Talk:WikiJournal User Group

From Wikiversity
(Redirected from Talk:WikiJournal Preprints)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Technical feature discussion[edit]

As part of the sister project application, there is a discussion about possible technical features here. It may also be useful to organise and summarise the outcomes at this page. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 07:28, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

The technical feature list is beginning to look good. Any edits to update the relative priorities and technical feasibilities will be good to work out what order we tackle these in, and how large a developer team may need to be assembled to implement the most important ones.
Any opinions welcome here or at this discussion link. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 11:08, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Sister project and Thematic organisation applications[edit]

Sister Project application for Wikimedia Journals (combined).pdf

As part of the User Group's expansion, there are two applications in progress that people are invited to contribute to:

  1. The final form for becoming an Thematic Organisation affiliate (now that the bylaws have had their initial check by the affiliations committee)
  2. The cover letter for presenting the Sister Project application to the WMF Board of Trustees
  3. Prioritising which items on the technical features wishlist should be included in an initial grant application

Please feel free to contribute/comment/discuss! T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 05:59, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

The proposal cover letter has now been submitted to the WMF board of trustees along with the five letters of support (link). The pageviews and discussion looks like it has plateaued, with two spikes corresponding to dissemination events listed here. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 12:30, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
The WMF board has confirmed that they have received the application and will be discussing it at their next in person meeting Feb 11th and 12th of 2020. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 03:12, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Extension:InterwikiExtracts[edit]

Hi! As promised in the afterparty of the October meeting, I created the Extension:InterwikiExtracts so that we can transclude articles directly from Wikipedia. Here are a few demos for you (don't forget to click on "View source"):

The extension is also able to do some other things, but I think these are the functionalities that may be most useful for WikiJournals. Should we request the WMF to review and enable this extension on Wikiversity through meta:Community Wishlist Survey 2020? Cheers! Sophivorus (discusscontribs) 02:14, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

@Sophivorus: Brilliant! I think it should definitely be added to meta:Community Wishlist Survey 2020. From the example you showed, it also seems to transclude the necessary templates, is that correct? Can it also transclude just a template for use in another page (e.g. {{#InterwikiExtract: template:Dyslexia|wiki = wikipedia|format = html|parametersforthattemplate=...}}). There are quire a few templates currently imported form Wikipedia that are only used once (e.g. template:Dinogloss), so inter-wiki transclusion could be more robust. ps, I have hyperlinked your mention of the October meeting. Please revert if you prefer to keep you comments exactly as posted. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 04:56, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
Very good ! This extention match perfectly with my technical wish proposal : Community Wishlist Survey 2020/Wikiversity/Transclude wikipedia pages (template, module, etc) on small project as Wikiversity Lionel Scheepmans Contact (French native speaker) 10:03, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
Nice work, simple to operate, that should be very useful. Chiswick Chap (discusscontribs) 11:19, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
Unfortunately the extension cannot be used to transclude templates and make them usable (sorry). The extension transcludes already parsed HTML. For that reason, I think InterwikiExtracts is not adequate for solving the request at Community Wishlist Survey 2020/Wikiversity/Transclude wikipedia pages (template, module, etc) on small project as Wikiversity (see my comment there) and we should therefore start another request just for transcluding content pages, for which the InterwikiExtracts extension was designed as is reasonably fit. Sophivorus (discusscontribs) 13:33, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
It's done ! Lionel Scheepmans Contact (French native speaker) 13:56, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
@Sophivorus: What steps would be needed in order to activate the extension on wikiversity for testing? Does the WMF need to approve it beforehand? T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 00:53, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
@Evolution and evolvability: Yes, they need to do a code review and security review before enabling it on any Wikimedia wiki. Steps are detailed at mw:Writing an extension for deployment. I'll try to get the ball rolling asap, if no one else does it first. Sophivorus (discusscontribs) 01:02, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Wikimedia Summit Berlin 2020[edit]

original comments that are re-formatted below

Hello, I would like to be present as Wikijournal group delegate at the Wikimedia Summit in Berlin in April 2020. Thomas were there last year and I don't know if he want to be there a second time or if there is other candidate. I am not the oldest or most active person on the Wikijournal Board, but I have several reasons to be present at the Berlin meeting. The first one is that I want to get more involved in the Wikijournal project, this representation would therefore be an opportunity for me to prepare the summit and by the way be more involved on the promotion of the group and the explanation of our necessities. The second is that it would be an opportunity for me to participate for the first time in this meeting, and this experience should a great opportunity in one hand to collect useful informations for my doctoral thesis on the Wikimedia movement, in second hand, to make a very complete English report about the summit for the members of the user group. The third and lastly, is that I am in Belgium, not very far from Berlin, and I am free from April 3 to 5, 2020. Lionel Scheepmans Contact (French native speaker) 12:16, 11 November 2019 (UTC) P.S. Oh yes, I've forgot... The WikiJournal user group is also the only way to have a representative of the Wikiversity community during the summit and I'll be glad to assume this role as fr.wikiversity administrator.

Great point bringing this up. It was a very valuable meeting last year (summary) and the 2020 Wikimedia Summit will be at a very relevant point in Wikimedia's current WM2030 strategy. I agree that someone other than me should go this year. If any others volunteer then we can vote (final decision deadline Dec 16). T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 05:39, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:User:Dr.khatmando/sandbox#Dr.Jason Dixon delegate submission, per Wikiversity:Request custodian action. Any responses should be @Dr.khatmando: -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 21:10, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello - I am Jack Nunn and I am the Strategy Liaison for the Wiki Journals and am passionate about improving how the journals can help more people get involved in publishing open access, peer reviewed content for free. Here is a summary of what I have been working on for the Wikimedia Foundation and how I hope to build on this work if I attend the Berlin Summit:

  • I recently ran a ‘Youth Strategy Salon’ for the WikiJournals, in partnership with 'Science for All', with the report and recommendations here [1]. I would value a chance to build on the online meetings I have had by attending face to face and meeting colleagues from around the world to discuss this issue. Some of the issues included how to respectfully and appropriately incorporate the knowledge of Indigenous peoples into Wikimedia projects. I am working with a number of Aboriginal organisations in Australia and I would be keen to use this Summit as a chance to meet people from other parts of the world that face this important challenge.
  • I am on the Editorial Board for both the ‘WikiJournal of Science’ and the ‘WikiJournal of Humanities’, giving me a perspective which spans these disciplines, helping see commonalities. Attending regular meetings and facilitating online discussions has helped me reflect on better ways of gathering and prioritising the needs of our community, which I would like to discuss with others at the Summit.
  • As Director of the charity 'Science for All' I run a number of projects to involve the public in doing science, including leading a project to involve people in writing up a citizen science project in the Wiki Journals [2]. The Summit would give me an opportunity to share my learning about this process and hear from others about ways of improving the work of the Wiki Journals.
  • I am on the Cochrane Advocacy Advisory committee, working to build links between them and the Wikimedia Foundation. One of the ways I have been doing this is through leading the development of Standardised Data on Initiatives (STARDIT) [3]. Working with colleagues from the Wiki Journals, Cochrane, the National Institute for Health Research (UK), the Campbell Collaboration and others, we have published a pre-print summarising a way for people to share standardised data about initiatives. The aim is that the Wiki Journals will host this, with anyone able to complete reports. This will help improve transparency about research and enable people to critically appraise the trustworthiness of research, articles and data. We have published a pre-print about this work and are inviting anyone to be a co-author of a peer-reviewed paper [4]. The Summit in Berlin would be an important opportunity to discuss ways of partnering with other people in order to improve this work.
  • I am currently doing a PhD exploring public involvement in genomics research. Developing evidence informed methodologies for involving people as equal partners in the research is important. This PhD has given me a chance to develop thinking about reporting involvement, and I hope to work with the Wiki Journals to make them a world leader in this area, using STARDIT as a starting point. The Summit would provide an opportunity to learn and share best-practice. Jacknunn (discusscontribs) 02:21, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

I've reformatted the above applications so that they are presented similarly for voting. Registration closes on Dec 16th so I reckon we should aim to conclude voting by Dec 9th to give plenty of safely margin. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 03:34, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Proposal for a deliberation[edit]

Sorry if I come a bit late with this proposition. But I think than a poll can provoke a bad feeling for the one who won't be selected and have as consequence to harm the relationship in our group.

The best way should be to discuss until a consensus is reached as is ideally done in Wikimedia decisions, but I don't know if we have time enough and if the two candidate are open for this option.

If the time is too short and consensus is not reached, then I think it would be better to draw lots between the two candidates.

I don't know what the other members of the group and Jacknunn in particular think about it ?

Lionel Scheepmans Contact (French native speaker) 15:34, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

P.S. As I don't have an answer to my message, I will send the link via the mailing list. I would like to take this opportunity to point out that my presence at the Summit is important for my PhD research on the Wikimedia movement. And I argue that putting two candidates in competition is not a wise choice. In such a context, I feel compelled to compare myself to Jacknunn in terms of online participation within the movement as meritocratic value and it is a delicate and uncomfortable exercise for me. Lionel Scheepmans Contact (French native speaker) 14:19, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

@Lionel Scheepmans: Sorry for the delayed response! I agree that a consensus method rather than a numerical vote would be better next time (though both methods have their limitations when there are multiple competing options). I'd initially been thinking about if from the point of view of how the ASBS nomination was done, but I appreciate that's a rather different situation. It's definitely difficult to have to select a single representative of the whole user group at the strategy meeting.
For this year: we could restructure the subsections below into a mixed discussion beneath the two applications rather than comments separately enumerated under each. There are still another 2 weeks until the final nomination deadline (16th Dec), so consensus may yet emerge. Closer to the time we can also prepare a communally-decided priority set for the representative to use in their decision-making at the summit.
For next year: we should also probably better define the aims and requirements of the representative at the strategy summit.
On a related note, given the existence of dedicated user groups for several of the other sister projects, it'd be logical for Wikiversity to form an additional one (I've added a discussion over at the colloquium). T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 05:29, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi Evolution and evolvability, the situation seams clear now with the actual state of the poll. No more discussion seams necessary for me. Lionel Scheepmans Contact (French native speaker) 15:10, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
In that case, given the current comments below, I'll notify the committee that Jacknunn is this year's representative at the summit. Sadly we didn't discuss the nomination system at the latest conference call meeting, however I'll make sure that next month's keeps to time better. Two ideas that people have put to me are 1) a public consensus discussion over a longer period or 2) people send in application seen by the boards only, who discuss and decide on the representative internally then announce the selected representative. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 03:14, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Lionel Scheepmans[edit]

Hello, I would like to be present as Wikijournal group delegate at the Wikimedia Summit in Berlin in April 2020. Thomas were there last year and I don't know if he want to be there a second time or if there is other candidate. I am not the oldest or most active person on the Wikijournal Board, but I have several reasons to be present at the Berlin meeting. The first one is that I want to get more involved in the Wikijournal project, this representation would therefore be an opportunity for me to prepare the summit and by the way be more involved on the promotion of the group and the explanation of our necessities. The second is that it would be an opportunity for me to participate for the first time in this meeting, and this experience should a great opportunity in one hand to collect useful informations for my doctoral thesis on the Wikimedia movement, in second hand, to make a very complete English report about the summit for the members of the user group. The third and lastly, is that I am in Belgium, not very far from Berlin, and I am free from April 3 to 5, 2020. Lionel Scheepmans Contact (French native speaker) 12:16, 11 November 2019 (UTC) P.S. Oh yes, I've forgot... The WikiJournal user group is also the only way to have a representative of the Wikiversity community during the summit and I'll be glad to assume this role as fr.wikiversity administrator.

  1. Symbol support vote.svg Support - I love how all candidates have strong academic involvement. They are all strong candidates. I think we need more people acitvely involved in Wikjournal. One way is to send out people who haven't represented at summits before. It would also be great to have more French languague involvement in Wikjournal. This is a whole area where also the English language WikiJournal can profit from. All the best, Taketa (discusscontribs) 10:01, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Jack Nunn[edit]

Hello - I am Jack Nunn and I am the Strategy Liaison for the Wiki Journals and am passionate about improving how the journals can help more people get involved in publishing open access, peer reviewed content for free. Here is a summary of what I have been working on for the Wikimedia Foundation and how I hope to build on this work if I attend the Berlin Summit:

  • I recently ran a ‘Youth Strategy Salon’ for the WikiJournals, in partnership with 'Science for All', with the report and recommendations here [5]. I would value a chance to build on the online meetings I have had by attending face to face and meeting colleagues from around the world to discuss this issue. Some of the issues included how to respectfully and appropriately incorporate the knowledge of Indigenous peoples into Wikimedia projects. I am working with a number of Aboriginal organisations in Australia and I would be keen to use this Summit as a chance to meet people from other parts of the world that face this important challenge.
  • I am on the Editorial Board for both the ‘WikiJournal of Science’ and the ‘WikiJournal of Humanities’, giving me a perspective which spans these disciplines, helping see commonalities. Attending regular meetings and facilitating online discussions has helped me reflect on better ways of gathering and prioritising the needs of our community, which I would like to discuss with others at the Summit.
  • As Director of the charity 'Science for All' I run a number of projects to involve the public in doing science, including leading a project to involve people in writing up a citizen science project in the Wiki Journals [6]. The Summit would give me an opportunity to share my learning about this process and hear from others about ways of improving the work of the Wiki Journals.
  • I am on the Cochrane Advocacy Advisory committee, working to build links between them and the Wikimedia Foundation. One of the ways I have been doing this is through leading the development of Standardised Data on Initiatives (STARDIT) [7]. Working with colleagues from the Wiki Journals, Cochrane, the National Institute for Health Research (UK), the Campbell Collaboration and others, we have published a pre-print summarising a way for people to share standardised data about initiatives. The aim is that the Wiki Journals will host this, with anyone able to complete reports. This will help improve transparency about research and enable people to critically appraise the trustworthiness of research, articles and data. We have published a pre-print about this work and are inviting anyone to be a co-author of a peer-reviewed paper [8]. The Summit in Berlin would be an important opportunity to discuss ways of partnering with other people in order to improve this work.
  • I am currently doing a PhD exploring public involvement in genomics research. Developing evidence informed methodologies for involving people as equal partners in the research is important. This PhD has given me a chance to develop thinking about reporting involvement, and I hope to work with the Wiki Journals to make them a world leader in this area, using STARDIT as a starting point. The Summit would provide an opportunity to learn and share best-practice. Jacknunn (discusscontribs) 02:21, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
  1. Symbol support vote.svg Support reading through the excellent contributions here I think this one gets my vote due to the broader coverage and multidisciplinary approach. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk 18:28, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
  2. Symbol support vote.svg Support Although all three candidates are excellent, I think that Jack has had the most experience with the workings of the WikiJournals and in the monthly meetings. Additionally, as strategy liaison, I have found Jack to be proactive and engaged in the current Wikimedia strategy process. COI: I work at the same institution as Jack, so have had greater opportunity to interact than I have with the two other candidates. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 08:53, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
  3. Symbol support vote.svg Support Both candidates sound good but I'm voting for Jack with his connections and experience. Chiswick Chap (discusscontribs) 16:05, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
  4. Symbol support vote.svg Support for reasons outlined by Chiswick. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:46, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
  5. Symbol support vote.svg Support Based on knowledge and experience. --Saguaromelee (discusscontribs) 14:37, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Introducing Wikimedia Diary: A memory book (notebook) for all[edit]

Wikipedia Education Globe 1.png Wikimedia Diary
Hello WikiJournal User Group, I wanna share you about Wikimedia Diary, a public memory book (notebook) in which Wikimedians from all over the world are free to write any worth noting event/activities/experiences by them or community in this Wiki world. It is a more casual place to write about what one is up to.

As we all know, a diary is a book in which diarist keeps a daily record of events and experiences. Likewise, the basic idea of Wikimedia Diary is that we do many activities here in wiki world which we are proud of, but unfortunately it became only the history anytime. So, It is meant to record those activities on the happened date with a signature (~~~~) which is worth noting, and letting fellow Wikimedians know about what inspirational you've did. It would motivate users from all around the world to keep on cool activities and publish a note. I hope you share your activities with all of us on the page, and please let your friends know about Wikimedia Diary. Also, your feedback is welcome on the discussion page. Thank you!
Kind regards,
Tulsi Bhagat, Initiator of Wikimedia Diary, Wikimedia movement communications group.
MediaWiki message delivery (discusscontribs) 08:09, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

WikiJournals on Wikipedia's Wikiversity page[edit]

I've done a little polishing on the Wikiversity page on Wikipedia, adding a photograph (from Commons), a few words on open access in the short "WikiJournals" section, and a new "Reception" section with quotations and citations from independent sources. Project members are invited to extend the article, whether on the Wikijournals or on Wikiversity in general, especially if further sources independent of Wikimedia come to light. Chiswick Chap (discusscontribs) 11:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap: Excellent idea, nicely done. Wikimedia is weirdly poor overall at at recording its history (I recently posted at Commons about how the Wikipedia article about Commons needs to be updated). T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 09:45, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Technical editor[edit]

As mentioned in recent discussions at wikijournal-en@lists.wikimedia.org, it should indeed be the primary responsibility of peer review coordinators to arrange peer reviews, but I do think a technical editor can offer to help out, at least in apparently overdue cases. I made a separate page for the role (here), now with the following wording for the discussed task:

"Assisting in arranging peer reviews, by regularly checking the potential upcoming articles, and offer assistance to peer review coordinators at least in articles with delayed progression. Such assistance may be in organizing lists of names, credentials and emails of potential peer reviewers."

I've also started a draft of a potential contract there:

One issue is the amount of compensation. Although it might be an idea to determine fixed amounts for specific tasks as mentioned in the October meeting, for now I think we have to apply an hourly rate, and focus on hiring someone who seems reliable in reporting the total time spent. At least initially, it's also important for the technical editor to document the time spent for different tasks. Even if it won't lead to a decision to put a price tag on each task, such detailed reports will help us decide what tasks the technical editor should do. As for the exact hourly amount, it varies worldwide, for example in US being $29 to $38 per hour [9], and in India being about $4 per hour [10]. I think we can start offering something closer to the latter. Since it is a non-profit organization, I think the position can still appeal to high income countries, and we could always increase it if we don't find any fitting candidate willing to do it for that salary. To have somewhere to start the discussion, I put $5 in the current contract draft. I appreciate suggestions for improvement to it.

Mikael Häggström (discusscontribs) 02:48, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Treasurer[edit]

Hi everyone.

  • Am starting this topic to discuss the Treasurer position as per the meeting earlier today. So far I have volunteered to assist with determining the selection criteria and eventually filling this position. In non-profit organizations, within the board of these, it is needed that several positions be in existence. Within our Editorial Board several of these are effectively already in existence. However we do need an official treasurer. As was discussed it looks like we will probably be moving the current arrangement for finances from Sweden to the USA. So this would make it helpful if the Treasurer was in the USA as they need to be directly responsible for both banking and taxation requirements and that will be in accordance with US law if the finances of WikiJournals is held in the USA.
  • One of the initial steps in this is that at minimum a selection committee should be involved in this process, made up of people (I would say at least 3-5) who are also currently on the editorial board or at least associate editors, though am open to other views on this. Formally selecting a treasurer in a non-profit cannot be done by one or two people, it needs a sub-committee who then upon decision present this to the board for ratification. So I would ask for anyone willing to assist on this sub-committee to add their names please. This is a committee that should be willing to assist the eventually selected Treasurer as there are some tasks that are difficult to do alone.
  • @Evolution and evolvability: today summarized some of the selection criteria ideas these need formulated it some concrete selection criteria to use in the selection process for anyone that volunteers for this position. Some of the responsibilities of the Treasurer (in the USA) are reconciliation of bank statements, reports to Board, yearly reports to IRS, using forms they will provide. Paying bills and ensuring they are properly invoiced and obtaining receipts, receiving money from grants etc., and any conditional requirements on the use of that money. So obviously some experience or understanding of this role is important.
  • So this initial post is to form a sub-committee that will do this selection job and oversee the process, I would ask that if you are considering applying for Treasurer please do not go on the sub-committee, thanks Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk 04:55, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Note this discussion also Talk:WikiJournal of Medicine/Financials cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk 15:04, 11 December 2019 (UTC)