Hi!
This reminds me of ugly practices of proprietary software companies
giving free software to students so that they are able to learn the
tools and then later on have to pay:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/The_Wikipedia_Library/Journals
So we will be making links to paywalled journals and we will be able
to do it for free, but then our readers will have to pay to read them?
So Wikipedia will provide free advertisements for paywalled content?
Nicely done, nicely done.
Mitar
--
http://mitar.tnode.com/https://twitter.com/mitar_m
Hey,
I submitted this bug https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=69294
I'm wondering if it's cool to the current subscribers of this list to
revive it especially:
"to discuss citations, references, sources, metadata and related topics for
Wikimedia projects, especially concerning Wikidata and Wikipedia"
Thanks!
// Matt
p.s. if this is cool, perhaps we can add another admin or two? Admin:
marielle.volz(a)gmail.com 2nd Admin: daniel.mietchen(a)gmail.com
--------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Access to academic journals (was Re: Remarks
on Wikimedia's fundraiser)
From: "Andreas Kolbe" <jayen466(a)yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, March 15, 2011 6:32 am
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
<foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- On Tue, 15/3/11, David Goodman <dggenwp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> From: David Goodman <dggenwp(a)gmail.com>
> I've been involved with open
> access journals as a professional
> activity from the start of the movement, long before I
> joined
> Wikipedia. There has been only limited success.
> Though there are
> almost ten thousand open access journals, 95% of them are
> either very
> small or very unimportant, and in almost all fields
> of study, none or
> almost none of the important journals are open access:
This is my experience too; thanks for pointing it out.
> No important journals at all in chemistry are open access,
> Almost none in physics
> Almost none in geology
> Almost none in ecology & evolution
> A few in molecular & cell biology
> A few only in biomedical sciences
> None in psychology
> Almost none in the social sciences or the humanities
> Almost none in engineering and applied science
> A few in medicine
<snip>
> At this point, there is no academic field of study
> whatsoever where an
> adequate article could be written using only open access
> material.
> This is of course a very limiting thing for access to
> information not
> just for us, but for the world in general, and the WMF
> projects should
> certainly cooperate as closely as possible with the
> forces working
> for open access, but the suggestion that it is possible to
> limit to or
> even prefer open acces material is incompatible with the
> policy on
> using the best available sources.
Could someone from the Foundation please respond to the idea of contacting
universities and content database providers and inviting them to support
Wikipedia by making a certain number of log-in IDs available, with the
benefit -- to them -- that increased citation of high-quality publications
would potentially make these publications visible to a larger audience?
Is this something the Foundation would consider pursuing?
Andreas
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
In connection with the Credo subscriptions Erik Möller
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation created the mailing list
Wikimediareference-l list run by erik at wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediareference-l
It has a little bit of discussion from March to July, 2010.
Let's all subscribe and bury this conversation away from public view so
we won't have to think about it any more.
I see they have a job description for a communications staff person to
coordinate discussions. This is a good example of what some way of
coordinating discussions is needed.
One thought though, there should be some mechanism for the donor to get
feedback on the use and usefulness of their donation by active and
successful Wikipedia editors if they are going to be satisfied that their
donation was useful and appreciated.
Fred
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 06:32, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Could someone from the Foundation please respond to the idea of
contacting
>> universities and content database providers and inviting them to support
>> Wikipedia by making a certain number of log-in IDs available, with the
benefit -- to them -- that increased citation of high-quality
>> publications
>> would potentially make these publications visible to a larger audience?
>>
>> Is this something the Foundation would consider pursuing?
>
> Credo offered 100 accounts last year as a charitable donation.
> Unfortunately they were given out on a first-come, first-served basis,
which meant editors who don't contribute content signed up for them, as
did those who already have access at home through their local libraries
-- though in fairness several withdrew their names once they realized
that. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CREDO
>
> It would be wonderful if the Foundation could seek more of the same
kind of donation, particularly from databases giving access to
> academic journals (e.g. JSTOR), but being careful to make sure the
accounts went to editors who would use them the most, but who don't
currently have access. This kind of thing would really improve article
quality, and would make established editors feel their needs were being
looked after.
>
> Sarah
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
"Wikipedia Credo Subscribers,
I would like to hear from any Wikipedian editors who are planning to
attend Wikimania in Gdansk, Poland next month. I am thinking of assembling
a group of Wikipedian editors who would be interested in discussing other
ways in which publishers and aggregators who provide content to
libraries can support the work of Wikipedia. We've had some discussions
with members of the Wikipedia staff, but it would be especially worthwhile
to get feedback and suggestions from Wikipedian editors.
John Dove, President, Credo Reference "
--
dove(a)credoreference.com
+1 781.964.2325 (mobile)
“Credo's Got My Attention Again!" – Cheryl LaGuardia, Library Journal,
January 26, 2010, upon learning of Credo signing up for images from the
National Gallery
Hi,
Thank you for giving me access to the Credo reference suite. I have been
looking around the Credo site and I noticed that each entry has a very
useful module for different citation formats.
I think there might be two slight enhancements to this module. The first
would be to embed the citation data in the page in a computer readable
format so it could be picked up by Zotero and similar citation managing
programs. I think this would be extremely useful without having any effects
on site usability, design or content. (This would enhance the built-in
feature to export saved results in different citation formats and for
different citation managers.)
It might also be good if among the citation formats there would be an extra
option for Wikipedia. This would be useful for those of us that have
received the accounts but might also encourage non-Wikipedians doing
research on Credo to turn to improve the relevant Wikipedia article.
This second improvement might be a bit more difficult to do as it would
probably need assistance from the Wikimedia community to explain the
citation format and to write some specific help pages for those who come to
Wikipedia from Credo.
Note that this is not as important as the first proposed improvement as
Zotero can produce the Wikpedia and other citation and bibliography
formats on demand.
Best regards,
Bence Damokos
When I search for "paradox", I get 1394. Browsing won't work past 200
entries. I can work around by performing narrower searches, but that is
a bit awkward. Any chance of this being fixed?
Regards
Paradoctor
--
"A Paradox May Be Paradoctored"
Robert Anson Heinlein, "All You Zombies", 1959
Instead of a checkbox, I'd rather see a button or link. Also, checking
off results becomes quickly tedious if you want to save a large set of
results. I'd like a button to save all results of a given search, or at
least all results on the current page. And ten results per page is not
enough, for me at least. It would be good if that could be user-configured.
Regards
Paradoctor
--
"A Paradox May Be Paradoctored"
Robert Anson Heinlein, "All You Zombies", 1959
Welcome to the mailing list to discuss the Credo Reference account
program. You should have received a separate welcome message when you
were subscribed. As per that message, this mailing list accompanies
the program at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Credo_accounts
In addition to all account recipients, I've added John Dove, President
of Credo Reference, to the subscribers. The list is publicly archived
and open to new, interested subscribers. I hope that it can eventually
become a general forum for discussing such programs.
All best,
Erik
--
Erik Möller
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
Hello,
First of all, i would like to thank Credo Reference for giving us this
wonderful tool.
I have a basic technical question: Is it possible to change the password
that we received? I couldn't find anything like "profile", "preferences",
"account settings", etc.
Thanks in advance.
--
אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
Amir Elisha Aharoni
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
"We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace." - T. Moore