On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 4:20 PM, <WJhonson(a)aol.com> wrote:
That is how I envision this WikiJournal prospective. Not as another
university-driven nowheresville which gets no traction because the vast
majority
of the world doesn't really care to read highly scientific and technical
articles.
Another example might be, let's say that you write a piece on intricate
details of the Watergate scandal, as an investigative journalist. It's not
"news" but I would think WikiJournal (or whatever) might be a perfect venue
to
have such an article peer-reviewed. WikiNews is not peer-reviewed.
How is this different than the "peer review" at Wikipedia?