Hi,
"Don't hesitate to be bold :)"
Being bold is in this case (and in my opinion) not trying to access un-free
(libre) content.
As I commented on the *google doc*, to me any 'hack' in accessing and using
pay-walled (or gold openaccess) content is reinforcing them as a needed
component. They are not (unless we let them be).
I would advice against publishing in "not open" journals. Ignoring them
altogether. But to do that, we'd need alternatives. They exist (in ranging
degree of openness). And some are developing in wikiversities :
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiJournal_User_Group
Some researcher communities, quitting proprietary journals is not
unprecedented
(
http://openaccess.inist.fr/?Lingua-face-a-Elsevier-pour ;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossa_(journal)
http://sigir.org/files/forum/F2001/sigirFall01Letters.html ;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_of_Machine_Learning_Research)
The more we delay by h/cr-acking proprietary journals, the latter we'll see
"*open, global, collaborative research ecosystem*" appear.
The trick is not a huge (operational) step. Convince enough 'secured'
(titulaire / holder) researchers to start organizing as reviewing groups
under an open system and divert all publication work toward it (including
organizing conferences, a thing WMF already learned to its own purpose).
But don't fool ourselves. In terms of academical power, it's an
overwhelmingly huge step. And some professors will drown (and fight it).
Full-rights OA (FROA) is easier to access, use, quote, mix... and should
thus be positively received in those biblio-metric indicators our
institutions put us under. Changing biblio-flows is changing the monitoring
of our activities thus the power pathways (this is where it is a huge
change). More importantly, under such a system the content should fall
under Linus's_Law. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus%27s_Law>
So " Is the OA movement involved enough in making wikimedian journals (or
any fully open one) arise ? " That's my *bold* question.
BR
Rudy (user:RP87)
PS : That was a surprise. ? a google doc, from :
*Head of the Wikipedia Library*
*Wikimedia Foundation"*
Ok, user:Ocaasi's page quote is "Make everything as simple as possible, but
not simpler." -Mr. Einstein <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein>
But isn't this choice a denial of wikimedian tools ?
On 19 October 2017 at 21:03, Jake Orlowitz <jorlowitz(a)gmail.com> wrote:
To help researchers (and Wikipedians), I've been
collaboratively working
on a now 24-option guide about how to access sources when you don't have
access to them. Many of you are pros at this kind of digging. Could you
give it 10 minutes and feel free to make comments, suggestions,
corrections, or additions? Don't hesitate to be bold :)
***Review the full guide
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OOw4Pcz920bkbP24uOI7AVr5SOOlVOCXOOw1G4tJkVo/edit>***
You're a Researcher without Access to Research: What do you do?
Investigating solutions for small nonprofits, social impact organizations,
and earnest individuals.
The world of publishing is evolving frantically, while it remains
frustratingly fragmented and prohibitively expensive for many. If you're a
student who just left your plush academic library behind only to discover
you are now locked out of the stacks; a Swedish startup researching water
usage in Africa and keep hitting paywalls; a small nonprofit that studies
social change activism, but all the latest papers cost $40 per read… This
article is for you.
***Review the full guide
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OOw4Pcz920bkbP24uOI7AVr5SOOlVOCXOOw1G4tJkVo/edit>***
*Thank you!*
*Jake Orlowitz*
*Head of the Wikipedia Library*
*Wikimedia Foundation*
_______________________________________________
OpenAccess mailing list
OpenAccess(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/openaccess