[Foundation-l] Closer look at Nature's results

Fri Dec 16 04:29:33 UTC 2005

It would be great if we could leverage this to get groups of academics
to adopt small parts of Wikipedia -- without getting turned off by
disputes.  Perhaps drawing on the experiences of academics in our
midst to help them get their bearings; or offering help with
synchronizing local wiki-shards with WP proper.

SJ

On 12/15/05, Scott Keir <scottkeir at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> On Thursday, December 15, 2005, at 08:03  pm,
> foundation-l-request at wikimedia.org wrote:
> > I think that the "Nature" article was largely sympathetic.  Our best
> > response would be to review the articles surveyed to make whatever
> > corrections are needed, or even to make corrections that they failed to
> > notice as well.
>
> The Nature article is very sympathetic - and there's an editorial in
> the current issue of Nature encouraging scientists to contribute to
> Wikipedia.
> http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v438/n7070/index.html#Editorial
> "Wiki's wild world p890
> Researchers should read Wikipedia cautiously and amend it
> enthusiastically.
> doi:10.1038/438890a"
>
> (apologies if this has been discussed already - I just get the digest,
> so may be a bit behind)
>
> Scott
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
++SJ