Talk:Research Works Act

A fact from Research Works Act appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 15 January 2012 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Research Works Act proposed in the U.S. House of Representatives would ban open access mandates for federally funded research?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2012/January. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Research Works Act.

Wikipedia

Law C‑class Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Academic Journals C‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Academic Journals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Academic Journals on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Academic JournalsWikipedia:WikiProject Academic JournalsTemplate:WikiProject Academic JournalsAcademic Journal articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
See WikiProject Academic Journals' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Open Access Mid‑importance

Research Works Act is part of WikiProject Open Access, a collaborative attempt at improving the coverage of topics related to Open Access and at improving other articles with the help of materials from Open Access sources. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Open AccessWikipedia:WikiProject Open/Open access task forceTemplate:WikiProject Open AccessOpen access articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Open Access to-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Creative Commons licensing (to replace Creative Commons license); Creative Commons Attribution License (currently a redirect), reproducible research (currently a redirect), supplementary material. Scholarly Open Access (currently a redirect)
Cleanup : Access2Research
Stubs : de-stub articles in Category:Stub-Class Open access articles.
Other : add {{WikiProject Open Access}} to talk pages of related articles, and assess;
- Check media files uploaded by the Open Access Media Importer for missing or incomplete categorization or lack of descriptions, or put the files into suitable Wikipedia articles. See also recent uploads of open-access files more generally.

Open (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Open, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.OpenWikipedia:WikiProject OpenTemplate:WikiProject OpenOpen articles

United States: Government Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Low-importance).

DYK?

Any suggestions for a DYK? -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 03:49, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some ideas, to get started:

... that the Research Works Act was introduced in the United States House of Representatives to prevent open access mandates for federally funded research?
... that the Research Works Act was co-sponsored by Representatives Darrell Issa and Carolyn B. Maloney, who were both sponsored by the publisher Elsevier?
... that the Research Works Act introduced in the United States House of Representatives calls for a ban on open access mandates for federally funded research?

Please add or edit as you see fit. Deadline for nomination: 03:24, January 12, 2012‎ (UTC).

-- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 12:16, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I like the first one for its clear description. Thanks for adding the related legislation section, by the way. Gobonobo ^T ^C 03:57, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

+1 --DarTar (talk) 07:16, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think the first two collide with some of the DYK policies, so I added a third one that presumably does not. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 09:20, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and nominated the third hook here. Feel free to revise or add ALTs. Gobonobo ^T ^C 21:29, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It got promoted and is now scheduled for Sunday, Jan 15, 8am - 4pm UTC. I inquired about moving this to a workday's afternoon UTC. --Mietchen (talk) 15:41, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rescheduled for Monday 16, 4pm-midnight UTC. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 11:13, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, it's up for 4pm today. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 08:43, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of private work

It'd be nice to capture the growing debate over the definition of federally funded published research as "private-sector research works". This post has some excellent quotes by AAP CEO Tom Allen and Duke Scholarly Communication Officer Kevin Smith. Are there enough materials to create a dedicated section? --DarTar (talk) 07:16, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

perhaps an overstatement?

"If enacted, it would also severely restrict the sharing of scientific data.[6]"

The source from which this claim is derived is essentially a blog post from a speculative (and perhaps far reaching) conclusion drawn from an individual's interpretation of the bill in question. Blogger said that the wording might result in the exclusion of datasets from public access. Ill check back in a week or so to see if this has been changed or if others disagree with me. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.79.219.54 (talk) 02:22, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

more detail

I would like to see a more explicit description of the content of the proposed act -- the actual restrictions. 62.167.72.194 (talk) 20:35, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]