Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library/NYT

Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge. That is what we're doing. Wikipedia is the 5th most visited website in the world and a nearly ubiquitous starting point for readers to begin their research. Over 500 million unique visitors come to Wikipedia every month and make over 21 billion page views. The world simply comes to Wikipedia, so it is essential that Wikipedia both be based on the most reliable sources and concurrently use them as references for readers to follow-up with for verification and further research.
 * Introduction

The New York Times is one of the world's premier and most respected sources of news. It is also, according to a recent study, one of the most cited news sources on Wikipedia (second only to the BBC). The New York Times has a deep amount of content in its archives and a generally open 'freemium' model for current events which permits readers access to 10 free articles per month before hitting a paywall. This page is a brief proposal to explore the idea of a cooperative, informal partnership between the NYT and Wikipedia to improve the quality of references in the encyclopedia by giving editors more thorough access to the NYT's rich content, both current and archived. The motivation for this projects is simple: Wikipedia is a resource that benefits the entire world. As a collaboratively written encyclopedia, it is nonetheless bedrocked upon the fact-checking and accuracy cultivated by respected academic journals, publishers, and newspapers. These are the bedrock upon which Wikipedia's core policy of verifying information is built. Everything on Wikipedia must follow from an authoritative source, and there are few sources more authoritative than the New York Times. We have built similar relationships between publishers and Wikipedia editors to great success. Partnerships with Credo Reference, HighBeam Research, Questia Online Library, JSTOR, and The Cochrane Library have set a precedent for well-executed and mutually beneficial donations of sources access. Over 4,500 of our community's most prolific editors have been given access through these programs and been able to contribute hundreds if not thousands of reliable references to the encyclopedia. These partnerships are part of a broad community initiative called The Wikipedia Library which seeks to facilitate research within our community via the provision and use of reliable sources through an open research hub that connects editors with both publishers and reference experts. Wikipedia makes these partnerships fully managed on our end. We host an application process in which we set minimal requirements for editor activity and experience (typically 1 year and 1000 edits); this helps ensure that only editors who regularly contribute to the encyclopedia will receive and actually use the donated accounts. It also helps minimize the risk that recipients will use the source for their personal enrichment or in such a way as to cannibalize a revenue stream from the publisher. Quite the opposite is typically the case: editors often spend tens or hundreds of hours per month doing nothing but building content to share with the world for free, in line with our inspiring mission to "share the sum of all human knowledge with every person on the planet". While some of these editors are in college or university, or have an affiliation with a research institution of some sort, most do not, and are left to purchase source access out of pocket. That financial barrier limits their effectiveness at contributing to what is essentially a public good with tremendous reach. Partnering with Wikipedia in this way is a lightweight and mutually beneficial approach. Wikipedia clearly benefits from access to the highest quality sources and our editors save themselves from often prohibitive expenses. Meanwhile, the participating publisher receives: 1) the opportunity to contribute to a powerful mission and global public resource and brand; 2) increased visibility within our community as having contributed to our project; 3) thorough promotion throughout community forums to promote the availability of accounts; 4) top-line mention in our Library navigation templates as a 'partner'; 5) mentions in social media and blog posts about the partnership; 6) placement on Wikipedia pages as references; 7) prominent placement in articles for readers often in the body of the Wikipedia article as well as in the sources at the bottom; 8) typically increased usage of the donated source on Wikipedia (for example, the HighBeam partnership saw a 600% increase on usage); 9) increased referral traffic from links back from Wikipedia to the donated source; 10) millions of page views from readers who consume Wikipedia daily. Wikipedia would be honored and enriched by working with the New York Times. Our community would eagerly rally around such a partnership and further a relationship between two great institutions that both serve the public though their combined gathering of reliable information and its dissemination to readers around the world.
 * Motivation
 * Precedent
 * Management
 * Mutual benefit
 * Conclusion