Design/Archive/Wikimedia User Interface/Concepts/Expertpedia

The following is a concept by User:TheDJ. Enhancing, commenting, creating mockups and forking is encouraged !

Expertpedia is an idea that I have had for a while to bridge the gap between 'amateurism' of Wikipedia and the 'old world' of experts. Think of it as the intersection of Wikipedia, Quora and Google Knol. The project consists of:
 * Confirmed/verified identities for Subject Matter Experts (SME's).
 * Public profile pages for these SME's hosted on a separate project.
 * The profiles are connected to the different publications, identifiers and other scientific connections of experts
 * Experts are required to organize themselves in (private) groups like "MIT" or "Nature magazine" etc... You can be part of multiple groups.
 * Experts will have peer voting/scoring on eachothers contributions, but individual scores (and who awarded them) will only be visible inside the group. If you are outside the group you can only see the group average.
 * Experts can leave 'comments' or 'reviews' on specific revisions of Wikimedia pages (Wiktionary, Wikipedia etc). These would be exposed as a 'building blocks' on our 'knowledge graph'. At the bottom of an article you could see for instance a block "Expert opinion" that would link to these comments. I've also been calling this part the "Expert wall".
 * Wikimedia audience can "like" these opinions/reviews. But only if they have verified email addresses and registered their "Real name". This to prevent abuse/badgering etc.
 * Ideally these expert comments would actually be like comment bubbles on sentences in the articles. You could expose them in Edit mode, in order to improve an article. (Mark as resolved?). (Probably requires full parsoid based contentmodel for all revisions.)
 * In this world, Experts can publish their own topic articles as "Expert articles" on expertpedia. This will look a lot like Google Knol honestly. This time it will work, because of 2 things. 1: Verified identities and peer voting (quality insurances) and 2: the top voted expert article will be available from the bottom of a Wikipedia article [another 'building block'] (exposure).
 * They can also publish paper's with original research, based on the same prinicples.

See what I did there ? I created a platform for secondary sources, tertiary sources and peer review. All in an open and free ecosystem. It's awesome :) —Th e DJ (Not WMF) (talk • contribs) 20:30, 15 February 2016 (UTC)