Grants talk:Programs/Wikimedia Research Fund/Wikipedia as a tool for understanding contemporary science and the growth of knowledge
 | We want to remind all participants on this discussion page that the Community Resources and Research Fund teams have specific expectations regarding discussion about proposals in this space. In the Community Resources team's behavioral expectations for this space, anyone with concerns about a proposal is welcome to express them in a constructive and supportive manner. However, to the extent that feedback is excessive, contains personalized and disparaging remarks about the applicant or their organization, or if the concerns are expressed in an hostile or punitive manner, they may be removed from the discussion page partially or entirely. Relatedly, participants should follow the Universal Code of Conduct, which contains the minimum level of guidelines for communications and behavior on Wikimedia projects. These expectations are important, we want to ensure that conversations about proposals in our funding programs are productive, that is, focused on building shared understanding and generally supporting applicants to improve their ideas and projects, regardless of what funding decision is made. |
We ask you to respond to the following questions:
- In what ways do you think this research can support you or other members of the Wikimedia communities in the work that you do on the Wikimedia projects?
- What advice do you have for the authors to improve their research or the impact of their research? (We encourage you to share with the authors projects or initiatives that you think can benefit from the result of their research. This can help the authors connect their work with ongoing projects in the early stages of their research.)
- Please share any other feedback about this proposal that you think the Research Fund Committee should consider below.
Please use Add feedback button below to add your feedback.
1. In what ways do you think this research can support you or other members of the Wikimedia communities in the work that you do on the Wikimedia projects?
- the applicant proposes creating a rigorous method for using edit histories to determine how knowledge is constructed, in this case contemporary scientific knowledge. The potential for WP to allow researchers to unpack how we arrive at "knowledge" is under-utilized and I would welcome this research for its innovation. I expect it would have strong appeal among humanities scholars, who recognise that knowledge is not fixed, but always situated. Also, it focuses on scientific knowledge which is particularly relevant right now in the covid era where science and facts are being undermined.
2. What advice do you have for the authors to improve their research or the impact of their research? (We encourage you to share with the authors projects or initiatives that you think can benefit from the result of their research. This can help the authors connect their work with ongoing projects in the early stages of their research.)
- This will likely provide a useful counter to the anti-scientific community, so as well as the journal articles, they might consider also publishing in mainstream media, where it can also demonstrate the rigour of Wikipedia's editing and referencing practices for people unfamiliar with how WP operates.
3. Please share any other feedback about this proposal that you think the Research Fund Committee should consider below.
- It is unclear how many people will be involved, which would have been helpful, but it would appear to include a range of students, "citizen scientists" and researchers, all learning and contributing and becoming involved with the movement.
--Doctor 17 (talk) 02:04, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
1. In what ways do you think this research can support you or other members of the Wikimedia communities in the work that you do on the Wikimedia projects?
- I'm a very occasional user, and research that can help me find other editors that might have common interests and would be willing to help in a task that I want to carry out would be interesting. Also finding ways to do some micro contributions of tasks will be useful.
2. What advice do you have for the authors to improve their research or the impact of their research? (We encourage you to share with the authors projects or initiatives that you think can benefit from the result of their research. This can help the authors connect their work with ongoing projects in the early stages of their research.)
- Don't know!
3. Please share any other feedback about this proposal that you think the Research Fund Committee should consider below.