Blogging through Wikipedia (2018)

I think social system is first important thing in the countries. There is right to reject by the countries if there are a lots of effects by Wikipedia. But there is no country without social system. Some issues in the world is so sensitive in some countries. So people in those countries act so sensitively of those issues. I think that's why some governments block Wikipedia. But also Wikipedia have free right to reject censorship of government. So They follow their rules if Wikipedia want to provide their site in some blocked countries.

Summary  Jimmy Wales  told like that "Give freely the sum of the world’s knowledge to every single person on the planet in the language of their choice, under a free license, so that they can modify, adapt, reuse, or redistribute it." I think This is most important fact of Wikipedia. I haven't actually known yet about the main idea of Wikipedia. But this article told me what is it. Interesting Point They said internet system of world is not perfectly pair right now. They know about this matter and think how to solve this problem. But this is not simple problem. So they just try again and again to make world better to access world wide web. I hope it will be succeed. Also they said mutual respect is also important thing. I think this is important matter too. Discussion point Without all intelligence of the world, how could we say collective intelligence is perfect? So I think we should try this world make better to gather the intelligence. And then how could we

  1. Summary    The previous reference books before Wikipedia distanced from institutions, people, and discussions. But Wikipedia is not. It is not just an online multilingual encyclopedia, it is a community and encyclopedia. Wikipedia always plays a role in demonstrating the community's successive conversations. Most importantly, these conversations reveal the collective culture - " good luck ". So, how do we understand this culture?   Wikipedia's culture can be traced to a collaborative culture, which is based on three central policies. " Neutral Point Of View (NPOV.), " " No Original Research, " and " Verifiability. " A neutral perspective may initially seem to be incompatible with neutral knowledge. The two different policies " No Original Research " and " Verifiability. " mean that " all Wikipedia materials must be based on reliable and open-source sources. "  The projects discussed in thi

This article explains the process and motto of Wikipedia. Unlike previous encyclopedias, Wikipedia aims to collect all human knowledge and make it freely editable and redistributable to everyone. In fact, anyone who can access Wikipedia through the Internet can easily edit and get information. Wikipedia is said to be developed through accumulation of knowledge through the collective intelligence of people. This is an open source encyclopedia of Wikipedia's motto.   Interestingly, Wikipedia started with a challenging motto of "Anyone can Edit Encyclopedia", but the actual number of edits is only 2.5% of logged in users. This means that there are many people who get information from Wikipedia rather than those who edit Wikipedia. In order to overcome this, it seems that the mature attitude of Wikipedia users is necessary.   Wikipedia is a truly innovative site. But there is something to worry about. If you think Wikipedia has incorrect information. It would

1. Summary Wikipedia is both a community and an encyclopedia on the cyber space. Wikipedia is said to be a cooperative community based on 'good faith'. On this basis Wikipedia shares “the sum of all knowledge”. Although there were failures before the Wikipedia project, Wikipedia has been successful in its free, open-source encyclopedia that has long been studied in terms of accessibility, cost and cooperation. 2. Interesting Point In other words, Wikipedia has a meaning for collecting information in one place based on good faith. I found that one interesting. It is what happens in cyberspace. We naturally use cyber space, but it is amazing to know that it is the encyclopedia of cyber space, which is an infinite world. The functional aspects of cyber space were also interesting. Information can be obtained very easily from external links or footnotes(said typical function of wiki) on the definitions and heated discussions we would like to know. It is just amazing that

No one has Rights to censor Wikipedia. The purpose of Wikipedia is to spread information to everyone. Information includes everything so does encyclopedia. Once difference between encyclopedia and Wikipedia is a writer. Everyone in the world can be the writer in Wikipedia but not all of them has expertise . The question starts from now on. Does the information on Wikipedia is correct? How can we find errors in Wikipedia if Wikipedia has wrong information? It is sure that we don’t need to censor Wikipedia even if Wikipedia has wrong information? These are very difficult questions, but I decided my answer. I will say No. Even though not all of the Wikipedia writers are experts there is a ‘feedback’ in Wikipedia. Feedback is a special characteristic of Wikipedia. Feedback in Wikipedia is fast cause people search Wikipedia every time and also when we edit on Wikipedia we need a source; where did I get this information. If I didn’t write the sources someone would delete.

1.Summary First in this Reagle's article, there were lots of information of Wikipedia. And some of them are related to our class discussion questions. In this article, there is advantage and meaning of discussion in Wikipedia. Also this article tell us about collectiveness of Wikipedia and saying Wikipedia is a big community. And from reading this article, I could understand Wikipedia policy. Why did Wikipedia sets those policy and rules. for example, this article talks about universality of Wikipedia and why this universality is important. These information was what we learned in this course. 2.Interesting point I am really interested in Wikipedia's discussion section and universality. As written in article, in discussion section there could be a sort of concord. Because we experienced different culture, everyone's value is different. From that difference there could be gap in using the words and opinions. In discussion section, by talking together we could narrow that

Summary I could learn the history, culture, and events of Wikipedia from this text. With the development of computer technology, it seems Wikipedia is the site that can store the knowledge of the world. The problem of document attack, the side effect of development, was the thing I was curious about last week. Should Wikipedia record everything without blocking anything? Interesting point Wikipedia has grown rapidly with the development of computer technology. It is so old and huge. You may have learned a great deal from the history of earlier humans, but it is very interesting that the standards of right, wrong, and valued judgements on documents are still ambiguous. Of course, it can be difficult to judge because it is very subjective. But I think it is very interesting that we haven't decided yet on Wikipedia, where the world's intelligence gathers. Discussion point Documents containing politically sensitive issues and ideological contents are deleted an

1. Summary Wikipedia is not simply an online multi-lingual encyclopedia. Unlike books in the library, Wikipedia is a community-based encyclopedia. The wiki stands for "super fast" in the Hawaiian language. This means that it is easy to edit. This reading focuses on the collaborative culture of Wikipedia. A community-based encyclopedia like Wikipedia should have a " good faith collaborative culture." Attempts to increase access to information through collaboration are needed. It should be a place where every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge . Wikipedia is interested in "the sum of all knowledge". Jimmy Wales, co-founder of Wikipedia and founding member of Nupedia, means that an encyclopedia like Wikipedia would be a force to transform the world.   Also, according to Wales, Wikipedia follows three policies: “Neutral Point of View,” “No Original Research,” and “Verifiability”. These three policies must follow in Wik

2012047790 박종훈 Wikipedia has limits of unrealized vision, failed projects, and false predictions. Nevertheless, it is undeniable that the Web is one of the most desirable alternatives to realize the characteristics of an encyclopedia. In this Web-based book, I learned a lot about wikis and its background, but the most likely thing to come to me is the conclusion. It may not be best if the encyclopedia's platform is turned into a Web. But I could not help agreeing more than once that it is one of the most desirable ways at the moment. The cause is decentralization. The vast knowledge of the world is beyond the control of one person. He doesn't know everything. Also, a person can never achieve it on their own strength. If you take it a little broader, it is a sign that a lot of people's knowledge and many people's efforts are needed. Therefore, it takes a lot of people's effort and time to find a partial solution to make it possible on the Web. In my opi

1. Summary In this article, writer tells Wikipedia’s goal, and shows about the studies many people have done to create Wikipedia and its characteristics and meanings.  Wikipedia realizes the historical pursuit of the Universal Encyclopedia, a vision based on a technology that is not perfect and has flaws but is seeking to increase access to information. This article introduces Godwin's law, referring to the anecdote of blocking the account of the white supremacist on Wikipedia. Godwin's Law states that online discussions become more of a personal attack as they progress, while Wikipedia does not. In other words, Godwin's law dictates that while the tendency to think worst is recognized, Wikipedia's culture encourages contributors to treat and think well about others. The creators of Wikipedia worked together to imagine a world where all humans could freely share all their knowledge, to program and build something valuable. There are still very few perfectly credi

Joseph Michael Reagle’s « Good faith collaboration : the culture of wikipedia », is as it title suggests about the culture of wikipedia which for the most rely on good faith. First of all how and why did the wikipedia project arose eighteen years from now ? The author mention that during the twentieth century a trend was established and more people believed that through open source software we could solve of the world problem, and create a barrier free community which goal is to share and contribute to the sum of all knowledge. As the author well explained wikipedia was not the first project of this sort,two of it predecessor were  Paul Otlet’s Universal repertory and H.G. wells’s World brain. But what makes the difference between all thos projects, is the culture and the vision the creators wanted to hàd down. If one’s vision of the world do not match it’s contemporary, the project will failed. Indeed, Paul Otlet was more of a documentalist, Wells a technocrats, the software Nupedi

1.Summary This article is a description of Wikipedia's "vision" and the technology behind it. Wikipedia is not an online multilingual encyclopedia. Wikipedia is a project based on technology that enhances accessibility to information and is a project that realizes the historical goals of the Universal encyclopedia. The technology that improves this 'information accessibility' goes well with the slogan of the Wikipedia to make it editable by anyone. Wikipedia therefore has a special vision of access and openness. Wikipedia is Nupedia's wiki-based successor, whose name is a miniature of the online collaboration editing tools "wiki" and "encyclopedia". "As an open content encyclopedia, Nupedia is licensed to read and improve the software sources you use, including proprietary software that may limit your personal use (eg, non-backupable, multiple copy installations, recovery or improvement) Wikipedia has a lot of features that are not s

In chapter 1, Joseph Michael Reagle Jr. explains that Wikipedia is not only an encyclopedia but also a community and new contents in Wikipedia depend on conversations of this community. In fact, Wikipedia is based on a good faith collaborative culture. If some articles are criticized because of thorny subjects like Nazism and create a debate between users, it is important to have a cordial and respectful discussion to resolve these kinds of issues. This Website is powerful because everybody can participate by creating and adding freely what they want, but users have to respect three rules: neutral point of view, no original research and verifiability. The chapter 2 deals with the pursuit of the universal encyclopedia, and the authors makes the connection between some historical projects of encyclopedia and Wikipedia. The collective intelligence began with The Enlightenment and the Encyclopédie edited by Diderot. Then, works of Paul Otlet and Wells about the repertory and the univer

Discuss Reagle's Chapters 1-2 1. Summary     Wikipedia's heritage can be found in a project from the early 20th century (Paul Otto's Universal Repertory and H. G. Wells' proposal for a World Brain). This project is designed to increase accessibility to information and to gather global intelligence. But from the beginning, this has not led to Wikipedia. Prior to Wikipedia, there was Intepedia, Nupedia, which took an online encyclopedia mode. Nupedia, the predecessor of Wikipedia, has had difficulty obtaining volunteer commitments for complex editing. Wikipedia is designed to complement and solve the problem. "Wiki Wiki" stands for "super fast" in the Hawaiian language. As its name suggests, Wikipedia can easily and quickly edit web pages. While Nupedia was crashing, Wikipedia remained healthy.     Wikipedia has three core policies: 'Neutral Point of View', 'No Original Research' and 'Verifiability.' NPOV reduces confl

Do you think Wikipedia is right to reject censorship? Information sociology 2015048986 천병헌    Wikipedia is a space where various people participate. Not only Wikipedia, but also the space of Amazon, Daum, Naver and so on are also participated by various people. I think censorship is especially needed in spaces where information can be edited and handled. The spreading power and speed of information are faster than expected. People see a stimulating article or information and have a momentary awareness of it.  And it takes a lot of time and effort to change that perception. Therefore, Wikipedia should accept censorship from time to time. For example, we should be careful when writing authentic or very personal stories such as entertainers. It should also be cautious about national sensitive topics.

Information Sociology 2012047886 유동준 1. Summary There is a particular vision of access and openness at Wikipedia, as seen in its slogan describing itself as the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. This vision, the encyclopedia, and its community and culture are introduced in the sections that follow. The Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit organization under which Wikipedia and its related projects operate, asks the reader to “Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. this vision exceeds the production of information. This means that reference work compilers would be joined by world scholars and international technocrats to produce a resource that every student might easily access, in a personal, inexpensive, and portable format. Consequently, the inspiration for a free and open source encyclopedia might be thought of as the most recent stage of a long-running pursuit.   2. Interesting Point W

W4. Discuss Reagle's Chapters 1-2. Information sociology 2015048986 천병헌 1. Summary   Chapter 1 introduces the encyclopedia and its vision of culture and collaboration. Wikipedia is not just an online multilingual encyclopedia.  While Web sites are useful, popular, and allow almost everyone to contribute, t he site is only the most visible artifact of the active community. Wikipedia is to realize the historical pursuit of a universal encyclopedia that pursues a vision that is based on technology that increases access to information with even greater human consent, even if it is faulty.    Wikipedia does not currently share all wikis, but it has many features. We will see a link explaining how to sign in to the page of interest and display or edit the favorite links. We can also use page history to show all changes about the page. We can easily compare different versions.   Wikipedia has more than 75,000 active contributors. Given its size, it is not trivial to

1. Summary  Wikipedia is not just an online multilingual encyclopedia. Wikipedia is a project based on technology that increases access to information and is a project to realize the historic goal of a universal encyclopedia. The technology for improving this 'information accessibility' fits well with Wikipedia's slogan, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit . Thus, Wikipedia has a special vision of access and openness.  First, the explanation of vision. Wikipedia is an online wiki-based encyclopedia. Here 'Wiki' means 'Super-fast' in the Hawaiian language, which means that you can easily edit the page. And Wikipedia also allows editing in all browsers, which also improves accessibility. Based on this, Wikipedia contains over 3 million articles in the English language version. Also, each article is categorized according to its own rating criteria, and not all articles are of equal quality. More people are needed to improve this quality. On the co

1. Summary It is a story about introducing and comparing Wikipedia, starting with history. Wikipedia has a special vision for access and openness. Wikipedia is based on online wikis and it is easy to edit pages. There is value in the techniques associated with the accessibility of the information required to create a gastric light. And in order to understand Wikipedia, you have to know its history. Along the way, characters such as nupedia .let explain Wikipida. 2. Interesting point It is said that the information taxonomy that Oatlett described about 100 years ago is now in its most similar form to Wikipedia, and it could be its origin.It is surprising that information has affected the present in this ever-changing society more than 100 years ago. The bottom line is that Optlet's taxonomy is now similar to Wikipedia's taxonomy and credo.   3. discussion point   The most interesting aspect of Wikipedia is its editing function. Even in the initial best Web br

1. Summary Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and a community that changes every time that everyone can contribute. Several people discuss the topic and content and develop it in a better direction. Another characteristic of Wikipedia is that it is nonprofit. Wikipedia is a free open-source software that has given its users editing skills and expanded the idea of ' WWW '. Of course, before Wikipedia, there were projects similar to Wikipedia. There has been a development of collective intelligence based on them, and today there are millions of articles on Wikipedia and they are becoming professional. It is Wikipedia that has helped people around the world work together to form agreements. 2. Interesting Point One of the most interesting characteristics of Wikipedia is its ' discussion '. Wikipedia does not only reflect the opinions of people on certain topics. Everyone participates and everyone goes through the process of completing. As many people modify the article,

his article tells about the origin of Wikipedia, the people who influenced wikipedia’s birth and the spirits that affected it. I ve been using Wikipedia for long time and I think it was useful to know the background of Wikipedia, instead of just using it lightly.       Wikipedia is not just a multilingual encyclopedia. If the encyclopedia can be compared to a library, Wikipedia could be compared to the ancient Greek colonist or place of discussion, “the salon”. This is because Wikipedia's information is always revised and updated. Wikipedia has a vision for creating a world where all humans are free to share all their knowledge. The Wikipedia spirit can be traced back to the idea of the " brain of the world. " The man named Wells believed that everyone should have access to efficiently stored knowledge. I saw that the storage of information needed to be done well and that there would be a large encyclopedia in one language. It also saw that infor

Wikipedia is a space where anyone can write freely. With no restriction, you can easily receive knowledge you want to share or information from all over the world. For these reasons, I will use Wikipedia a lot. As a result, there could be a lot of inaccurate information and therefore receive false information. For this reason, I think it is necessary to censor it. However, as other people make adjustments, the information will be accurate. The fact that censorship gives Wikipedia the freedom to write is a difference and a great attraction from other encyclopedia, but these benefits will disappear. So I think it is right to refuse to censor.

1. Summary   In this chapter, I read about the history of Wikipedia and its introduction. It was an important read to see how Wikipedia was created, what crises it faced, and how it evolved. Wikipedia's purpose is to gather knowledge from all over the world to create an encyclopedia that everyone can participate in. The purpose of Wikipedia's original nupedia was a dictionary created by experts. Wikipedia was created early on in its creation under the criticism of the number nupedia. There are still a number of problems at the moment. But beyond these issues, Wikipedia has come to understand each other across the region.   2. Interesting point   Wikipedia is a media that, like traditional webpages, is not only available to a handful of people, but is easily accessible to many people. The two men who created these media were Charles and Sanger, who had sufficient education and knowledge about the Web media and created Wikipedia using them. They were a

In the chapter 1, it is very important to know that Wikipedia is both a community and an encyclopedia. Moreover, Wikipedia is based on a good faith collaborative culture. So, if there are some controversial articles (example: Nazism), and if there are disagreements among Wikipedia users, you need to talk about it in a cordial manner. It is necessary to respect others Wikipedia users and to abide to the norm of Wikiquette. “Wiki wiki” means super-fast in Hawaiian language. Anyone can edit on Wikipedia, but there is the “Holy trinity” of Wikipedia to respect: neutral point of view, no original research and verifiability. The second chapter is about the pursuit of the universal encyclopedia, and more about different encyclopedia projects before Wikipedia. Diderot, Paul Otlet and Wells have developed different projects like the Encyclopédie, the repertory and the universal decimal classification, and the “world brain”. It is the beginning of collective intelligence. Nevertheless,

    1. Summary      The vision of Wikipedia, the encyclopedia and its community and culture are introduced in chapter 1. 'The vision of Wikipedia' is that “Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge." People work together to build thing of value by bringing all the mental wealth of our world. It is a practical activities. The encyclopedia they are making could solve the global problems. As Alain Coulon said, it is “the study of the methods that members use in their daily lives that enable them to live together and to govern their social relationships, whether conflictual or harmonious.”    There are the basic practices and norms of English Wikipedia which the tens of thousands of active contributors are familiar with. First, there are the actual Wikipedia pages, edits and the discussion page associated with each article on which people can converse about the article. There are mailing lists on which more a

     I think Wikipedia has to accept censorship in some sensitive field like political issue between nations. Of course Wikipedia accepts reliable, objective sources, but it could be manipulated by national dimension. Some issues like territorial waters, It could become problem that mention own word itself. To address these issue, I think it can be one of the possible solutions that investigate the quoted sources like where they came from etc, and through this procedure identify if it is biased or not.

Edits 1: "Hanyang Univ Erica Campus" I modified the name of campus at Hanyang Univ article. The article had used name as "Ansan Campus". However since then 2009, the campus name changed into "ERCIA Campus". So I corrected the error. Edits 2: "Little Forest" (Movie) I made an edit at the movie's synopsis. Before I edited, it had described that "A story of a young woman who fails to find a teaching job and is not successful in love while living in the city, ~". However I thought love isn't the core in this movie as one of the viewers. So I modified the part that mentioned love into "A story of a young woman who fails to find a teaching job and has been no room for composure in mind while living in the city, ~". Edits 3: "R language" (Programming) In Korea Wikipedia, there was only a little syntax cases to the R programming language compared to English's. So I translated the English cases