Group items tagged

Welcome to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (SEP). From its inception, the SEP was designed so that each entry is maintained and kept up-to-date by an expert or group of experts in the field. All entries and substantive updates are refereed by the members of a distinguished Editorial Board before they are made public. Consequently, our dynamic reference work maintains academic standards while evolving and adapting in response to new research. You can cite fixed editions that are created on a quarterly basis and stored in our Archives (every entry contains a link to its complete archival history, identifying the fixed edition the reader should cite). The Table of Contents lists entries that are published or assigned. The Projected Table of Contents also lists entries which are currently unassigned but nevertheless projected.

I like this encyclopedia, I already have used it to do my homework, it has very structured information, and is like consult a great book of phylosophy and very specialized!

"Self-publishing is at a stage analogous to the early days of Wikipedia, when users were reluctant to trust information contained in a communally written encyclopedia. It turns out that online democracy performs quite an effective self-regulating function. "

Good points in the article: There are several good reasons a novelist chooses to self-publish: 1. Because of repeated rejection. 2. To get the book to market more quickly. 3. To have more control over the process. 4. To receive a larger share of the book's earnings. 5. To attract the attention of a major publisher.

With digitization of publishing its now an option to self publicize especially for new writers who thing their work will never be acknowledged. But musicians are also using the self publicizing/promotion and later one it does pays on. I heard of Justin Bieber story of when the mother was busy posting you-tube videos.So its possible to go a "freenuim" way and start with e.g blogging and eventually build a fan/interest base

"Unnoticed by most of its readers, Wikipedia continues to undergo dramatic changes, as its sister project Wikidata introduces a new multilingual "Wikipedia for data" (http://www.wikidata.org) to manage the factual information of the popular online encyclopedia. With Wikipedia's data becoming cleaned and integrated in a single location, opportunities arise for many new applications."

"Stardust@home is a citizen science project that encourages volunteers to search images for tiny interstellar dust impacts. The project began providing data for analysis on August 1, 2006."

Since I'm interested in publishing, here's a good start! Open publishing is a process of creating news or other content that is transparent to the readers. They can contribute a story and see it instantly appear in the pool of stories publicly available. Those stories are filtered as little as possible to help the readers find the stories they want.

A crowdsourced "open" perspective on Academic Publishing!

This paper seeks to provide reference librarians and faculty with evidence regarding the comprehensiveness and accuracy of Wikipedia articles compared with respected reference resources.

Actually the article conforms our Wikipedia research field work results.

Due to the difficult political situation around the online encyclopedia Wikipedia developed this information war.

Researchers found out that " Wikipedia is significantly more biased than Britannica by their measurement, and a bit more left-leaning." But isn't the biggest and the most important thing of Wikipedia is their neutral point of view policy? This is introduced by the Wikipedia founder as the core principle of the community in our lecture video. However, researchers also found out that, the research result is influenced by their measurement, "Wikipedia articles are longer, on average, than Britannica articles, and on a per word basis Wikipedia is actually slightly less biased. Wikipedia articles which have received more revisions tend to be more neutral. The more the crowd works on an article, the less biased it is."

Does that mean it has created a platform for all the political foes to meet, under one roof and voice out their views.

Why it "works" Network Effect Wikipedia benefits tremendously from the network effect. The network effect is when a user of a product benefits more from a product if other people also use the product. Telephones are a textbook example. If only a few dozen consumers have telephones, then the telephones aren't very useful. But if millions of consumers have telephones, they become more useful since each telephone owner can contact many people. The large number of Wikipedia users benefits Wikipedia. First, the more editors there are, the the higher the accuracy and quality of the articles. Secondly, it gives an incentive to users to edit. Since editors know the each article will be read by thousands of users, the sheer influence of each article is a strong enough incentive to edit, even though Wikipedia is free. Openness Wikipedia is free and open for any user to edit, even anonymously. This means there is a very large number of editors. This helps Wikipedia ensure accuracy since each mistake and inaccuracy will have to get by hundreds of editors. With so many writers, the scope of Wikipedia articles is very large, minimizing the amount of missing information. Although the openness of Wikipedia provides a powerful self-correcting method, it also makes Wikipedia vulnerable to vandalism. In addition, editors are anonymous and may have a conflict of interest, or might have inadequate knowledge of the article's subject. Yet, because Wikipedia is open to any edits, it is also likely to be corrected. It operates by a system of checks and balances from many editors. However, it has some guidelines to protect it against misinformation and bias: 1. Verifiability principle. To prevent bias and to protect the encyclopedic quality of its articles, all edits on Wikipedia must in theory be a verifiable fact. Moreover, it must have a reliable source to verify each fact. 2. No Original Research. As an encyclopedia, it is mean to be a secondary source of infor

"global virtual culture-historical encyclopaedia www.nekropole.info/en in which any person could record their memories about their ancestors, family members and other close and important people." At present, on more than 14.0 million pages the website holds data on more than 3.85 million persons. More than 131,000 sites of burial grounds have been added and marked on the maps. The website continues to grow and is constantly technically improved. Today, the information can be recorded in 8 languages: English, Russian, German, French, Polish, Latvian, Lithuanian, and Hebrew.

This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it .

it would be a good idea for all the African countries to have a similar list for all types of libraries. We have been struggling with a directory for African libraries , school libraries etc

Thanks for the list!

"In truth, publishing is flourishing, creating massive new fortunes for entrepreneurs and more choices for consumers. It's also attracting large investments by established companies and venture capitalists. Though not everyone prospers, there has never been a better time for publishers."

Good overview with fundamental advice for publishers: innovate

Good read, Kevin! :) I agree with this article that said "As long as people want to be informed, entertained, and inspired, there will be profitable opportunities in publishing." The main key to keep the business running is everyone must adapt. Traditional publishers need to moves to digital media in order to survive and meet the modern readers' needs.

Wikipediocracy.com hosts articles examining Wikipedia's editorial failings and the governance flaws that lead to them, as well as a forum dedicated to criticism of Wikipedia's administrative culture.

Wikipediocracy's mission is so negatively stated, that one wonders when someone will have to create a site to examine it: "We exist to shine the light of scrutiny into the dark crevices of Wikipedia and its related projects; to examine the corruption there, along with its structural flaws; and to inoculate the unsuspecting public against the torrent of misinformation, defamation, and general nonsense that issues forth from one of the world's most frequently visited websites, the 'encyclopedia that anyone can edit.'" Oversight of Wikipedia et al is a good thing. A more open minded approach is needed. As I've not yet read any of the articles in depth, I reserve judgment of the site itself. I'm only critiquing the mission statement.

This is a Wikipedia book on health care, a collection of Wikipedia articles that can be easily saved, rendered electronically, and ordered as a printed book