[Oa-italia] Re: Wiki e Open Access

Andrea Zanni zanni.andrea84 a gmail.com
Ven 15 Lug 2011 11:51:35 CEST

Segnalo che, dato il crescente interesse, la Wikimedia Foundation ha creato
una mailing list ad hoc
per le biblioteche, in cui discutere ovviamente le questioni legate all'Open
E' stata creata apposta per consentire a persone esterne al movimento
Wikimedia di poter
discutere di argomenti inerenti al mondo mbibliotecario senza dover per
forza essere iscritti a liste più generali (e dispersive).

Per cui invito tutti ad iscriversi a


Andrea Zanni

2011/7/7 Andrea Zanni <zanni.andrea84 a gmail.com>

> Dato che ho ricevuto qualche feedback in privato,
> mi permetto di inoltrare al gruppo l'inizio di un thread che si sta
> svolgendo fra vari Wikimediani a livello internazionale.
> In un paio di battute sono stati coinvolti Melissa Hagemann (Senior Program
> Manager dell'Open Society Foundations) e Daniel Mietchen, Wikimedian in
> residence per l'Open Access e Open society.
> Ho posto a loro la stessa domanda che ho posto in questa lista (citata
> esplicitamente da Melissa, fra l'altro), cioè un tentativo di capire quali
> progetti sono in piedi fra movimento Wikimedia ed OA e quali, in teoria, si
> potrebbero organizzare.
> Chi volesse partecipare al thread non ha che da dirlo (anche in privato),
> lo inserirò nella prossima mail.
> Andrea Zanni
> (user:Aubrey)
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Daniel Mietchen <daniel.mietchen a googlemail.com>
> Date: 2011/7/7
> Subject: Re: OA - Call for brainstorm
> To: Melissa Hagemann <mhagemann a osi-dc.org>
> Cc: Samuel Klein <meta.sj a gmail.com>, Andrea Zanni <
> zanni.andrea84 a gmail.com>, "fschulenburg a wikimedia.org" <
> fschulenburg a wikimedia.org>, phoebe ayers <phoebe.wiki a gmail.com>,
> Federico Leva <federicoleva a tiscali.it>, Laurentius <
> puntoesclamativo a email.it>, "mathias.schindler a wikimedia.de" <
> mathias.schindler a wikimedia.de>, "pavel.richter a wikimedia.de" <
> pavel.richter a wikimedia.de>, "l_guldbrandsson a hotmail.com" <
> l_guldbrandsson a hotmail.com>, "dgerard a gmail.com" <dgerard a gmail.com>,
> Direttivo Wikimedia Italia <direttivo a wikimedia.it>, jayvdb <
> jayvdb a gmail.com>, "lodewijk a effeietsanders.org" <
> lodewijk a effeietsanders.org>
> Dear all,
> thanks for bringing me into this conversation, Melissa.
> I see a number of areas in which the OA and WMF communities could join
> forces, and several of these are relevant to the newly approved
> project. None of these points is specific to Italy or Italian, but
> although Italian had not been on my radar there yet (basically because
> I can only understand it, not produce it myself), I agree that
> addressing them together with existing communities with overlapping
> interests is a good idea.
> Let me outline a few:
> (1) the WMF would benefit from feedback from the OA community on the
> draft of a WMF policy on OA and open data. It currently exists in two
> variants - a general mandate modeled after the NIH policy (cf.
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Committee/Areas_of_interest/Open-access_policy
> ) and a scheme more cast in terms of practical implementation (cf.
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:WMF_support ) that takes into
> account different degrees of WMF support for research projects (a
> distinction not made at the NIH).
> (2) both sides would benefit from a broader reuse of OA materials -
> especially images - on WMF projects. I have collected some basic stats
> on this at
> http://species-id.net/wiki/User:Daniel_Mietchen/Slides/Reuse-of-OA-on-Wikimedia
> and think it would be very good to have a simple way of uploading all
> suitably licensed OA materials to Commons or a sister directory (e.g.
> http://figshare.com/ or similar). On a related note, the annual image
> contest at Commons (for latest issue, see
> http://blog.wikimedia.org/2011/06/29/commons-picture-year-winners-2011/
> ) features very few images that came from an OA source (so far, I only
> found one - http://commons.wikimedia.org/?title=File:Culex_sp_larvae.png
> ; a finalist in 2007). Having some more systematic approach to getting
> OA-sourced images featured as picture of the day/ month/ year would
> certainly be good.
> (3) the articles on OA and related topics are generally not in a good
> shape, and typically not even assessed for quality. For the English
> Wikipedia, I have started building a skeleton for what is to become an
> overview of what OA-related articles would be desirable to have:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mietchen/OA_catalogue . Turning this
> into a set of coherent articles will require something like a Task
> force, even though the most relevant ones do not seem to be very
> active these days, and there is not much of collaboration in this
> regard across different WMF projects or even languages. Here, having
> OA people involved across projects or languages would certainly be
> beneficial.
> (4) I think publishers (not just OA ones, actually) would benefit from
> having a closer look at the RNA families Track at the journal RNA
> Biology (which is not OA, btw), in which authors are required to
> submit, for manuscripts reporting on new types of RNA families, the
> draft for a corresponding Wikipedia article, which will be peer
> reviewed along with the manuscript (see
> http://www.landesbioscience.com/journals/rnabiology/guidelines/ and
> search for Wikipedia). Once the paper is published, the Wikipedia
> article goes live, naturally citing the journal article, thus
> providing the journal with exposure at a highly visible platform.
> Similar partnerships are possible with other WMF projects (e.g.
> http://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikispecies:Collaboration_with_ZooKeys_and_PhytoKeys
> ).
> (5) I think peer review in any journal (and at funding agencies, but
> that is another story) would benefit from being conducted in the open
> (cf. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/473452b ). One possibility here is to
> post the reviews of accepted papers in public (e.g.
> http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/8/62/prepub ), another to have
> the manuscript posted in public and to invite public comments along
> with public formal reviews (e.g.
> http://www.biogeosciences-discuss.net/4/2959/2007/bgd-4-2959-2007-discussion.html
> ). This latter approach works only for publishers that accept green OA
> in some form, but it works best for gold OA. Having some more OA
> publishers experiment with such a system could, over time, develop
> into something like "wiki-style" review at Scholarpedia (cf.
> http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Help:Reviewers#Wiki-style_peer-review
> ), i.e. that reviewers edit the draft directly rather than commenting
> on it. With such a system in place at (at least some) OA journals,
> researchers could well be more motivated to contribute to
> collaborative projects like those run by the WMF (see also the survey
> at
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Expert_participation_survey ).
> Also related to the issue of motivation: Participants at the recent
> Open Science Workshop at OAI7 voted "Change the way scientists are
> evaluated" to the top of the agenda (cf.
> http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/2011-July/000840.html ),
> and joining forces with WMF (and funders) to get wiki contributions
> included in the picture of scientific evaluation could well be
> worthwhile too.
> Expansion of the approach mentioned in (3) to languages other than
> English is anticipated (though for the moment only to those three that
> I can write articles in). For example, for the German Wikimedia
> chapter's WikiConvention later this year, I have proposed a session in
> preparation for Open Access Week (cf.
> http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiConvention/Themensammlung#Wikimedia_und_Open_Access
> ), and this could certainly be coordinated with related activities on
> the Italian end, or elsewhere.
> During OA week, one could think of highlighting OA-derived content on
> WMF projects, or having collaborative writing sessions on OA-related
> topics, or having prizes for contributions along these lines.
> Looking forward to further deepening of the discussion,
> Daniel
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 11:04 PM, Melissa Hagemann <mhagemann a osi-dc.org>
> wrote:
> > Hi SJ and Aubrey,
> >
> > Wonderful to hear that there is interest in Italy to find ways to bring
> together the WMF and OA communities.
> >
> > I'm adding Daniel Mietchen to the thread, as the Open Society Foundations
> just approved a grant to support Daniel to be a Wikimedian in Residence on
> Open Access and Open Science. For years, I've thought the OA and WMF
> communities had much in common and we should be doing more to properly
> introduce the communities and build synergies between them. So perhaps
> Daniel can help to brainstorm about what more could be done in Italy and
> then Italy could become an example of what can be accomplished in this area.
> >
> > In general, I think that by raising awareness of OA (and specifically the
> materials which are freely available through OA) within the WMF community,
> we could encourage more OA resources to be used as references in Wikipedia
> articles.  In addition, Wikimedians could become powerful allies in the OA
> movement, helping to make more content freely available through OA, so it
> could be used in more WMF projects.
> >
> > With regards to Italy, Aubrey, you mentioned that you are in close
> contact with many folks working on OA there, so you probably know about
> these resources, but I thought it would be helpful to share some info on
> those I've worked with in the past as well as current OA projects:
> >
> > - Paola Gargiulo (p.gargiulo a caspur.it) - you may already know Paola,
> but I think she's great and would probably enjoy being part of this
> conversation.
> > - Portal for Italian Electronic Scholarly Literature in Institutional
> Archives - a service provider to Italian OA scholarly and research content;
> collects and  provides access to current information on OA in Italy and
> abroad http://www.openarchives.it/pleiadi
> > - OA Week Wiki in Italian -
> http://wiki.openarchives.it/index.php/Pagina_principale
> > - OA Mailing list in Italian:
> http://openarchives.it/mailman/listinfo/oa-italia
> >
> > Excited to see what we can do to make Italy an example of what can be
> achieved through collaboration between the OA and WMF communities.
> >
> > Best,
> > Melissa
> >
> >
> > Melissa Hagemann
> > Senior Program Manager
> > Information Program
> > Open Society Foundations
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Samuel Klein [mailto:meta.sj a gmail.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 11:20 AM
> > To: Andrea Zanni; Melissa Hagemann
> > Cc: fschulenburg a wikimedia.org; phoebe ayers; Federico Leva; Laurentius;
> mathias.schindler a wikimedia.de; pavel.richter a wikimedia.de;
> l_guldbrandsson a hotmail.com; dgerard a gmail.com; Direttivo Wikimedia
> Italia; jayvdb; lodewijk a effeietsanders.org
> > Subject: Re: OA - Call for brainstorm
> >
> > Andrea, let me introduce you to our advisor Melissa Hagemann, one of the
> driving forces behind the Open Access movement.
> >
> > Melissa and I had a conversation about how Wikimedia and OAI could work
> better together - including ways we could give more attention to OA in our
> engagements with academia.  She should definitely be part of this thread.
> >
> > Melissa, if you have any ideas specifically for Italy, this is a perfect
> opportunity.  Aubrey's sorcery is powerful.
> >
> > SJ
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Andrea Zanni <zanni.andrea84 a gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> Hi all.
> >> In case you don't know me, I'm Aubrey, current secretary of Wikimedia
> >> Italy and compulsive wikisourceror.
> >> I'm writing you for a little request, and as an attempt of structuring
> >> a debate about Open Access.
> >>
> >> Members of Wikimedia Italy are getting more and more interested in the
> >> Open Access movement, and would like to support it and work together,
> >> as both initiatives pursue the same goals.
> >> But, right now, we really lack ideas of the ways and projects we could
> >> support.
> >>
> >> It's not just a matter of money, but of ideas, projects, competences,
> >> directions.
> >> Examples:
> >> * as WMI, we are currently studying if an OAI-PMH extension for
> >> MediaWiki could be useful for our projects (i.e. Wikisource, Commons)
> >> * we are asking opens source communities behind librarin softwares as
> >> OJS, VuFind to move on translatewiki.net, to crowdsource translations
> >> * we are interested in the world of biological/chemistry data banks,
> >> as it happens many make visualizations/animations of
> >> proteins/viruses/cells, and maybe we wante them released in CC-BY-SA
> >> (e.g. http://www.scivis.ifc.cnr.it/,
> >> http://proteopedia.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page)
> >> * we are currently brainstorming about an event for the international
> >> Open Access Week, that will be held from 24 to 30 October, 2011.
> >> But these are just drafts, and I sense an unexplored world out there.
> >>
> >> I also wrote to OA librarians around Italy (I know many of the actors
> >> here in Italy, and it happens my job is related to that), but they are
> >> as confused as me on the possible convergences we may have.
> >>
> >> So I'm writing to you, because afaik everyone of you has been more or
> >> less involved in OA, and in the relationship between OA and Wikimedia.
> >> Which projects have you done? Which ideas do you have in mind? What
> >> can we do all together? What can we do as chapters? What can the
> Foundation do?
> >>
> >> Thank you for your time and expertise, and feel free to forward to
> >> anyone who could be interested (and valuable) in this conversation
> >>
> >> Aubrey
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Samuel Klein          identi.ca:sj           w:user:sj          +1 617
> 529 4266
> >
> >
> >
-------------- parte successiva --------------
Un allegato HTML è stato rimosso...
URL: <http://liste.cineca.it/pipermail/oa-italia/attachments/20110715/ed33b482/attachment.html>

Maggiori informazioni sulla lista OA-Italia