Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2011-11-21/WikiProject report

← Back to WikiProject report

Discuss this story

Great writeup. An oft-overlooked aspect of Wikipedia's coverage I'm glad has some dedicated attention! Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 03:34, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

• Wikisource quietly has started Wikisource:WikiProject Academic Papers and it has a little momentum, though there is some pull on the older works too. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:32, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
• For non-science journals, equivalent indexing guidelines would be the MLA Bibliography for literature, and for general periodicals Reader's Guide to Periodical Literature. I'm mentioning those because unless things have changed drastically in the years since I got my B.A. in English, when it comes to the humanities educators are more concerned with getting students to read & respond to the primary texts than to introduce them to the secondary literature. (Which is the reasonI suspect most Wikipedia articles in those subject areas suck: how does one follow the rules for writing an article on, say, Watership Down if one has no idea that material may exist in Modern Language Notes or TriQuarterly?) -- llywrch (talk) 18:48, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
• Thanks for a great interview, both in terms of questions and replies. I am interested in joining forces to cover OA journals more systematically. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 21:29, 22 November 2011 (UTC)