hi Andrzej, all,
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005, Andrzej Marecki wrote:
On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 01:54:18PM +0100, Boud Roukema wrote:
Nice to see that Nature has discovered wikis and blogs, but it's rather hypocritical for them to say that wikis and blogs are a great thing while failing to make their own archives available for no-cost ("free as in beer") access on the web.
Let's hope it changes some time in the future. So far they published this in the latest issue:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v438/n7070/full/438890a.html
... and the last para of the above reads:
"Nature would like to encourage its readers to help. The idea is not to seek a replacement for established sources such as the Encyclopaedia Britannica, but to push forward the grand experiment that is Wikipedia, and to see how much it can improve. Select a topic close to your work and look it up on Wikipedia. If the entry contains errors or important omissions, dive in and help fix them. It need not take too long. And imagine the pay-off: you could be one of the people who helped turn an apparently stupid idea into a free, high-quality global resource."
Wow! Cool!
i highly recommend this whole Nature article (well most of it, unfortunately, it does not seem to be a wikified article, so i can't correct the obvious errors...) to those people who think my style of teaching - with a strong wikipedia component - is too "politically incorrect"...
Also you can note that (at least) CfA UMK has a free access to new articles.
Well, it doesn't change the fact that Nature is being hypocritical.
Anyway, thanks for the info. :)
It's nice to know when authoritarian organisations are forced to accept the advantages of openness and cooperation instead of hierarchy and competition...
pozdr boud