Nice information, thanks for sharing! I think it's quite low. In that a) PLoS is a sister project which we should be supporting and following closely; many of their editors are wikipedians b) Every one of their articles is about a notable topic and a reliable primary source c) We could generate a useful todo list by finding a home for every article they choose to publish.
This reminds me of the way that our inclusion of the CC-SA khan academy videos - all those published up until mid-2010 at least - on commons is remarkably low, even though they are now already available transcoded into ogv. Until a group of editors actively sees a source of valuable knowledge as such and as something to incorporate, we often don't use knowledge that is already out there, even when freely licensed. SJ _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
