Monthly Archives: January 2012

SHERPA/RoMEO: Publishers’ Copyright Policies and Self-Archiving

If you have written an article and have had it accepted for publication, you might have signed a publisher’s agreement or a publisher’s copyright agreement.  Did you read it carefully?  In such an agreement, the publisher may have placed restrictions on the posting of your article (sometimes referred to as self-archiving) on web pages such as a university’s departmental web page, in an institutional repository like MINDS@UW-River Falls, or even on a personal web page.  So if you put your article freely on the web, you may be in violation of that publisher’s agreement.

How can you be sure?  The best method to avoid conflict is to talk to your publisher before posting materials online and read your publisher’s agreement very carefully!  Some publisher’s agreements even ask you to transfer your rights as a copyright holder to the publisher.  So talk to your publisher before signing the agreement and ask them questions about your rights.  If you would like to learn more about your rights as an author, check out some of the articles found here.

Additionally, there is a helpful web site called SHERPA/RoMEO.  SHERPA/RoMEO isn’t a site where you can go to find a guide to the Himalayas.  Instead, it is a place to view publisher copyright policies and self-archiving policies for a variety of journals and publishers.  SHERPA-RoMEO is not a place to go for legal advice – it is the publisher of the journal that has the final say on whether or not you can post a copy of your article online.  SHERPA/RoMEO is a place to help you get started.

Have any questions?  Send Heidi Southworth a note and she can assist you.  Also, don’t forget about MINDS@UW-River Falls , the UWRF Institutional Repository.  MINDS@UW-River Falls serves as a place where the scholarly output of the university is organized into one central location.  This scholarly output can include a variety of materials from post-print articles published in journals to newsletter articles and posters and papers.  Talk to Heidi if you are interested in setting up your collection today!

Featured MINDS@UW-River Falls Item of the Week

Featured MINDS@UW-River Falls Item of the Week

Starting this week, look for the featured item of the week from the MINDS@UW-River Falls institutional repository!  Each week, we will select an item from MINDS@UW-River Falls and feature it on the library’s home page.

This week’s featured MINDS@UW-River Falls item is Nobody has my back by UWRF student Matthew P. McMillan.  Matthew’s piece appeared in the 2009 edition of the University of Wisconsin-River Falls literature and art magazine, Prologue and is part of the English Department’s Prologue collection in MINDS@UW-River Falls.  Click here to view Matthew’s item in MINDS@UW-River Falls or to see other items in the MINDS@UW-River Falls repository, visit

For more information on MINDS@UW-River Falls, contact Heidi Southworth or visit the project home page at:

Celebrating Research, Scholarship and Creative Achievement, 2011

Submissions are now being accepted for Celebrating Research, Scholarship and Creative Achievement (CRSCA), 2011.   CRSCA is an annual event coordinated by the Office of the Provost, Grants and Research, and the Chalmer Davee Library.  This celebration is designed to recognize the intellectual and creative achievements of faculty and staff of the University of Wisconsin-River Falls by honoring the work that goes on outside of the classroom.

Each spring semester the library displays the articles, books, academic posters, fine and performance art, playbills and other items produced by UW-River Falls faculty and staff during the previous calendar year.  All submissions are cited in a CRSCA booklet and the celebration culminates in an annual reception to honor the faculty and staff who submitted work.

This year’s celebration will take place Tuesday, March 27th from 3:30-4:30pm.  Please watch Falcon Daily for notices and additional information.

Visit the CRSCA webpage for details about submission guidelines or to submit your work.

First New Master’s Thesis Added to MINDS!

Following the newly enacted guidelines for mandatory submission to MINDS@UW-River Falls, the first Plan A Master’s Thesis has been added to the Graduate Studies collection.  The thesis is entitled Wisconsin 4-H/Youth Development staff perspectives on Hispanic 4-H programs  by graduate student Candis O’Brien, advised by Dr. Timothy Buttles.  The paper is available at:  This 2012 Master of Science thesis joins one other thesis – Dr. John Turcheneske’s 1971 Master of Arts thesis – in the UWRF Graduate Theses (Plan A) collection.

Figures and Abstraction – Exhibit Now Open

Figures and Abstraction by Jason McIntyre, a masters student at UW-River Falls, is now open the library’s Harriet Barry Gallery.  McIntyre’s paintings, which are offered for sale,  combine figurative subjects with abstract lines and shapes.   A reception will be taking place Saturday, January 28th at 1pm.  The gallery is open to all for viewing during the library’s regular public hours.

English Wikipedia anti-SOPA blackout, Jan. 18, 2012

The following is an interesting item about a Wikipedia blackout in response to proposed legislation that could seriously damage the free and open Internet, including Wikipedia.  [Thanks Heidi!]
To: English Wikipedia Readers and Community
From: Sue Gardner, Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director
Date: January 16, 2012

Today, the Wikipedia community announced its decision to black out the English-language Wikipedia for 24 hours, worldwide, beginning at 05:00 UTC on Wednesday, January 18 (you can read the statement from the Wikimedia Foundation here). The blackout is a protest against proposed legislation in the United States — the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the U.S. House of Representatives, and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA) in the U.S. Senate — that, if passed, would seriously damage the free and open Internet, including Wikipedia.

This will be the first time the English Wikipedia has ever staged a public protest of this nature, and it’s a decision that wasn’t lightly made. Here’s how it’s been described by the three Wikipedia administrators who formally facilitated the community’s discussion. From the public statement, signed by User:NuclearWarfare, User:Risker and User:Billinghurst:

It is the opinion of the English Wikipedia community that both of these bills, if passed, would be devastating to the free and open web.

Over the course of the past 72 hours, over 1800 Wikipedians have joined together to discuss proposed actions that the community might wish to take against SOPA and PIPA. This is by far the largest level of participation in a community discussion ever seen on Wikipedia, which illustrates the level of concern that Wikipedians feel about this proposed legislation. The overwhelming majority of participants support community action to encourage greater public action in response to these two bills. Of the proposals considered by Wikipedians, those that would result in a “blackout” of the English Wikipedia, in concert with similar blackouts on other websites opposed to SOPA and PIPA, received the strongest support.

On careful review of this discussion, the closing administrators note the broad-based support for action from Wikipedians around the world, not just from within the United States. The primary objection to a global blackout came from those who preferred that the blackout be limited to readers from the United States, with the rest of the world seeing a simple banner notice instead. We also noted that roughly 55% of those supporting a blackout preferred that it be a global one, with many pointing to concerns about similar legislation in other nations.

In making this decision, Wikipedians will be criticized for seeming to abandon neutrality to take a political position. That’s a real, legitimate issue. We want people to trust Wikipedia, not worry that it is trying to propagandize them.

But although Wikipedia’s articles are neutral, its existence is not. As Wikimedia Foundation board member Kat Walsh wrote on one of our mailing lists recently,

We depend on a legal infrastructure that makes it possible for us to operate. And we depend on a legal infrastructure that also allows other sites to host user-contributed material, both information and expression. For the most part, Wikimedia projects are organizing and summarizing and collecting the world’s knowledge. We’re putting it in context, and showing people how to make to sense of it.

But that knowledge has to be published somewhere for anyone to find and use it. Where it can be censored without due process, it hurts the speaker, the public, and Wikimedia. Where you can only speak if you have sufficient resources to fight legal challenges, or if your views are pre-approved by someone who does, the same narrow set of ideas already popular will continue to be all anyone has meaningful access to.

The decision to shut down the English Wikipedia wasn’t made by me; it was made by editors, through a consensus decision-making process. But I support it.

Like Kat and the rest of the Wikimedia Foundation Board, I have increasingly begun to think of Wikipedia’s public voice, and the goodwill people have for Wikipedia, as a resource that wants to be used for the benefit of the public. Readers trust Wikipedia because they know that despite its faults, Wikipedia’s heart is in the right place. It’s not aiming to monetize their eyeballs or make them believe some particular thing, or sell them a product. Wikipedia has no hidden agenda: it just wants to be helpful.

That’s less true of other sites. Most are commercially motivated: their purpose is to make money. That doesn’t mean they don’t have a desire to make the world a better place — many do! — but it does mean that their positions and actions need to be understood in the context of conflicting interests.

My hope is that when Wikipedia shuts down on January 18, people will understand that we’re doing it for our readers. We support everyone’s right to freedom of thought and freedom of expression. We think everyone should have access to educational material on a wide range of subjects, even if they can’t pay for it. We believe in a free and open Internet where information can be shared without impediment. We believe that new proposed laws like SOPA and PIPA, and other similar laws under discussion inside and outside the United States — don’t advance the interests of the general public. You can read a very good list of reasons to oppose SOPA and PIPA here, from the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Why is this a global action, rather than US-only? And why now, if some American legislators appear to be in tactical retreat on SOPA?

The reality is that we don’t think SOPA is going away, and PIPA is still quite active. Moreover, SOPA and PIPA are just indicators of a much broader problem. All around the world, we’re seeing the development of legislation intended to fight online piracy, and regulate the Internet in other ways, that hurt online freedoms. Our concern extends beyond SOPA and PIPA: they are just part of the problem. We want the Internet to remain free and open, everywhere, for everyone.

On January 18, we hope you’ll agree with us, and will do what you can to make your own voice heard.

Sue Gardner,
Executive Director, Wikimedia Foundation

New gallery exhibit opening soon: Figures and Abstraction

Figures and Abstraction by Jason McIntyre, a masters student at UW-River Falls, will be opening in the library’s Harriet Barry Gallery on January 23rd.  McIntyre’s paintings, which will be offered for sale,  combine figurative subjects with abstract lines and shapes.   A reception will be taking place Saturday, January 28th at 1pm.  The gallery is open to all for viewing during the library’s regular public hours.