Diamond open access | Wikipedia

Diamond open access refers to academic texts (such as monographs, edited collections, and journal articles) published/distributed/preserved with no fees to neither reader nor author. Alternative labels include platinum open access, non-commercial open access, cooperative open access or, more recently, open access commons. While these terms were first coined in the 2000s and the 2010s, they have been retroactively applied a variety of structure and forms of publishing from subsidized university publisher to volunteer-run cooperative that have existed in prior decades.

In 2021, it is estimated that between 17,000 and 29,000 scientific journals rely on a diamond open access model. They make up for 73%[1] of the journals registered in the Directory of Open Access Journals and 44% of the articles, as their mean output is smaller than commercial journals. The diamond model has been especially successful in Latin America-based journals (95% of OA journals[1]) following the emergence of large publicly supported platforms, such as SciELO and Redalyc.

In 2022, new national and international policies, such as the UNESCO recommendation on open science, and the Action Plan for Diamond Open Access promoted by the cOAlition S aim to support the development of non-commercial or community-driven forms open access publishing.

 

Scholia for Software

Abstract:  Scholia for Software is a project to add software profiling features to Scholia, which is a scholarly profiling service from the Wikimedia ecosystem and integrated with Wikipedia and Wikidata. This document is an adaptation of the funded grant proposal. We are sharing it for several reasons, including research transparency, our wish to encourage the sharing of research proposals for reuse and remixing in general, to assist others specifically in making proposals that would complement our activities, and because sharing this proposal helps us to tell the story of the project to community stakeholders.

A “scholarly profiling service” is a tool which assists the user in accessing data on some aspect of scholarship, usually in relation to research. Typical features of such services include returning the biography of academic publications for any given researcher, or providing a list of publications by topic. Scholia already exists as a Wikimedia platform tool built upon Wikidata and capable of serving these functions. This project will additionally add software-related data to Wikidata, develop Scholia’s own code, and address some ethical issues in diversity and representation around these activities. The end result will be that Scholia will have the ability to report what software a given researcher has described using in their publications, what software is most used among authors publishing on a given topic or in a given journal, what papers describe projects which use some given software, and what software is most often co-used in projects which use a given software.

 

 

[2208.08426] “We Need a Woman in Music”: Exploring Wikipedia’s Values on Article Priority

Abstract:  Wikipedia — like most peer production communities — suffers from a basic problem: the amount of work that needs to be done (articles to be created and improved) exceeds the available resources (editor effort). Recommender systems have been deployed to address this problem, but they have tended to recommend work tasks that match individuals’ personal interests, ignoring more global community values. In English Wikipedia, discussion about Vital articles constitutes a proxy for community values about the types of articles that are most important, and should therefore be prioritized for improvement. We first analyzed these discussions, finding that an article’s priority is considered a function of 1) its inherent importance and 2) its effects on Wikipedia’s global composition. One important example of the second consideration is balance, including along the dimensions of gender and geography. We then conducted a quantitative analysis evaluating how four different article prioritization methods — two from prior research — would affect Wikipedia’s overall balance on these two dimensions; we found significant differences among the methods. We discuss the implications of our results, including particularly how they can guide the design of recommender systems that take into account community values, not just individuals’ interests.

 

[2208.08426] “We Need a Woman in Music”: Exploring Wikipedia’s Values on Article Priority

Abstract:  Wikipedia — like most peer production communities — suffers from a basic problem: the amount of work that needs to be done (articles to be created and improved) exceeds the available resources (editor effort). Recommender systems have been deployed to address this problem, but they have tended to recommend work tasks that match individuals’ personal interests, ignoring more global community values. In English Wikipedia, discussion about Vital articles constitutes a proxy for community values about the types of articles that are most important, and should therefore be prioritized for improvement. We first analyzed these discussions, finding that an article’s priority is considered a function of 1) its inherent importance and 2) its effects on Wikipedia’s global composition. One important example of the second consideration is balance, including along the dimensions of gender and geography. We then conducted a quantitative analysis evaluating how four different article prioritization methods — two from prior research — would affect Wikipedia’s overall balance on these two dimensions; we found significant differences among the methods. We discuss the implications of our results, including particularly how they can guide the design of recommender systems that take into account community values, not just individuals’ interests.

 

SAGE Publishing Partners with The Wikipedia Library to Grant Journal Access to Wikipedia Editors — SAGE Publishing

“SAGE Publishing is pleased to announce a partnership with The Wikipedia Library to provide Wikipedia editors full-text access to SAGE’s more than 1,100 journals beginning immediately. The partnership will connect peer-reviewed research to those outside of academia for greater societal understanding and increase research connections….”

How AI could help make Wikipedia entries more accurate

“Automated tools can help identify gibberish or statements that lack citations, but helping human editors determine whether a source actually backs up a claim is a much more complex task — one that requires an AI system’s depth of understanding and analysis.

Building on Meta AI’s research and advancements, we’ve developed the first model capable of automatically scanning hundreds of thousands of citations at once to check whether they truly support the corresponding claims. It’s open-sourced here, and you can see a demo of our verifier here. As a knowledge source for our model, we created a new dataset of 134 million public webpages — an order of magnitude larger and significantly more intricate than ever used for this sort of research. It calls attention to questionable citations, allowing human editors to evaluate the cases most likely to be flawed without having to sift through thousands of properly cited statements. If a citation seems irrelevant, our model will suggest a more applicable source, even pointing to the specific passage that supports the claim. Eventually, our goal is to build a platform to help Wikipedia editors systematically spot citation issues and quickly fix the citation or correct the content of the corresponding article at scale….”

Wikipedia fights Russian order to remove Ukraine war information | Reuters

“The Wikimedia Foundation, which owns Wikipedia, has filed an appeal against a Moscow court decision demanding that it remove information related to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, arguing that people have a right to know the facts of the war….”

CFP: Wikimedia+Libraries International Convention 2022 | Maynooth, Ireland, 23-24 July, 2022

“With support from the Wikimedia Foundation, we are excited to announce the first-ever Wikimedia+Libraries International Convention, to be held in Maynooth, Ireland, 23-24 July, 2022. While a limited number of scholarships are available, individuals do not need to be awarded a scholarship to participate. As the inaugural conference for professionals working at the intersection of Wikimedia and libraries, we seek proposals that engage all aspects of libraries and information literacy work happening in and alongside the Wikimedia movement. Wikimedia’s core-knowledge projects (especially Wikipedia, Wikidata, Wikisource, and Wikimedia Commons) provide the community, resources, and technical infrastructure that enable free educational content on a global scale. To reach their full potential, however, these projects need participation from library leaders and their communities. To that end, we seek proposals that demonstrate practical, scholarly, and/or speculative engagement with Wikimedia across a diverse range of topics, including but not limited to:

Advocacy and outreach in local contexts
Tutorials and training on Wikimedia’s core-knowledge projects (Wikipedia, Wikidata, Wikisource, Wikimedia Commons)
Experience sharing panels
Productive failures
Future research – What are the initiatives/research that will move us forward?
Publication and research at the intersection of Wikimedia+Libraries

Important Dates

27 May – 21 June, 2022: Share the call for proposals with your networks!
21 June, 2022: Deadline for proposal submission
22 June – 2 July, 2022: Programme committee reviews proposals
5 July, 2022: Decisions on proposals and publication of programme draft
23 July – 24 July, 2022: Conference event…”

UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science – Free Knowledge Advocacy Group EU

“In late 2021, the UNESCO General Assembly approved a new Recommendation on Open Science. All the member states agreed on a final version, that for the first time provides an official definition of what open science is, and that calls for legal and policy changes in favor of open science. As a recommendation is the strongest policy tool of UNESCO, “intended to influence the development of national laws and practices”, this is important news for the entire scientific community. 

The recommendation presents a framework on, and principles for, open science. It aims to build a common understanding on the topic, and calls for publicly funded research to be aligned with the principles: transparency, scrutiny, critique and reproducibility; equality of opportunities; responsibility, respect and accountability; collaboration, participation and inclusion; flexibility, and sustainability. 

It asks for more dialogue between the public and the private sector, and for new, innovative means and methods to be developed for open science. Finally, the recommendation stresses the importance of citizen science and crowdsourcing, and the need for cooperation between different kinds of actors, nationally and internationally.

In Sweden, the recommendation is currently being discussed with stakeholders. A few weeks ago, Wikimedia Sverige was invited by the Swedish National UNESCO Commission to a round table conversation on the subject. Other than Wikimedia Sverige, organisations and institutions such as the Association of Swedish Higher Education Institutions, the Swedish Research Council, the Ministry for Education and the National Library, took part – many of those who will bear the largest responsibility for putting the recommendations in practice. …”

How academic institutions can help to close Wikipedia’s gender gap

“The world’s largest online encyclopedia mirrors society’s bias towards male achievements. Employers in science, technology, engineering, mathematics and medicine can help to change that….

Since 2018, 500 Women Scientists, a grass-roots advocacy organization of which we are all members, has run more than 30 Wikipedia edit-a-thon sessions — workshops in which Wikipedia experts and novices come together for a guided crash course on the website and a few hours of focused editing. Over biscuits and coffee, we’ve built a community of contributors who are committed to tackling inequalities in the online encyclopedia. We have sponsored in-depth editor training with Wiki Education — a non-profit organization that builds partnerships between academia and the Wikimedia Foundation, which funds Wikipedia and its sibling projects — to address this under-representation….

In the past four years, we’ve created and edited more than 3,000 pages, which have been viewed more than 80 million times: 80 million opportunities to share diverse stories of those working in STEMM, and to slowly change the face of science….

A 2021 ethnographic study3 demonstrated that biographies of women and members of the LGBTQ+ community who meet Wikipedia’s notability criteria are more frequently nominated for deletion than are men’s biographies. Take Nobel laureate Donna Strickland, a physicist at the University of Waterloo in Canada: pre-Nobel, her Wikipedia entry had been tagged for ‘speedy deletion’, and was subsequently deleted, within six minutes of going live. …

In 2018, only 17.7% of Wikipedia biographies written in English were about women — four years later, the number has increased to 19.2%. This is essential progress, but incremental. We need more editors to collectively chip away at Wikipedia’s gender, racial, geographical and societal bases….”

 

Wikimedia Project update | DPLA

“At the start of 2020, the Digital Public Library of America embarked on an ambitious program to assist our network in providing their digital collections to Wikipedia and in realizing the resulting increase in access to those images. Since that time, DPLA has added over 2.5 million files to Wikimedia Commons—with over 200 million pieces of metadata from about 1 million items—and these have already received over 100 million page views. As we wrap up the second year of this initiative, we’d like to share some of our outcomes so far, and discuss the new phase we will soon enter….”

» How College Students Are Improving Wikipedia

“Some of that information has been added by college students from New England, written as a class assignment. Wiki Education, a small nonprofit, runs a program called the Wikipedia Student Program, in which we support college and university faculty who want to assign their students to write Wikipedia articles as part of their coursework.

Why do instructors assign their students to edit Wikipedia as a course assignment? Research shows a Wikipedia assignment increases motivation for students, while providing them learning objectives like critical thinking, research, writing for a public audience, evaluating and synthesizing sources and peer review. Especially important in today’s climate of misinformation and disinformation is the critical digital media literacy skills students gain from writing for Wikipedia, where they’re asked to consider and evaluate the reliability of the sources they’re citing. In addition to the benefits to student learning outcomes, instructors are also glad to see Wikipedia’s coverage of their discipline get better. And it does get better; studies such as this and this and this have shown the quality of content students add to Wikipedia is high.

Since 2010, more than 5,100 courses have participated in the program and more than 102,000 student editors have added more than 85 million words to Wikipedia. That’s 292,000 printed pages or the equivalent of 62 volumes of a printed encyclopedia. To put that in context, the last print edition of Encyclopedia Britannica had only 32 volumes. That means Wikipedia Student Program participants have added nearly twice as much content as was in Britannica. …”

Helping Ukrainian Scholars, One Book at a Time – Internet Archive Blogs

“The Internet Archive is proud to partner with Better World Books to support Ukrainian students and scholars. With a $1 donation at checkout during your purchase at betterworldbooks.com, you will help provide verifiable information to Ukrainian scholars all over the world through Wikipedia.

Since 2019, the Internet Archive has worked with the Wikipedia community to strengthen citations to published literature. Working in collaboration with Wikipedians and data scientists, Internet Archive has linked hundreds of thousands of citations in Wikipedia to books in our collection, offering Wikipedia editors and readers single-click access to the verifiable facts contained within libraries. 

Recently, our engineers analyzed the citations in the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia, and were able to connect citations to more than 17,000 books that have already been digitized by the Internet Archive, such as the page for ???????? (English translation: Genomics), which links to a science textbook published in 2002. Through this work, we discovered that there are more than 25,000 additional books that we don’t have in our collection—and that’s where you can help! …”