| Scholarly publishing|
(Alternative names for this keyword)
|Export and share|
|BibTeX, CSV, RDF, JSON|
|Browse properties · List of keywords|
Scholarly publishing is included as keyword or extra keyword in 0 datasets, 0 tools and 4 publications.
There is no datasets for this keyword.
There is no tools for this keyword.
|Title||Author(s)||Published in||Language||DateThis property is a special property in this wiki.||Abstract||R||C|
|Wikis in scholarly publishing||Daniel Mietchen
Konrad U. Förstner
M. Fabiana Kubke
|Information Services and Use||English||2011||Scientific research is a process concerned with the creation, collective accumulation, contextualization, updating and maintenance of knowledge. Wikis provide an environment that allows to collectively accumulate, contextualize, update and maintain knowledge in a coherent and transparent fashion. Here, we examine the potential of wikis as platforms for scholarly publishing. In the hope to stimulate further discussion, the article itself was drafted on Species ID – http://species-id.net; a wiki that hosts a prototype for wiki-based scholarly publishing – where it can be updated, expanded or otherwise improved.||0||1|
|Editing encyclopedias for fun and aggravation||Ross J.I.
|Publishing Research Quarterly||English||2009||This collaborative, retrospective autoethnography begins by offering an overview of the encyclopedias with which we have been involved, as both contributors and consulting editors, over the past decade. We then review our strategies for recruiting authors and maintaining their interest to ensure the highest quality entries; it also covers the mechanics of processing these entries. Next, we discuss the actual and perceived benefits of editing an encyclopedia, the most significant issues we encountered, and our solutions. Finally, we contextualize the previous information in light of recent changes in the scholarly publishing industry.||0||0|
|QuWi: Quality control in Wikipedia||Alberto Cusinato
Vincenzo Della Mea
Francesco Di Salvatore
|WICOW'09 - Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Information Credibility on the Web, Co-located with WWW 2009||English||2009||We propose and evaluate QuWi (Quality in Wikipedia), a framework for quality control in Wikipedia. We build upon a previous proposal by Mizzaro , who proposed a method for substituting and/or complementing peer review in scholarly publishing. Since articles in Wikipedia are never finished, and their authors change continuously, we define a modified algorithm that takes into account the different domain, with particular attention to the fact that authors contribute identifiable pieces of information that can be further modified by other authors. The algorithm assigns quality scores to articles and contributors. The scores assigned to articles can be used, e.g., to let the reader understand how reliable are the articles he or she is looking at, or to help contributors in identifying low quality articles to be enhanced. The scores assigned to users measure the average quality of their contributions to Wikipedia and can be used, e.g., for conflict resolution policies based on the quality of involved users. Our proposed algorithm is experimentally evaluated by analyzing the obtained quality scores on articles for deletion and featured articles, also on six temporal Wikipedia snapshots. Preliminary results demonstrate that the proposed algorithm seems to appropriately identify high and low quality articles, and that high quality authors produce more long-lived contributions than low quality authors Copyright 200X ACM.||0||0|
|No budget, no worries: Free and open source publishing software in biomedical publishing||Loubani T.
|Open Scholarship: Authority, Community, and Sustainability in the Age of Web 2.0 - Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Electronic Publishing, ELPUB 2008||English||2008||Open Medicine (http://www.openmedicine.ca) is an electronic open access, peer-reviewed general medical journal that started publication in April 2007. The editors of Open Medicine have been exploring the use of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) in constructing an efficient and sustainable publishing model that can be adopted by other journals. The goal of using FOSS is to minimize scarce financial resources and maximize return to the community by way of software code and high quality articles. Using information collected through archived documents and interviews with key editorial and technical staff responsible for journal development, this paper reports on the incorporation of FOSS into the production workflow of Open Medicine. We discuss the different types of software used; how they interface; why they were chosen; and the successes and challenges associated with using FOSS rather than proprietary software. These include the flagship FOSS office and graphics packages (OpenOffice, The GIMP, Inkscape), the content management system Drupal to run our Open Medicine Blog, wiki software MediaWiki to communicate and archive our weekly editorial and operational meeting agenda, minutes and other documents that the team can collectively edit, Scribus for automated layout and VOIP software Skype and OpenWengo to communicate. All software can be run on any of the main operating systems, including the free and open source GNU/Linux Operating system. Journal management is provided by Open Journal Systems, developed by the Public Knowledge Project (http://pkp.sfu.ca/?q=ojs). OJS assists with every stage of the refereed publishing process, from submissions, assignment of peer reviewers, through to online publication and indexing. The Public Knowledge Project has also recently developed Lemon8-XML (http://pkp.sfu.ca/lemon8), which automates the conversion of text document formats to XML, enabling structured markup of content for automated searching and indexing. As XML is required for inclusion in PubMed Central, this integrated, semi-automated processing of manuscripts is a key ingredient for biomedical publishing, and Lemon8-XML has significant resource implications for the many journals where XML conversion is currently done manually or with proprietary software. Conversion to XML and the use of Scribus has allowed semi-automated production of HTML and PDF documents for online publication, representing another significant resource saving. Extensive use of free and open source software by Open Medicine serves as a unique case study for the feasibility of FOSS use for all journals in scholarly publishing. It also demonstrates how innovative use of this software adds to a more sustainable publishing model that is replicable worldwide.||0||0|