OpenWetWare talk:PLoS community page: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
<font color=red>should we really talk about wikipedia? I wonder if we should just ignore wikipedia? If we do want to talk about it, I propose moving this to a later section.</font> | <font color=red>should we really talk about wikipedia? I wonder if we should just ignore wikipedia? If we do want to talk about it, I propose moving this to a later section.</font> | ||
* '''[[User:Ricardo Vidal|Ricardo Vidal]] 05:35, 6 September 2007 (EDT)''': I think that wikipedia should be ignored. Recently there was a bit of talk about wikipedia and how it ''sucks'' for science. Read more at [http://epidemix.org/blog/?p=72 Why Does Wikipedia Suck on Science?] (this post was featured at Slashdot and Digg, so it got some exposure) | |||
oww: editors are scientists with some knowledge of field, each account associated with real person (accounts screened by real person), usernames are full names; wikipedia: anonymous editors, can't really know when you should trust a specific article | oww: editors are scientists with some knowledge of field, each account associated with real person (accounts screened by real person), usernames are full names; wikipedia: anonymous editors, can't really know when you should trust a specific article | ||
Revision as of 02:35, 6 September 2007
Austin Che and Reshma Shetty are writing a community page on OpenWetWare for PLoS Biology. Please leave feedback here.
Feedback, comments and suggestions
- Ricardo Vidal 16:05, 4 September 2007 (EDT): Please correct me if I'm wrong. This new community page will harbor "inside" information/details regarding the activities that PLoS (biology) has planned to help disseminate scientific research? If so, why is all the OWW information exposed on this page when it already exists on other pages like here and here?
- Reshma 16:43, 4 September 2007 (EDT): A PLoS community page is actually a type of article published in PLoS Biology. As seen on their site, a Community Page is "a forum for organizations and societies to highlight their efforts to enhance the dissemination and value of scientific knowledge". We're writing a draft of an article on OpenWetWare to be submitted as a community page to PLoS Biology. Since the topic of the article is OpenWetWare, we're drawing on existing pages on the site for source material. Sorry for the confusing page name!
- Ricardo Vidal 16:53, 4 September 2007 (EDT): Thank you for the explanation, I was unaware of such community pages. I believe that the newly created OWW blogs are an important point to include too as they deliver a closer look at the user's experiences and research thoughts/findings providing even more transparency to the scientific community.
- Reshma 16:43, 4 September 2007 (EDT): A PLoS community page is actually a type of article published in PLoS Biology. As seen on their site, a Community Page is "a forum for organizations and societies to highlight their efforts to enhance the dissemination and value of scientific knowledge". We're writing a draft of an article on OpenWetWare to be submitted as a community page to PLoS Biology. Since the topic of the article is OpenWetWare, we're drawing on existing pages on the site for source material. Sorry for the confusing page name!
Wikipedia
oww: prepublication; wikipedia: postpublication
should we really talk about wikipedia? I wonder if we should just ignore wikipedia? If we do want to talk about it, I propose moving this to a later section.
- Ricardo Vidal 05:35, 6 September 2007 (EDT): I think that wikipedia should be ignored. Recently there was a bit of talk about wikipedia and how it sucks for science. Read more at Why Does Wikipedia Suck on Science? (this post was featured at Slashdot and Digg, so it got some exposure)
oww: editors are scientists with some knowledge of field, each account associated with real person (accounts screened by real person), usernames are full names; wikipedia: anonymous editors, can't really know when you should trust a specific article
also, do we want to discuss authorship in the context of wikipedia ... why not just talk about our author policy in a later section
Community page guidelines
The "Community Page" is meant to provide organizations interested in the dissemination of scientific information with an opportunity to highlight their activities. We ask contributors to resist the temptation of self-promotion and instead focus on conveying information to a diverse audience. It is usually preferable to focus on a specific activity or program rather than listing a number of them. Length guidelines: Approximately one page, which accommodates approximately 900 words and one image.
Published community pages
Not a complete list
