Hi all,
We are doing a guest blog post on open access for EFF next week. I would very much appreciate your thoughts on it and in particular the section that discusses WikiProject Open Access.
Best, Yana
Free as in Open Access and Wikipedia
Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia sites are closely connected to open access ideals of making scholarship freely available and reusable. Consistent with these ideals, the Wikimedia sites make information available to internet users around the world free of charge in hundreds of languages. Wikimedia content can also be reused under its free licenses. The content is enriched by citations to open access scholarship, and the Wikimedia sites play a unique role in making academic learning easily available to the world. As the next generation of scholars embraces open access principles to become a true Generation Open http://youtu.be/8hxKH3-42U0, we will move closer to "a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Vision."
To write and edit Wikipedia, contributors need to access high quality independent sources. Unfortunately, paywalls and copyright restrictions often prevent the use of academic journals to write Wikipedia articles and enrich them with citations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources Citations are particularly important to allow readers to verify Wikipedia articles and learn more about the topic from the underlying sources. Given the importance of open access to Wikipedia, the Wikimedia community of contributors has set up https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/01/15/wikimedia-and-open-access/ a WikiProject Open Access https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Open_Access to improve open access-related articles on Wikipedia and create an Open Access Policy https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Committee/Areas_of_interest/Open-access_policy for research projects with the support https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Committee/Areas_of_interest/Significant_support of the Wikimedia Foundation.
Great potential lies in the reciprocal relationship between the open access scholarship that enriches Wikipedia and Wikipedia’s promotion of primary sources. As a secondary source, Wikipedia does not publish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research ideas or facts that are not supported by reliable and published sources https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability#Sources. Wikipedia has tremendous power as a platform for relaying the outcomes of academic study http://columbiaspectator.com/opinion/2014/10/13/sharing-wikipedia by leading over 400 million monthly visitors http://reportcard.wmflabs.org/ to underlying scholarship cited in articles. Just as a traditional encyclopedia would, Wikipedia can make the underlying research easier to find. But unlike a traditional encyclopedia, it provides free access and free reuse to all. In that sense, Wikipedia is an ideal secondary source for open access research.
In light of this, we are thrilled to see Generation Open blooming. The Digital Commons Network http://network.bepress.com/ now boasts 1,109,355 works from 358 institutions. The Directory of Open Access Journals http://doaj.org/ further has over 10,035 journals from 135 countries. Esteemed law journals such as the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/, Berkeley Technology Law Journal http://btlj.org/, and Michigan Law Review http://www.michiganlawreview.org/ subscribe to the Open Access Law Program https://creativecommons.org/press-releases/entry/5464, which encourages them to archive their articles under open access principles.
Wikipedians are also contributing to the body of published open access scholarship. Earlier this month, four Wikipedians published an article on Dengue fever http://www.openmedicine.ca/article/viewFile/562/564 in Open Medicine http://www.openmedicine.ca/ (an open access and peer-reviewed journal) based on a Wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dengue_fever#External_linksthat was collaboratively edited http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dengue_fever&offset=&limit=500&action=history by 1,369 volunteers and bots. In addition to providing an open access scholarly article on this important topic, this publication validated that Wikipedia's editorial process can produce high quality content outside traditional academia.
Placing scholarship behind paywalls has the effect of relegating new advances in human knowledge to small academic communities. As more academics allow their work to be shared freely, online secondary sources like Wikipedia will play a large role disseminating the knowledge to more people in new regions https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Zero and on different devices http://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/04/17/carry-the-entirety-of-wikipedia-in-your-pocket-with-kiwix-for-android/.
Thanks, Yana. Comments inline.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 2:52 AM, Yana Welinder ywelinder@wikimedia.org wrote:
We are doing a guest blog post on open access for EFF next week.
Cool!
Free as in Open Access and Wikipedia
Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia sites are closely connected to open access ideals
"ideals" has a bit too much of a romantic connotation here. Something like "goals" would be better, I think.
of making scholarship freely available and reusable. Consistent with these ideals, the Wikimedia sites make information available to internet users around the world free of charge in hundreds of languages. Wikimedia content can also be reused under its free licenses. The content is enriched by citations to open access scholarship, and the Wikimedia sites play a unique role in making academic learning easily available to the world. As the next generation of scholars embraces open access principles to become a true Generation Open,
- the video linked there is licensed -NC-ND (as displayed shortly before the end, and contrary to the CC BY indicated in the metadata), so I would not link to it. - "true" in such contexts is also problematic, especially near non-open licenses and considering that open access refers only to access to (some of the) final outputs of research, rather than all outputs and the entire process.
we will move closer to "a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge."
To write and edit Wikipedia, contributors need to access high quality independent sources. Unfortunately, paywalls and copyright restrictions often prevent the use of academic journals to write Wikipedia articles and enrich them with citations. Citations are particularly important to allow readers to verify Wikipedia articles and learn more about the topic from the underlying sources. Given the importance of open access to Wikipedia, the Wikimedia community of contributors has set up
I don't think that "set up" should be linked, and the link currently in there is not a good fit anyway (it would fit better to the "importance of open access to Wikipedia" phrase above or the "closely connected" one from the introductory sentence, or the "reciprocal relationship" below).
a WikiProject Open Access to improve open access-related articles on Wikipedia
and to increase the reuse of open-access materials on Wikimedia platforms more generally, e.g. as per http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Open_Access_Media_Importer_Bot or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Open_Access/Signalling_O... . For an overview of activities, see the monthly reports at https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:This_Month_in_GLAM_Open_Access_... .
and create an Open Access Policy for research projects with the support of the Wikimedia Foundation.
Those were not the goals of the creation of the WikiProject, and the policy - which is still in draft stage, by the way - has not received support from the Foundation, and that link is to a page that is misleading in the context of this blog post, as it only clarifies the meaning of the term "significant support" for the purposes of that draft policy.
Great potential lies in the reciprocal relationship between the open access scholarship that enriches Wikipedia and Wikipedia’s promotion of primary sources. As a secondary source, Wikipedia does not publish ideas or facts that are not supported by reliable and published sources. Wikipedia has tremendous power as a platform for relaying the outcomes of academic study by leading over 400 million monthly visitors to underlying scholarship cited in articles. Just as a traditional encyclopedia would, Wikipedia can make the underlying research easier to find. But unlike a traditional encyclopedia, it provides free access and free reuse to all. In that sense, Wikipedia is an ideal secondary source for open access research.
Here, it would be appropriate to mention the Open Access Reader project: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Access_Reader .
In light of this, we are thrilled to see Generation Open blooming.
Not sure what you see blooming here.
The Digital Commons Network now boasts 1,109,355 works from 358 institutions.
Most of these are actually not openly licensed.
The Directory of Open Access Journals further has over 10,035 journals
"over 10,000" would be more appropriate.
from 135 countries.
Esteemed law journals such as the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, Berkeley Technology Law Journal, and Michigan Law Review subscribe to the Open Access Law Program, which encourages them to archive their articles under open access principles.
These journals archive their content under free-to-read principles, with limited options for reuse. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Open_Access_Initiative#Definition_of_... .
Wikipedians are also contributing to the body of published open access scholarship. Earlier this month, four Wikipedians published an article on Dengue fever in Open Medicine (an open access and peer-reviewed journal) based on a Wikipedia article that was collaboratively edited by 1,369
"over 1,300" may be better here
volunteers and bots. In addition to providing an open access scholarly article on this important topic, this publication validated that Wikipedia's editorial process can produce high quality content outside traditional academia.
Yes.
It is worth mentioning that many more Wikipedia articles already incorporate text from openly licensed scholarly articles (cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_articles_incorporating_text... ) and that a subset thereof (cf. http://topicpages.ploscompbiol.org/wiki/Category:PLoS_Computational_Biology_...) have actually been written by scholars for that purpose and published in a peer-reviewed journal.
Placing scholarship behind paywalls has the effect of relegating new advances in human knowledge to small academic communities. As more academics allow their work to be shared freely, online secondary sources like Wikipedia will play a large role disseminating the knowledge to more people in new regions and on different devices.
Yup. Perhaps worth mentioning that there was an entire Wikimania track devoted to Open Scholarship this year (with a focus on Open Access; https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Scholarship ) and that Wikimedia-related talks have been given at Open Access meetings (e.g. http://river-valley.zeeba.tv/transparency-in-measures-of-scientific-impact/ or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mietchen/Talks/COASP_2014 ).
Last but not least, Open Access Week has a Wikidata item ( https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2000002 ) and that Wikimedians have actively participated in it in the past (e.g. https://p2pu.org/en/groups/open-access-wikipedia-challenge/ ).
Looking forward to the next version of your post, Daniel
Thanks so much Daniel! Lots of interesting info that we'll incorporate in the next version. Quick question about this comment:
It is worth mentioning that many more Wikipedia articles already
incorporate text from openly licensed scholarly articles (cf.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_articles_incorporating_text... ) and that a subset thereof (cf.
http://topicpages.ploscompbiol.org/wiki/Category:PLoS_Computational_Biology_... ) have actually been written by scholars for that purpose and published in a peer-reviewed journal.
Were the articles in the subset written by scholars on Wikipedia and then published in a peer-review journal like the article on Dengue fever? Or did the scholars publish scholarship in a peer-reviewed open access journal in order for the papers to be incorporated in Wikipedia articles? I think it is the former, but just wanted to make sure that I got it right.
Best, Yana
Hi Yana,
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 7:22 AM, Yana Welinder ywelinder@wikimedia.org wrote:
Quick question about this comment:
It is worth mentioning that many more Wikipedia articles already incorporate text from openly licensed scholarly articles (cf.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_articles_incorporating_text... ) and that a subset thereof (cf.
http://topicpages.ploscompbiol.org/wiki/Category:PLoS_Computational_Biology_...) have actually been written by scholars for that purpose and published in a peer-reviewed journal.
Were the articles in the subset written by scholars on Wikipedia and then published in a peer-review journal like the article on Dengue fever? Or did the scholars publish scholarship in a peer-reviewed open access journal in order for the papers to be incorporated in Wikipedia articles? I think it is the former, but just wanted to make sure that I got it right.
It's more of the latter - the articles are actually drafted and reviewed on a separate MediaWiki instance (e.g. http://topicpages.ploscompbiol.org/wiki/Multi-state_modeling_of_biomolecules ), then published in the journal, then on Wikipedia. For more details on that, see http://wikiambassador.jiscinvolve.org/wp/2014/03/28/publishing-scholarly-wik... .
When precisely do you intend to post the piece? We're working on a video about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Open_Access/Signalling_O... that should be ready in the next few days and may be a good fit for your post.
d.
Got it. Thanks for clarifying!
We are posting this on Monday. But I think we should be able to add the video later if you don't have it ready by then.
Yana
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 9:23 PM, Daniel Mietchen < daniel.mietchen@googlemail.com> wrote:
Hi Yana,
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 7:22 AM, Yana Welinder ywelinder@wikimedia.org wrote:
Quick question about this comment:
It is worth mentioning that many more Wikipedia articles already incorporate text from openly licensed scholarly articles (cf.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_articles_incorporating_text...
) and that a subset thereof (cf.
http://topicpages.ploscompbiol.org/wiki/Category:PLoS_Computational_Biology_... )
have actually been written by scholars for that purpose and published in a peer-reviewed journal.
Were the articles in the subset written by scholars on Wikipedia and then published in a peer-review journal like the article on Dengue fever? Or
did
the scholars publish scholarship in a peer-reviewed open access journal
in
order for the papers to be incorporated in Wikipedia articles? I think
it is
the former, but just wanted to make sure that I got it right.
It's more of the latter - the articles are actually drafted and reviewed on a separate MediaWiki instance (e.g.
http://topicpages.ploscompbiol.org/wiki/Multi-state_modeling_of_biomolecules ), then published in the journal, then on Wikipedia. For more details on that, see
http://wikiambassador.jiscinvolve.org/wp/2014/03/28/publishing-scholarly-wik... .
When precisely do you intend to post the piece? We're working on a video about
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Open_Access/Signalling_O... that should be ready in the next few days and may be a good fit for your post.
d.
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
Hi all,
The post is now live on the EFF blog: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/10/free-open-access-and-wikipedia
We will cross-post it to the Wikimedia blog shortly and I think that Stanford CIS may cross-post it on theirs.
Thanks so much for all your input and help with this!
Best, Yana
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 9:23 PM, Daniel Mietchen < daniel.mietchen@googlemail.com> wrote:
Hi Yana,
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 7:22 AM, Yana Welinder ywelinder@wikimedia.org wrote:
Quick question about this comment:
It is worth mentioning that many more Wikipedia articles already incorporate text from openly licensed scholarly articles (cf.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_articles_incorporating_text...
) and that a subset thereof (cf.
http://topicpages.ploscompbiol.org/wiki/Category:PLoS_Computational_Biology_... )
have actually been written by scholars for that purpose and published in a peer-reviewed journal.
Were the articles in the subset written by scholars on Wikipedia and then published in a peer-review journal like the article on Dengue fever? Or
did
the scholars publish scholarship in a peer-reviewed open access journal
in
order for the papers to be incorporated in Wikipedia articles? I think
it is
the former, but just wanted to make sure that I got it right.
It's more of the latter - the articles are actually drafted and reviewed on a separate MediaWiki instance (e.g.
http://topicpages.ploscompbiol.org/wiki/Multi-state_modeling_of_biomolecules ), then published in the journal, then on Wikipedia. For more details on that, see
http://wikiambassador.jiscinvolve.org/wp/2014/03/28/publishing-scholarly-wik... .
When precisely do you intend to post the piece? We're working on a video about
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Open_Access/Signalling_O... that should be ready in the next few days and may be a good fit for your post.
d.
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
Thanks, Yana.
It turned out great! Sydney
Sydney Poore User:FloNight Wikipedian in Residence at Cochrane Collaboration
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Yana Welinder ywelinder@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi all,
The post is now live on the EFF blog: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/10/free-open-access-and-wikipedia
We will cross-post it to the Wikimedia blog shortly and I think that Stanford CIS may cross-post it on theirs.
Thanks so much for all your input and help with this!
Best, Yana
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 9:23 PM, Daniel Mietchen < daniel.mietchen@googlemail.com> wrote:
Hi Yana,
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 7:22 AM, Yana Welinder ywelinder@wikimedia.org wrote:
Quick question about this comment:
It is worth mentioning that many more Wikipedia articles already incorporate text from openly licensed scholarly articles (cf.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_articles_incorporating_text...
) and that a subset thereof (cf.
http://topicpages.ploscompbiol.org/wiki/Category:PLoS_Computational_Biology_... )
have actually been written by scholars for that purpose and published in a peer-reviewed journal.
Were the articles in the subset written by scholars on Wikipedia and
then
published in a peer-review journal like the article on Dengue fever? Or
did
the scholars publish scholarship in a peer-reviewed open access journal
in
order for the papers to be incorporated in Wikipedia articles? I think
it is
the former, but just wanted to make sure that I got it right.
It's more of the latter - the articles are actually drafted and reviewed on a separate MediaWiki instance (e.g.
http://topicpages.ploscompbiol.org/wiki/Multi-state_modeling_of_biomolecules ), then published in the journal, then on Wikipedia. For more details on that, see
http://wikiambassador.jiscinvolve.org/wp/2014/03/28/publishing-scholarly-wik... .
When precisely do you intend to post the piece? We're working on a video about
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Open_Access/Signalling_O... that should be ready in the next few days and may be a good fit for your post.
d.
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
-- Yana Welinder Legal Counsel Wikimedia Foundation 415.839.6885 ext. 6867 @yanatweets https://twitter.com/yanatweets
NOTICE: This message may be confidential or legally privileged. If you have received it by accident, please delete it and let us know about the mistake. As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical reasons I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer.
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
Hi Yana,
To build on Daniel's comment re inclusion of OA in Wikimania this year, Jimmy spoke on an OA panel Daniel and I participated in. Jimmy gave four great reasons as to why OA is important to Wikimedia. Unfortunately, I was chairing the session, and didn't write them all down, but perhaps Daniel remembers, as Jimmy framed his talk very well. I believe three of them were:
OA is important to Wikimedia as it provides access to research in: - developing countries - everyone with Jack Andraka as an example - the OA scholarly research which is made available which can be used to develop WMF projects
Cheers, Melissa Hagemann
-----Original Message----- From: openaccess-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:openaccess-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Mietchen Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 12:42 AM To: Open Access discussions Subject: Re: [OpenAccess] Blog post on Open Access
Thanks, Yana. Comments inline.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 2:52 AM, Yana Welinder ywelinder@wikimedia.org wrote:
We are doing a guest blog post on open access for EFF next week.
Cool!
Free as in Open Access and Wikipedia
Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia sites are closely connected to open access ideals
"ideals" has a bit too much of a romantic connotation here. Something like "goals" would be better, I think.
of making scholarship freely available and reusable. Consistent with these ideals, the Wikimedia sites make information available to internet users around the world free of charge in hundreds of languages. Wikimedia content can also be reused under its free licenses. The content is enriched by citations to open access scholarship, and the Wikimedia sites play a unique role in making academic learning easily available to the world. As the next generation of scholars embraces open access principles to become a true Generation Open,
- the video linked there is licensed -NC-ND (as displayed shortly before the end, and contrary to the CC BY indicated in the metadata), so I would not link to it. - "true" in such contexts is also problematic, especially near non-open licenses and considering that open access refers only to access to (some of the) final outputs of research, rather than all outputs and the entire process.
we will move closer to "a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge."
To write and edit Wikipedia, contributors need to access high quality independent sources. Unfortunately, paywalls and copyright restrictions often prevent the use of academic journals to write Wikipedia articles and enrich them with citations. Citations are particularly important to allow readers to verify Wikipedia articles and learn more about the topic from the underlying sources. Given the importance of open access to Wikipedia, the Wikimedia community of contributors has set up
I don't think that "set up" should be linked, and the link currently in there is not a good fit anyway (it would fit better to the "importance of open access to Wikipedia" phrase above or the "closely connected" one from the introductory sentence, or the "reciprocal relationship" below).
a WikiProject Open Access to improve open access-related articles on Wikipedia
and to increase the reuse of open-access materials on Wikimedia platforms more generally, e.g. as per http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Open_Access_Media_Importer_Bot or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Open_Access/Signalling_O... . For an overview of activities, see the monthly reports at https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:This_Month_in_GLAM_Open_Access_... .
and create an Open Access Policy for research projects with the support of the Wikimedia Foundation.
Those were not the goals of the creation of the WikiProject, and the policy - which is still in draft stage, by the way - has not received support from the Foundation, and that link is to a page that is misleading in the context of this blog post, as it only clarifies the meaning of the term "significant support" for the purposes of that draft policy.
Great potential lies in the reciprocal relationship between the open access scholarship that enriches Wikipedia and Wikipedia’s promotion of primary sources. As a secondary source, Wikipedia does not publish ideas or facts that are not supported by reliable and published sources. Wikipedia has tremendous power as a platform for relaying the outcomes of academic study by leading over 400 million monthly visitors to underlying scholarship cited in articles. Just as a traditional encyclopedia would, Wikipedia can make the underlying research easier to find. But unlike a traditional encyclopedia, it provides free access and free reuse to all. In that sense, Wikipedia is an ideal secondary source for open access research.
Here, it would be appropriate to mention the Open Access Reader project: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Access_Reader .
In light of this, we are thrilled to see Generation Open blooming.
Not sure what you see blooming here.
The Digital Commons Network now boasts 1,109,355 works from 358 institutions.
Most of these are actually not openly licensed.
The Directory of Open Access Journals further has over 10,035 journals
"over 10,000" would be more appropriate.
from 135 countries.
Esteemed law journals such as the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, Berkeley Technology Law Journal, and Michigan Law Review subscribe to the Open Access Law Program, which encourages them to archive their articles under open access principles.
These journals archive their content under free-to-read principles, with limited options for reuse. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Open_Access_Initiative#Definition_of_... .
Wikipedians are also contributing to the body of published open access scholarship. Earlier this month, four Wikipedians published an article on Dengue fever in Open Medicine (an open access and peer-reviewed journal) based on a Wikipedia article that was collaboratively edited by 1,369
"over 1,300" may be better here
volunteers and bots. In addition to providing an open access scholarly article on this important topic, this publication validated that Wikipedia's editorial process can produce high quality content outside traditional academia.
Yes.
It is worth mentioning that many more Wikipedia articles already incorporate text from openly licensed scholarly articles (cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_articles_incorporating_text... ) and that a subset thereof (cf. http://topicpages.ploscompbiol.org/wiki/Category:PLoS_Computational_Biology_...) have actually been written by scholars for that purpose and published in a peer-reviewed journal.
Placing scholarship behind paywalls has the effect of relegating new advances in human knowledge to small academic communities. As more academics allow their work to be shared freely, online secondary sources like Wikipedia will play a large role disseminating the knowledge to more people in new regions and on different devices.
Yup. Perhaps worth mentioning that there was an entire Wikimania track devoted to Open Scholarship this year (with a focus on Open Access; https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Scholarship ) and that Wikimedia-related talks have been given at Open Access meetings (e.g. http://river-valley.zeeba.tv/transparency-in-measures-of-scientific-impact/ or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mietchen/Talks/COASP_2014 ).
Last but not least, Open Access Week has a Wikidata item ( https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2000002 ) and that Wikimedians have actively participated in it in the past (e.g. https://p2pu.org/en/groups/open-access-wikipedia-challenge/ ).
Looking forward to the next version of your post, Daniel
_______________________________________________ OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
Thanks all! I'm sorry that I missed the OA panel at Wikimania. Does anyone know if there is a video of the panel?
Thanks, Yana
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:56 AM, Melissa Hagemann < melissa.hagemann@opensocietyfoundations.org> wrote:
Hi Yana,
To build on Daniel's comment re inclusion of OA in Wikimania this year, Jimmy spoke on an OA panel Daniel and I participated in. Jimmy gave four great reasons as to why OA is important to Wikimedia. Unfortunately, I was chairing the session, and didn't write them all down, but perhaps Daniel remembers, as Jimmy framed his talk very well. I believe three of them were:
OA is important to Wikimedia as it provides access to research in:
- developing countries
- everyone with Jack Andraka as an example
- the OA scholarly research which is made available which can be used to
develop WMF projects
Cheers, Melissa Hagemann
-----Original Message----- From: openaccess-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto: openaccess-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Mietchen Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 12:42 AM To: Open Access discussions Subject: Re: [OpenAccess] Blog post on Open Access
Thanks, Yana. Comments inline.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 2:52 AM, Yana Welinder ywelinder@wikimedia.org wrote:
We are doing a guest blog post on open access for EFF next week.
Cool!
Free as in Open Access and Wikipedia
Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia sites are closely connected to open access ideals
"ideals" has a bit too much of a romantic connotation here. Something like "goals" would be better, I think.
of making scholarship freely available and reusable. Consistent with these ideals, the Wikimedia sites make information available to internet users around the world free of charge in hundreds of languages. Wikimedia content can also be reused under its free licenses. The content is enriched by citations to open access scholarship, and the Wikimedia sites play a unique role in making academic learning easily available to the world. As the next generation of scholars embraces open access principles to become a true Generation Open,
- the video linked there is licensed -NC-ND (as displayed shortly before
the end, and contrary to the CC BY indicated in the metadata), so I would not link to it.
- "true" in such contexts is also problematic, especially near non-open
licenses and considering that open access refers only to access to (some of the) final outputs of research, rather than all outputs and the entire process.
we will move closer to "a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge."
To write and edit Wikipedia, contributors need to access high quality independent sources. Unfortunately, paywalls and copyright restrictions often prevent the use of academic journals to write Wikipedia articles and enrich them with citations. Citations are particularly important to allow readers to verify Wikipedia articles and learn more about the topic from the underlying sources. Given the importance of open access to Wikipedia, the Wikimedia community of contributors has set up
I don't think that "set up" should be linked, and the link currently in there is not a good fit anyway (it would fit better to the "importance of open access to Wikipedia" phrase above or the "closely connected" one from the introductory sentence, or the "reciprocal relationship" below).
a WikiProject Open Access to improve open access-related articles on Wikipedia
and to increase the reuse of open-access materials on Wikimedia platforms more generally, e.g. as per http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Open_Access_Media_Importer_Bot or
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Open_Access/Signalling_O... . For an overview of activities, see the monthly reports at https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:This_Month_in_GLAM_Open_Access_... .
and create an Open Access Policy for research projects with the support of the Wikimedia
Foundation. Those were not the goals of the creation of the WikiProject, and the policy - which is still in draft stage, by the way - has not received support from the Foundation, and that link is to a page that is misleading in the context of this blog post, as it only clarifies the meaning of the term "significant support" for the purposes of that draft policy.
Great potential lies in the reciprocal relationship between the open access scholarship that enriches Wikipedia and Wikipedia’s promotion of primary sources. As a secondary source, Wikipedia does not publish ideas or facts that are not supported by reliable and published sources. Wikipedia has tremendous power as a platform for relaying the outcomes of academic study by leading over 400 million monthly visitors to underlying scholarship cited in articles. Just as a traditional encyclopedia would, Wikipedia can make the underlying research easier to find. But unlike a traditional encyclopedia, it provides free access and free reuse to all. In that sense, Wikipedia is
an ideal secondary source for open access research. Here, it would be appropriate to mention the Open Access Reader project: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Access_Reader .
In light of this, we are thrilled to see Generation Open blooming.
Not sure what you see blooming here.
The Digital Commons Network now boasts 1,109,355 works from 358 institutions.
Most of these are actually not openly licensed.
The Directory of Open Access Journals further has over 10,035 journals
"over 10,000" would be more appropriate.
from 135 countries.
Esteemed law journals such as the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, Berkeley Technology Law Journal, and Michigan Law Review subscribe to the Open Access Law Program, which encourages them to archive their articles under open access principles.
These journals archive their content under free-to-read principles, with limited options for reuse. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Open_Access_Initiative#Definition_of_... .
Wikipedians are also contributing to the body of published open access scholarship. Earlier this month, four Wikipedians published an article on Dengue fever in Open Medicine (an open access and peer-reviewed journal) based on a Wikipedia article that was collaboratively edited by 1,369
"over 1,300" may be better here
volunteers and bots. In addition to providing an open access scholarly article on this important topic, this publication validated that Wikipedia's editorial process can produce high quality content outside traditional academia.
Yes.
It is worth mentioning that many more Wikipedia articles already incorporate text from openly licensed scholarly articles (cf.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_articles_incorporating_text... ) and that a subset thereof (cf.
http://topicpages.ploscompbiol.org/wiki/Category:PLoS_Computational_Biology_... ) have actually been written by scholars for that purpose and published in a peer-reviewed journal.
Placing scholarship behind paywalls has the effect of relegating new advances in human knowledge to small academic communities. As more academics allow their work to be shared freely, online secondary sources like Wikipedia will play a large role disseminating the knowledge to more people in new regions and on different devices.
Yup. Perhaps worth mentioning that there was an entire Wikimania track devoted to Open Scholarship this year (with a focus on Open Access; https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Scholarship ) and that Wikimedia-related talks have been given at Open Access meetings (e.g. http://river-valley.zeeba.tv/transparency-in-measures-of-scientific-impact/ or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mietchen/Talks/COASP_2014 ).
Last but not least, Open Access Week has a Wikidata item ( https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2000002 ) and that Wikimedians have actively participated in it in the past (e.g. https://p2pu.org/en/groups/open-access-wikipedia-challenge/ ).
Looking forward to the next version of your post, Daniel
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess _______________________________________________ OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
Hi,
I don’t think it was recorded as it wasn’t in the main auditorium.
Hopefully Daniel remembers the fourth reason.
Thanks, David
On 16 Oct 2014, at 19:26, Yana Welinder ywelinder@wikimedia.org wrote:
Thanks all! I'm sorry that I missed the OA panel at Wikimania. Does anyone know if there is a video of the panel?
Thanks, Yana
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:56 AM, Melissa Hagemann melissa.hagemann@opensocietyfoundations.org wrote: Hi Yana,
To build on Daniel's comment re inclusion of OA in Wikimania this year, Jimmy spoke on an OA panel Daniel and I participated in. Jimmy gave four great reasons as to why OA is important to Wikimedia. Unfortunately, I was chairing the session, and didn't write them all down, but perhaps Daniel remembers, as Jimmy framed his talk very well. I believe three of them were:
OA is important to Wikimedia as it provides access to research in:
- developing countries
- everyone with Jack Andraka as an example
- the OA scholarly research which is made available which can be used to develop WMF projects
Cheers, Melissa Hagemann
-----Original Message----- From: openaccess-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:openaccess-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Mietchen Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 12:42 AM To: Open Access discussions Subject: Re: [OpenAccess] Blog post on Open Access
Thanks, Yana. Comments inline.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 2:52 AM, Yana Welinder ywelinder@wikimedia.org wrote:
We are doing a guest blog post on open access for EFF next week.
Cool!
Free as in Open Access and Wikipedia
Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia sites are closely connected to open access ideals
"ideals" has a bit too much of a romantic connotation here. Something like "goals" would be better, I think.
of making scholarship freely available and reusable. Consistent with these ideals, the Wikimedia sites make information available to internet users around the world free of charge in hundreds of languages. Wikimedia content can also be reused under its free licenses. The content is enriched by citations to open access scholarship, and the Wikimedia sites play a unique role in making academic learning easily available to the world. As the next generation of scholars embraces open access principles to become a true Generation Open,
- the video linked there is licensed -NC-ND (as displayed shortly before the end, and contrary to the CC BY indicated in the metadata), so I would not link to it.
- "true" in such contexts is also problematic, especially near non-open licenses and considering that open access refers only to access to (some of the) final outputs of research, rather than all outputs and the entire process.
we will move closer to "a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge."
To write and edit Wikipedia, contributors need to access high quality independent sources. Unfortunately, paywalls and copyright restrictions often prevent the use of academic journals to write Wikipedia articles and enrich them with citations. Citations are particularly important to allow readers to verify Wikipedia articles and learn more about the topic from the underlying sources. Given the importance of open access to Wikipedia, the Wikimedia community of contributors has set up
I don't think that "set up" should be linked, and the link currently in there is not a good fit anyway (it would fit better to the "importance of open access to Wikipedia" phrase above or the "closely connected" one from the introductory sentence, or the "reciprocal relationship" below).
a WikiProject Open Access to improve open access-related articles on Wikipedia
and to increase the reuse of open-access materials on Wikimedia platforms more generally, e.g. as per http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Open_Access_Media_Importer_Bot or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Open_Access/Signalling_O... . For an overview of activities, see the monthly reports at https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:This_Month_in_GLAM_Open_Access_... .
and create an Open Access Policy for research projects with the support of the Wikimedia Foundation.
Those were not the goals of the creation of the WikiProject, and the policy - which is still in draft stage, by the way - has not received support from the Foundation, and that link is to a page that is misleading in the context of this blog post, as it only clarifies the meaning of the term "significant support" for the purposes of that draft policy.
Great potential lies in the reciprocal relationship between the open access scholarship that enriches Wikipedia and Wikipedia’s promotion of primary sources. As a secondary source, Wikipedia does not publish ideas or facts that are not supported by reliable and published sources. Wikipedia has tremendous power as a platform for relaying the outcomes of academic study by leading over 400 million monthly visitors to underlying scholarship cited in articles. Just as a traditional encyclopedia would, Wikipedia can make the underlying research easier to find. But unlike a traditional encyclopedia, it provides free access and free reuse to all. In that sense, Wikipedia is an ideal secondary source for open access research.
Here, it would be appropriate to mention the Open Access Reader project: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Access_Reader .
In light of this, we are thrilled to see Generation Open blooming.
Not sure what you see blooming here.
The Digital Commons Network now boasts 1,109,355 works from 358 institutions.
Most of these are actually not openly licensed.
The Directory of Open Access Journals further has over 10,035 journals
"over 10,000" would be more appropriate.
from 135 countries.
Esteemed law journals such as the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, Berkeley Technology Law Journal, and Michigan Law Review subscribe to the Open Access Law Program, which encourages them to archive their articles under open access principles.
These journals archive their content under free-to-read principles, with limited options for reuse. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Open_Access_Initiative#Definition_of_... .
Wikipedians are also contributing to the body of published open access scholarship. Earlier this month, four Wikipedians published an article on Dengue fever in Open Medicine (an open access and peer-reviewed journal) based on a Wikipedia article that was collaboratively edited by 1,369
"over 1,300" may be better here
volunteers and bots. In addition to providing an open access scholarly article on this important topic, this publication validated that Wikipedia's editorial process can produce high quality content outside traditional academia.
Yes.
It is worth mentioning that many more Wikipedia articles already incorporate text from openly licensed scholarly articles (cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_articles_incorporating_text... ) and that a subset thereof (cf. http://topicpages.ploscompbiol.org/wiki/Category:PLoS_Computational_Biology_...) have actually been written by scholars for that purpose and published in a peer-reviewed journal.
Placing scholarship behind paywalls has the effect of relegating new advances in human knowledge to small academic communities. As more academics allow their work to be shared freely, online secondary sources like Wikipedia will play a large role disseminating the knowledge to more people in new regions and on different devices.
Yup. Perhaps worth mentioning that there was an entire Wikimania track devoted to Open Scholarship this year (with a focus on Open Access; https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Scholarship ) and that Wikimedia-related talks have been given at Open Access meetings (e.g. http://river-valley.zeeba.tv/transparency-in-measures-of-scientific-impact/ or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mietchen/Talks/COASP_2014 ).
Last but not least, Open Access Week has a Wikidata item ( https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2000002 ) and that Wikimedians have actively participated in it in the past (e.g. https://p2pu.org/en/groups/open-access-wikipedia-challenge/ ).
Looking forward to the next version of your post, Daniel
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess _______________________________________________ OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
David Carroll Open Access Button Project Lead david@openaccessbutton.org @davidecarroll ---- I prefer to use encrypted email. My public key fingerprint is 4FFB C540 1284 57FC 5971 2B1A 57DC 89F4 C3F0 BEB3.
You can learn how to use GnuPG encryption here: https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/
Everything was recorded. Here it is, starting at 37:00: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYzwlf_qKmc
A.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 11:34 AM, David Carroll carroll.davide@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I don’t think it was recorded as it wasn’t in the main auditorium.
Hopefully Daniel remembers the fourth reason.
Thanks, David
On 16 Oct 2014, at 19:26, Yana Welinder ywelinder@wikimedia.org wrote:
Thanks all! I'm sorry that I missed the OA panel at Wikimania. Does anyone know if there is a video of the panel?
Thanks, Yana
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:56 AM, Melissa Hagemann < melissa.hagemann@opensocietyfoundations.org> wrote:
Hi Yana,
To build on Daniel's comment re inclusion of OA in Wikimania this year, Jimmy spoke on an OA panel Daniel and I participated in. Jimmy gave four great reasons as to why OA is important to Wikimedia. Unfortunately, I was chairing the session, and didn't write them all down, but perhaps Daniel remembers, as Jimmy framed his talk very well. I believe three of them were:
OA is important to Wikimedia as it provides access to research in:
- developing countries
- everyone with Jack Andraka as an example
- the OA scholarly research which is made available which can be used to
develop WMF projects
Cheers, Melissa Hagemann
-----Original Message----- From: openaccess-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto: openaccess-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Mietchen Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 12:42 AM To: Open Access discussions Subject: Re: [OpenAccess] Blog post on Open Access
Thanks, Yana. Comments inline.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 2:52 AM, Yana Welinder ywelinder@wikimedia.org wrote:
We are doing a guest blog post on open access for EFF next week.
Cool!
Free as in Open Access and Wikipedia
Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia sites are closely connected to open access ideals
"ideals" has a bit too much of a romantic connotation here. Something like "goals" would be better, I think.
of making scholarship freely available and reusable. Consistent with these ideals, the Wikimedia sites make information available to internet users around the world free of charge in hundreds of languages. Wikimedia content can also be reused under its free licenses. The content is enriched by citations to open access scholarship, and the Wikimedia sites play a unique role in making academic learning easily available to the world. As the next generation of scholars embraces open access principles to become a true Generation Open,
- the video linked there is licensed -NC-ND (as displayed shortly before
the end, and contrary to the CC BY indicated in the metadata), so I would not link to it.
- "true" in such contexts is also problematic, especially near non-open
licenses and considering that open access refers only to access to (some of the) final outputs of research, rather than all outputs and the entire process.
we will move closer to "a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge."
To write and edit Wikipedia, contributors need to access high quality independent sources. Unfortunately, paywalls and copyright restrictions often prevent the use of academic journals to write Wikipedia articles and enrich them with citations. Citations are particularly important to allow readers to verify Wikipedia articles and learn more about the topic from the underlying sources. Given the importance of open access to Wikipedia, the Wikimedia community of contributors has set up
I don't think that "set up" should be linked, and the link currently in there is not a good fit anyway (it would fit better to the "importance of open access to Wikipedia" phrase above or the "closely connected" one from the introductory sentence, or the "reciprocal relationship" below).
a WikiProject Open Access to improve open access-related articles on Wikipedia
and to increase the reuse of open-access materials on Wikimedia platforms more generally, e.g. as per http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Open_Access_Media_Importer_Bot or
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Open_Access/Signalling_O... . For an overview of activities, see the monthly reports at https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:This_Month_in_GLAM_Open_Access_... .
and create an Open Access Policy for research projects with the support of the Wikimedia
Foundation. Those were not the goals of the creation of the WikiProject, and the policy - which is still in draft stage, by the way - has not received support from the Foundation, and that link is to a page that is misleading in the context of this blog post, as it only clarifies the meaning of the term "significant support" for the purposes of that draft policy.
Great potential lies in the reciprocal relationship between the open access scholarship that enriches Wikipedia and Wikipedia’s promotion of primary sources. As a secondary source, Wikipedia does not publish ideas or facts that are not supported by reliable and published sources. Wikipedia has tremendous power as a platform for relaying the outcomes of academic study by leading over 400 million monthly visitors to underlying scholarship cited in articles. Just as a traditional encyclopedia would, Wikipedia can make the underlying research easier to find. But unlike a traditional encyclopedia, it provides free access and free reuse to all. In that sense, Wikipedia is
an ideal secondary source for open access research. Here, it would be appropriate to mention the Open Access Reader project: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Access_Reader .
In light of this, we are thrilled to see Generation Open blooming.
Not sure what you see blooming here.
The Digital Commons Network now boasts 1,109,355 works from 358
institutions. Most of these are actually not openly licensed.
The Directory of Open Access Journals further has over 10,035 journals
"over 10,000" would be more appropriate.
from 135 countries.
Esteemed law journals such as the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, Berkeley Technology Law Journal, and Michigan Law Review subscribe to the Open Access Law Program, which encourages them to archive their articles under open access principles.
These journals archive their content under free-to-read principles, with limited options for reuse. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Open_Access_Initiative#Definition_of_... .
Wikipedians are also contributing to the body of published open access scholarship. Earlier this month, four Wikipedians published an article on Dengue fever in Open Medicine (an open access and peer-reviewed journal) based on a Wikipedia article that was collaboratively edited by 1,369
"over 1,300" may be better here
volunteers and bots. In addition to providing an open access scholarly article on this important topic, this publication validated that Wikipedia's editorial process can produce high quality content outside traditional academia.
Yes.
It is worth mentioning that many more Wikipedia articles already incorporate text from openly licensed scholarly articles (cf.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_articles_incorporating_text... ) and that a subset thereof (cf.
http://topicpages.ploscompbiol.org/wiki/Category:PLoS_Computational_Biology_... ) have actually been written by scholars for that purpose and published in a peer-reviewed journal.
Placing scholarship behind paywalls has the effect of relegating new advances in human knowledge to small academic communities. As more academics allow their work to be shared freely, online secondary sources like Wikipedia will play a large role disseminating the knowledge to more people in new regions and on different devices.
Yup. Perhaps worth mentioning that there was an entire Wikimania track devoted to Open Scholarship this year (with a focus on Open Access; https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Scholarship ) and that Wikimedia-related talks have been given at Open Access meetings (e.g.
http://river-valley.zeeba.tv/transparency-in-measures-of-scientific-impact/ or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mietchen/Talks/COASP_2014 ).
Last but not least, Open Access Week has a Wikidata item ( https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2000002 ) and that Wikimedians have actively participated in it in the past (e.g. https://p2pu.org/en/groups/open-access-wikipedia-challenge/ ).
Looking forward to the next version of your post, Daniel
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess _______________________________________________ OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
David Carroll Open Access Button https://www.openaccessbutton.org Project Lead david@openaccessbutton.org @davidecarroll
I prefer to use encrypted email. My public key fingerprint is 4FFB C540 1284 57FC 5971 2B1A 57DC 89F4 C3F0 BEB3.
You can learn how to use GnuPG encryption here: https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
Oh wow, thanks for that. I didn’t know it was recorded
Thanks, David
On 16 Oct 2014, at 20:25, Asaf Bartov abartov@wikimedia.org wrote:
Everything was recorded. Here it is, starting at 37:00: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYzwlf_qKmc
A.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 11:34 AM, David Carroll carroll.davide@gmail.com wrote: Hi,
I don’t think it was recorded as it wasn’t in the main auditorium.
Hopefully Daniel remembers the fourth reason.
Thanks, David
On 16 Oct 2014, at 19:26, Yana Welinder ywelinder@wikimedia.org wrote:
Thanks all! I'm sorry that I missed the OA panel at Wikimania. Does anyone know if there is a video of the panel?
Thanks, Yana
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:56 AM, Melissa Hagemann melissa.hagemann@opensocietyfoundations.org wrote: Hi Yana,
To build on Daniel's comment re inclusion of OA in Wikimania this year, Jimmy spoke on an OA panel Daniel and I participated in. Jimmy gave four great reasons as to why OA is important to Wikimedia. Unfortunately, I was chairing the session, and didn't write them all down, but perhaps Daniel remembers, as Jimmy framed his talk very well. I believe three of them were:
OA is important to Wikimedia as it provides access to research in:
- developing countries
- everyone with Jack Andraka as an example
- the OA scholarly research which is made available which can be used to develop WMF projects
Cheers, Melissa Hagemann
-----Original Message----- From: openaccess-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:openaccess-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Mietchen Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 12:42 AM To: Open Access discussions Subject: Re: [OpenAccess] Blog post on Open Access
Thanks, Yana. Comments inline.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 2:52 AM, Yana Welinder ywelinder@wikimedia.org wrote:
We are doing a guest blog post on open access for EFF next week.
Cool!
Free as in Open Access and Wikipedia
Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia sites are closely connected to open access ideals
"ideals" has a bit too much of a romantic connotation here. Something like "goals" would be better, I think.
of making scholarship freely available and reusable. Consistent with these ideals, the Wikimedia sites make information available to internet users around the world free of charge in hundreds of languages. Wikimedia content can also be reused under its free licenses. The content is enriched by citations to open access scholarship, and the Wikimedia sites play a unique role in making academic learning easily available to the world. As the next generation of scholars embraces open access principles to become a true Generation Open,
- the video linked there is licensed -NC-ND (as displayed shortly before the end, and contrary to the CC BY indicated in the metadata), so I would not link to it.
- "true" in such contexts is also problematic, especially near non-open licenses and considering that open access refers only to access to (some of the) final outputs of research, rather than all outputs and the entire process.
we will move closer to "a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge."
To write and edit Wikipedia, contributors need to access high quality independent sources. Unfortunately, paywalls and copyright restrictions often prevent the use of academic journals to write Wikipedia articles and enrich them with citations. Citations are particularly important to allow readers to verify Wikipedia articles and learn more about the topic from the underlying sources. Given the importance of open access to Wikipedia, the Wikimedia community of contributors has set up
I don't think that "set up" should be linked, and the link currently in there is not a good fit anyway (it would fit better to the "importance of open access to Wikipedia" phrase above or the "closely connected" one from the introductory sentence, or the "reciprocal relationship" below).
a WikiProject Open Access to improve open access-related articles on Wikipedia
and to increase the reuse of open-access materials on Wikimedia platforms more generally, e.g. as per http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Open_Access_Media_Importer_Bot or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Open_Access/Signalling_O... . For an overview of activities, see the monthly reports at https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:This_Month_in_GLAM_Open_Access_... .
and create an Open Access Policy for research projects with the support of the Wikimedia Foundation.
Those were not the goals of the creation of the WikiProject, and the policy - which is still in draft stage, by the way - has not received support from the Foundation, and that link is to a page that is misleading in the context of this blog post, as it only clarifies the meaning of the term "significant support" for the purposes of that draft policy.
Great potential lies in the reciprocal relationship between the open access scholarship that enriches Wikipedia and Wikipedia’s promotion of primary sources. As a secondary source, Wikipedia does not publish ideas or facts that are not supported by reliable and published sources. Wikipedia has tremendous power as a platform for relaying the outcomes of academic study by leading over 400 million monthly visitors to underlying scholarship cited in articles. Just as a traditional encyclopedia would, Wikipedia can make the underlying research easier to find. But unlike a traditional encyclopedia, it provides free access and free reuse to all. In that sense, Wikipedia is an ideal secondary source for open access research.
Here, it would be appropriate to mention the Open Access Reader project: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Access_Reader .
In light of this, we are thrilled to see Generation Open blooming.
Not sure what you see blooming here.
The Digital Commons Network now boasts 1,109,355 works from 358 institutions.
Most of these are actually not openly licensed.
The Directory of Open Access Journals further has over 10,035 journals
"over 10,000" would be more appropriate.
from 135 countries.
Esteemed law journals such as the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, Berkeley Technology Law Journal, and Michigan Law Review subscribe to the Open Access Law Program, which encourages them to archive their articles under open access principles.
These journals archive their content under free-to-read principles, with limited options for reuse. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Open_Access_Initiative#Definition_of_... .
Wikipedians are also contributing to the body of published open access scholarship. Earlier this month, four Wikipedians published an article on Dengue fever in Open Medicine (an open access and peer-reviewed journal) based on a Wikipedia article that was collaboratively edited by 1,369
"over 1,300" may be better here
volunteers and bots. In addition to providing an open access scholarly article on this important topic, this publication validated that Wikipedia's editorial process can produce high quality content outside traditional academia.
Yes.
It is worth mentioning that many more Wikipedia articles already incorporate text from openly licensed scholarly articles (cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_articles_incorporating_text... ) and that a subset thereof (cf. http://topicpages.ploscompbiol.org/wiki/Category:PLoS_Computational_Biology_...) have actually been written by scholars for that purpose and published in a peer-reviewed journal.
Placing scholarship behind paywalls has the effect of relegating new advances in human knowledge to small academic communities. As more academics allow their work to be shared freely, online secondary sources like Wikipedia will play a large role disseminating the knowledge to more people in new regions and on different devices.
Yup. Perhaps worth mentioning that there was an entire Wikimania track devoted to Open Scholarship this year (with a focus on Open Access; https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Scholarship ) and that Wikimedia-related talks have been given at Open Access meetings (e.g. http://river-valley.zeeba.tv/transparency-in-measures-of-scientific-impact/ or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mietchen/Talks/COASP_2014 ).
Last but not least, Open Access Week has a Wikidata item ( https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2000002 ) and that Wikimedians have actively participated in it in the past (e.g. https://p2pu.org/en/groups/open-access-wikipedia-challenge/ ).
Looking forward to the next version of your post, Daniel
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess _______________________________________________ OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
David Carroll Open Access Button Project Lead david@openaccessbutton.org @davidecarroll
I prefer to use encrypted email. My public key fingerprint is 4FFB C540 1284 57FC 5971 2B1A 57DC 89F4 C3F0 BEB3.
You can learn how to use GnuPG encryption here: https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
-- Asaf Bartov Wikimedia Foundation
Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! https://donate.wikimedia.org _______________________________________________ OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
David Carroll Open Access Button Project Lead david@openaccessbutton.org @davidecarroll ---- I prefer to use encrypted email. My public key fingerprint is 4FFB C540 1284 57FC 5971 2B1A 57DC 89F4 C3F0 BEB3.
You can learn how to use GnuPG encryption here: https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/
Really helpful!
Thanks, Yana
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 12:40 PM, David Carroll carroll.davide@gmail.com wrote:
Oh wow, thanks for that. I didn’t know it was recorded
Thanks, David
On 16 Oct 2014, at 20:25, Asaf Bartov abartov@wikimedia.org wrote:
Everything was recorded. Here it is, starting at 37:00: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYzwlf_qKmc
A.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 11:34 AM, David Carroll carroll.davide@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I don’t think it was recorded as it wasn’t in the main auditorium.
Hopefully Daniel remembers the fourth reason.
Thanks, David
On 16 Oct 2014, at 19:26, Yana Welinder ywelinder@wikimedia.org wrote:
Thanks all! I'm sorry that I missed the OA panel at Wikimania. Does anyone know if there is a video of the panel?
Thanks, Yana
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:56 AM, Melissa Hagemann < melissa.hagemann@opensocietyfoundations.org> wrote:
Hi Yana,
To build on Daniel's comment re inclusion of OA in Wikimania this year, Jimmy spoke on an OA panel Daniel and I participated in. Jimmy gave four great reasons as to why OA is important to Wikimedia. Unfortunately, I was chairing the session, and didn't write them all down, but perhaps Daniel remembers, as Jimmy framed his talk very well. I believe three of them were:
OA is important to Wikimedia as it provides access to research in:
- developing countries
- everyone with Jack Andraka as an example
- the OA scholarly research which is made available which can be used to
develop WMF projects
Cheers, Melissa Hagemann
-----Original Message----- From: openaccess-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto: openaccess-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Mietchen Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 12:42 AM To: Open Access discussions Subject: Re: [OpenAccess] Blog post on Open Access
Thanks, Yana. Comments inline.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 2:52 AM, Yana Welinder ywelinder@wikimedia.org wrote:
We are doing a guest blog post on open access for EFF next week.
Cool!
Free as in Open Access and Wikipedia
Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia sites are closely connected to open access ideals
"ideals" has a bit too much of a romantic connotation here. Something like "goals" would be better, I think.
of making scholarship freely available and reusable. Consistent with these ideals, the Wikimedia sites make information available to internet users around the world free of charge in hundreds of languages. Wikimedia content can also be reused under its free licenses. The content is enriched by citations to open access scholarship, and the Wikimedia sites play a unique role in making academic learning easily available to the world. As the next generation of scholars embraces open access principles to become a true Generation Open,
- the video linked there is licensed -NC-ND (as displayed shortly before
the end, and contrary to the CC BY indicated in the metadata), so I would not link to it.
- "true" in such contexts is also problematic, especially near non-open
licenses and considering that open access refers only to access to (some of the) final outputs of research, rather than all outputs and the entire process.
we will move closer to "a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge."
To write and edit Wikipedia, contributors need to access high quality independent sources. Unfortunately, paywalls and copyright restrictions often prevent the use of academic journals to write Wikipedia articles and enrich them with citations. Citations are particularly important to allow readers to verify Wikipedia articles and learn more about the topic from the underlying sources. Given the importance of open access to Wikipedia, the Wikimedia community of contributors has set up
I don't think that "set up" should be linked, and the link currently in there is not a good fit anyway (it would fit better to the "importance of open access to Wikipedia" phrase above or the "closely connected" one from the introductory sentence, or the "reciprocal relationship" below).
a WikiProject Open Access to improve open access-related articles on Wikipedia
and to increase the reuse of open-access materials on Wikimedia platforms more generally, e.g. as per http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Open_Access_Media_Importer_Bot or
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Open_Access/Signalling_O... . For an overview of activities, see the monthly reports at https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:This_Month_in_GLAM_Open_Access_... .
and create an Open Access Policy for research projects with the support of the Wikimedia
Foundation. Those were not the goals of the creation of the WikiProject, and the policy - which is still in draft stage, by the way - has not received support from the Foundation, and that link is to a page that is misleading in the context of this blog post, as it only clarifies the meaning of the term "significant support" for the purposes of that draft policy.
Great potential lies in the reciprocal relationship between the open access scholarship that enriches Wikipedia and Wikipedia’s promotion of primary sources. As a secondary source, Wikipedia does not publish ideas or facts that are not supported by reliable and published sources. Wikipedia has tremendous power as a platform for relaying the outcomes of academic study by leading over 400 million monthly visitors to underlying scholarship cited in articles. Just as a traditional encyclopedia would, Wikipedia can make the underlying research easier to find. But unlike a traditional encyclopedia, it provides free access and free reuse to all. In that sense, Wikipedia
is an ideal secondary source for open access research. Here, it would be appropriate to mention the Open Access Reader project: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Access_Reader .
In light of this, we are thrilled to see Generation Open blooming.
Not sure what you see blooming here.
The Digital Commons Network now boasts 1,109,355 works from 358
institutions. Most of these are actually not openly licensed.
The Directory of Open Access Journals further has over 10,035 journals
"over 10,000" would be more appropriate.
from 135 countries.
Esteemed law journals such as the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, Berkeley Technology Law Journal, and Michigan Law Review subscribe to the Open Access Law Program, which encourages them to archive their articles under open access principles.
These journals archive their content under free-to-read principles, with limited options for reuse. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Open_Access_Initiative#Definition_of_... .
Wikipedians are also contributing to the body of published open access scholarship. Earlier this month, four Wikipedians published an article on Dengue fever in Open Medicine (an open access and peer-reviewed journal) based on a Wikipedia article that was collaboratively edited by 1,369
"over 1,300" may be better here
volunteers and bots. In addition to providing an open access scholarly article on this important topic, this publication validated that Wikipedia's editorial process can produce high quality content outside traditional academia.
Yes.
It is worth mentioning that many more Wikipedia articles already incorporate text from openly licensed scholarly articles (cf.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_articles_incorporating_text... ) and that a subset thereof (cf.
http://topicpages.ploscompbiol.org/wiki/Category:PLoS_Computational_Biology_... ) have actually been written by scholars for that purpose and published in a peer-reviewed journal.
Placing scholarship behind paywalls has the effect of relegating new advances in human knowledge to small academic communities. As more academics allow their work to be shared freely, online secondary sources like Wikipedia will play a large role disseminating the knowledge to more people in new regions and on different devices.
Yup. Perhaps worth mentioning that there was an entire Wikimania track devoted to Open Scholarship this year (with a focus on Open Access; https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Scholarship ) and that Wikimedia-related talks have been given at Open Access meetings (e.g.
http://river-valley.zeeba.tv/transparency-in-measures-of-scientific-impact/ or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mietchen/Talks/COASP_2014 ).
Last but not least, Open Access Week has a Wikidata item ( https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2000002 ) and that Wikimedians have actively participated in it in the past (e.g. https://p2pu.org/en/groups/open-access-wikipedia-challenge/ ).
Looking forward to the next version of your post, Daniel
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess _______________________________________________ OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
David Carroll Open Access Button https://www.openaccessbutton.org/ Project Lead david@openaccessbutton.org @davidecarroll
I prefer to use encrypted email. My public key fingerprint is 4FFB C540 1284 57FC 5971 2B1A 57DC 89F4 C3F0 BEB3.
You can learn how to use GnuPG encryption here: https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
-- Asaf Bartov Wikimedia Foundation http://www.wikimediafoundation.org/
Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! https://donate.wikimedia.org _______________________________________________ OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
David Carroll Open Access Button https://www.openaccessbutton.org Project Lead david@openaccessbutton.org @davidecarroll
I prefer to use encrypted email. My public key fingerprint is 4FFB C540 1284 57FC 5971 2B1A 57DC 89F4 C3F0 BEB3.
You can learn how to use GnuPG encryption here: https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
Yana Welinder, 16/10/2014 02:52:
Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia sites are
We call them Wikimedia projects. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_projects
At the beginning I'd rather place something more general and definite, à la «Wikimedia projects have Open Access as a prerequisite for an environment in which they can flourish. Acknowledging this, Wikimedia has been part of the Open Access movement since 2009 or earlier, raising public awareness and intensifying cooperation with others in the OA movement» (OA experts? OA professionals? other OA promoters?). And the link for this paragraph will be https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_access
The content is enriched by citations to open access scholarship [...] write Wikipedia articles and enrich them with citations.
Duplicate. Should also use a term more generic than "citations": Wikimedia Commons, Wikisource and Wikidata have material from Open Access sources. Wikibooks and Wikiversity too, probably, or could. Etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sourcesCitations are particularly important to allow readers to verify Wikipedia articles and learn more about the topic from the underlying sources. Given the importance of open access to Wikipedia, the Wikimedia community of contributors has set up https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/01/15/wikimedia-and-open-access/a WikiProject Open Access https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Open_Accessto improve open access-related articles on Wikipedia and create an Open Access Policy https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Committee/Areas_of_interest/Open-access_policyfor research projects with the support https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Committee/Areas_of_interest/Significant_supportof the Wikimedia Foundation.
See comments by Daniel for the specifics.
Should we also mention any Open Access week event being organised by Wikimedia across the world?
Nemo
On 16 October 2014 01:52, Yana Welinder ywelinder@wikimedia.org wrote:
We are doing a guest blog post on open access for EFF next week. I would very much appreciate your thoughts on it and in particular the section that discusses WikiProject Open Access.
You might like to mention ORCID:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORCID
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:ORCID
At the very least the author(s) should give their ORCID identifier(s) in their bylines (having first registered for one, if not done already)
(I'm Wikipedian in Residence at ORCID; happy to advise further, if the above links aren't sufficient)
Hi Yana,
Thanks for taking on this important topic.
I think is really important to emphasis the the unrestricted use aspect of open access. I see freely available to read confused with true open access.
In my conversations with people who are in health care research, I find that today they are mostly all in favor of open access in the sense it is available for free. Even eager to see it happen for their own research.
But it being published with in way that gives permission for unrestricted reuse is not seen as being nearly as important.
Often, I think it is an oversight and they have not completely thought through the meaning of open access when it is presented to them as only being freely available to read.
So, it would be good to emphasis why being able to freely reuse is an important part of true open access. And not let the meaning of the term get diluted by publishers who will give quick access to view articles if researcher pay a premium for it, but still want to control the material long tern.
Hope that makes sense. :-)
Sydney Poore User:FloNight Wikipedian in Residence at Cochrane Collaboration
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:52 PM, Yana Welinder ywelinder@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi all,
We are doing a guest blog post on open access for EFF next week. I would very much appreciate your thoughts on it and in particular the section that discusses WikiProject Open Access.
Best, Yana
Free as in Open Access and Wikipedia
Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia sites are closely connected to open access ideals of making scholarship freely available and reusable. Consistent with these ideals, the Wikimedia sites make information available to internet users around the world free of charge in hundreds of languages. Wikimedia content can also be reused under its free licenses. The content is enriched by citations to open access scholarship, and the Wikimedia sites play a unique role in making academic learning easily available to the world. As the next generation of scholars embraces open access principles to become a true Generation Open http://youtu.be/8hxKH3-42U0, we will move closer to "a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Vision."
To write and edit Wikipedia, contributors need to access high quality independent sources. Unfortunately, paywalls and copyright restrictions often prevent the use of academic journals to write Wikipedia articles and enrich them with citations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources Citations are particularly important to allow readers to verify Wikipedia articles and learn more about the topic from the underlying sources. Given the importance of open access to Wikipedia, the Wikimedia community of contributors has set up https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/01/15/wikimedia-and-open-access/ a WikiProject Open Access https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Open_Access to improve open access-related articles on Wikipedia and create an Open Access Policy https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Committee/Areas_of_interest/Open-access_policy for research projects with the support https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Committee/Areas_of_interest/Significant_support of the Wikimedia Foundation.
Great potential lies in the reciprocal relationship between the open access scholarship that enriches Wikipedia and Wikipedia’s promotion of primary sources. As a secondary source, Wikipedia does not publish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research ideas or facts that are not supported by reliable and published sources https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability#Sources. Wikipedia has tremendous power as a platform for relaying the outcomes of academic study http://columbiaspectator.com/opinion/2014/10/13/sharing-wikipedia by leading over 400 million monthly visitors http://reportcard.wmflabs.org/ to underlying scholarship cited in articles. Just as a traditional encyclopedia would, Wikipedia can make the underlying research easier to find. But unlike a traditional encyclopedia, it provides free access and free reuse to all. In that sense, Wikipedia is an ideal secondary source for open access research.
In light of this, we are thrilled to see Generation Open blooming. The Digital Commons Network http://network.bepress.com/ now boasts 1,109,355 works from 358 institutions. The Directory of Open Access Journals http://doaj.org/ further has over 10,035 journals from 135 countries. Esteemed law journals such as the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/, Berkeley Technology Law Journal http://btlj.org/, and Michigan Law Review http://www.michiganlawreview.org/ subscribe to the Open Access Law Program https://creativecommons.org/press-releases/entry/5464, which encourages them to archive their articles under open access principles.
Wikipedians are also contributing to the body of published open access scholarship. Earlier this month, four Wikipedians published an article on Dengue fever http://www.openmedicine.ca/article/viewFile/562/564 in Open Medicine http://www.openmedicine.ca/ (an open access and peer-reviewed journal) based on a Wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dengue_fever#External_linksthat was collaboratively edited http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dengue_fever&offset=&limit=500&action=history by 1,369 volunteers and bots. In addition to providing an open access scholarly article on this important topic, this publication validated that Wikipedia's editorial process can produce high quality content outside traditional academia.
Placing scholarship behind paywalls has the effect of relegating new advances in human knowledge to small academic communities. As more academics allow their work to be shared freely, online secondary sources like Wikipedia will play a large role disseminating the knowledge to more people in new regions https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Zero and on different devices http://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/04/17/carry-the-entirety-of-wikipedia-in-your-pocket-with-kiwix-for-android/.
-- Yana Welinder Legal Counsel Wikimedia Foundation 415.839.6885 ext. 6867 @yanatweets https://twitter.com/yanatweets
NOTICE: This message may be confidential or legally privileged. If you have received it by accident, please delete it and let us know about the mistake. As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical reasons I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer.
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
That's a great point Sydney! I recently came across this issue when submitting an article to an academic journal that subscribes to an open access network and yet the editors were surprised when I asked them to publish the article under a Creative Commons license.
I'll see how I can address this point in the blog post. :)
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Sydney Poore sydney.poore@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Yana,
Thanks for taking on this important topic.
I think is really important to emphasis the the unrestricted use aspect of open access. I see freely available to read confused with true open access.
In my conversations with people who are in health care research, I find that today they are mostly all in favor of open access in the sense it is available for free. Even eager to see it happen for their own research.
But it being published with in way that gives permission for unrestricted reuse is not seen as being nearly as important.
Often, I think it is an oversight and they have not completely thought through the meaning of open access when it is presented to them as only being freely available to read.
So, it would be good to emphasis why being able to freely reuse is an important part of true open access. And not let the meaning of the term get diluted by publishers who will give quick access to view articles if researcher pay a premium for it, but still want to control the material long tern.
Hope that makes sense. :-)
Sydney Poore User:FloNight Wikipedian in Residence at Cochrane Collaboration
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:52 PM, Yana Welinder ywelinder@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi all,
We are doing a guest blog post on open access for EFF next week. I would very much appreciate your thoughts on it and in particular the section that discusses WikiProject Open Access.
Best, Yana
Free as in Open Access and Wikipedia
Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia sites are closely connected to open access ideals of making scholarship freely available and reusable. Consistent with these ideals, the Wikimedia sites make information available to internet users around the world free of charge in hundreds of languages. Wikimedia content can also be reused under its free licenses. The content is enriched by citations to open access scholarship, and the Wikimedia sites play a unique role in making academic learning easily available to the world. As the next generation of scholars embraces open access principles to become a true Generation Open http://youtu.be/8hxKH3-42U0, we will move closer to "a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Vision."
To write and edit Wikipedia, contributors need to access high quality independent sources. Unfortunately, paywalls and copyright restrictions often prevent the use of academic journals to write Wikipedia articles and enrich them with citations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources Citations are particularly important to allow readers to verify Wikipedia articles and learn more about the topic from the underlying sources. Given the importance of open access to Wikipedia, the Wikimedia community of contributors has set up https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/01/15/wikimedia-and-open-access/ a WikiProject Open Access https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Open_Access to improve open access-related articles on Wikipedia and create an Open Access Policy https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Committee/Areas_of_interest/Open-access_policy for research projects with the support https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Committee/Areas_of_interest/Significant_support of the Wikimedia Foundation.
Great potential lies in the reciprocal relationship between the open access scholarship that enriches Wikipedia and Wikipedia’s promotion of primary sources. As a secondary source, Wikipedia does not publish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research ideas or facts that are not supported by reliable and published sources https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability#Sources. Wikipedia has tremendous power as a platform for relaying the outcomes of academic study http://columbiaspectator.com/opinion/2014/10/13/sharing-wikipedia by leading over 400 million monthly visitors http://reportcard.wmflabs.org/ to underlying scholarship cited in articles. Just as a traditional encyclopedia would, Wikipedia can make the underlying research easier to find. But unlike a traditional encyclopedia, it provides free access and free reuse to all. In that sense, Wikipedia is an ideal secondary source for open access research.
In light of this, we are thrilled to see Generation Open blooming. The Digital Commons Network http://network.bepress.com/ now boasts 1,109,355 works from 358 institutions. The Directory of Open Access Journals http://doaj.org/ further has over 10,035 journals from 135 countries. Esteemed law journals such as the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/, Berkeley Technology Law Journal http://btlj.org/, and Michigan Law Review http://www.michiganlawreview.org/ subscribe to the Open Access Law Program https://creativecommons.org/press-releases/entry/5464, which encourages them to archive their articles under open access principles.
Wikipedians are also contributing to the body of published open access scholarship. Earlier this month, four Wikipedians published an article on Dengue fever http://www.openmedicine.ca/article/viewFile/562/564 in Open Medicine http://www.openmedicine.ca/ (an open access and peer-reviewed journal) based on a Wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dengue_fever#External_linksthat was collaboratively edited http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dengue_fever&offset=&limit=500&action=history by 1,369 volunteers and bots. In addition to providing an open access scholarly article on this important topic, this publication validated that Wikipedia's editorial process can produce high quality content outside traditional academia.
Placing scholarship behind paywalls has the effect of relegating new advances in human knowledge to small academic communities. As more academics allow their work to be shared freely, online secondary sources like Wikipedia will play a large role disseminating the knowledge to more people in new regions https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Zero and on different devices http://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/04/17/carry-the-entirety-of-wikipedia-in-your-pocket-with-kiwix-for-android/.
-- Yana Welinder Legal Counsel Wikimedia Foundation 415.839.6885 ext. 6867 @yanatweets https://twitter.com/yanatweets
NOTICE: This message may be confidential or legally privileged. If you have received it by accident, please delete it and let us know about the mistake. As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical reasons I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer.
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
OpenAccess mailing list OpenAccess@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Sydney Poore sydney.poore@gmail.com wrote:
So, it would be good to emphasis why being able to freely reuse is an important part of true open access. And not let the meaning of the term get diluted by publishers who will give quick access to view articles if researcher pay a premium for it, but still want to control the material long tern.
We've written a bit about this issue in the past: https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/07/new-open-licenses-arent-so-open/
Luis
openaccess@lists.wikimedia.org