open Content is fully Discoverable https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/all-open-content-discoverable-john-dove?
On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 4:49 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
As a reminder of the link I sent earlier:
Federico Leva (Nemo), 28/05/2017 12:15:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Wikipedia_Library#Poke_authors_via_...
This is going on, thanks to oaDOI/Dissemin improvements and some committed Wikimedia Italia members. Updates will continue in https://github.com/dissemin/dissemin/issues/251
If you want to help, apart from suggestions on messaging improvements, here are some issues I found with the various OAI-PMH endpoints and metadata crawlers:
https://github.com/dissemin/dissemin/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=False%20is%... https://github.com/Impactstory/oadoi/issues
Especially Wiley has a really poor coverage in their OAI-PMH endpoint it seems.
Nemo
Agree it is a great initiative. Many authors retain the rights to host a version of their paper via their own website or institution. This is improving "free access" rather than changing the underlying license to "open access".
James
On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 1:54 AM, Jake Orlowitz jorlowitz@wikimedia.org wrote:
Federico,
This is a really neat initiative and brings together a lot of thinking around oa repositories, indexes, apis, citation practices, and author engagement.
I have one request if you don't mind...
*Could you share the email text that you're using to send to authors with this group?*
I am not concerned if publishers don't like this project, but I wouldn't want them to be upset* just because* language gave them a misunderstanding about how Wikipedia treats copyright (which is we treat it appropriately, and share freely whenever possible).
Thank you, Jake Orlowitz Wikipedia Library
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 9:15 AM John G. Dove johngdove@gmail.com wrote:
Federico, This is great news! You are showing the way. I look forward to many more such initiatives, not just in Wikipedia, but anywhere people look for access to knowledge. The "brand" of Wikipedia is all about having "every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge". There are many organizations, commercial and otherwise, that espouse a commitment to "open". Finally you (and the shoulders you are standing on) are showing how we can systematically message authors to share. This has the real possibility of breaking the monopoly control and pricing of access to knowledge.
Good job.
-john dove
John G. Dove, personal e-mail JohnGDove@gmail.com
Check out my latest post on LinkedIn: Not all Open Content is fully Discoverable https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/all-open-content-discoverable-john-dove?
On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 4:49 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemowiki@gmail.com
wrote:
As a reminder of the link I sent earlier:
Federico Leva (Nemo), 28/05/2017 12:15:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Wikipedia_ Library#Poke_authors_via_Dissemin
This is going on, thanks to oaDOI/Dissemin improvements and some committed Wikimedia Italia members. Updates will continue in https://github.com/dissemin/dissemin/issues/251
If you want to help, apart from suggestions on messaging improvements, here are some issues I found with the various OAI-PMH endpoints and metadata crawlers: https://github.com/dissemin/dissemin/issues?utf8=%E2%9C% 93&q=False%20is%3Aissue%20is%3Aopen%20 https://github.com/Impactstory/oadoi/issues
Especially Wiley has a really poor coverage in their OAI-PMH endpoint it seems.
Nemo
Excellent initiative, Federico.
I am wondering if this could be partly automated to make it scale (detect the citation of a new DOI > extract the author contact email > check if a preprint is available > if not, trigger an email to the author).
In the future, a social media bot will simultaneously (publicly) notify the author, if the handle can identified and is reliably stored in Wikidata.
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:39 PM, James Heilman jmh649@gmail.com wrote:
Agree it is a great initiative. Many authors retain the rights to host a version of their paper via their own website or institution. This is improving "free access" rather than changing the underlying license to "open access".
James
On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 1:54 AM, Jake Orlowitz jorlowitz@wikimedia.org wrote:
Federico,
This is a really neat initiative and brings together a lot of thinking around oa repositories, indexes, apis, citation practices, and author engagement.
I have one request if you don't mind...
*Could you share the email text that you're using to send to authors with this group?*
I am not concerned if publishers don't like this project, but I wouldn't want them to be upset* just because* language gave them a misunderstanding about how Wikipedia treats copyright (which is we treat it appropriately, and share freely whenever possible).
Thank you, Jake Orlowitz Wikipedia Library
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 9:15 AM John G. Dove johngdove@gmail.com wrote:
Federico, This is great news! You are showing the way. I look forward to many more such initiatives, not just in Wikipedia, but anywhere people look for access to knowledge. The "brand" of Wikipedia is all about having "every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge". There are many organizations, commercial and otherwise, that espouse a commitment to "open". Finally you (and the shoulders you are standing on) are showing how we can systematically message authors to share. This has the real possibility of breaking the monopoly control and pricing of access to knowledge.
Good job.
-john dove
John G. Dove, personal e-mail JohnGDove@gmail.com
Check out my latest post on LinkedIn: Not all Open Content is fully Discoverable https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/all-open-content-discoverable-john-dove?
On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 4:49 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) < nemowiki@gmail.com> wrote:
As a reminder of the link I sent earlier:
Federico Leva (Nemo), 28/05/2017 12:15:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Wikipedia_Library# Poke_authors_via_Dissemin
This is going on, thanks to oaDOI/Dissemin improvements and some committed Wikimedia Italia members. Updates will continue in https://github.com/dissemin/dissemin/issues/251
If you want to help, apart from suggestions on messaging improvements, here are some issues I found with the various OAI-PMH endpoints and metadata crawlers: https://github.com/dissemin/dissemin/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93& q=False%20is%3Aissue%20is%3Aopen%20 https://github.com/Impactstory/oadoi/issues
Especially Wiley has a really poor coverage in their OAI-PMH endpoint it seems.
Nemo
-- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
Dario Taraborelli, 29/08/2017 18:16:
I am wondering if this could be partly automated to make it scale (detect the citation of a new DOI > extract the author contact email > check if a preprint is available > if not, trigger an email to the author).
It's not especially hard to automate, the question is what to put in the From and Reply-To fields. :) The sender needs to be of interest for the author and somebody knowledgeable needs to be available to answer questions. I can do some super-work and handle a few hundreds support requests from authors for a few weeks but I can't promise to be available forever to do this. ;)
In the future, a social media bot will simultaneously (publicly) notify the author, if the handle can identified and is reliably stored in Wikidata.
We could do this already via ORCID but not that many authors have usable profiles there.
Nemo
Hi all,
Federico, this sounds amazing!
I want to offer the help of the Open Access Button request system here: https://openaccessbutton.org/api.
We have an endpoint for requesting content similarly to how you've done here. It handles the process of requesting from: * checking if content is already available * finding author contact info (even if it's not available, and getting up to date info if whats on the page is wrong) * moderating requests in < 4 hours (with help from the community) * sending the request to the author * providing authors with info from Sherpa Romeo in an easy to interpret way. That's backed up by a help desk to help with confusion and all the edge cases that appear * facilitating very easy deposit & passing content over the Zenodo * (soon) moderating content as it comes in to make sure it's legal
This is all shown publically on request pages (where people can "support" a request to be notified on its progress), and works on any article (no doi required, although it's always nice to have). We've handled quite a few requests thus far: https://openaccessbutton.org/request although we have a lot of work that's close to shipping that we're hoping will rapidly increase our ability to scale. One thing that's been quite hard for us so far has been "bulk" requesting, like you've done here, but we've now got a workflow for that too which makes it easy (alongside A/B testing).
We've been working on this for over a year now, and importantly are pretty far down the path of getting this to a point where it's sustainable in the long term.
I'd love to work with you to figure out how we can help here, as it would be a shame for us to duplicate this!
Again, congrats this looks awesome.
Joe
On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 at 16:46 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Dario Taraborelli, 29/08/2017 18:16:
I am wondering if this could be partly automated to make it scale (detect the citation of a new DOI > extract the author contact email > check if a preprint is available > if not, trigger an email to the
author).
It's not especially hard to automate, the question is what to put in the From and Reply-To fields. :) The sender needs to be of interest for the author and somebody knowledgeable needs to be available to answer questions. I can do some super-work and handle a few hundreds support requests from authors for a few weeks but I can't promise to be available forever to do this. ;)
In the future, a social media bot will simultaneously (publicly) notify the author, if the handle can identified and is reliably stored in
Wikidata.
We could do this already via ORCID but not that many authors have usable profiles there.
Nemo
Joseph McArthur, 29/08/2017 18:52:
Federico, this sounds amazing!
Thanks.
I want to offer the help of the Open Access Button request system here: [...]
I'd love to work with you to figure out how we can help here, as it would be a shame for us to duplicate this!
Sure. In fact I reused some of your learnings, so you already contributed to my campaign. https://github.com/OAButton/discussion/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=commenter...
From https://github.com/OAButton/discussion/issues/587 I got the impression you wouldn't be able to sustain my requests for 224k DOIs at once, so I figured I'd try to add some additional capacity with WMIT resources at least for this initial test of mine. In the short term (September), if some of you have spare cycles, I could use your help in drafting the next emails and replying to support requests.
In the long term, if we want something stable as suggested by Dario (or indeed John https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/accelerating-open-access-adoption-john-dove), I agree we should go through some permanent help desk like the OAbutton, ideally with some resources/support from SPARC, JISC, OpenAIRE or whoever is interested in directly supporting green OA beyond specific borders.
Nemo
P.s: I've removed from Cc some addresses which I believe are already in the list, to avoid making these messages always go into moderation.
Thanks for the quick reply, tried the same below.
On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 at 17:31 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Joseph McArthur, 29/08/2017 18:52:
Federico, this sounds amazing!
Thanks.
I want to offer the help of the Open Access Button request system here:
[...]
I'd love to work with you to figure out how we can help here, as it would be a shame for us to duplicate this!
Sure. In fact I reused some of your learnings, so you already contributed to my campaign.
https://github.com/OAButton/discussion/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=commenter...
Oh grand, I'll take a peak at those issues in the coming days and see if there is anything else useful I could add.
From https://github.com/OAButton/discussion/issues/587 I got the impression you wouldn't be able to sustain my requests for 224k DOIs at once, so I figured I'd try to add some additional capacity with WMIT resources at least for this initial test of mine. In the short term (September), if some of you have spare cycles, I could use your help in drafting the next emails and replying to support requests.
From issues it sounded like you were doing a few thousand emails to
authors, which we could manage with a bit of co-ordination (technically, you could do it via the API without consulting but it would be quite innefficient for us) e.g let us know what you want requested in a spreadsheet, and then we'll get it up the same day and have messages sent. If you simply wanted to run 224k DOI's to see if they were available, that's a pretty light lift, so I wouldn't worry about that (just hit the API when you fancy).
We might have some spare time, shall we try and have a 30 minute chat by phone (or similar) and try to hammer something out? If that makes sense see if there a time that works for you here: doodle.com/joemcarthur.
In the long term, if we want something stable as suggested by Dario (or indeed John < https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/accelerating-open-access-adoption-john-dove
),
I agree we should go through some permanent help desk like the OAbutton, ideally with some resources/support from SPARC, JISC, OpenAIRE or whoever is interested in directly supporting green OA beyond specific borders.
All the more reason to chat :)
Nemo
P.s: I've removed from Cc some addresses which I believe are already in the list, to avoid making these messages always go into moderation.
Thanks!
Hi,
I'm glad to see this initiative and the momentum it is getting. I know automation is needed and will provide scale. However, I have a feeling we are missing an ingredient, something (not else) but more.
Freeing academically produced literature is not just about pushing formerly published work toward open archives. A lot of work, resources and money is spent to sent publicly funded work in the private lucrative repositories of a very limited number of publishers. In France, Elsevier receive from Couperin-Abes (the organism 'negotiating' and buying access to journals for most of french research institutions) about as much money as the world wide Wikimedian budget. As a whole, France could pay a double wikimedia if giving-up all what is know from these subscriptions. Furthermore from the research I maid and lived, academia in its vast majority simply do not care. It is part of the economics of academia (some notoriety-academical-kapitalism). One aiming at a carrier in research can hardly escape this system. And from first hand experience I'd rather discourage writing about it without a secured academical position. So civil society must push a bit to get back what she made possible. In my opinion Wikimedia is just the right intermed body.
What is done to make contact with researchers showing them, repeatedly, who is financially supporting their work and that *public *research can directly be produced under free (libre) licenses ? Going toward opening knowledge communities more than opening past research would benefit more the interaction between researchers and the rest of society.
As discussed with Dario and previously on some wikimedian discussion on this matter (can't find the URL), I was proposing to enable emailing corresponding authors via the mailing tool of a * wikimedian account *(in use for notifications). And I mean a person-account (not *just *bots*)*. Pre- established mails would be sent with links such as the ' Email this user https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Special:EmailUser/RP87 ', but addressed to corresponding authors found in the meta-data or head of the article.
For instance: ~To {{U|the user mailing the request}} Please, consider personalizing this e-mail template ~ "Dear 'Auto- Author-Name', Searching the references on 'Auto- Matter-Topic', indicated on the article 'Auto- Wikimedian-article', I found your paper entitled 'Auto- Article-Title'. I was impeded in this work by paywalls. Would you please publish this work in an open archive [Auto- major archives links]. Their are by the way alternative way to publish scientific work, direct open access, without author publishing charges : 'Link toward wikiversities scientific journals'.
Nice formulations about knowledge creation and dissemination etc. Sincerely yours, {{U|Auto- the user}} and the wikimedian community."
The contact links would be placed in the reference part or in a template at the head of the article : "This article *does not cite https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources enough Open Access sources https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability* Contact corresponding authors, in order to free this knowledge and related references. Click and send, from your wikimedian account, requests to theses authors to free their work 'Auto-e-mail-LINK'. * article 1 * article 2 ... If you are working on this topic, please join an open-peer-reviewing group [[open-peer-reviewing group portal]]' If you are from any part of civil society interested in the topic and searching for advanced knowledge on the topic, please join a [[vulgarization group]] for not-understood content, or a [[bibliographic intelligence and problematization group]] for 'non-researched yet' material. "
I'll watch for the visio-chat opportunity (some mumble equivalent at least if we are many). But the current period is quite loaded, with social, political and work context. So I may just contribute on any meta / wiki page you point toward. I push this mail toward some friends, former colleagues and contacts, as I'm sure some will see opportunities.
Best Regards
@+ Rudy {{U|RP87}}
On 29 August 2017 at 19:57, Joseph McArthur joe@sparcopen.org wrote:
Thanks for the quick reply, tried the same below.
On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 at 17:31 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Joseph McArthur, 29/08/2017 18:52:
Federico, this sounds amazing!
Thanks.
I want to offer the help of the Open Access Button request system here:
[...]
I'd love to work with you to figure out how we can help here, as it would be a shame for us to duplicate this!
Sure. In fact I reused some of your learnings, so you already contributed to my campaign. https://github.com/OAButton/discussion/issues?utf8=%E2%9C% 93&q=commenter%3Anemobis%20
Oh grand, I'll take a peak at those issues in the coming days and see if there is anything else useful I could add.
From https://github.com/OAButton/discussion/issues/587 I got the impression you wouldn't be able to sustain my requests for 224k DOIs at once, so I figured I'd try to add some additional capacity with WMIT resources at least for this initial test of mine. In the short term (September), if some of you have spare cycles, I could use your help in drafting the next emails and replying to support requests.
From issues it sounded like you were doing a few thousand emails to authors, which we could manage with a bit of co-ordination (technically, you could do it via the API without consulting but it would be quite innefficient for us) e.g let us know what you want requested in a spreadsheet, and then we'll get it up the same day and have messages sent. If you simply wanted to run 224k DOI's to see if they were available, that's a pretty light lift, so I wouldn't worry about that (just hit the API when you fancy).
We might have some spare time, shall we try and have a 30 minute chat by phone (or similar) and try to hammer something out? If that makes sense see if there a time that works for you here: doodle.com/joemcarthur.
In the long term, if we want something stable as suggested by Dario (or indeed John https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/accelerating-open- access-adoption-john-dove), I agree we should go through some permanent help desk like the OAbutton, ideally with some resources/support from SPARC, JISC, OpenAIRE or whoever is interested in directly supporting green OA beyond specific borders.
All the more reason to chat :)
Nemo
P.s: I've removed from Cc some addresses which I believe are already in the list, to avoid making these messages always go into moderation.
Thanks!
Joseph McArthur Assistant Director: Right to Research Coalition http://righttoresearch.org/ Co-Lead/Founder: Open Access Button http://openaccessbutton.org/ Twitter: @Mcarthur_Joe https://twitter.com/Mcarthur_Joe Skype: joseph_mcarthur
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
Sorry I know I'm late to this thread, but just wanted to mention the oaDOI API, which could be helpful depending on your goals.
We can easily handle 225k DOIs if you spread them out over a few hours...we currently serve 500k DOIs daily, and have handled 2M daily in the past with no trouble. Response time is about 200ms at that load.
We also have a data dump so you could store it all locally and make it as fast as you like, if you want to put the resources into that.
We currently have records for all 90M DOIs, and OA locations for ~10M of them. We're in the middle of a large rolling update (v2) that will add links to another 7M or so hybrid DOIs.
ResearchGate and Academia.edu resources are not included in the index, which is either a feature or a bug depending on your goals :)
FWIW, we now have an evaluation set https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kC9A9WscsPr-N3r8ULZYjTZdJb3NdhrbMtGlJSHJn-M/edit#gid=263352758 comparing oaDOI v1, oaDOI v2, the Dissemin API, and the Open Access Button API. oaDOI v2 is currently putting up the best numbers, particularly in precision (low false positives)
There are some qualifiers, though. The evaluation set is a random sample of all DOIs, across all years. We count RG as closed. The gold standard is manual coding based on Google and Google Scholar searches, which was done independently (by Lisa Matthias and Juan Alperin, coauthors on our recent paper https://peerj.com/preprints/3119v1/).
So feel free to interpret accordingly :). But we think it might be helpful, particularly since it's quite time-consuming to create the manual gold standard of availability (and without this there tend to be a lot of false positives).
Feel free to ignore if it's not what you're looking for. Happy to help (or not) any way we can! Best, J
On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 7:42 AM, Rudy Patard rudy.patard@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I'm glad to see this initiative and the momentum it is getting. I know automation is needed and will provide scale. However, I have a feeling we are missing an ingredient, something (not else) but more.
Freeing academically produced literature is not just about pushing formerly published work toward open archives. A lot of work, resources and money is spent to sent publicly funded work in the private lucrative repositories of a very limited number of publishers. In France, Elsevier receive from Couperin-Abes (the organism 'negotiating' and buying access to journals for most of french research institutions) about as much money as the world wide Wikimedian budget. As a whole, France could pay a double wikimedia if giving-up all what is know from these subscriptions. Furthermore from the research I maid and lived, academia in its vast majority simply do not care. It is part of the economics of academia (some notoriety-academical-kapitalism). One aiming at a carrier in research can hardly escape this system. And from first hand experience I'd rather discourage writing about it without a secured academical position. So civil society must push a bit to get back what she made possible. In my opinion Wikimedia is just the right intermed body.
What is done to make contact with researchers showing them, repeatedly, who is financially supporting their work and that *public *research can directly be produced under free (libre) licenses ? Going toward opening knowledge communities more than opening past research would benefit more the interaction between researchers and the rest of society.
As discussed with Dario and previously on some wikimedian discussion on this matter (can't find the URL), I was proposing to enable emailing corresponding authors via the mailing tool of a * wikimedian account *(in use for notifications). And I mean a person-account (not *just *bots*)*. Pre- established mails would be sent with links such as the ' Email this user https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Special:EmailUser/RP87 ', but addressed to corresponding authors found in the meta-data or head of the article.
For instance: ~To {{U|the user mailing the request}} Please, consider personalizing this e-mail template ~ "Dear 'Auto- Author-Name', Searching the references on 'Auto- Matter-Topic', indicated on the article 'Auto- Wikimedian-article', I found your paper entitled 'Auto- Article-Title'. I was impeded in this work by paywalls. Would you please publish this work in an open archive [Auto- major archives links]. Their are by the way alternative way to publish scientific work, direct open access, without author publishing charges : 'Link toward wikiversities scientific journals'.
Nice formulations about knowledge creation and dissemination etc. Sincerely yours, {{U|Auto- the user}} and the wikimedian community."
The contact links would be placed in the reference part or in a template at the head of the article : "This article *does not cite https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources enough Open Access sources https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability* Contact corresponding authors, in order to free this knowledge and related references. Click and send, from your wikimedian account, requests to theses authors to free their work 'Auto-e-mail-LINK'.
- article 1
- article 2
... If you are working on this topic, please join an open-peer-reviewing group [[open-peer-reviewing group portal]]' If you are from any part of civil society interested in the topic and searching for advanced knowledge on the topic, please join a [[vulgarization group]] for not-understood content, or a [[bibliographic intelligence and problematization group]] for 'non-researched yet' material. "
I'll watch for the visio-chat opportunity (some mumble equivalent at least if we are many). But the current period is quite loaded, with social, political and work context. So I may just contribute on any meta / wiki page you point toward. I push this mail toward some friends, former colleagues and contacts, as I'm sure some will see opportunities.
Best Regards
@+ Rudy {{U|RP87}}
On 29 August 2017 at 19:57, Joseph McArthur joe@sparcopen.org wrote:
Thanks for the quick reply, tried the same below.
On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 at 17:31 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Joseph McArthur, 29/08/2017 18:52:
Federico, this sounds amazing!
Thanks.
I want to offer the help of the Open Access Button request system
here: [...]
I'd love to work with you to figure out how we can help here, as it would be a shame for us to duplicate this!
Sure. In fact I reused some of your learnings, so you already contributed to my campaign. https://github.com/OAButton/discussion/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93 &q=commenter%3Anemobis%20
Oh grand, I'll take a peak at those issues in the coming days and see if there is anything else useful I could add.
From https://github.com/OAButton/discussion/issues/587 I got the impression you wouldn't be able to sustain my requests for 224k DOIs at once, so I figured I'd try to add some additional capacity with WMIT resources at least for this initial test of mine. In the short term (September), if some of you have spare cycles, I could use your help in drafting the next emails and replying to support requests.
From issues it sounded like you were doing a few thousand emails to authors, which we could manage with a bit of co-ordination (technically, you could do it via the API without consulting but it would be quite innefficient for us) e.g let us know what you want requested in a spreadsheet, and then we'll get it up the same day and have messages sent. If you simply wanted to run 224k DOI's to see if they were available, that's a pretty light lift, so I wouldn't worry about that (just hit the API when you fancy).
We might have some spare time, shall we try and have a 30 minute chat by phone (or similar) and try to hammer something out? If that makes sense see if there a time that works for you here: doodle.com/joemcarthur.
In the long term, if we want something stable as suggested by Dario (or indeed John https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/accelerating-open-access- adoption-john-dove), I agree we should go through some permanent help desk like the OAbutton, ideally with some resources/support from SPARC, JISC, OpenAIRE or whoever is interested in directly supporting green OA beyond specific borders.
All the more reason to chat :)
Nemo
P.s: I've removed from Cc some addresses which I believe are already in the list, to avoid making these messages always go into moderation.
Thanks!
Joseph McArthur Assistant Director: Right to Research Coalition http://righttoresearch.org/ Co-Lead/Founder: Open Access Button http://openaccessbutton.org/ Twitter: @Mcarthur_Joe https://twitter.com/Mcarthur_Joe Skype: joseph_mcarthur
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
Looping in Phoebe Ayers, now at MIT Libraries, who has been getting a few questions from faculty about this email.
Cheers, Jake
On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 6:54 AM Jason Priem jason@impactstory.org wrote:
Sorry I know I'm late to this thread, but just wanted to mention the oaDOI API, which could be helpful depending on your goals.
We can easily handle 225k DOIs if you spread them out over a few hours...we currently serve 500k DOIs daily, and have handled 2M daily in the past with no trouble. Response time is about 200ms at that load.
We also have a data dump so you could store it all locally and make it as fast as you like, if you want to put the resources into that.
We currently have records for all 90M DOIs, and OA locations for ~10M of them. We're in the middle of a large rolling update (v2) that will add links to another 7M or so hybrid DOIs.
ResearchGate and Academia.edu resources are not included in the index, which is either a feature or a bug depending on your goals :)
FWIW, we now have an evaluation set https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kC9A9WscsPr-N3r8ULZYjTZdJb3NdhrbMtGlJSHJn-M/edit#gid=263352758 comparing oaDOI v1, oaDOI v2, the Dissemin API, and the Open Access Button API. oaDOI v2 is currently putting up the best numbers, particularly in precision (low false positives)
There are some qualifiers, though. The evaluation set is a random sample of all DOIs, across all years. We count RG as closed. The gold standard is manual coding based on Google and Google Scholar searches, which was done independently (by Lisa Matthias and Juan Alperin, coauthors on our recent paper https://peerj.com/preprints/3119v1/).
So feel free to interpret accordingly :). But we think it might be helpful, particularly since it's quite time-consuming to create the manual gold standard of availability (and without this there tend to be a lot of false positives).
Feel free to ignore if it's not what you're looking for. Happy to help (or not) any way we can! Best, J
On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 7:42 AM, Rudy Patard rudy.patard@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I'm glad to see this initiative and the momentum it is getting. I know automation is needed and will provide scale. However, I have a feeling we are missing an ingredient, something (not else) but more.
Freeing academically produced literature is not just about pushing formerly published work toward open archives. A lot of work, resources and money is spent to sent publicly funded work in the private lucrative repositories of a very limited number of publishers. In France, Elsevier receive from Couperin-Abes (the organism 'negotiating' and buying access to journals for most of french research institutions) about as much money as the world wide Wikimedian budget. As a whole, France could pay a double wikimedia if giving-up all what is know from these subscriptions. Furthermore from the research I maid and lived, academia in its vast majority simply do not care. It is part of the economics of academia (some notoriety-academical-kapitalism). One aiming at a carrier in research can hardly escape this system. And from first hand experience I'd rather discourage writing about it without a secured academical position. So civil society must push a bit to get back what she made possible. In my opinion Wikimedia is just the right intermed body.
What is done to make contact with researchers showing them, repeatedly, who is financially supporting their work and that *public *research can directly be produced under free (libre) licenses ? Going toward opening knowledge communities more than opening past research would benefit more the interaction between researchers and the rest of society.
As discussed with Dario and previously on some wikimedian discussion on this matter (can't find the URL), I was proposing to enable emailing corresponding authors via the mailing tool of a * wikimedian account *(in use for notifications). And I mean a person-account (not *just *bots*)*. Pre- established mails would be sent with links such as the ' Email this user https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Special:EmailUser/RP87 ', but addressed to corresponding authors found in the meta-data or head of the article.
For instance: ~To {{U|the user mailing the request}} Please, consider personalizing this e-mail template ~ "Dear 'Auto- Author-Name', Searching the references on 'Auto- Matter-Topic', indicated on the article 'Auto- Wikimedian-article', I found your paper entitled 'Auto- Article-Title'. I was impeded in this work by paywalls. Would you please publish this work in an open archive [Auto- major archives links]. Their are by the way alternative way to publish scientific work, direct open access, without author publishing charges : 'Link toward wikiversities scientific journals'.
Nice formulations about knowledge creation and dissemination etc. Sincerely yours, {{U|Auto- the user}} and the wikimedian community."
The contact links would be placed in the reference part or in a template at the head of the article : "This article *does not cite https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources enough Open Access sources https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability* Contact corresponding authors, in order to free this knowledge and related references. Click and send, from your wikimedian account, requests to theses authors to free their work 'Auto-e-mail-LINK'.
- article 1
- article 2
... If you are working on this topic, please join an open-peer-reviewing group [[open-peer-reviewing group portal]]' If you are from any part of civil society interested in the topic and searching for advanced knowledge on the topic, please join a [[vulgarization group]] for not-understood content, or a [[bibliographic intelligence and problematization group]] for 'non-researched yet' material. "
I'll watch for the visio-chat opportunity (some mumble equivalent at least if we are many). But the current period is quite loaded, with social, political and work context. So I may just contribute on any meta / wiki page you point toward. I push this mail toward some friends, former colleagues and contacts, as I'm sure some will see opportunities.
Best Regards
@+ Rudy {{U|RP87}}
On 29 August 2017 at 19:57, Joseph McArthur joe@sparcopen.org wrote:
Thanks for the quick reply, tried the same below.
On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 at 17:31 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Joseph McArthur, 29/08/2017 18:52:
Federico, this sounds amazing!
Thanks.
I want to offer the help of the Open Access Button request system
here: [...]
I'd love to work with you to figure out how we can help here, as it would be a shame for us to duplicate this!
Sure. In fact I reused some of your learnings, so you already contributed to my campaign.
https://github.com/OAButton/discussion/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=commenter...
Oh grand, I'll take a peak at those issues in the coming days and see if there is anything else useful I could add.
From https://github.com/OAButton/discussion/issues/587 I got the impression you wouldn't be able to sustain my requests for 224k DOIs at once, so I figured I'd try to add some additional capacity with WMIT resources at least for this initial test of mine. In the short term (September), if some of you have spare cycles, I could use your help in drafting the next emails and replying to support requests.
From issues it sounded like you were doing a few thousand emails to authors, which we could manage with a bit of co-ordination (technically, you could do it via the API without consulting but it would be quite innefficient for us) e.g let us know what you want requested in a spreadsheet, and then we'll get it up the same day and have messages sent. If you simply wanted to run 224k DOI's to see if they were available, that's a pretty light lift, so I wouldn't worry about that (just hit the API when you fancy).
We might have some spare time, shall we try and have a 30 minute chat by phone (or similar) and try to hammer something out? If that makes sense see if there a time that works for you here: doodle.com/joemcarthur.
In the long term, if we want something stable as suggested by Dario (or indeed John < https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/accelerating-open-access-adoption-john-dove
),
I agree we should go through some permanent help desk like the OAbutton, ideally with some resources/support from SPARC, JISC, OpenAIRE or whoever is interested in directly supporting green OA beyond specific borders.
All the more reason to chat :)
Nemo
P.s: I've removed from Cc some addresses which I believe are already in the list, to avoid making these messages always go into moderation.
Thanks!
Joseph McArthur Assistant Director: Right to Research Coalition http://righttoresearch.org/ Co-Lead/Founder: Open Access Button http://openaccessbutton.org/ Twitter: @Mcarthur_Joe https://twitter.com/Mcarthur_Joe Skype: joseph_mcarthur
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
-- Jason Priem, co-founder Impactstory http://impactstory.org/: Share the full story of your research impact follow at @jasonpriem http://twitter.com/jasonpriem and @impactstory http://twitter.com/impactstory _______________________________________________ OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
Would folks be interested in having a video/voice chat to collaborate and discuss how this initiative could scale? It seems like multiple parties are very interested, including me!
I'd be happy to send around a Doodle to find time for a meeting.
Jake
On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 9:31 AM Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Joseph McArthur, 29/08/2017 18:52:
Federico, this sounds amazing!
Thanks.
I want to offer the help of the Open Access Button request system here:
[...]
I'd love to work with you to figure out how we can help here, as it would be a shame for us to duplicate this!
Sure. In fact I reused some of your learnings, so you already contributed to my campaign.
https://github.com/OAButton/discussion/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=commenter...
From https://github.com/OAButton/discussion/issues/587 I got the impression you wouldn't be able to sustain my requests for 224k DOIs at once, so I figured I'd try to add some additional capacity with WMIT resources at least for this initial test of mine. In the short term (September), if some of you have spare cycles, I could use your help in drafting the next emails and replying to support requests.
In the long term, if we want something stable as suggested by Dario (or indeed John < https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/accelerating-open-access-adoption-john-dove
),
I agree we should go through some permanent help desk like the OAbutton, ideally with some resources/support from SPARC, JISC, OpenAIRE or whoever is interested in directly supporting green OA beyond specific borders.
Nemo
P.s: I've removed from Cc some addresses which I believe are already in the list, to avoid making these messages always go into moderation.
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
On 30 August 2017 at 19:51, Jake Orlowitz jorlowitz@gmail.com wrote:
Would folks be interested in having a video/voice chat to collaborate and discuss how this initiative could scale?
Given that this uses ORCID iDs (and I'm Wikimedian in Residence at ORCID); I would.
On 30/08/2017 21:17, Andy Mabbett wrote:
On 30 August 2017 at 19:51, Jake Orlowitz jorlowitz@gmail.com wrote:
Would folks be interested in having a video/voice chat to collaborate and discuss how this initiative could scale?
Given that this uses ORCID iDs (and I'm Wikimedian in Residence at ORCID); I would.
I'm in too! :)
Antonin
I'd be very interested. I've not been jumping in on this thread at the moment because I'm "flat-out" on my project for MDPI. But I would find time to join in on a discussion.
-john
_________________ John G. Dove, personal e-mail JohnGDove@gmail.com
Check out my latest post on LinkedIn: Not all Open Content is fully Discoverable https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/all-open-content-discoverable-john-dove?
On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Jake Orlowitz jorlowitz@gmail.com wrote:
Would folks be interested in having a video/voice chat to collaborate and discuss how this initiative could scale? It seems like multiple parties are very interested, including me!
I'd be happy to send around a Doodle to find time for a meeting.
Jake
On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 9:31 AM Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Joseph McArthur, 29/08/2017 18:52:
Federico, this sounds amazing!
Thanks.
I want to offer the help of the Open Access Button request system here:
[...]
I'd love to work with you to figure out how we can help here, as it would be a shame for us to duplicate this!
Sure. In fact I reused some of your learnings, so you already contributed to my campaign. https://github.com/OAButton/discussion/issues?utf8=%E2%9C% 93&q=commenter%3Anemobis%20
From https://github.com/OAButton/discussion/issues/587 I got the impression you wouldn't be able to sustain my requests for 224k DOIs at once, so I figured I'd try to add some additional capacity with WMIT resources at least for this initial test of mine. In the short term (September), if some of you have spare cycles, I could use your help in drafting the next emails and replying to support requests.
In the long term, if we want something stable as suggested by Dario (or indeed John https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/accelerating-open- access-adoption-john-dove), I agree we should go through some permanent help desk like the OAbutton, ideally with some resources/support from SPARC, JISC, OpenAIRE or whoever is interested in directly supporting green OA beyond specific borders.
Nemo
P.s: I've removed from Cc some addresses which I believe are already in the list, to avoid making these messages always go into moderation.
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
John G. Dove, 28/08/2017 19:14:
This is great news! You are showing the way. I look forward to manymore such initiatives, not just in Wikipedia, but anywhere people look for access to knowledge.
Thank you for your kind words. It's nice to see the authors' enthusiastic response, but the warmth from OA friends including https://twitter.com/petersuber/status/898941119924502528 has given me more energy to continue.
Jake, the text is no secret. Originally I intended to draft it together with everyone else here on Meta, but then only WMIT/AISA OA people offered to help so we're coordinating things on the WMIT wiki. If somebody wants to help more (e.g. by providing at least 10 hours of work in our "help desk" for authors), I can get them added to the wiki and/or OTRS. By the end of September I plan to publish some ideas on how to proceed in a more coordinated fashion.
Mind you, I contact only people whose work is depositable according to SHERPA/RoMEO per Dissemin. Hundreds of authors have replied and I've told many to contact their journal or publisher if they're still unsure. I hope they get useful replies!
So, below you find one version of the text (I should really cut it a bit).
Nemo
----
From: Wikimedia Italia Open Access group Subject: Thanks for your research, from Wikipedia articles Body:
Dear Pinco Pallo,
thank you for your research and for advancing public knowledge about your field! We think you'll be interested in knowing that the English Wikipedia references your work https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=all&search=insource:[DOI] (doi:[DOI]).
As you know, Wikipedia strives for neutrality and verifiability: all are free to edit, insofar they summarise suitable published information and points of view, so that every reader can study the topic further and revise or expand the articles as needed. If we want the public to exercise critical thinking and grow knowledge, we need such scientific literature to be freely available, in Open Access. It's already possible to make all the scientific literature just one click away for everybody from Wikipedia articles, but we need the authors' help.
In fact, your publications could be archived in an open repository according to their journal's policies, but they were not yet (according to SHERPA/RoMEO and available metadata). The good news is that you can now make all your works freely available for everybody with few clicks, thanks to Zenodo (hosted by CERN): you only have to search Dissemin https://dissem.in/search/?status=couldbe&authors=Pinco+Pallo for your name and upload the PDF files for all the publications which can be archived, while the system takes care of filling the metadata.
The Dissemin page about each work contains more information and links on the policies which allow you to upload a copy. Usually you can share without restrictions at least the pre-print, that is the file as you submitted it for peer review; in most cases you can also share the post-print, that is the final file you submitted after peer review (before any editing by the publisher). Dissemin will ask you to login via ORCID: you may already have an ORCID account from your institution, but if not you can easily signup and create your unique author identity.
To integrate with free knowledge resources, "libre" Open Access helps: at Wikimedia we prefer the Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike (CC BY-SA) license, or the CC BY. For more information, we recommend the SPARC Open Access website and Peter Suber's how-to https://cyber.harvard.edu/hoap/How_to_make_your_own_work_open_access .
We hope you will use Dissemin https://dissem.in today to reach a wider audience.
Kind regards,
Federico Leva for Wikimedia Italia
P.s.: If you reply with comments or questions, we'll forward to a group of field experts who will help. This message is sent to your address as relevant feedback about the publication which provided it. Dissemin is run by the independent CAPSH association.
Federico, Many (most?) authors will have scholarly communication librarians and I.R. managers at their institution. Have you considered providing links in your e-mails to their institutional support for sharing their articles? I know that adds an additional layer of processing, but it does create a virtuous cycle.
-john dove
Sent from my iPad.
On Aug 29, 2017, at 2:10 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
John G. Dove, 28/08/2017 19:14:
This is great news! You are showing the way. I look forward to many more such initiatives, not just in Wikipedia, but anywhere people look for access to knowledge.
Thank you for your kind words. It's nice to see the authors' enthusiastic response, but the warmth from OA friends including https://twitter.com/petersuber/status/898941119924502528 has given me more energy to continue.
Jake, the text is no secret. Originally I intended to draft it together with everyone else here on Meta, but then only WMIT/AISA OA people offered to help so we're coordinating things on the WMIT wiki. If somebody wants to help more (e.g. by providing at least 10 hours of work in our "help desk" for authors), I can get them added to the wiki and/or OTRS. By the end of September I plan to publish some ideas on how to proceed in a more coordinated fashion.
Mind you, I contact only people whose work is depositable according to SHERPA/RoMEO per Dissemin. Hundreds of authors have replied and I've told many to contact their journal or publisher if they're still unsure. I hope they get useful replies!
So, below you find one version of the text (I should really cut it a bit).
Nemo
From: Wikimedia Italia Open Access group Subject: Thanks for your research, from Wikipedia articles Body:
Dear Pinco Pallo,
thank you for your research and for advancing public knowledge about your field! We think you'll be interested in knowing that the English Wikipedia references your work https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=all&search=insource:[DOI] (doi:[DOI]).
As you know, Wikipedia strives for neutrality and verifiability: all are free to edit, insofar they summarise suitable published information and points of view, so that every reader can study the topic further and revise or expand the articles as needed. If we want the public to exercise critical thinking and grow knowledge, we need such scientific literature to be freely available, in Open Access. It's already possible to make all the scientific literature just one click away for everybody from Wikipedia articles, but we need the authors' help.
In fact, your publications could be archived in an open repository according to their journal's policies, but they were not yet (according to SHERPA/RoMEO and available metadata). The good news is that you can now make all your works freely available for everybody with few clicks, thanks to Zenodo (hosted by CERN): you only have to search Dissemin https://dissem.in/search/?status=couldbe&authors=Pinco+Pallo for your name and upload the PDF files for all the publications which can be archived, while the system takes care of filling the metadata.
The Dissemin page about each work contains more information and links on the policies which allow you to upload a copy. Usually you can share without restrictions at least the pre-print, that is the file as you submitted it for peer review; in most cases you can also share the post-print, that is the final file you submitted after peer review (before any editing by the publisher). Dissemin will ask you to login via ORCID: you may already have an ORCID account from your institution, but if not you can easily signup and create your unique author identity.
To integrate with free knowledge resources, "libre" Open Access helps: at Wikimedia we prefer the Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike (CC BY-SA) license, or the CC BY. For more information, we recommend the SPARC Open Access website and Peter Suber's how-to https://cyber.harvard.edu/hoap/How_to_make_your_own_work_open_access .
We hope you will use Dissemin https://dissem.in today to reach a wider audience.
Kind regards,
Federico Leva for Wikimedia Italia
P.s.: If you reply with comments or questions, we'll forward to a group of field experts who will help. This message is sent to your address as relevant feedback about the publication which provided it. Dissemin is run by the independent CAPSH association.
John G. Dove, 10/09/2017 09:14:
Many (most?) authors will have scholarly communication librariansand I.R. managers at their institution. Have you considered providing links in your e-mails to their institutional support for sharing their articles? I know that adds an additional layer of processing, but it does create a virtuous cycle.
Very good point. I have this line in my latest version of the invitation:
----
If you have already deposited your works elsewhere, please contact your librarians or the administrators of your repository so that they can investigate why BASE/oaDOI fail to direct users to your archived version. They may also be able to help you archive your works if you are not able to do it yourself.
----
In a previous version I also linked or mentioned OpenDOAR, but that was too technical for most people. Do note that many researchers don't even know that a librarian (or other roles) exists for such things in their organisation, and it's sometimes hard even for me to find out who's the best contact (particularly in certain government agencies).
Federico
Maybe there's a way to use Wikipedia's model of volunteerism-for-the-benefit-of-sharing-the-sum-of-all-knowledge, to recruit local helpers (including librarians) to the tasks of scholar-deposits on a particular campus. ???
-john
On Sep 21, 2017, at 4:48 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
John G. Dove, 10/09/2017 09:14:
Many (most?) authors will have scholarly communication librariansand I.R. managers at their institution. Have you considered providing links in your e-mails to their institutional support for sharing their articles? I know that adds an additional layer of processing, but it does create a virtuous cycle.
Very good point. I have this line in my latest version of the invitation:
If you have already deposited your works elsewhere, please contact your librarians or the administrators of your repository so that they can investigate why BASE/oaDOI fail to direct users to your archived version. They may also be able to help you archive your works if you are not able to do it yourself.
In a previous version I also linked or mentioned OpenDOAR, but that was too technical for most people. Do note that many researchers don't even know that a librarian (or other roles) exists for such things in their organisation, and it's sometimes hard even for me to find out who's the best contact (particularly in certain government agencies).
Federico
John Dove, 21/09/2017 19:52:
Maybe there's a way to use Wikipedia's model of volunteerism-for-the-benefit-of-sharing-the-sum-of-all-knowledge, to recruit local helpers (including librarians) to the tasks of scholar-deposits on a particular campus. ???
Yes, that's definitely something I'm exploring. I'm going to conduct some pilots with a couple universities to see how far we can go and what tools work.
Federico
Hi, As it was part of my thesis work, let me shed some light with a few field experiences.
The push toward OA in building here is very tied to the (positive) sensibility of documentalists and some key researchers helping the process and granting 'good notoriety'.
In the process of making researchers (first hand experience): * In Lille1 (a north of France university "hard science oriented") the doctoral cursus orientation is toward "valorization trough intellectual property", a module also exist called "valorisation of knowledge with wikipedia" though. But there was less participants (I did both). Furthermore, it's not related to scientific journal publications. * In Lille 3 (a neighbor university of Lille 1 but more social science oriented), in the doctoral school - and lab - my sister was in, they introduce (with the main documentalist) HAL open archive, the way to deposit, sherpa romeo's site http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/index.php to know what version researchers can deposit without fearing legal set-back (...) * A Chinese colleague that went back to china wrote me recently his career was delayed due to insufficient number of publications (in certain journals). Career building is rarely based on providing to civil society what they paid for. * A contrary example is Liège university (Belgium) ( http://orbi.ulg.ac.be/handle/2268/102031) "The Liège ORBi model: Mandatory policy without rights retention but linked to assessment processes".
At this point I have the embedded elitism in research will make an OA winning campaign, not based on universities power (those in power there hold position thanks to this knowledge retention system tied to their notoriety building), but to the political power related to universities and research. Towns, regions (any political circle) with access to a say in research funding. Massively explain the triple payment for citizens to access research and put political faces in relation to this with incoming electoral front in each country (that would be quite continuous). Non confidential work defense are also public (PhD, HDR), go with journalist and in public ask questions about the accessible work of the defendant, the jury... who's getting a diploma, a title or a position and not providing the research to the citizens giving their wages. Universities elections are also occasion to put this kind of 'strikes".
As this program requires wo-men-power : A few month ago (almost a year now) I started a few pages around an alternative publication model that I consider needed for sustainability assessment (a very data intensive field). https://fr.wikiversity.org/wiki/Projet:Journal_scientifique_libre/Communaut% C3%A9 I was granted the right to use the list of Elsevier's ban "The cost of knowledge" from the mathematician who started it ( https://fr.wikiversity.org/wiki/Projet:Journal_scientifique_libre/Communaut% C3%A9/the-cost-of-knowledge). By the time I got Tyler Neylon's GO for it, complications with my hierarchy reached its pic and I was no longer officially PhD student, with no HDR (prof) to go on. I'll forward to the list Tyler's answer so you can reach him and see how you can crowd-source your action.
BR Rudy
On 21 September 2017 at 19:46, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
John Dove, 21/09/2017 19:52:
Maybe there's a way to use Wikipedia's model of volunteerism-for-the-benefit-of-sharing-the-sum-of-all-knowledge, to recruit local helpers (including librarians) to the tasks of scholar-deposits on a particular campus. ???
Yes, that's definitely something I'm exploring. I'm going to conduct some pilots with a couple universities to see how far we can go and what tools work.
Federico
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
On 26 August 2017 at 09:49, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Dissemin
I made:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q38197780
for Dissemin, and added a "third party formatter URL" to the property for ORCID iDs:
https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Property:P496&diff=549359591&...
Are there any other identifiers which can be passed to Dissemin in that way?
On 31/08/2017 15:31, Andy Mabbett wrote:
On 26 August 2017 at 09:49, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote: I made:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q38197780for Dissemin, and added a "third party formatter URL" to the property for ORCID iDs:
https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Property:P496&diff=549359591&...
Are there any other identifiers which can be passed to Dissemin in that way?
That is very kind of you!
Dissemin also accepts DOIs: https://dissem.in/<doi>
Thanks a lot! Antonin
On 31 August 2017 at 15:35, Antonin Delpeuch (lists) lists@antonin.delpeuch.eu wrote:
On 31/08/2017 15:31, Andy Mabbett wrote:
That is very kind of you!
Thank you.
Dissemin also accepts DOIs: https://dissem.in/<doi>
Done:
https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Property:P356&diff=549640440&...
Happy to join a call if I can make it work timing-wise.
Rudy – I'm pretty much in agreement with what you said, it strikes me that WMF and large parts of the Wikimedia movement have underestimated so far the opportunity we have to become an engine of change in this space: there's no other organization or movement at this scale, with an active community, independence from particular interests, and with such an impact on what the world gets to read when it comes to the scholarly literature.
Wikimedia being at the helm of the Initiative for Open Citations shows how much we can leverage our "brand" and push for bipartisan changes that benefit society at large, not just academia.
Very excited to explore new ideas with the rest of this group.
On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 7:45 AM, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On 31 August 2017 at 15:35, Antonin Delpeuch (lists) lists@antonin.delpeuch.eu wrote:
On 31/08/2017 15:31, Andy Mabbett wrote:
That is very kind of you!
Thank you.
Dissemin also accepts DOIs: https://dissem.in/<doi>
Done:
https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Property:P356& diff=549640440&oldid=534211056
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
openaccess@lists.wikimedia.org