On the changing relationship between Wikipedia and academic publishing.
The relationship between Wikipedia and academic publishing is changing. In particular, WikiJournals are bringing together the scholarly rigour of academic publishing with the massive impact of Wikipedia and Wikidata. Participating journals publish a range of formats: from broad reviews copied fully into Wikipedia, to image galleries that get integrated throughout the encyclopedia, to stand-alone research and teaching articles.
What does this look like to an Academic? We're used to even top academic articles getting <10,000 views ever, whereas a Wikipedia article on the same topic can get that many each day. Getting both a peer reviewed, citable journal article, that's also integrated into Wikipedia to reach broader demographics like students, journalists and policymakers merges the best of both worlds.
What does this look like to a librarian? It's an interesting way to match quality assurance. It's also unusual to see journals that are free to both reader and author ('Diamond OA'). Article metadata is also integrated Wikidata - an exciting meta-database that's flexible, human- and machine-readable, and multilingual.
What does this look like to a Wikipedian? It's an effective was of drawing in subject-experts who would otherwise not have contributed to a Wikimedia project as authors, peer reviewers and editors. It's a way to generate new high-quality content as well as thoroughly audit existing content.
For those who came to last year's session (https://doi.org/10.26181/5ED388168AE4B
) this seminar will cover new ground and avoid repetition, but for those who didn't, we'll still be introducing the necessary background. We'll look at new experiments in format, statistics on impacts so far, and what lessons can be applied to pother projects.