How to improve Wikipedia citations with Hypothesis direct links – Jon Udell

“Wikipedia aims to be verifiable. Every statement of fact should be supported by a reliable source that the reader can check. Citations in Wikipedia typically refer to online documents accessible at URLs. But with the advent of standard web annotation we can do better. We can add citations to Wikipedia that refer precisely to statements that support Wikipedia articles….”

How do memory institutions use Wikipedia and Wikidata in their collection catalogues? – Wikimedia Blog

“Last year, the blog highlighted the amazing and powerful ways in which galleries, libraries, archives and museums (GLAMs) connect their cultural heritage collections with the world through Wikidata. Since then, the Wikidata community working on heritage materials has grown significantly—and the recent Wikidata Conference highlighted just how powerful and cross-disciplinary Wikidata is becoming, allowing for a number of different audiences to learn more about their data.”

Raising awareness for Wikipedia in Nigeria – Wikimedia Blog

“With an estimated 190 million residents, Nigeria is the largest country in Africa. A remarkable 60% of Nigerians are school-aged, creating one of the largest student bodies in the world. With internet access in Nigeria quickly growing, local Wikimedians are working together to raise awareness for the platform and how Nigeria’s many students can both use and improve Wikipedia.”

What can fact-checkers learn from Wikipedia? We asked the boss of its nonprofit owner – Poynter

“Several studies have shown that Wikipedia is as reliable if not more reliable than more traditional encyclopedias. A 2012 study commissioned by Oxford University and the Wikimedia Foundation, for example, showed that when compared with other encyclopedic entries, Wikipedia articles scored higher overall with respect to accuracy, references and overall judgment when compared with articles from more traditional encyclopedias. Wikipedia articles were also generally seen as being more up-to-date, better-referenced and at least as comprehensive and neutral. This study followed a similar 2005 study from Nature that found Wikipedia articles on science as reliable as their counterparts from Encyclopedia Britannica.”

The International Society for Computational Biology and WikiProject Computational Biology: Celebrating Ten Years of Collaboration Towards Open Access

“Open access to scientific information is a core principle of the International Society for Computational Biology (ISCB). This principle is shared by the the Wikimedia Foundation, with its primary goal to collect, develop and disseminate free and open-access educational content. Consequently, ISCB has and continues to foster strong links with several Wikimedia projects, particularly Wikipedia. To this end, ISCB works closely with WikiProject Computational Biology (WCB), a group of around 130 editors overseeing Wikipedia articles relating to computational biology and bioinformatics. In 2017, WCB celebrates its 10th anniversary, having grown to cover more than 1,300 articles in the English Wikipedia. This article serves to acknowledge past ISCB-WCB collaborations, release the results of the 2016-17 ISCB Wikipedia competition, officially announce the 2017-18 competition, and explore exciting future directions, including the potential role of WCB in classroom education for computational biology…”

Amplifying the impact of open access: Wikipedia and the diffusion of science – Teplitskiy – 2016 – Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology – Wiley Online Library

Abstract:  With the rise of Wikipedia as a first-stop source for scientific information, it is important to understand whether Wikipedia draws upon the research that scientists value most. Here we identify the 250 most heavily used journals in each of 26 research fields (4,721 journals, 19.4M articles) indexed by the Scopus database, and test whether topic, academic status, and accessibility make articles from these journals more or less likely to be referenced on Wikipedia. We find that a journal’s academic status (impact factor) and accessibility (open access policy) both strongly increase the probability of it being referenced on Wikipedia. Controlling for field and impact factor, the odds that an open access journal is referenced on the English Wikipedia are 47% higher compared to paywall journals. These findings provide evidence is that a major consequence of open access policies is to significantly amplify the diffusion of science, through an intermediary like Wikipedia, to a broad audience.