W13 blog topic: Can Wikipedia disappear? - jongchan kim

1. Summary
 
Wikipedia's growth is stable now. It is said that the number of editors of Wikipedia will decrease, even though it is stable. New users are gradually decreasing, limited to English Wikipedia. There are various reasons for this. The first problem is complex rules. Unlike early Wikipedia, there are now various rules in Wikipedia. These rules serve as entry barriers for new users. The second problem was that users were leaving, which was interesting. Interesting users are leaving because they may not like the Wikipedia environment, but new better platforms are emerging. Wikipedia is hearing this crisis, but its completion is not yet complete. This is because Wikipedia has not yet completed its themes in various fields. To address these problems, Wikipedia is working on a variety of issues besides creating an easy interface for new user
 
2. Interesting Point
 
I think Wikipedia is the most significant outcome of any cultural heritage ever undertaken. But I was able to hear and sympathize with the Wikipedia crisis. Using Wikipedia in Korea, I could really relate to the crisis in Wikipedia. Wikipedia is thought to be the best example of human collective intelligence. Therefore, I felt that I had to think about the crisis in Wikipedia.
 
3. Discussion Point
 
I have been using Wikipedia for a semester and felt that it is a really good platform. But as the current crisis in Wikipedia shows, there are clearly problems. Resolving these problems will determine Wikipedia's survival. As you read the article, you must have felt a lot while using Wikipedia for a semester. What is the problem with Wikipedia that you feel?

Comments

  1. UnknownJune 3, 2018 at 7:22 AM

    That is a very interesting question. I thought of some problems. First, Wikipedia is a place where you can do a lot of creative work. Many people edit Wikipedia. But in reality, only a few people show high loyalty to Wikipedia. The rest are just information quotes and sharing. However, it is hard to overlook their role. Their presence has enhanced Wikipedia's information and site credibility. The second problem is people's perception of Wikipedia. Non-school or non-professionals gather to edit information and have low confidence. This may be why people don't use Wikipedia very well. However, due to the nature of the open space, there is nothing we can do about it. The fairness or objectivity of information and whether it is true depends on individual judgment.

    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