Did you compare these hand-maintained lists with this:
http://www.bibsonomy.org/tag/wikipedia
While I'm a big fan of wikis and Wikipedia, obviously, sometimes specialized applications with the right incentive system can outperform a more general wiki-based approach.
My hunch is that Bibsonomy does that.
Dirk
On Feb 7, 2008 3:27 AM, Daniel Kinzler daniel@brightbyte.de wrote:
Hello All
As I'm currently working on my major thesis about extracting a multilingual thesaurus from wikipedia data, I have collected quite a bit of research resources about wikipedia. Here are a few links:
- My Wikipedia Research link collection:
http://del.icio.us/brightbyte/wikipedia%2Bresearch
- Wikipedia tag on CiteULike: http://www.citeulike.org/tag/wikipedia
- Wikipedia group on CiteULike: http://www.citeulike.org/group/382/library
- My own wikipedia stuff there:
http://www.citeulike.org/user/brightbyte/tag/wikipedia
- Overview page for my thesis work: http://brightbyte.de/page/WikiWord
I hope this will be useful to someone. I mainly focused on Wikipedia as a resource for linguistic and semantical analysis.
As to having a central place to coordinate and discuss research: yes, that would be great. Though I'm also not sure of the best form. A good bibliography system would sure help, and wiki-style flexible creation of topic pages, and some sort of discussion system, and perhaps a "planet" style aggregated news feed? Ideally, all this could be provided by a single system - I have discussed my dreams about a Bibliography Thing / research platform a few weeks ago here: http://brightbyte.de/page/The_Bibliography_Thing
Regards, Daniel Kinzler, aka Duesentrieb, aka BrightByte
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l