W11 blog topic: Discuss Reagle’s chapter 5 - kim jongchan

1. Summary

Humans tend to find clear ways. Wikipedia is a community of good will and trust. Wikipedia is also working as a means of global integration, which means it has become a global presence of arbitration and judgment. Wikipedia has become an attractive place to make community decisions in a new context. Wikipedia is a new example of breaking the difficulties of consensus doctors. To become this process, Wikipedia has gone through a lot of trouble. 

2.Interesting Point

Wikipedia is creating objective information with numerous agreements and disputes. But what is objective? Who makes objectivity? Can it be considered objective that many people agreed? In Wikipedia, there is a balance between computer technology and humans. The agreement and debate in Wikipedia has come about by the balance of computer technology and human beings. 

3. Discussion

Majority rule is a key principle in a democratic society. But majority rule does not say everything is right. Because people are not always objective. Can it be seen as objective that the articles of numerous agreements and debates take place on Wikipedia? I think people should also doubt this because it is not always right. How should Wikipedia reflect minority opinions in order to be more objective and great?

Comments

  1. UnknownMay 18, 2018 at 9:20 PM

    It is a good opinion. I think that "Discussion Tap" should be used more enthusiastically in order for a few opinions to be reflected. There will certainly be people who read the article and have doubts about the information in the article. Therefore, in order to draw a good consensus, I think we should encourage more people to participate through active publicity of the discussion tab.

    ReplyDelete
  2. UnknownMay 18, 2018 at 9:24 PM

    I have the same concern with you about objectivity in Wikipedia. Even the majority rules cannot be objective and I think it's just agreement by the public. For more balance and advanced community, the minority agreement should be discussed officially. 2016062706 MInSeung Sung

    ReplyDelete

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