Il giorno mer 5 giu 2019 alle ore 12:00 John Erling Blad <jeblad(a)gmail.com>
ha scritto:
One reason; reach.
In academia reach -per se- is not a big deal, while impact is.
Reach leads to impact. You can't get impact without reach, but reach
in non-scientific communities does not necessarily turn into reach in
scientific communities.
Apart from the hype I wouldn't releate reach and scientific impact. Most of
research community is forced to seek for impact, bibliometric indicators
and abiding by the publish or perish principle.
There are nothing that blocks Wikipedia from doing
peer review. (It
has implicit peer review.) What you propose for WikiJournal is to make
peer review a policy. That does not in itself turn articles into good
research.
I disagree with this, Wikipedia doesn't make original research by
definition.
I concur we have something similar to peer review, though ours is less
"autorithy-centered".
Vito