Wikipedia talk:Visiting Scholars/Participating institutions/Cochrane 2016

About this program
The Visiting Scholars program was established in 2013 as a collaboration between The Wikipedia Library and OCLC to increase access to information collections, such as those at libraries. Later the Wiki Education Foundation began to promote the program to increase public access to university libraries.

Cochrane's idea in 2016 is to provide some expert support to a few people interested in health care who also would be willing to try contributing to Wikipedia. To me, Cochrane's idea sounded similar to the research support model of the Visiting Scholars program, so I am drafting this documentation page as an instance of that program. I talked this over a bit with user:Ocaasi at the Wikipedia Library and user:Rhododendrites at Wiki Education Foundation, both of whom identified some challenges but agreed that the Visiting Scholars program could experiment. There still might be details to sort but in Wikipedia spirit, I am going to be bold and add this to the list of Visiting Scholar programs in progress. I am notifying Wikiproject Medicine about this and trying to keep communication channels open for feedback.

Let's see what happens! If anyone has questions then please ask. Like many other outreach programs, this program includes off-wiki training and off-wiki expert review of content. I am posting here to try to document some of what is planned. Thanks.  Blue Rasberry  (talk)  21:45, 13 September 2016 (UTC)


 * This is really exciting. A few questions/comments:
 * This text looks to target people within Cochrane more than potential volunteers (e.g. "If your CRG is interested..."), and differs from information in the call for volunteers (e.g. 3 months vs. 4 months). To me this would ideally be aimed at potential Visiting Scholars (and then for people to learn more about the position and the work that came out of it). When the on-wiki portal for the Cochrane-Wikipedia collaboration goes up, it seems like information targeting people already working with the organization would be more at home there?
 * How do you feel about setting this page to look like the other participating institution profiles?
 * Taking both of the above bulletpoints into consideration, I started a draft at User:Ryan (Wiki Ed)/Cochrane. Some of the text from "Position announcements" is taken from this announcement. Some is from this page, but without the content that isn't relevant to the potential Wikipedian. I want to point out that some of the text is obviously copied, which we can change if that's not ok.
 * My inclination would be to move either page to just /Cochrane (rather than /Cochrane 2016, in the way the other institution pages include past and current work/announcements.
 * What your thoughts? --Ryan (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:34, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Cochrane has a massive international network with most of its contributors being only slightly active, similar to English Wikipedia's 80,000 editors. It is presumed that volunteers would come from their network but this really is a general call to tens of thousands of people of all backgrounds. I think someone with no background at Cochrane could do this. There are multiple versions of the call to participation going around also. The terms of this are kind of negotiable.
 * Yes, the cosmetic look of the page should match the other ones.
 * The advertising text describing this position is intended to have a Wikimedia compatible license. It still is difficult to note that, but I confirm that it is so.
 * I am not sure about the title. Somehow there needs to be a title system to note continuous iterations of this. For this round, there will be 3 people October - December with an interest in aging. Some parts of this could change, and there is already discussion of simultaneously doing another topic with another time frame. As the cosmetics get synced, there should also be a plan to create copies of the format and drop additional instances of the program on wiki in a way that advertises the call, documents the program, and makes it clear where people should communicate. I am already thinking about this conversation we are having here; perhaps this talk should be moved to a new project page that I just made at WP:Cochrane, and perhaps all the Cochrane discussion should happen there to centralize this.
 * Let me look more...  Blue Rasberry   (talk)  15:14, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Maybe /Participating institutions/Cochrane for an overview, transcluding profiles of all past Visiting Scholars and linking to subpages like /2016 or /Ageing or somesuch (or linking to subpages at WP:Cochrane). We can always figure that out later. Stick to whatever's easiest in the short-term, and move talk page threads as you see fit. --Ryan (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:39, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * BTW I added a link to the header. You may want to add a summarized version to WP:VS/A. --Ryan (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:48, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The text at User:Ryan (Wiki Ed)/Cochrane is superior. I would like to deprecate or delete this draft eventually and use what you set up. Is there more to do with that version?  Blue Rasberry   (talk)  15:55, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * If you're satisfied with what's there, let's go for it. Can always add more text/images if you want, but other than adding the category that's it. Go ahead and move whenever you see fit. --Ryan (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:00, 15 September 2016 (UTC)