yepp, Joe, agree, let's develop both of these answer 2 + 2a ideas further http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Research_Ideas/Research_Hub
see you@all there Claudia On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 20:10:55 +0000, Joe Corneli wrote > On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 4:38 PM, <koltzenb...@w4w.net> wrote: > > > Answer 2: > > > > articles are not "submitted" to the journal's editors but written openly on > > the journals' platform (and then > > maybe sent to a review process elsewhere as well as opening up to public > > review here) > > My answer would be like your Answer 2 above. > > Let me be clear that what I envision would be more like a "research > hub" than a journal -- but in the end, it would of course include > papers that could be cited (and that could be noted down on > contributors' CVs). But not all contributions would have to be like > that. If we extended the scope quite broadly, it would be "like > Wikipedia, but without the 'no original research' clause." We'd > presumably want some other rule, about "focusing on high quality > research." > > I might also go further: > > Answer 2a: > > The platform itself could be a target for experiment by contributors. > So, while we could start with a standard MediaWiki installation and > standard papers, the journal could also review "papers plus > experiments". The experiment could take place with extensions to the > basic MediaWiki installation, or in some other attached wiki. (In > mathematics, there's a journal called "Experimental Mathematics" which > captures a similar sort of spirit.) > > _______________________________________________ > 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
