[Foundation-l] Access to academic journals (was Re: Remarks on Wikimedia's fundraiser)

[Andreas Kolbe]

--- On Wed, 9/3/11, Stephanie Daugherty <sdaugherty at gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Stephanie Daugherty <sdaugherty at gmail.com>

> I object to this strongly. The FA, and DYK processes are
> absolutely
> useless as a measure of an editor's worth to the project.
> There's
> plenty of wikignomes and other mostly unrecognized editors
> that will
> be able to do more than someone just focused on brownie
> points. The
> only thing that should be a consideration is that the
> editor is
> committed enough to use the resources to improve articles,
> and that
> the editor doesn't already have access to the resources
> another way
> (like through their local library). FA and even DYK
> processes are too
> political on some wikis, at least from my experience on en
> - the
> process needs to be aimed at making sure regulars have
> resources, not
> about a reward for some token "achievement".
> 
> If we have to base it on numbers, a pattern of
> contributions over
> several months is what we should look for - something that
> suggests
> the editor will keep contributing.


That's fine, Stephanie. 

Deciding who should benefit from access is something that can be worked out
if and when we actually have some access to give to editors; at present we 
haven't.

As far as OA vs. commercial science publishers is concerned, we should not 
limit ourselves to one strategy. We should pursue all avenues available that 
provide increased access to quality sources, whether OA or commercial. 

OA is great, but if they are OA because they receive tax funding, for 
example, while commercial publishers do not, then it is not a fair contest.
Focusing on OA would also have the unexpected side effect that we would 
privilege tax-funded research. That may be great for health issues, in terms 
of eliminating commercial bias, but it might introduce other forms of bias in 
other areas.

I know a few "commercially" published academics; they're not rolling in it 
by any means. We would not stop citing books or newspapers because they
are offered for sale, rather than made available freely. So let's not
discriminate against commercially published scholars, either.

Andreas