As can be seen when clicking on my name here I founded the ReplicationWiki. Replication is my field of expertise. I came across stack exchange because I saw someone had linked to the ReplicationWiki in the Quant Stack Exchange and someone had found this helpful. The information provided there was incomplete so I explained in more detail.
I then looked what other questions are already asked here and saw someone asked for journals that publish replication of experiments, someone else wanted to know what software is used most in economics and I saw a question for examples of code for instrumental variables. All this information is readily available in the wiki, that's why I provided it here and posted the links to show how to find it. I searched for further questions that are already answered in the wiki and found one in the quant stack exchange on replication of a specific study and several questions on datasets in the open data stack exchange that I could answer with the help of the wiki and several users voted that they found the information useful: a, b, c.
I see that this can be seen as a way of self-promotion, and someone already complained about this. I am open about the fact that I founded the wiki, and I am grateful for advice how to deal with this appropriately. I already found the feedback useful that I should not edit answers of others with links to the project because even though it is shown that I edited them it is not directly clear that I as founder of the project added that information and that does not mean the original author of the answer endorses it.
There are two points that I would like to add here and that I need some advice for, a tag for replication related questions and the question how to identify studies that the community thinks should be replicated.
For questions that are related to replication of empirical studies I think it would be nice to have a tag and I created one. So far in the economics stack exchange there is only one question where I clearly see it should fit, the one on journals that publish replications of experiments. For a tag creation one is asked to provide relevant links. The most relevant links in this case as far as I would say are the web project that I founded myself and the literature list that I compiled in a different project. I am however obviously biased and would like to know what you think about it. I have worked on the topic for several years and already posted much of the information I have on the internet, so I thought I should also share it here. Unavoidably that can be seen as a conflict of interest and I would like to have your advice. On the one hand I would like to encourage the stack exchange community to ask their questions on replication, on the other hand I don't want to harm the project (and in the end myself) by attaching too much importance to my own work.
The second point is my question how to find a mechanism to identify studies that should be replicated. In the economics stack it was only partly answered in some comments and then after complaints about self-promotion some voted it down and I removed it. The same question in the quant stack exchange already got a relevant answer, maybe because there I could already refer to an example question someone has asked on a specific study they wanted to replicate. I have not yet understood why such questions are not asked here more often. Strangely I found three such questions on economics studies in the stats stack (d, e, f) and none here, so I asked there, too and it is upvoted there. The point is that I wonder why in psychology voting on such studies works whereas in economics we do not yet have anything alike that is used much. Could you help me to ask this in a way appropriate for this site?