W5. Can we trust wikipedia?- Dong Joon, Yoo

Information Sociology
2012047886 Dong Joon, Yoo


Wikipedia has surpassed the 200-year history of the Britannica Encyclopedia in just five years since its launch, and has widened the gap to 15 times in two years. All this happened in six to seven years. After information is accumulated during this period, it is a natural phenomenon that external growth slows down. The internal expansion is crucial after this. For Wikipedia, it will be important to know how to improve its quality and reliability.
No matter what type of communication, it is no surprise that a small number of ardent contributors and participants are leading the overall atmosphere. Wikipedia systematically allows all participation. Participation by many users and discussions of content are made transparently without any sanctions. It is, so to speak, a free debating space. The person who speaks his or her own opinion in the crowded square will be a minority and most people will only listen. But if you don't like other’s opinion, you can always come up with a counter-argument and have a debate with an opponent or with people you agree with.
Finally, the reliability of Wikipedia is suggested. Most of Wikipedia's information is valued at a highly credible level. But only for the political and social topics are they not so. Politics and society are called science, but unlike other natural sciences, they are not a field that can be clearly divided into facts and lies. Even the same person can not be evaluated in the same way. Britannica Encyclopedia doesn't have to do this. But the Internet-based Wikipedia is always bound to crash. Especially if it is a political figure. Wikipedia can solve this through discussion.
Nevertheless, the Internet media, including Wikipedia, will continue to expand and it will not be able to reverse the trend. I realize that there are no media without problems, and it has the clear and differentiated advantage(collective intelligence) that the media, such as newspapers and broadcasters, have not had.
Is there any other way to improve the reliability besides debating and censorship?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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 s...
Read more

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