Dear Wiki-Research-L,

Yes, as Andrea said, the original idea proposed was about a new journal *for* Wikipedia but it seems the consensus is that there is far more interest in a journal *about* wikim/pedia research. To that end, I'd like to gauge the opinion of the authors here about the viability of such a journal. I have sounded out a couple of university presses and they're interested in discussing the idea of funding and hosting a "Journal of Wikipedia Research" (or title to that effect). So, I was wondering if the people here could say whether such a thing would be a) viable and b) what factors would be important to you personally in being interested in such a publication.
For example:
- Do you think that a Journal of Wikipedia Research would be an unhealthy competition against WikiSym, or a boost for it?
- Would the reputation/location of the hosting university be a factor for you?
- or, would the people on the editorial committee be a more important factor?
- would you prefer to see a journal that was entirely an aggregation/synthesis of other publications, or entirely filled with content published no where else, or, would you be happy with a mixture of sections (new work, re-publications, syntheses, reviews...)
- Would the frequency of publication be important to you?
- Would you prefer something that only published in your particular research field (e.g. statistical/sociological/computer-scinece) or would you be happy with a variety of research fields being included in the one edition?
- Would it be more important to you to publish in existing journals with an established reputation or to publish in a journal with a scope that is specific to Wikip/media (even though it's reputation would not yet be established)?

Of course, these are all just exploratory/scoping questions just to gauge interest. The original idea that I had proposed was for a different thing, but, if the research community here would like to see a journal created for them (in some way/shape/form) and if you believe that such a thing would help our field grow and develop - then I'm happy to try and help! :-)

Sincerely,
-Liam

wittylama.com/blog
Peace, love & metadata


On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 9:22 PM, Andrea Forte <andrea.forte@gmail.com> wrote:
I think the original idea here was to have a journal where writing
*for* Wikipedia would be rewarded with a publication, and it turned
into a discussion about what academics really want: to be rewarded for
work *about* Wikipedia and to be able to find the best work out there.
:)

I agree with Reid that academics are very unlikely to spend time
writing journal articles for an unknown publication either way. I also
agree with James that it would be nice to have a place where good
wikipedia (and wiki) related research bubbles up.

I see at least two interesting and useful ways of doing this. First is
a review system as James suggested to aggregate research and identify
the best work out there. Second would be a high quality annual review
that synthesizes wiki research, rather than aggregates it. This could
be a publication opportunity for some group of researchers who have
the time and energy for it. :) Some of us have extensive literature
reviews in dissertations and elsewhere that could be tapped perhaps
for a first version...

-Andrea

On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 11:26 AM, James Howison <james@howison.name> wrote:
>
> On Sep 25, 2009, at 10:56, Reid Priedhorsky wrote:
>
>> On 09/25/09 06:59, Liam Wyatt wrote:
>>>
>>> But I think that this issue (that of "but would academics * actually*
>>> write for this Journal?") is the one piece of the proposal that is
>>> the genuine and acceptable risk. [...] The risk of the Journal
>>> failing because of a lack of interest from academics is indeed a
>>> possibility. But, I think that is the thing that needs to be tested.
>>> Academics have never yet been given academically legitimate reasons
>>> to participate and I would like to give them the option. If the
>>> Journal were to fail for lack of interest from Academics, then that
>>> is a very important lesson and worth the effort of learning it.
>>
>> Sorry to be a party pooper. But, I think that lack of interest from
>> academics is not a risk, it's a near-certainty. There are already
>> plenty
>> of journals and conferences out there, and I can tell you now that we
>> would not be submitting anything.
>>
>> Now, if the goal is to bring the whole of Wikipedia-related research
>> into one place -- which is a good one, though I would extend it to all
>> wiki research since Wikipedia is just one example and (IMO) over-
>> studied
>> to the exclusion of other systems -- then a (preferably online)
>> publication which put out summaries/reviews of wiki research wherever
>> it's published (think the page on Wikipedia, but better) would be
>> highly
>> desirable. Math does this sort of thing to great success, I think.
>
> I've considered this for research on free and open source software
> too.  One of the troubles of forming one's "own journal" is that you
> are essentially ghettoizing the research, ensuring that it will not be
> read as widely in one's "home/reference discipline".
>
> Reid's suggestion is a good one, if I understand it right (and
> possibly even if I've gotten it wrong ;), I'd imagine it as a frequent
> 'best papers' award, a meta-journal, which on a regular basis reviews
> the peer-reviewed literature and provides pointers and commentary
> about the Wikipedia-related articles there.  Obviously, for copyright
> reasons, one cannot re-publish the articles, but there's no reason
> that an editorial board couldn't review submitted, already published
> papers, and build consensus on the best and most important Wikipedia
> related papers, perhaps on a bi-monthly basis.  Perhaps authors
> nominating their papers could provide 2 page "contextualization"
> pieces explaining to the interdisciplinary community something about
> the venue and why they published there...
>
> Is the Math reference you make something vaguely similar to that?
>
> --J
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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