Difference between revisions of "Archaeopedia:About"

From Archaeopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(About Archaeopedia)
(About Archaeopedia)
 
Line 3: Line 3:
 
What is the role of a Wiki in science?
 
What is the role of a Wiki in science?
  
Some are advocating that science communication move on-line - see: [http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=science-2-point-0-great-new-tool-or-great-risk - Is Open Access Science the Future?] by M. Mitchell Waldrop in ''Scientific American''. In that concept results would be available in a form where a community of insiders would be able to contribute criticisim / corrections / additions.   
+
Some are advocating that science communication move on-line - see: [http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=science-2-point-0-great-new-tool-or-great-risk - Is Open Access Science the Future?] by M. Mitchell Waldrop in ''Scientific American''. In that concept, scientific results would be available in a form where a community of insiders would be able to contribute criticisim / corrections / additions.   
  
 
A commentor on that article said "Blogs and wikis are the digital equivalents of hallway conversations at a conference or a lab meeting, but you are a long way from replacing journals. You don't get points for making a statement in science unless you can prove that statement."
 
A commentor on that article said "Blogs and wikis are the digital equivalents of hallway conversations at a conference or a lab meeting, but you are a long way from replacing journals. You don't get points for making a statement in science unless you can prove that statement."

Latest revision as of 16:55, 14 July 2010

About Archaeopedia

What is the role of a Wiki in science?

Some are advocating that science communication move on-line - see: - Is Open Access Science the Future? by M. Mitchell Waldrop in Scientific American. In that concept, scientific results would be available in a form where a community of insiders would be able to contribute criticisim / corrections / additions.

A commentor on that article said "Blogs and wikis are the digital equivalents of hallway conversations at a conference or a lab meeting, but you are a long way from replacing journals. You don't get points for making a statement in science unless you can prove that statement."

We do aim to be more than a hallway conversation. But what in particular - some direction or just where contributors take it?

Any comments?

webmaster@archaeopedia.com