For anybody doubting the value of our Covid-19 coverage, take a look at https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium.MAGAZINE-why-wikipedia-is-immune-t… Haaretz is a well-respected Israeli newspaper with a fairly liberal outlook; the article itself is hugely complimentary about Wikipedia's coverage and gives real validation to time spent by Wikipedia editors in producing that content and keeping the quality high. Keep safe all, Rexx On 09 April 2020 at 18:00 Richard Nevell <richard.nevell(a)wikimedia.org.uk> wrote: Wikimedia UK and Wikimedia Medicine are creating a joint initiative to help tackle the issues around information about Covid-19 on Wikipedia, and we need your help. There are three "top-level" articles: - The pandemic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019%E2%80%9320_coronavirus_pandemic - The condition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus_disease_2019 - The virus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severe_acute_respiratory_syndrome_coronavirus… as well as over 750 related articles. These related articles are where we want to concentrate our support efforts. Coverage changes very rapidly and there is considerable concern about ensuring that the information provided is factual and accurate, as well as up-to-date. There are many dedicated editors involved in WikiProject Medicine and the recently created WikiProject COVID-19, but the task of keeping myths, misinformation and poorly-sourced content out of the large number of articles is huge. We are therefore asking our regular editors in the UK to do what you do best. We need help fact-checking and editing the Covid-19 articles. Whether you feel able to spare fifteen minutes from your regular editing, or bold enough to make it a regular task, every bit helps. We have a wiki page to coordinate efforts, share resources, and have discussion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_COVID-19/WMUK-WPMEDF_Jo… So please add it to your watchlist. One starting point is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:2019%E2%80%9320_coronavirus_pandemic from where you can find something that interests you. Just picking an article, reading its references, and correcting text that needs it would help. As a useful extra step (though hardly compulsory) once you’ve gone over an article it would be useful to add a note in this section: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_COVID-19/WMUK-WPMEDF_Jo… If anybody needs familiarity with the sourcing standards for medical articles, take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources_(medic… - although most of the content will only need to meet the usual standards for sourcing that you're used to. *Richard Nevell, on behalf of Wikimedia UK* *Doug Taylor, on behalf of Wikimedia Medicine* -- Dr Richard Nevell Project Coordinator, Wikimedia UK 020 3372 0765 *Wikimedia UK* is the national chapter for the global Wikimedia open knowledge movement, and a registered charity. We rely on donations from individuals to support our work to make knowledge open for all. Have you considered supporting Wikimedia? https://donate.wikimedia.org.uk Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827 Registered Charity No.1144513 Registered Office Ground Floor, Europoint, 5–11 Lavington Street, London SE1 0NZ The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

On 09 April 2020 at 18:00 Richard Nevell <richard.nevell(a)wikimedia.org.uk> wrote: If anybody needs familiarity with the sourcing standards for medical articles, take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources_(medic… - although most of the content will only need to meet the usual standards for sourcing that you're used to. *Richard Nevell, on behalf of Wikimedia UK* *Doug Taylor, on behalf of Wikimedia Medicine* Yes, that's an important point in practice. The extraordinary times Covid-19 has brought with it have seen the major medical journal publishers react. This Twitter thread is very helpful with the open access aspects of the huge volume of publications: https://twitter.com/MsPhelps/status/1249662402255298560 Temporarily, much more of the literature is going to be available to read, on the PubMed Central repository, than would usually be the case. The actual details of all that could be the basis of a crash course on open access. And why it matters. The bibliographical situation that is emerging is scary, really. Let's note that Wikidata can help cope: by holding details on papers, and data giving an idea of the reliability of journals. By capturing Creative Commons license information. By allowing us to add topical information. And with queries that are quite intuitive, supporting use and maintenance of the data. Charles _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk