Greetings, Fellow Wikipedia Researchers.
In creating a new journal one of the key issues is demonstrating enough "paper pressure" that is high quality, but not suitable for existing journals. Is there evidence that there is high quality research in Wikipedia that is not suitable for existing journals, or that is not receiving a fair hearing in the review process for those journals?
I am an associate editor of ACM Transactions on the Web, which would be a great place to publish high quality Wikipedia research that is analytic or tools-based. For Wikipedia research that has a strong user interface or ethnography component ACM Transactions on CHI would be perfect. Wikipedia research that has both intelligent algorithms and interfaces would be perfect for a new journal that ACM has just approved called ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems. (I'm co-Editor in Chief of the new ACM TiiS.)
So, while the idea of having an outlet for high quality Wikipedia research to get published in journals is an excellent one, and would certainly improve WikiSym as a research venue, rather than competing with it, there already seem to be great outlets for most of the relevant research.
Is there high quality Wikipedia research that should be published in journals that is not suitable for these venues?
Best, John