🌟Nominations are now open for the 2026 SORTEE Commendation Awards!
Know a project promoting #OpenScience in Ecology & Evolution (workshops, tools, outreach & more)? Projects can be local or global, team-based or individual
Submit a nomination here: sortee.org/awards/
Does it replicate? I recall that some problems have been raised with some of Langer's other work...
Anyone else heading to Vancouver in a couple weeks for the World Congress on Research Integrity? Looking to meet up with peeps!
The editorial board of a WikiJournal (I'm an associate editor). About DMs, yes please email me at aoholcombe@gmail.com !
Let me know of any thoughts!
Drafting your replacement in your user sandbox (User:YourName/sandbox)
Posting on the article's Talk page explaining your proposed changes and inviting comment
Tagging relevant WikiProjects on the Talk page for expert eyes
Using WP:Peer review if it's a substantial rewrite
About other opportunities to do something similar (getting review before replacing an article), I am not a Wikipedia expert but I asked Claude AI and here is its answer:
However, while the WikiJournal of Science (en.wikiversity.org/wiki/WikiJou...) is active the WikiJournal of Humanities, where this article would presumably go, is in limbo because of hopefully-temporary lack of a chief editor.
makes it less "rude" that you replaced the existing article, and makes people think twice about reverting it or making big changes right away, as the new article has passed expert peer review.
The way it works is that you submit a candidate re-write to the journal, we organise expert peer review, and then after potential revision and it is accepted to the journal, you/we replace the existing article and cite the WikiJournal publication. This gives some credibility to the rewrite,
The Wikijournals (WikiJournal of Science, WikiJournal of the Humanities) are Scopus-indexed journals that exist in part to get more expert input to Wikipedia and facilitate completely replacing an existing article with a new and better one.
Hi Peter, thank you for taking the idea seriously. Yes, Frankenstein's monsters of articles are unfortunately very common on Wikipedia, as you say people tend to just randomly tack additional bits on without ever doing a needed rewrite.
Please edit the Wikipedia article, especially if you can see an easy way to improve it!
Agree. The Conversation has been very effective at helping academics write short pieces, many of which go on to be very widely-read. I wrote several pieces in its first years and was so happy to be contributing. And it got its start in Australia and continues to be headquartered in Melbourne!
Milton, writing about 2026.
I myself don't have much understanding of the pressures, but multiple credible international analysts have indicated that in the current environment, the pressure is mainly to be more hardline. This is common in war and other chaotic situations – extremists tend to rise to the top.
My understanding of the article is that they gave access to many large corporations, but not to Mozilla or e.g. the maintainers of OpenBSD.
I was referring more to the end, that the incentive inside Iran officialdom is to show one is a hardliner, which is not obvious to all outsiders, and makes it hard for them to make a deal.
As in many NYT articles, the real information is at the very end www.nytimes.com/2026/04/15/u...
Opensource code and libraries to fall behind as Anthropic seems to be giving only large corporations access to Mythos, including to find their software's security vulnerabilities. www.nytimes.com/2026/04/15/o...
Let's!!
OK great, and let them know we'd be happy to discuss all this :)
I've found technician staff and their managers at one university to be very receptive.
3. In research outputs, include acknowledgees in JATS-XML in similar fashion to authors, but without the author tag.
Let us know if you might be able to help us to advocate for/implement these changes at your university, journal, or other institution! #scholarlyPublishing #metascience
2. In manuscript submission systems, solicit identities, ORCIDs, and the contributions of acknowledgees in the same way as co-authors.
Three concrete recommendations that we make in our manuscript (osf.io/preprints/me...) on Acknowledgment sections:
1. Include ORCID numbers in parentheses after names of individuals in Acknowledgments. This will disambiguate their identities so that scholarly databases can index them.
When I first got into #openscience, twenty years ago, the term didn't exist, but "open notebook science" had just been coined en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-no...
The recent history of science would have gone much better if there had been widespread use of the internet to share lab notebooks.
Fascinating short history, including how "Isaac Newton’s famous Waste Book is a rare example of a physical continuity between the two cultures of notetaking: humanist and scientific."
www.asimov.press/p/lab-notebo...
I googled it and the main cactus used is actually prickly pear! So the war we declared here 100 years ago shoulda just been a series of feasts.