Grants:Project/Rapid/WikiJournal 2017/Report

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

WikiJournal logo.svg

WikiJournal User Group
Open access • Publication charge free • Public peer review • Wikipedia-integrated

WikiJournal User Group is a publishing group of open-access, free-to-publish, Wikipedia-integrated academic journals. <seo title=" WJM, WikiJMed, Wiki.J.Med., WikiJMed, Wikiversity Journal User Group, WikiJournal WikiMed, Free to publish, Open access, Open-access, Non-profit, online journal, Public peer review "/>

Report accepted
This report for a Rapid Grant approved in FY 2016-17 has been reviewed and accepted by the Wikimedia Foundation.
  • To read the approved grant submission describing the plan for this project, please visit Grants:Project/Rapid/WikiJournal 2017.
  • You may still comment on this report on its discussion page, or visit the discussion page to read the discussion about this report.
  • You are welcome to Email rapidgrants at wikimedia dot org at any time if you have questions or concerns about this report.


Did you meet your goals? Are you happy with how the project went?

Yes, the grant allowed the project to grow substantially, and gather many new participants. Much of running a journal relies on membership of indexing services like Crossref in order to assure that works are find-able and cite-able. The grant's contributions during 2016 helped lay the foundations for the large improvements and expansion seen in 2017 (more detail in the 'outcomes' section).


Please report on your original project targets.

Target outcome Achieved outcome Explanation
A gradual increase in the number of submissions to this journal. 4 published articles so far this year, and 4 potential upcoming articles in progress This is a substantial increase compared to 1 published article in 2016
An increase in the number of users finding their way to the project by means of DOI links. From Crossref reports, we had 1,061 viewers to articles using DOI links for December 2016. This is a substantial increase compared to 596 viewers for December 2015
Discussion, review and criticism of the journal in external media, both online and offline. Recent mentions in the media:
Using both direct and indirect metrics of journal performance Detailed report is available at: WikiJournal of Medicine/Citation metrics An impact factor of about 8 is higher than most medical journals [1]
Tracking the number of pages where text from the journal is used and attributed.
Specific numeric targets include: We hope to publish at least 10 peer reviewed articles next year, garner a minimum of 3 citations to existing articles, recruit 3 additional members to the editorial board. First goals are described above. We still have 10 editorial board members, but have just recently received interest from another potential board member.

See also:


  • What worked well?

The number of submissions and participants has massively improved since the 2016 overhaul of formatting, organisation and structure. In particuler, Promotion through the Wikipedia community (WikiProject advert) has worked well, with several existing Wikipedia articles submitted. Promotion through personal contacts may yield additional submissions. Crossref membership has been particularly useful for organizing publications and integrating them into the academic record via DOIs.

  • What did not work so well?

Greater participation in the editorial board is still needed to handle the increasing submissions. Attracting submission from people who have never previously contributed to a WMF project is a key goal, but remains difficult. Some of this shortfall will improve naturally over time as the journal gains in reputation. Being eligible to PUBMED and MEDLINE is of key importance for becoming better accepted by the academic community.

  • What would you do differently next time?

Detailed information about editorial board responsibilities and how to become a member is now described in a page that is more visible from the main page. Asking for direct advertising or promotional support from the WMF could help with being seen as reputable.

Also, future grants should be via a bank account of WikiJournal of Medicine rather than through a private account, which will make accounting easier.


Grant funds spent[edit]

Please describe how much grant money you spent for approved expenses, and tell us what you spent it on.

Expenses from before grant approval
Crossref annual membership for 2014 $206
Crossref annual membership for 2015 $275
Crossref annual membership for 2016 $275
Past expenses for the Internet domain ($16 per year) $64
Expenses after grant approval
Crossref annual membership for 2017 (paid Dec 2016) $275
Total $1095

Remaining funds[edit]

Remaining funds for expenses approved from grant application
Prize competition (to be paid Dec 2017) $400
COPE membership fee (New applications temporarily suspended) $210
Total $610

Expenses + remaining funds[edit]

$1705 (same as budget)

Anything else[edit]

Anything else you want to share about your project?

The grant has stimulated the growth of this journal, which in turn has contributed to the mission of the Wikimedia Foundation to empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content (as article submissions) under free licenses, and to disseminate it effectively and globally (to other Wikimedia projects and to the world).

The yearly budget for the journal is about a third of the average cost of publishing a single article in most journals. [2]

See also[edit]