W4. Discuss Reagle's Chapters 1-2 - Clément Chevallier

In chapter 1, Joseph Michael Reagle Jr. explains that Wikipedia is not only an encyclopedia but also a community and new contents in Wikipedia depend on conversations of this community. In fact, Wikipedia is based on a good faith collaborative culture. If some articles are criticized because of thorny subjects like Nazism and create a debate between users, it is important to have a cordial and respectful discussion to resolve these kinds of issues.
This Website is powerful because everybody can participate by creating and adding freely what they want, but users have to respect three rules: neutral point of view, no original research and verifiability.

 The chapter 2 deals with the pursuit of the universal encyclopedia, and the authors makes the connection between some historical projects of encyclopedia and Wikipedia. The collective intelligence began with The Enlightenment and the Encyclopédie edited by Diderot. Then, works of Paul Otlet and Wells about the repertory and the universal decimal classification and the “world brain”, develop this idea of collecting and communicating all the human knowledge.

Before Wikipedia, many projects failed because of lack of organization and accessibility, as Nupedia. On the contrary, Wikipedia is very popular because the access is very easy for all, and you don't need to have a lot of knowledge to write an article and contribute on this website.

 I think the most interesting point is that sometimes we forget Wikipedia is first a real community before being an online encyclopedia. And thanks to this community, everybody can freely have access to an important sum of knowledge.

I wonder if the dream of Jimmy Wales would come true one day. Will Wikipedia be available for just the cost of printing to schoolhouses across the world?

 Clément CHEVALLIER.

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

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

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