WikiJournal User Group/Meetings/2019-03-08

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

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 "/>

Minutes originally drafted in Google doc and copied here after 48 hours

Atttendees[edit]

March 8 @ 10 pm UTC

Agenda[edit]

  • Update on Action items from Jan 2019 meeting
  • Editorial boards
    • Composition: rebalancing gender, ethnicity, location bias?
    • Process: fixes for low engagement in application voting?
    • Volunteers for specialised tasks? (treasurer, meeting organiser, soc media, outreach, etc)
  • Indexing goals? (examples)
    • WikiJMed now eligible to re-apply for SCOPUS indexing
    • WikiJSci similarly eligible for SCOPUS
    • WikiJMed eligible for PMC
  • Recruit a research methodology & statistics expert for WikiJSci & WikiJMed. See this comment I (Mark Worthen) made regarding accurate computation and interpretation of inter-rater reliability for an article submitted as a preprint.
  • Add articles to Wikidata and link them via the Template:Article info
  • Push development of the Template:Article infobox to replace Template:Article info X

Ran out of time before full agenda finished (marked ‘X’)

Notes[edit]

  • Code of conduct report
    • CoC working group meet on 14 March with WMF community safety group
    • Aims and goals being defined with help of WMF community safety group
    • Initial preference for concise, 3-part structure (inspired by friendly space policy)
      • Positives to strive for
      • Negatives not tolerated (red lines)
      • Reporting structure and action process
    • Draft being written as google doc
    • Preliminary, tentative timeline:
      • March 31 - have internal first draft
      • April 15 - Invite WikiJournal Editorial boards feedback to generate second draft
      • April 31 - Invite WikiJournal public feedback to generate third draft
      • May 07 - Put CoC to vote for initial implementation
      • Later date - Feedback/'advertising' from broader Wikimedia community?
  • Social media for Women and Girls in Science day was not actioned (none assigned in time)
  • Rapid grant 2019 application delayed (2018 report not yet accepted)
  • WikiJournal User Group hopes to become “Thematic organisation”
    • Will give access to larger subsequent grants
    • Not budget inflation for inflation’s sake, but greater flexibility
      • Hire someone to write a bot to assist technical editor?
      • Add budget for graphic design / formatting papers?
  • Editorial board diversity important
    • Contact our own networks
    • Advertise via soc media
  • Centralise editorial board and associate editor applications to single page to make easier to watch?
  • Cross-editorial board communication ideas:
    • How to create regular internal updates newsletter (Kelee may be willing to do this, research options for organization)
    • Create a ‘rhythm’ of communication expectation - for example, every week spend at least 1 hour reading/writing
    • Tools to consider - Trello, Loomio - Facebook/whatsapp
    • Internal cross-board initially, then maybe expanded to also public version if successful
  • Jack has contacted Cochrane about ways of integrating new systematic reviews into peer the work of the WikiJournals (for example, the Task Exchange)
    • Cochrane controversy is complex - main internal criticism was that Cochrane was becoming too business-linked and not independent enough (lead to protest resignations)
    • May have been amplified by media reports
  • Contribution report system ‘STARDIT’ (draft)
    • If anyone wants to be involved, contact Jack - we’ll need co-authors for preparing a pre-print
  • Looking for research methodology & statistics expert
    • Role/responsibility: Systematic peer review and original research statistics, (once every 3-4 months), act as extra checking layer as well as peer reviewers
    • Contact our own professional networks
    • Public tweet that can be re-tweeted
  • WikiData could be useful way of centralising data for use across multiple templates, but could be harder to edit initially?

Action items[edit]

  • Share these minutes to metawiki with any confidential info redacted
    1. This Google Doc will be emailed to the boards immediately (Thomas Shafee)
    2. Its contents will be posted to a public wiki page after 48 hours to give time for any additional notes to be added, and any private info redacted (Thomas Shafee)
    3. Organise next meeting - doodle poll share do 4th/5th Poll to decide times for mid-late April (kelee)
  • Monthly Newsletter (Kelee & Gwinyai & Sarah)
  • Post criteria for PMC and SCOPUS to talk page to collaboratively draft (Thomas Shafee)
  • Tweet about research methodology & statistics expert (Kelee to ask Mark Worthen)