![]() | 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 is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The topic certainly not less important than, e.g., of ResearchGate. Dr Oldekop ( talk) 20:15, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
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)
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)
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.
Yes, it started out as a free, open-access website and was awarded a .edu domain name. I think the publicity initially said that the founder was a philosophy PhD student at Oxford, and I thought he'd wanted to do some good for the world. Not long after I joined, it became a spam site. It offers paid access to scholarship and your supposed metrics (which are inflated, misleading etc etc). No one can read the papers unless they too join. Luckily ResearchGate still exists which has become what Academia.edu falsley claimed to be. It is really awful that Academia got a .edu domain name on false pretnses and went to town to profit from it. Createangelos ( talk) 22:12, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
I clicked on a link to this site by accident. Later, I started to receive emails from them that were sent to an email address that I rarely use and certainly never provided to them. I have never had an account with Academia.edu. Xxanthippe ( talk) 22:50, 8 June 2020 (UTC).
When one downloads an article from Academia, a pop-up invites one to explain why one is interested in the paper. That seems quite reasonable. The problem is that many of the authors which are to be found on Academia are a little 'dissident' in nature and, if that author suspects that you might be planning to critique his work in some way, you are likely to receive a very abusive message. That does not seem to be consistent with normal academic behavior.
The redirect
Academy.edu has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 1 § Academy.edu until a consensus is reached.
ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)
Talk to Me!
15:48, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
![]() | 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 is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The topic certainly not less important than, e.g., of ResearchGate. Dr Oldekop ( talk) 20:15, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
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)
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)
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.
Yes, it started out as a free, open-access website and was awarded a .edu domain name. I think the publicity initially said that the founder was a philosophy PhD student at Oxford, and I thought he'd wanted to do some good for the world. Not long after I joined, it became a spam site. It offers paid access to scholarship and your supposed metrics (which are inflated, misleading etc etc). No one can read the papers unless they too join. Luckily ResearchGate still exists which has become what Academia.edu falsley claimed to be. It is really awful that Academia got a .edu domain name on false pretnses and went to town to profit from it. Createangelos ( talk) 22:12, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
I clicked on a link to this site by accident. Later, I started to receive emails from them that were sent to an email address that I rarely use and certainly never provided to them. I have never had an account with Academia.edu. Xxanthippe ( talk) 22:50, 8 June 2020 (UTC).
When one downloads an article from Academia, a pop-up invites one to explain why one is interested in the paper. That seems quite reasonable. The problem is that many of the authors which are to be found on Academia are a little 'dissident' in nature and, if that author suspects that you might be planning to critique his work in some way, you are likely to receive a very abusive message. That does not seem to be consistent with normal academic behavior.
The redirect
Academy.edu has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 1 § Academy.edu until a consensus is reached.
ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)
Talk to Me!
15:48, 1 May 2023 (UTC)