WikiJournal User Group/Meetings/2019-07-02

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

Attendees[edit]

Date: 11pm 2 July 2019 EST

Agenda[edit]

  • Update on action items from April
  • How to handle wikipedia submitting authors who wish to remain anonymous?
  • Lassa fever article as case study - Copyright and wikipedia style
    • Two paragraphs of copyvio introduced after our initial check at submission
    • Not MEDMOS-compliant for integration into Wikipedia
  • Baryonyx article case study - Author requests to replace one image per this diff
    • Addendum/update with versioned doi?
  • Sister project discussion
    • Technical aspects and future development grant application?
    • What’s in a name? There would be a distinction between the Journals (e.g. WikiJMed), the publisher (e.g. WikiJournal User Group), and the hosting website (currently Wikiversity). Although the ‘Wikimedia Journals’ - as the journals themselves are not a ‘wiki’ - having ‘Wikimedia’ in the title might make the name more trustworthy
  • Expansion and streamlining X
    • How to grow more article submissions?  X
    • How to improve/simplify participation?  X
  • Strategic liaison preferred ways of working (consensus/prioritisation/voting tools)

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

Notes[edit]

  • Bylaws updated (note, quorum now stricter = 20% of relevant board size)
  • Code of conduct draft
    • External feedback now in but implementing that feedback stalled
    • Not ready for voting to implement
    • Volunteers sought to join that working group
  • Sister project proposal
    • >130 votes, general supportive
    • Wait 1 more week for signpost readers to vote then approach WMF
  • Signpost article finished and published (+ short articles in the German Kurier and French RAW)
  • ‘Four modest proposals’ experiment progress here
  • Anonymous/pseudonymous authors?
    • Used to be common in older journals (espec. taxonomy) but become v.rare
    • Very difficult to establish accountability
    • Maybe able to half implement, with anon author but known affiliation
    • Currently need to be extra cautious in legitimacy as start up
  • Lassa fever case study
    • Maybe run copyvio detector at both submission and publication (automate?)
    • Authorship declaration form require acknowledgement of reading guidelines
    • Rely on peer reviewers to spot if reference is being cited inappropriately
    • Contact COPE with case study for feedback on whether original needs to be retracted or just corrected
  • Baryonyx case study
    • Even seemingly small changes can change meaning, so best to peer review if new doi assigned
    • First step: just contact same peer reviewers again, since known to be responsive
    • May need to implement a minimum time between major published versions?
    • May need to invite new/additional reviewers if many revisions so as to not overload original reviewers
  • Articles per issues?
    • Currently arbitrarily 6-15 as default
    • Could standardise to 10 articles per issue?
    • Could abolish issues all together and just have single-issue volumes?
    • If publication rate increases:
  • Naming
    • 2030 strategy - talked about brand-awareness - Wikipedia was more known that Wikimedia - ‘Wikipedia Journals’?
    • Sister project site should be versatile for all sorts of peer review functions and other journals to start up
    • Naming suggested URL format?:
      • https://www.journals.wikimedia.org/science
      • https://www.journals.wikimedia.org/medicine
      • https://www.journals.wikimedia.org/humanities
      • https://www.journals.wikimedia.org/PLOS or BMC or BMJ or PeerJ or Elife?
  • Technical requirements/wishlist
    • Technical discussions currently taking place at meta:talk:WikiJournal
    • Wishlist should be sorted by priority (maybe lumio?)
    • MediaWiki plus extensions is very versatile, but run a risk if the WMF does not support an extension
    • We can easily spin up a test wiki with extensions for a trial
    • Set up additional meeting / email thread for technical discussions
  • Wikimedia strategy Liaison

Action items[edit]

  • Set up meeting for technical aspects (Thomas Shafee)
  • Share these minutes to metawiki with any confidential info redacted
    • This Google Doc will be emailed to the boards immediately (Thomas Shafee)
    • 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)
  • Organise next meeting - doodle poll share do 4th/5th Poll to decide times for early August