[WikiEN-l] PLoS Comp Biol article on getting stuff intoWikipedia

[Carcharoth]

On 4/11/12, Dr Jacob F. de Wolff <jfdwolff at doctors.org.uk> wrote:
> Carcharoth wrote:
>>What I'm thinking in particular
> is that some FACs would benefit from what is essentially an *external*
> peer review process (as opposed to the internal peer review and other
> review processes). i.e. Actively soliciting reviews from those holding
> credentials (academic or otherwise) in the topic area. Historically,
> given the "anyone an edit" and (mostly) pseudonymous nature of
> editing, there hasn't been much interest in this model of reviewing,
> but I'd be interested to see reactions to this.
>
> Some medical FAs had the benefit of external peer review (coeliac disease,
> subarachnoid hemorrhage), but as always it depends on someone outside
> Wikipedia to take an interest. The quality, depth and timeliness of the peer
> review is largely dependant on that.

Returning to this topic because something similar has come up at WT:FAC, see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_candidates#Subject_matter_experts_and_reviews

I completely forgot to go there (WT:FAC) earlier and point out the
PLoS Comp Biol review process. I'm away this weekend and might not be
able to post on-wiki about this until tonight or Tuesday. I know it is
a big ask, but would someone reading this be able to briefly post at
WT:FAC pointing out this mailing list thread and this talk page
review:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Circular_permutation_in_proteins#Open_Peer_Review

It might not be what is planned at WP:FAC, but I think that 'open peer
review' should be brought into that discussion as an example at least.

Carcharoth