WikiJournal User Group/Meetings/2022-11-02

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

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 "/>

Dates and locations:

  • November 2, 2022 12:00 PM UTC
  • November 2, 2022 10:00 PM UTC


Attendees[edit]

First meeting[edit]

Second meeting[edit]

Agenda[edit]

Meeting Notes[edit]

Notes (First Meeting)[edit]

Status update on in-progress WikiJMed

  • 10 articles currently in progress - down from ~20 half-way through
  • Two in final stages after author responses to reviewer comments
  • Aiming for 8 by next meeting
  • Two with handling editors that have not sent out requests and are non-contactable (may need new handling editors)
  • Version of record for PDF creation (Leptospirosis)
    • Abstract was added post-review
    • Issue new DOI and note the addition in talk page (example)
    • Since addition was after acceptance but before PDF generated, create PDF based on revised version and new DOI if abstract is uncontroversial

Status update on in-progress WikiJSci

  • Oldest article (last update Jan 2020) author still working on it
    • Need to ask to specify own deadline (or decide a deadline ourselves)
    • All 3 reviewers had asked to see again after changes, so a risk they would not respond as it’s been so long

Status update on in-progress WikiJHum

  • 1 paper close to being publishable (Loveday, 1458) - However author not provided full name
  • Current policies require full, real name
  • Do we want to develop a policy/precedent for pseudonymous authorship (Student T Test probably the most famous example, but also examples in medical journals where patients are authors of articles)?
  • One editor: “I would vote for not modifying the rules for this single case as consequences might be grave.”
  • Second editor: “leaning towards not making an exception”
  • Third editor: “suggest this as one-off”
  • Status quo would be to not permit - would require active decision to change policy/precedent

WorkMarket

  • Sarah is going through technical setup in the interface

Technical editor application PPB journal can resume groundwork when we get submission backlog under control

  • Will significantly affect statistics

Grant application

  • Question from grant committee: “What audiences will you be targeting for marketing for this year's proposal? How will you know if your marketing is successful? That is, how will you assess this particular goal?” Input will be appreciated

Notes (Second Meeting)[edit]

Should the pdf include revisions if they occur after submission?

  • Can add as long as the pdf has not already been created and the changes are uncontroversial
  • Add a version 2 DOI (example: 10.15347/wjm/2020.001.2 to indicate second version (Would be best to start using “V2” to make more obvious)
    • Andrew post-meeting note: The DOI best practice recommends against marking newer versions as v2, v3, etc.
  • need to add these guidelines to the tech editor steps

Grant questions

  • Deadline is tomorrow (Nov 3, 2022)
  • If you can take a look and provide feedback before then

Editorial board procedures (inactive policies)

  • Poll closed, need to add the clause to bylaw
  • Not a top priority but should start end of this year/ early next year

Contacting peer reviewers

  • Contact a few more than needed
  • Those who responded (whether accept/reject review), you can ask if there is anyone they recommend you to contact to review
  • Good rule of thumb is doubling, contact 4, then 8, then 16
  • Send a follow up email 2 weeks after if they do not respond the first time
  • May need to contact a significant amount to get 2 to agree
  • Try to make sure who you are reaching out to has the expertise and qualifications to be a reviewer- if there is a question about this contact the editor in charge to confirm

Launch of Psych Journal

  • Split medicine into a psych/psychiatry journal
    • Continue to publish in Medicine in the meantime, but can be held for the new journal if it is not a time sensitive article
  • May push into end of next year/ early 2024
  • Wait until Eric has capacity to come back and take this on
  • Tasks to start (about a year process)
    • Officially onboarding editorial board
    • Reaching out to potential authors
    • Getting authors to submit (6-12 articles)
    • Sending out for peer review

Search engine optimization

  • Google scholar: pocket developer who is working on getting a Wikimedia extension as safe to use of wiki, would allow us to embed metadata tags into the pages that would be detectable by google scholar
    • Know someone who works for google scholar who is willing to work on a solution, build at google scholar (last resort)

Open journal systems back end

  • Replacement for google docs, spreadsheets, and forms that are currently used
  • The current system does not interact with mediawiki the way it needs to to be able to use it
  • Have not been able to find someone with the skills to do this
  • Thomas plans to do another round of contacting within the next month or so

Sister project proposal

  • WMF staff needs to do risk assessment, hung up on this part as it occurred ~February 2020
  • We may also need to do a risk assessment ourselves
    • None of us have experience in risk assessment
    • Foundation does not have experience in actual publishing
      • Liability for being a publisher instead of a website host
  • Andrew will follow up with Rosie to restart the conversation
  • Thomas has an email address that can be shared in confidence if we do not hear from Rosie
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=WikiJournal_User_Group/Meetings/2022-11-02&oldid=25165784"