Open Access Reader: Difference between revisions

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Content deleted Content added
Project updates!
Line 2: Line 2:


==Introduction==
==Introduction==
'''Open Access Reader''' is a project to systematically ensure that all significant open access research is cited in Wikipedia.
'''Open Access Reader (OAR)''' is a project to systematically ensure that all significant open access research is cited in Wikipedia. As the proportion of research released open access expands, this will result in Wikipedia ultimately representing the cutting edge of human knowledge!


There's lots of great research being published in good quality open access journals that isn't cited in Wikipedia. It's peer reviewed, so it should count as a reliable source. It's available for anyone to read and probably comes with pretty decent metadata too. Can we set up a process to make it super convenient for editors to find and cite these papers?
There's lots of great research being published in good quality open access journals that isn't cited in Wikipedia. It's peer reviewed, so it should count as a reliable source. It's available for anyone to read and probably comes with pretty decent metadata too. Can we set up a process to make it super convenient to find and cite these papers?


==Exploration Period, August - October 2014==
[https://tools.wmflabs.org/oar/bestuncitedlong3.html Example Output]
An [[Grants:IEG/Open_Access_Reader|initial grant]] from The Wikimedia Foundation IEG programme produced:


*A small but promising [https://tools.wmflabs.org/oar/bestuncitedlong3.html|example set of candidate papers], generated from a dump of metadata from [http://core.kmi.open.ac.uk CORE], using a very rudimentary method of significance ranking.
[[/v1specification]]
*A set of [[/v1specification|wireframes]] for a desktop UI.
*A proposal from the team behind [http://core.kmi.open.ac.uk CORE] to produce and support:
**the backend required to supply open access metadata in the form we require for OAR.
**a considered and justified [[OpenAccessReader/PrioritisingSignificance|ranking methodology]].


[[/Project Diary]]
See also: [[/Project Diary|Project Diary]]


==Project Overview==
==Project Overview==
Line 35: Line 40:


Milestones to MVP:
Milestones to MVP:
# Identify best Open Access Aggregator
# Identify best Open Access Aggregator - Done! ([http://core.kmi.open.ac.uk CORE])
# Identify and assess available open metrics to create specification for significance filter.
# Identify and assess available open metrics to create specification for significance filter.
# Produce a system that generates an up-to-date list of most significant papers.
# Produce a system that generates an up-to-date list of most significant papers.
Line 62: Line 67:


===Success Metrics===
===Success Metrics===
* Build MVP
How can we measure the success of this project?
* New citations generated

* New contributors
===Grants===
The OAR team is creating '''[[Grants:IEG/Open_Access_Reader|an application]]''' for an IEG grant.


==Endorsements==
==Endorsements==

Revision as of 23:22, 3 November 2014

Introduction

Open Access Reader (OAR) is a project to systematically ensure that all significant open access research is cited in Wikipedia. As the proportion of research released open access expands, this will result in Wikipedia ultimately representing the cutting edge of human knowledge!

There's lots of great research being published in good quality open access journals that isn't cited in Wikipedia. It's peer reviewed, so it should count as a reliable source. It's available for anyone to read and probably comes with pretty decent metadata too. Can we set up a process to make it super convenient to find and cite these papers?

Exploration Period, August - October 2014

An initial grant from The Wikimedia Foundation IEG programme produced:

  • A small but promising set of candidate papers, generated from a dump of metadata from CORE, using a very rudimentary method of significance ranking.
  • A set of wireframes for a desktop UI.
  • A proposal from the team behind CORE to produce and support:
    • the backend required to supply open access metadata in the form we require for OAR.
    • a considered and justified ranking methodology.

See also: Project Diary

Project Overview

We break down this endeavour into four parts:

I: Sourcing Papers

There exist projects to provide API access to the aggregation of all open access repositories, such as CORE. It makes sense to use one of these instead of re-inventing the wheel, but which should we use?

II: Prioritising Significance

There are millions of papers published every year. What's the best way to decide which papers editors should tackle first?

III: Identifying, Recruiting and Alerting Editors

It's likely that OA papers come with metadata. How can we use this to find editors that are likely to take an interest?

IV: Streamlining Editor Workflow

How can we make this convenient for editors to use?

Project Management

Roadmap

Milestones to MVP:

  1. Identify best Open Access Aggregator - Done! (CORE)
  2. Identify and assess available open metrics to create specification for significance filter.
  3. Produce a system that generates an up-to-date list of most significant papers.
  4. Assess quality of topic metadata to create specification for paper-to-keyword filter.
  5. Build and demonstrate paper-to-keyword filter.
  6. Configure automated report of most significant papers for a particular keyword
  7. Create feedback process
  8. Introduce the report to sample communities via Wikiprojects, lists.

The Team

Perhaps you'd like to volunteer?

Success Metrics

  • Build MVP
  • New citations generated
  • New contributors

Endorsements

If you think this is a cool idea, please put your name below!