Open Journal - A Subversive ProposalEdit
The reason why wiki and academia represent opposing points of view.
|publishing needs||freedom||publish or perish|
|editing||celebrates diversity: collaborate.||values originality: edit in secret.|
|review||based on consensus with future editors.||secret peer review (it cannot be revised).|
|editor identity||can be anonymous.||identity is reputation.|
|format||web based.||print based according to the discipline's standard.|
Opposing point of view naturaly lead to conflict. It apears that much of the best content in wikipedia is the work of academics. So why are these point of view so difficul to reconsile?
To properly answer this question, the stak holders must be examined.
The Stake HoldersEdit
The stake main holders are:
- their respected journals
- journal editors
- peer reviewers
- academic institution
- their libraries (pay for subscription)
- their academic employees. (article authors and consumers)
- their paying customers (students) AKA article consumers (have no voice)
- Wiki sphere.
- The wide public. (Finances all ventures above, has no voice)
Synthesis: Wiki Journal - A ProposalEdit
* Open a Sister Project within Wikipedia for academic publication.
- It would
- It would have a (marginal) cost to edit.
- It would place its contents into public domain but would host archival version of documents that are not editable.
- It would require registration using real world/academic information.
- It would compete with one journal in each discipline.
- It shoud merge with projects that digitize academic article and open content databases.
- It would provide real-time metrics on users.
- It would have everything an article database should have.
- It would allow to host raw data and code.
- It would provide semi private editing surface for user collaboration before publication.
Strategy for SuccessEdit
Wiki journals or a similar entity will one day replace all the existing paid for journals. This is clear since there is no longer any reason for these old institutions to exists except perhaps for the entrenced traditions.
- for profit orgenizations outside the Publishing world
- owners of open content databases. (Patent databases)
- national libraries
- non profit projects digitizing academic of material out of copyright.
- university library congolomorates
- preprint archives
- The Institutions.
- University of microfilm.
- Scholarly societies which own journals.
- universities that own publishing houses.
- Lobby by a few academic specialist publishers (Springer etc).
Since there is great resistance to the Wikipedia model in academia the only way such a proposal could hoe to succeed is by adopting a strategy that takes into account all the stake holders.
The immediate beneficiary will be universities. The next ones to enjoy these benefits would be no other than the publishing academics, as they will have greater academic freedom to publish once economic concerns are minimised from the academic world.
To gain acceptance as an academic publising vehiachale to further academic careers wikijournals would have to firs conform to current standards of academia. The first journals should use academics of move should be done
Add refrences Notes to meriam farber's cource on the subject.