Re: [Wiki-research-l] long in tooth: ignoring recent scholarship

2012-05-03 Thread Richard Jensen
Looking at a spinoff Shakespeare article: [[Shakespeare's plays]]. 
It's peak activity year was 2007.  A dozen people made 10 or more 
edits.  It has 26 citations and no bibliography.  There are no 
scholarly journals. Half the citations are over 40 years old. Only 
one book was published after 2007.  That profile strongly suggests 
editors who are unfamiliar with current scholarship.


Happily the article on [[WIlliam Shakespeare's Style]] is MUCH more 
up-to-date.  



___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l


Re: [Wiki-research-l] long in tooth: ignoring recent scholarship

2012-05-03 Thread Amir E. Aharoni
2012/5/3 Richard Jensen rjen...@uic.edu:
 Looking at a spinoff Shakespeare article: [[Shakespeare's plays]]. It's peak
 activity year was 2007.  A dozen people made 10 or more edits.  It has 26
 citations and no bibliography.  There are no scholarly journals. Half the
 citations are over 40 years old. Only one book was published after 2007.
  That profile strongly suggests editors who are unfamiliar with current
 scholarship.

I sense low-hanging fruit here. What academic wouldn't want his paper
to be cited more? Wikipedia is not an academic source, but it's a
hugely popular one. A correctly-done campaign to get academics and
their students to cite recently published papers will benefit
everybody.

 Happily the article on [[WIlliam Shakespeare's Style]] is MUCH more
 up-to-date.  

... Which shows that a lot of is very intermittent and haphazard, but
often in a good way.

--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
‪“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬

___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l


Re: [Wiki-research-l] long in tooth: ignoring recent scholarship

2012-05-03 Thread Juliana Bastos
For my last semester class at the Brazilian Education Program I encouraged
students to use recent books and papers in Portuguese, instead of only the
traditional English textbooks copied from the WP:EN articles. This also
happened because the English proficiency level for some students was not so
good, so I had to make them use material in Portuguese anyway [1]. I
noticed this turned out to be a great way to have academic papers in
Portuguese to be known and read. This gets even easier because most online
journals in Portuguese are open source [2].

As for the debate on peak edits on English Wikipedia, I'd just like to add
a comment. I recently watched this documentary about Wikipedia [3] where
one of the Encyclopaedia Britannica editors said WP should be understood as
a game. I don't meant to raise the issue about WP X Britannica, neither I
actually agree with him, but this is what came to my mind while reading the
current discussion. What I mean is that eventually - and already now for
some articles - specialists will have to be recruited instead of the
average editor. I am participating in a project that tried to deal with
this issue, by making students edit for grades, but I'm certain there are
many other ways to do it.

Juliana.


[1] An example: http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romaniza%C3%A7%C3%A3o
[2] http://www.scielo.org
[3] http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/the-truth-according-to-wikipedia/


On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Amir E. Aharoni 
amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il wrote:

 2012/5/3 Richard Jensen rjen...@uic.edu:
  Looking at a spinoff Shakespeare article: [[Shakespeare's plays]]. It's
 peak
  activity year was 2007.  A dozen people made 10 or more edits.  It has 26
  citations and no bibliography.  There are no scholarly journals. Half the
  citations are over 40 years old. Only one book was published after 2007.
   That profile strongly suggests editors who are unfamiliar with current
  scholarship.

 I sense low-hanging fruit here. What academic wouldn't want his paper
 to be cited more? Wikipedia is not an academic source, but it's a
 hugely popular one. A correctly-done campaign to get academics and
 their students to cite recently published papers will benefit
 everybody.

  Happily the article on [[WIlliam Shakespeare's Style]] is MUCH more
  up-to-date.  

 ... Which shows that a lot of is very intermittent and haphazard, but
 often in a good way.

 --
 Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
 http://aharoni.wordpress.com
 ‪“We're living in pieces,
 I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬

 ___
 Wiki-research-l mailing list
 Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l