Talk:Academia.edu

Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent.

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Academic Journals Start‑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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.
See WikiProject Academic Journals' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Open Access Start‑class Low‑importance

Academia.edu 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

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-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.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Websites: Computing Start‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

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

Importance

The topic certainly not less important than, e.g., of ResearchGate. Dr Oldekop (talk) 20:15, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of competitors

Do we really need a competitor's list on here? Those links may be better listed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_social_networking_websites — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.103.240.135 (talk) 21:18, 31 March 2011‎ (UTC)[reply]

How is this open access?

The papers posted are only available to those with academia.edu accounts, and as far as I can tell judging from the terms, the accounts require connections with one or another academic institution. The papers are not available to lay scholars, hobbyists, or the general public. 71.191.238.237 (talk) 18:47, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That is just not true - the papers are available to anyone that goes to their site. Just type in the keywords you are interested in and you can get to the articles if they authors have uploaded them. --Smithyour (talk) 02:58, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No "connections with one or another academic institution" are required to register with Academia.edu.Simha (talk) 16:41, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

criticisms, controversies

Feels like the article needs a section like this. There surely must be plenty of criticism and controversy since academia.edu is a for profit corporation and other for-profits, e.g. academic journals, might be losing part of their market since some authors are posting their articles here for free. Refer to sources on the Elsevier case... http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/posting-your-latest-article-you-might-have-to-take-it-down/48865 http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/12/11/has-elsevier-signaled-a-new-era-for-academia-edu-and-other-professional-networks/

108.35.251.135 (talk) 01:52, 25 April 2014 (UTC)R.E.D.[reply]

I got my first piece of spam from Academia.edu today: "[Co-author name]'s co-author tag is pending your approval. Hi [My name], [Co-author name] tagged you as a co-author on: [Article name]. To approve this tag, please visit the link below: [url]. You can opt out of receiving these kinds of emails from Academia.edu with the link below: [url]." So very similar to the researchgate spam, though at least this one doesn't have my co-author as the from address, like researchgate does. This spamming practice should be mentioned in a criticism section, if someone can find a secondary source about it. Amaurea (talk) 19:43, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]