unfortunately, if you want to make impact in the Academia, the approach of "all we need is a wiki" will not work. Even the most avid enthusiasts of open publication models and of wiki usually do have career-paths, tenure reviews, etc.
As long as reality is as it is now, we'd have to have a "proper" journal, with PDFs, page numbers, etc., and an aim to enter the journal rankings, because otherwise the top researchers will have a strong incentive not to even consider our journal in their publications.
best,dj__________________________On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 10:42 AM, emijrp <emijrp@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes, I think that it is important to focus in the wikis topic. It is so broad that hardly would need more than that, I neither understand the WikiSym move to OpenSym.
But not only a new journal, we have an opportunity to create a more open publication model, using a... wiki for all the steps (writing, peer-reviewing and final publication).
I see this project like a big experiment. All we need is a wiki, some volunteers to write papers and some volunteers to peer-review them. After a year of work, we can publish all the "approved" papers as the Journal of Wikis, Vol. 1, Issue 1.
Volunteers?--2012/11/2 Piotr Konieczny <piokon@post.pl>
This is not a list for researching collaboration support software, this is a list for discussing one specific type of it, the wikis (with a focus on Wikipedia). I see nothing wrong with retaining this focus, and I am surprised that the rather successful WikiSym is trying to reframe itself. Perhaps it makes sense for a conference, although I am not convinced. For journal, there is certainly a scope for a (the...) journal limited to wiki studies. There is already a number of journals dedicated to collaboration support software (International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning - http://ijcscl.org/ ; International Journal of e-Collaboration - http://www.igi-global.com/journal/international-journal-collaboration-ijec/1090 ; The Journal of Collaborative Computing and Work Practices - http://www.springer.com/computer/journal/10606), plus some more broad journals on collaboration (International Journal of Collaborative Practices - http://collaborative-practices.com/ ; Journal of collaboration - http://www.springerlink.com/content/g22377427w636731/). Starting an n-th journal on that topic seems rather pointless to me, the only redeeming grace would be that ours would be open source (most others are closed). Much better, IMHO, to start the FIRST journal of wiki studies. A more narrow field, yes, but much more badly in need of a journal than the broader field of collaboration support software, which already has several related journals.
-- Piotr Konieczny "To be defeated and not submit, is victory; to be victorious and rest on one's laurels, is defeat." --Józef PilsudskiOn 11/1/2012 2:21 PM, Aaron Halfaker wrote:
> I'd suggest focusing on the area of wiki studies, nothing more and nothing less.
I don't think that this is a good strategy. Wiki's are just one type of collaboration support software. What if the artifact of collaboration is not hypertext? Most people would not consider a open source code repository to be a "wiki" without doing some stretching, but as far as the contribution model goes, it is nearly the same.
Recently, the steering committee of WikiSym became aware of the problem of branding the conference around a single open collaboration technology and has started a transition from "WikiSym" to "OpenSym".
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Piotr Konieczny <piokon@post.pl> wrote:
On 11/1/2012 7:45 AM, Pierre-Carl Langlais wrote:What's wrong with hosting it at one of WMF wikis? Meta or Wikiversity seem rather appropriate?
*Technical issue : we probably need a specific wiki. Whereas not highly sophisticated, it should perhaps include some reading functions in order to make the journal main content easy to read and to refer to.
I'd suggest focusing on the area of wiki studies, nothing more and nothing less.
*Scientific issue : the journal requires rather a broad and definite general thematic, in order to receive diverse and, yet, coherent submissions. Perhaps a focus on epistemological topics (open access…) or communication topics (wiki-system and so on…) could deem appropriate, as it would allow to go beyond disciplinary barriers.
WMF grants procedure is here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Index
*Financial issue : a small grant from the WMF would be enough to start. As the journal is to rely on volunteer work, all we have to do is to ensure the technical bare necessities.
Through I am not sure what costs would involved, if it is hosted at a WMF wiki, and run by volunteers.
--
Piotr Konieczny
"To be defeated and not submit, is victory; to be victorious and rest on one's laurels, is defeat." --Józef Pilsudski
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Emilio J. Rodríguez-Posadahttp://LibreFind.org - The wiki search engine
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
--
dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak
profesor zarządzania
kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego
i centrum badawczego CROW
Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
http://www.crow.alk.edu.pl
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l