As far as my experience goes, the required group of editors would be an editor-in-chief, an executive committee and a scientific committee, mostly responsible for the peer reviews. Since I would like to participate, this reminds me what criteria would be adopt for recruiting these, and how this decision will be taken. I also assume that one or more universities (or an academic institution, for that matter) would have to provide support - as of, "published by...".

Of course, this is the traditional way... Some things can be changed, but others need to be retained in order for the journal to receive academic recognition.

Juliana.

On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Pierre-Carl Langlais <langlais.qobuz@gmail.com> wrote:

One idea would be to appoint one or several volunteer editor(s). They could ensure all the formal and administrative aspects of the journal: receiving and anonymizing the propositions, publishing them on the wiki, editing the final Wiki and PDF versions, keep in touch with ISI and other evaluation system and so on…

@emirjp : well you can already count me in :)

Not my case, but I understand that there are people in that situation. This story was the same in 2001, when people thought that only an expert-written encyclopedia with very rigid methods would be successful.

Good for you, but it is somewhat irrelevant. I'd speculate that possibly even most of the academic journals' production is done by people who do have to care where they publish. Per comparing the situation to Wikipedia in 2001, I want to firmly state that oranges are much better than apples.

Entering the journal rankings is based on citation numbers, right? I did this suggest thinking on the valuable researchers in this list, which may be interested in publishing/peer-reviewing stuff in the journal. Won't you cite that papers?

The JCR journal ranking, which so far is the only one that matters (in spite of its major flaws, methodological issues, etc.), bases on the number of citations counted ONLY in other journals already listed in it.

But there are also threshold requirements to be even considered for JCR ranking, and obviously a double-blind peer reviews is a must. For practical reasons of indexing, paper redistribution, etc., PDFs and numbered pages also make life of a person who wants to cite a paper much easier.

While I support your idea in principle, I think that it requires much more effort, planning, and understanding of how academic publishing and career paths actually work, than in the concept of "all we need is wiki".

cheers,

dj

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

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

--
www.domusaurea.org

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