On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Joe Corneli <holtzermann17@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 4:38 PM, <koltzenburg@w4w.net> wrote:

> Answer 2:
>
> articles are not "submitted" to the journal's editors but written openly on the journals' platform (and then
> maybe sent to a review process elsewhere as well as opening up to public review here)

My answer would be like your Answer 2 above.

Let me be clear that what I envision would be more like a "research
hub" than a journal -- but in the end, it would of course include
papers that could be cited (and that could be noted down on
contributors' CVs). But not all contributions would have to be like
that. If we extended the scope quite broadly, it would be "like
Wikipedia, but without the 'no original research' clause." We'd
presumably want some other rule, about "focusing on high quality
research."

I might also go further:

Answer 2a:

The platform itself could be a target for experiment by contributors.
So, while we could start with a standard MediaWiki installation and
standard papers, the journal could also review "papers plus
experiments". The experiment could take place with extensions to the
basic MediaWiki installation, or in some other attached wiki. (In
mathematics, there's a journal called "Experimental Mathematics" which
captures a similar sort of spirit.)

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