Dear friends,

at the WikiCon 2014 in Cologne (the Wikimania for the German speaking countries) we discussed similar issues, together with some external people. Can one quote from WP, under what circumstances, and why not. I hope that someone will do something with our etherpad notes.

A panel discussion yesterday evening. There was one gentleman from a major German publishing house (C.H. Beck; google about the related plagiarism scandal) who said that he was astonished that WP authors often talk so negativly about the quotability and quality of the articles. And one student in the audience said: "I am new here, I'am just a reader. If I understand you well, you guys here think that one should not quote from WP? (People saying: Yes, one should'nt!) Okay, I did not know that, and I believe that many people don't know that."

Kind regards Ziko

Am Samstag, 4. Oktober 2014 schrieb James Heilman :

I agree all Wikipedia articles are sort of peer reviewed. When I speak about GA/FA I refer to it as Wikipedia's semi-formal peer review process.

With respect to authorship, the 5th to 10th contributors by number of editors were contacted and asked if they wished to be listed as an author. All of them declined feeling that they had not contributed sufficiently to justify being listed.

-- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine www.opentextbookofmedicine.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; ?subject=unsubscribe>

Hi James,

first of all, congrats for proving this to be possible. As it has already been said it is an achievement nothing short of great.

2014-10-04 15:47 GMT+02:00 James Heilman jmh649@gmail.com:

I agree all Wikipedia articles are sort of peer reviewed. When I speak about GA/FA I refer to it as Wikipedia's semi-formal peer review process.

With respect to authorship, the 5th to 10th contributors by number of editors were contacted and asked if they wished to be listed as an author. All of them declined feeling that they had not contributed sufficiently to justify being listed.

You mean by number of edits? (I do not understand what you mean with "by number of editors"). I think this is a reasonable criteria. (We may discuss on the results, i.e. everybody declined, so Wikipedian!)

Anyway I would like to suggest other metrics that could be used as a measure of paternity of the article, e.g. bytes added or removed[1], I would point you to Dario Taraborelli and the analytics teams for other ideas.

It also worth pointing out for the readers of this thread that there is not a single version of the article [[Dengue Fever]] that is identical to the article published (see [[Talk:Dengue fever]] here[2]), although I would like to be pointed to one (or a set of) closest version(s). (Finding automatically close versions would be super interesting).

Thanks.

Cristian

[1] http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/whowriteswikipedia [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ADengue_fever&diff=6280...