We explore how we might use a prototype "Wiki Laboratory" tool to create some academic grade results. Our first experiment is a sharing-centric tool for Exploratory Parsing semi-structured texts with a particular interest in Wikipedia dump files.
Vision
Wikimedia's research mailing list ongoing discussion led to the notion of the laboratory. summary 
I was thinking about Federated Wiki contributing to scientific method when I made this observation and proposed this question:
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Ward Cunningham ward at c2.com wrote:
People should be able to publish their work as quickly as they like in a professional way, especially in fields that change rapidly and need to benefit from collaborating with one another.
What's the quickest way that we would ever want to publish our work? If we push on this hard enough we might change the nature of work. (I know, much in academia conspires against quick. Same for business and probably dating. But as a thought experiment, how quick could quick be?)
Many of the ideas explored on this site were spawned from Samuel Klein's response. email
He says, I don't know... how about [stars mine]:
Klein's List
You have a good project idea someone should do. You publish it.
You know some people doing interesting work in the area who need x,y,z to tackle such a project, and add that.
You start a project. You publish a pointer and project name.
Some collaborators join. You publish names.
You get a target to take data from, have a meeting, and publish.
You finalize procedures and start implementing. and publish. ★
You get first data. and publish. ★
You get context for the data. And publish. ★
You find time to look at the data, organize the context, add a summary, and publish. ★
You compile a full schedule of data, and run analysis, publishing your error logs and lab notebook pages on the fly. ★
You give a paper bag talk with slides (and publish)
You draft an abstract for peer review (and publish)
You finish an abstract and submit it for review (a. p.)
You get feedback from the journal you submitted to (a. p.) and revise (a. p.)
You get included in a major quarterly Journal, with polish (a. p.)
You get public commentary, cites, criticism; and make better talk slides (a. p.)
You add suggestions for your students or others to extend the work in future papers (a. p.)
Various fields adopt various subsets of the above; most have only a handful towards the end.
Notes
Expanding the Role of Tools in a
Literate Programming Environment. Kent and I anticipate the integration of tools and publications.
The Humanities and Technology Camp has a similar agenda. Adam Solove has attended bringing his expertise in classical Chinese poetry. Darn. Just missed their one Portland event. website
Wikimedia Research Data lists available dumps and feeds from Wikimedia properties. Many tools exist to read dump format. meta
Txtzyme provides an extremely simple model of an experimental device. We've shown how specialized markup makes for sharable experimental setups. video
ARISE 2 Report Unleashing America’s Research & Innovation Enterprise from the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
eLife Lens web-centric viewer associated with open-science initiative.