http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_is_the_enemy_of_good
From: Jake Orlowitz <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Reply-To: Wikimedia & Libraries <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Wednesday, November 5, 2014 at 11/5/14 • 8:09 PM To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: Wikimedia & Libraries <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "Wikimedia & GLAM collaboration [Public]" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [libraries] New Wikipedia Library Signups: Free Research Accounts! (sorry this conversation is happening across multiple lists, I should have used cc for the emails... ) Responding to Mitar on open access: You know I think it's sad too that we have to go around asking for donations and selling Wikipedia's value as a portal to publishers. On the other hand, we have 500 million monthly readers and when they come to Wikipedia they will see the content we have summarized from sources. The only question is whether that content is from full-text-available-online sources only, or from all of the best sources regardless of their access status. At the end of my day, I have to serve our editors and readers as best I can and that means giving them as much access to the best research as possible today. You may think this is a devil's bargain, but I have to admit that I'm a pragmatist and I'd rather have our editors summarize paywalled content for our readers than for that content to not be represented on Wikipedia at all, even if readers may hit a paywall when they click-through. It's long been Wikipedia's policy (at least English Wikipedia) that accessibility is not a deciding factor when it comes to what is a reliable source. That applies to out of print manuscripts as well as to embargoed journals--we use the best sources now because we have an encyclopedia to write. If we aim to change that, it requires a very deep discussion about how we prioritize and strategize our mission. I do whatever I can to support OA, to tweet about open access button efforts, to promote WikiProject Resource Exchange, to support the OA signalling project, to engage with initiatives like the Open Access reader, and to discuss the broader mission of sharing knowledge with reference experts and journals. The tides are changing and I see it daily as I speak with librarians and journal publishers. In other words, the efforts of The Wikipedia Library advance our mission and are indeed *complementary* to the radical vision of open access that I wholeheartedly support. So, I hope you take this as my saying, "I agree completely" and also "So what, we have an encyclopedia to write!" Happy to continue discussing this. Best, Jake (Ocaasi) On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 6:42 PM, Mitar <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: 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. 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. This is not open access. This direct opposite to open access. We should not be proud of this. (Please don't take this as an attack on anybody personally and I think The Wikipedia Library Team is doing a great job, but I really feel this is a bad deal. And it was sent to the open access mailing list. Which this is not.) Mitar On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Jake Orlowitz <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Hi! > The Wikipedia Library has new, free research donations available: > > NEW > *DeGruyter: 1000 accounts for English and German-language research, sign up > on one of two language Wikipedias: > English signup <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:De_Gruyter> > German signup <https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:De_Gruyter> > *Fold3: 100 accounts for American history and military archives > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fold3> > *Scotland's People: 100 accounts for Scottish Genealogy database > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ScotlandsPeople> > > EXPANDED > *British Newspaper Archive: 100+ new accounts for British Newspapers > archives > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BNA> > > OPEN > *Highbeam: 100+ accounts for newspapers and magazines > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:HighBeam> > *Questia: 100+ accounts for various aggregated journals and social science > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Questia> > *JSTOR: 100+ accounts for journal archives > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:JSTOR> > > Accounts are available to ALL global editors with a 1 year old account and > 1000 edits. Please notify your local community about the signups. Signups > for now are mostly on English Wikipedia, UNLESS you have started a local > Wikipedia Library branch like we've done on Arabic, Chinese, and German. To > get started, please contact Ocaasi at [[m:User:Ocaasi (WMF)]] or > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > > Thanks! > > The Wikipedia Library Team > <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/The_Wikipedia_Library> > > _______________________________________________ > OpenAccess mailing list > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess > -- http://mitar.tnode.com/ https://twitter.com/mitar_m _______________________________________________ OpenAccess mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess
_______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
