+1 on Piotr's comments. 

And very, very happy to hear about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ethically_researching_Wikipedia -- I think this is definitely the way to go: developing guidelines that we *regularly point people to* when they have questions etc. And maybe something that we as a group can work on in the coming months. 

I'll reiterate my suggestions for goals here and add some of Piotr's and others' comments: 

1. developing ethical research guidelines for Wikipedia research
- by building on the WP:Ethically_researching_Wikipedia page and regularly pointing people to it

2. finding ways of making responsible requests to the WMF for data that they hold that might benefit research outside the WMF
- through an official process with guidelines from the WMF on response times/ viable requests etc.

3. developing opportunities for researchers to collaborate and share what they're doing with the wider research community
- reorganising the research hub and pointing to best case practices etc (similar to the WP Global Education program, as Piotr suggests)
- actively recruiting WP researchers to join this list and visit the research hub
- some other regular way of involving researchers such as inviting them to showcase their work and have it recognised on the list, on the hub etc 
- recognising outstanding research (through a prize perhaps as Aaron suggested)

Looking forward to hearing Phoebe's suggestions!

Best,
Heather.


Heather Ford
Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme
EthnographyMatters | Oxford Digital Ethnography Group 
http://hblog.org | @hfordsa




On 29 July 2014 09:04, Pine W <wiki.pine@gmail.com> wrote:

The good and bad news is that the status quo with RCOM is likely to remain unless someone in WMF, the Board, or the community is interested enough in addressing the situation to put in some effort to make RCOM a functioning organization.

At the moment I have the impression that WMF researchers are absorbing most of the work that RCOM and some dedicated RCOM admin support could do, like help with lit review and prevent outside researchers from using WMF databases in ways that compromise user privacy. My perception is that the current situation is inefficient for WMF and for outside researchers who want to do good work with WMF  or community resources, and also that RCOM lacks the resources to respond in timely ways to requests for help with outside research that could benefit Wikimedia. So, I there are reasons to changs the status quo, and I hope WMF or the Board would be interested in something like the proposal I made previously.

Phoebe, what do you think?

Pine


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