From: Ari Belenkiy <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 22:29:58 -0700

Kalev,

Are you an author or a Wikipedia editor? You seem to propose a
monopoly - Wikipedia's monopoly - in evaluation of academic research.
Have you dealt with publishing papers first hand or second hand? Your
arguments are too schematic and superficial to be accepted in that
form.

I would point to two aspects where an editor adds invaluable touch:

1) he evaluates the often contradictory referee reports;

2) (after seeing a referee's report) he may find a minor flaw in the
argument and ask the author to fill in (still willing to accept the
paper!), thus extinguishing a potential priority dispute.

Now I quote your article: "...to select a set of publications from the
Wikipedia of their field that they deep the most rigorous and
impactful."

"they deem" - this what you meant?  Are you going to correct this
typo? It seems forgivable but still spoils the "landscape".

If yes, you shall tacitly do the editorial job you have publicly
disavowed. If no, someone later might repeat your arguments and claim
priority "since your text was incomprehensible."

Ari Belenkiy

Vancouver BC
Canada


On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 4:29 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 19:58:03 -0500
>
> It strikes me that very little if what is said in this article applies
> to monograph publishing or even to journal publishing in the
> humanities. The suggestions are interesting, but not widely applicable
> to all scholarly output.
>
> Sandy Thatcher
>
> > From: kalev leetaru <[log in to unmask]>
> > Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 09:18:23 -0400
> >
> > Thought many of you would like my latest piece on the open access
> > debate, especially towards the second half where I talk about how AI
> > can eventually replace reviewer selection and how the transition of
> > encyclopedias from dead tree editions to the living dynamic repository
> > of Wikipedia might offer one glimpse into how academic publishing
> > might be reimagined in the digital era:
> >
> > http://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2016/06/14/should-all-academic-research-be-free-and-what-wikipedia-can-teach-us-about-publishing/
> >
> >
> > ~Kalev
> > http://kalevleetaru.com/
> > http://blog.gdeltproject.org/