W3. Why do you think people use Wikipedia? Why do others write for it? - Sun bo Sim

 Why do you think people use Wikipedia? Why do others write for it?

1. Summary
It is quite natural that the main purpose people use Wikipedia is to get information. So I thought about why people choose Wikipedia for getting information. I think the first reason is the reliability of information in Wikipedia. We have many other sources of getting information. We can search for information scattered on the web through search tools such as Google or Naver. But we do not have the ability to ensure that such data are reliable. However, people prefer Wikipedia because it looks at its slogan " The Free Encyclopedia, " believing it may have the character of an encyclopedia. I also believe that Wikipedia's credibility is enhanced by the fact that its information is constantly being edited through the process of collective intelligence.

2. Interesting Point
Most people use Wikipedia to get information. However, some people like to make new articles and give information so that they continue to contribute to Wikipedia. There was an article on Wikipedia called The List of Wikipedians by Number of Words. I looked at some of them, and some people made hundreds of articles, putting up a great deal of information about a particular field. For instance, one of the Wikipedia editors in Korea has been constantly modifying and creating information about schools in Korea. Looking at these people, I thought some people might be using Wikipedia to achieve their intellectual sense of accomplishment.

3. Discussion Point

Unlike what I said about Wikipedia's merits, I still don't think Korean Wikipedia is perfect. Compared to the English Wikipedia, I think there are many articles in Wikipedia in Korea that have or do not have a clear source of information. Even after comparing the same article, there are many footnotes in the English Wikipedia, but not in Korea. For the development of Wikipedia in South Korea, the issue must be discussed.

Comments

  1. Jiwon ChoMarch 24, 2018 at 3:09 AM

    I agree with you. I have been watching a lot of Korean Wikipedia and American Wikipedia since taking classes. I think the big difference between the two is the difference of annotations. The United States is so annotated that almost every paragraph is annotated. However, in Korea, there are many cases where there are few comments and even there is not even at all. I think the manager should set a stricter standard for this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. UnknownMarch 25, 2018 at 6:52 AM

      Thank you for posting the comment. You are right. I also think there should be regulations and directives from managers

      Delete
  2. UnknownMarch 25, 2018 at 6:08 AM

    You are right. I also felt lack of footnotes. On the contrary, if there are more users, the problem could be solved naturally.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. UnknownMarch 25, 2018 at 6:54 AM

      I think it is best to solve it naturally, but I think there are difficulties in reality. I think there should be a proper standard, as Cho Jiwon said.

      Delete
  3. UnknownMarch 25, 2018 at 7:47 AM

    I am glad to have a similar thinking. I'm sure some of the people who edit Wikipedia are trying to be fulfilling. I think this is also a very intersting point.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

W5. Can we trust Wikipedia? Yun-Jin Kim

Then I want to ask. Can we trust News? I think Wikipedia is based on sources. Every time we edit on Wikipedia we need the sources. If we don’t put sources, the information we wrote would be deleted.   So I think asking ‘How can we trust Wikipedia’ is kind of similar to ‘How can we trust News’. I know there could be subjective opinion on Wikipedia. If the topic is unpopular, the public opinion doesn’t focus, there’s could be no feedback and that makes Wiki subjective. for this reason, we have to think before we choose the topic in Wiki. If the topic isn’t famous enough and have no sources, we should think this information isn’t sure enough. but if the topic has clear sources we can have a trust on that information. I think it is not important to ask, ‘is the Wikipedia trustful’. It is important to ask ‘is this information on Wikipedia has a exact source?’.
Read more

W6. How important is it to be civil online on the Internet?-Ji Young An

These days lots of controversial problems are rising. And because of those problems, people fight on the Internet. But I think most of problems happen because of a lack of civic attitudes. As I highlighted the discussion section of Wikipedia last post, talking together with having civic attitudes is very important point. On the Internet lots of people meet. And this means all of them has different thinking and experiences different cultures. So it is certain that everyone's opinion is different. But I think from this difference, the collective intelligence comes. So I think this difference is very important. But sadly, because of this difference some people fight, just arguing their opinion is one hundred percent right. This attitude is nothing good to our collective intelligence. To develop collective intelligence, people need the civic attitudes. Not just persisting stubbornly they should talk and listen, trying to understand other people. If they talk their opinion or thinking...
Read more