Improving science communication and organization visibility through Wikipedia: A case study of the American Association for Anatomy
Abstract
Wikipedia is one of the most widely accessed sources of scientific information globally, serving as a critical platform for public understanding and engagement with science. Despite its influence, many scientific societies are underrepresented or insufficiently described on the platform, limiting their visibility, outreach potential, and opportunities for public scholarship. This gap is particularly significant given Wikipedias high placement in search engine results and its role in shaping perceptions of scientific institutions. To address this issue, a structured case study was conducted focusing on the Wikipedia article for the American Association for Anatomy (AAA). A baseline evaluation revealed major deficiencies in article structure, historical coverage, citation quality, and alignment with Wikipedias editorial standards. Using a methodical editing process informed by science communication principles and content guidelines, the article was substantially revised. High-quality secondary sources were used to develop new sections on AAAs mission, governance, publications, awards, meetings, and outreach efforts. Following these edits, the articles classification improved from Stub to Start-class, its visibility and connectivity within Wikipedia increased, and the number of internal and external references, links, and structural elements grew substantially. This outcome demonstrates that scholarly engagement with Wikipedia can meaningfully enhance institutional presence and public accessibility of scientific knowledge. This case study offers a transparent and replicable model for scientific organizations and educators seeking to improve digital visibility and contribute to open-access science. It also highlights the potential for Wikipedia editing to serve as a form of public scholarship and a high-impact educational practice within the anatomical sciences.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 1
- FWCI
- 12.45
- Field percentile
- top 5%
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Keywords to success: a practical guide to maximise the visibility and impact of academic papers
P. Pottier, M. Lagisz, … S. Nakagawa·bioRxiv·Oct 2, 2023
- High Impact: Wikipedia sources and edit history document two decades of the climate change field
O. Benjakob, L. Jouveshomme, … R. Aviram·bioRxiv·Nov 30, 2023
- Wikipedia as a tool for contemporary history of science: A case study on CRISPR
O. Benjakob, O. Guley, … R. Aviram·bioRxiv·Nov 25, 2022
- Wikidata: A platform for data integration and dissemination for the life sciences and beyond
Elvira Mitraka, Andra Waagmeester, … Benjamin M. Good·bioRxiv·Nov 16, 2015
- Writing for identity? Exploring the motivations of pre-college students to participate in science publication
Sarah C. Fankhauser, Tanya Bhagatwala·bioRxiv·Mar 27, 2025
- Persistent Underrepresentation of Women’s Science in High Profile Journals
Yiqin Alicia Shen, Jason M. Webster, … Ione Fine·bioRxiv·Mar 8, 2018