Samuel, This is great! What's the idea for a WikiCite project? -Jodi On 20 Jun 2010, at 22:44, Samuel Klein wrote: _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Hi Samuel, That's really GREAT - we need that a lot for many "sensitive" topics.

Sincerely, Pavlo On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 2:38 AM, Samuel Klein <meta.sj(a)gmail.com> wrote: _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Pavlo Shevelo <pavlo.shevelo(a)gmail.com> wrote: Yes.  Also for reconciling differences between sources in different languages - which often carry their own quiet biases. The Foundation is now in a position to help support this sort of work with better contacts and brainstorming (than it was 5 years ago when these ideas were first developed), but someone still needs to design and run these projects...  I don't think anyone is working on these ideas at the moment. (Erik, David Strauss, Stirling -- any recent thoughts on the matter? WikiData as a concept has been worked on in various ways, but I haven't seen any discussion of this particular implementation.)

Hello Brian, Brian Mingus writes: You are right to call that out -- and your proofs of concept for documenting scientific sources are the best I know of, in the world of open code. And I believe AcaWiki is working with you now, yes?  I thought of your project more as summary and literature-review, rather than a global WikiCite... something that might one day delegate its citations, primarily of scientific topics, to a universal WikiCite.  (Correct me if I am wrong.)

"wikitextrose" equivalent. I like that formulation a lot. Which reminds me: we need to fix our project-proposal process. This sounds like a promising project.  Did you ever post a version of the above to strategy.wikimedia.org?  I thought that you were going to work with AcaWiki in the short term and see what you had in common. David, the Open Library plugin you mention also sounds excellent for solving the larger "every citable source in the world" challenge. -- Samuel Klein          identi.ca:sj           w:user:sj _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Hi Brian & all, This is the first I've heard of WikiPapers. If the software isn't released, is there someplace it's in use? In other words, how can I try it? (The closest I can find http://www.netblender.com/main/resources/wikipapers/ is clearly not you!) This "getting the metadata" functionality sounds very exciting -- especially if there aren't licensing restrictions on said metadata. I can definitely see synergies with AcaWiki -- and would love to facilitate conversations there -- hence cc-ing the AcaWiki listserv. -Jodi

In regards to WikiTextrose, Wikicite, WikiPaper, AcaWiki, Wikicat: I have now written a small blog entry related to structured citations: Two-way citations in MediaWiki http://fnielsen.posterous.com/two-way-citations-in-mediawiki In my wiki I use standard MediaWiki templates to structure the bibliographic information. With Semantic MediaWiki and without a 'wikicat' it is possible to get a deep two-way citation, - though the approach might be not be particularly beautiful. I suppose it will result in a lot of semantic queries and bad server load? /Finn

The Foundation is now in a position to help support this sort of work with better contacts and brainstorming (than it was 5 years ago when these ideas were first developed), but someone still needs to design and run these projects... I don't think anyone is working on these ideas at the moment.

Hi - I am interested in looking at how evolution of articles in the English Wikipedia in terms of length and article rating (within WikiProjects) is affected by participation from anonymous and registered contributors. Does anyone have an earlier dataset - the article length and rating I have is from May 2010. Data from late 2008-early 2009, one or two datapoints/ timeslices would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks Samuel, I think it would be great to have more citation tracking in Wikimedia projects! The projects you mention were new to me, but they're quite related to my own research in argumentation, and coming out of the library community, for me, citation analysis is second nature! http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiTextrose http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikicite Have you run into AcaWiki? It's conceived of as a "Wikipedia for academic research" and uses CC-BY and Semantic MediaWiki: http://www.acawiki.org/ AcaWiki focuses more on summarizing articles than on linking their citations together.There is a BibTeX importer -- which could be adapted for use in other MediaWiki installations (one of the desired parts of that project). It's a useful place to gather summaries for generals and other reading-based exams--for instance here's Benjamin Mako Hill's collection: http://acawiki.org/User:Benjamin_Mako_Hill/Generals I used to work with AcaWiki, and would love any feedback on the site (offlist). It was interesting to hear of BibDex! http://www.bibdex.com/ I'll definitely take a closer look. One possibility would be to draw on existing projects which are already documenting sources, particularly in confusing and problematic areas, where "good source" is not obvious or well-understood. For instance, on English Wikipedia, the WikiProject video games has a guideline on sources, documenting particular websites that are and are not reliable: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Sources  WikiProject Japan has documented offline resources recommended for the project: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Japan/Reference_library These projects are far from alone, as a search will show: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&redirs=1&s… If you want to get Wikicite and WikiTextrose going again -- or others are proposed as Brian mentions -- I'd like to be involved. ...recently submitted a project proposal to the Foundation along the lines of community documentation of scientific (and other) sources. So, let me know how I can contribute. :) -Jodi On 22 Jun 2010, at 00:38, Samuel Klein wrote: The idea is to have a wiki-project with an entry for every cited source, author, and publication -- including critical secondary sources that exist only to comment on sources/authors/publications. Aggregate information about the reliability of these sources, where they are used, how they are discussed and linked together. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiTextrose http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikicite The "wikitextrose" proposal aims to gather data about these types of sources, and links between them. The "wikicite" proposal aims to organize citable statements on other wiki projects so that one can trace the origins of the idea expressed back to sources. SJ On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 5:51 AM, Jodi Schneider <jodi.schneider(a)deri.org> wrote: Samuel, This is great! What's the idea for a WikiCite project? -Jodi On 20 Jun 2010, at 22:44, Samuel Klein wrote: Some motivation for a proper WikiCite project.     --sj =============== Begin forwarded message ================== "How citation distortions create unfounded authority: analysis of a citation network"        http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/339/jul20_3/b2680 Abstract: Objective -To understand belief in a specific scientific claim by studying the pattern of citations among papers stating it. Design - A complete citation network was constructed from all PubMed indexed English literature papers addressing the belief that \u03b2 amyloid, a protein accumulated in the brain in Alzheimer\u2019s disease, is produced by and injures skeletal muscle of patients with inclusion body myositis. Social network theory and graph theory were used to analyse this network. Main outcome measures - Citation bias, amplification, and invention, and their effects on determining authority. Results: The network contained 242 papers and 675 citations addressing the belief, with 220 553 citation paths supporting it. Unfounded authority was established by citation bias against papers that refuted or weakened the belief; amplification, the marked expansion of the belief system by papers presenting no data addressing it; and forms of invention such as the conversion of hypothesis into fact through citation alone. Extension of this network into text within grants funded by the National Institutes of Health and obtained through the Freedom of Information Act showed the same phenomena present and sometimes used to justify requests for funding. Conclusion: Citation is both an impartial scholarly method and a powerful form of social communication. Through distortions in its social use that include bias, amplification, and invention, citation can be used to generate information cascades resulting in unfounded authority of claims. Construction and analysis of a claim specific citation network may clarify the nature of a published belief system and expose distorted methods of social citation. -- Samuel Klein          identi.ca:sj           w:user:sj -- Samuel Klein          identi.ca:sj           w:user:sj _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l -- Samuel Klein          identi.ca:sj           w:user:sj _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l