Wikipedia:Wiki to journal publication

 Translation
Main page Those Involved
(sign up) Newsletter 

A flow diagram illustrating the article flow process of the WP:MED journal collaboration and translation project One concern we hear from academics is that Wikipedia gives too little of the recognition needed for tenure or advancement within one's profession. In an attempt to address this, potential collaborations with established journals are being discussed. The three journals that have expressed interest are Open Medicine, the Journal of Medical Internet Research and PLoS's PLoS Medicine. Further details can be found here and here. The main advantage of these collaborations would be providing high quality academic peer review and editorial support to create a corpus of professional-grade medical articles. Process Improve the article in question on Wikipedia to either GA or Featured Article status Submit it for peer review / further editing at the appropriate journal Publish the article and get it indexed into MEDLINE and Pubmed Reintegrate these changes into Wikipedia Hopefully by this point the article in question will pass the Wikipedia feature article nomination process and get a day on the main page. Authorship The lead author will be he or she who bring the articles through the peer review process and typically will be a major contributor. The authors will then be listed by the number of edits they have made to the article in question. As an example the list of authors for the dengue fever article can be found here. It is easy to see that authorship will be a major obstacle going forward. The ICMJE's view of what constitutes authorship is very well accepted in the medical publishing community. Considering the ICMJE guidelines for authorship, does a person who fixes a comma (for example) qualify? This is not to reduce the importance of copyediting in an encyclopedia - it's important. The top 10-50% of contributors by number of edits are listed in the author list, with lead author as indicated above. The remaining list of all contributors could be put in the 'contributors' area, or we could have a link to an app that lists all contributors to a page by number of edits. Audience Even though the audience we are writing for will be a general one, Wikipedia's medical content is used by 50-70% of practicing physicians. With the benefits of the Wikimedia software we can have articles that give a general overview of the topic in question followed by more details content within subpage. For example we have this section of the obesity article that gives an overview of management Obesity#Management and we have an entire article that deals with management in greater depth Management of obesity. Those with limited ability will be able to read the article in simple English. And through this project we will work on translating articles into the other 283 languages in which Wikipedia exists.[1] Co-ordination We will need to create an area to displace this material within the WMF (explain?). Whether this is as part of a new project or not such as The Wikipedia Journal is still being discussed. Potential obstacles Funding Funding will be needed to cover the XML tagging / copy-editing of articles before publication. This will require in the range of $1200CAD per article. Funding sources will need to be found. Many people publishing articles will have access to funds through their universities, however some will not. External funding sources for those without sufficient financial resources will be needed to ensure sustainability. Open Medicine, PLoS and probably JMIR have no questions asked publication fee waivers. Wikimedia markup Getting academics to learn a basic amount of Mediawiki markup. Article should initially be improved/written on Wikipedia so that the community can follow along and provide feedback on the process. Following this the article will be subjected to a formal copy-editing and peer review (which may occur primarily off wiki) and these changes will need to be re integrated back into Wikipedia. Licensing The default copyright licenses used by Wikipedia and the three mentioned journals are incompatible. PLoS journals use a Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY), whereas Wikipedia uses a Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike license (CC BY-SA). In order to publish materials from Wikipedia in PLoS Medicine, there are thus basically only two options: (1) all contributors to the wiki article agree to a relicensing of their contributions under CC BY, (2) the journal agrees to publish this article under CC BY-SA. JMIR also uses CC BY, but could be open to publishing an article under CC BY-SA. Open Medicine uses CC BY-NC-SA and might be willing to drop the -NC (non-commercial) clause for individual articles. Encyclopedic style Wikipedia is of course an encyclopedia and this comes with a specific style of writing that is somewhat different from a typical research journal article. We are going to be writing reviews of secondary sources rather than reviews of primary sources. Within the medical publishing community, these articles will most closely resemble 'clinical practice' articles in which literature is summarized and practical advice given to clinicians about the diagnosis and management of a common condition. An example would be this article by the AAFP on diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation. References requirements are guided by WP:MEDRS. We also have a manual of style in an attempt to maintain consistency across subject areas. The one for medicine can be found here WP:MEDMOS. Main articles are ideally around 40,000 to 100,000 bytes (4,000 to 10,000 word) and as such are just a summary of the literature. Further details can be placed in sub articles as seen in this example (Obesity#Management, Management of obesity) Collaborators Do we want to move forwards with this idea as a coalition of journals (Open Medicine, JMIR, PLoS) and possibly universities (UBC, U of T, Oxford, Yale, Cambridge)? This would allow the spreading of the costs and maybe make it easier to raise money. Final product The final products should be: A Wikipedia article that reintegrates changes made during the publication process An NLM XML of the article A published article in the publishing journal (web +/- print copy) Article priorities Figuring out which articles should come first is another piece. A list of the Popular pages from the Medicine project may be a place to start. One idea is to have a mix of articles that are very relevant to all clinicians (e.g., pneumonia) and those that are especially relevant to low-resource countries (e.g., malaria). A list of top priority articles can be found here. Users interested in this proposal Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:00, 17 April 2012 (UTC) Tarek (talk) 15:28, 17 April 2012 (UTC) Amashari (talk) 03:31, 20 April 2012 (UTC) G — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anturiaeth (talk • contribs) 13:54, 22 April 2012 (UTC) Axl ¤ [Talk] 19:23, 22 April 2012 (UTC) Sasata (talk) 01:52, 23 April 2012 (UTC) MastCell Talk 17:51, 23 April 2012 (UTC) Biosthmors (talk) 18:22, 23 April 2012 (UTC) Michelleloucks (talk) 08:48, 24 April 2012 (UTC) Remember (talk) 12:57, 25 April 2012 (UTC) ~~Ebe123~~ → report 02:57, 17 July 2012 (UTC) BonifaceFR (talk) 22:01, 17 July 2012 (UTC) (wp:fr user) Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 04:38, 18 July 2012 (UTC) Anthonyhcole (talk) 07:48, 18 July 2012 (UTC) Peter.C • talk • contribs 21:57, 3 August 2012 (UTC) Regards, --—Cyclonenim | Chat  00:10, 10 August 2012 (UTC) Anything the UK chapter can do to help, tell us: expert outreach is a central part of what we do. MartinPoulter (talk) 20:34, 31 August 2012 (UTC) MistyMorn (talk) 17:31, 11 September 2012 (UTC) Dr Satendra (talk) 14:53, 19 October 2012 (UTC) See also WP:J2W - journal to wiki publication