W13. Can Wikipedia disappear? - Yeonju Heo


  When I was in high school, electronic dictionaries were popular. If I had a word I did not understand while studying, I looked through the electronic dictionary. It was much easier than a paper dictionary. The following year, smart phones began to become popular. The electronic dictionary was pushed back. It was easy to use the dictionary with a smart phone. So what happens to Wikipedia, an open encyclopedia?

  I think Wikipedia is very different from a regular dictionary. First, Wikipedia is different from other dictionaries. Wikipedia is also different from electronic dictionaries. The general dictionary is bound in a paper book, and the electronic dictionary is bound in an electronic dictionary machine. However, Wikipedia can be viewed anywhere on a computer or mobile phone.

  Second, Wikipedia is different in content from other dictionaries. The general dictionary provides the universal and general meaning of a word. However, Wikipedia reflects culture. Wikipedia provides more explanation. For example, if you search for a tree in the English dictionary, it says, 'A tree is a tall plant that has a hard trunk, branches, and leaves.' However, if you search for a tree in Wikipedia, you can see a variety of information from basic definitions to pictures and mythology. Even if you do not look up botanical dictionary separately, you can find it through Wikipedia.

  Finally, Wikipedia is free to add content. Other dictionaries can not be modified by users. But Wikipedia can add content to anyone at any time. The new culture, play, and food can reflect the flow of that time.

  I think that this differentiation will keep Wikipedia. Culture will continue to be created, and content for Wikipedia will be created constantly. The development of technology will increase accessibility to Wikipedia. Even if you search for words in Google, Wikipedia is the first one. I think more people will use Wikipedia. Wikipedia will not disappear.

Comments

  1. Clément ChevallierJune 5, 2018 at 12:11 AM

    I would be not so categorical. Wikipedia can lose its differenciation. I think that a more innovative and easier website could appear and replace Wikipedia in the future and become the new reference.

    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