On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak <darekj@alk.edu.pl> wrote:

If the question is only "how to set up a journal" then I wonder if this should be taking place off-list, since that's not really a "wiki research" question.  If it is a question about "how to set up a journal that specifically meshes with the socio-technical patterns used by wiki communities", then of course it is appropriate for discussion here.  (And obviously I think it's the latter!)

the question may also be "how to set up a journal relevant for research specific for wiki-communities, that stands a chance of becoming the leading journal (ranked, listed, prestigious, etc.) in some related fields" and then questions on which traditional academic practices of a journal are necessary, and which are optional, obviously is both important, and of interest for this list.  Just saying.

I don't disagree, but I think the main driving question should be "what's interesting here?".  What it says on the wiki page presently is:

«The field of "wiki studies" exists but there is no dedicated journal. This is a problem to be solved.»

So, is the question just a relatively procedural one?  (How to create a journal for "Wiki Studies" and edit and populate it using relatively "traditional" means?)  I'm certainly not worried about the existence of a "procedural" phase.

My thought is, rather, that at this early stage, there may be some other not so procedural questions, and we shouldn't get lost in the details of process before we've understood what those are.