W4. Discuss Reagle's Chapters 1-2 - Yeonju Heo

Discuss Reagle's Chapters 1-2

1. Summary

    Wikipedia's heritage can be found in a project from the early 20th century (Paul Otto's Universal Repertory and H. G. Wells' proposal for a World Brain). This project is designed to increase accessibility to information and to gather global intelligence. But from the beginning, this has not led to Wikipedia. Prior to Wikipedia, there was Intepedia, Nupedia, which took an online encyclopedia mode. Nupedia, the predecessor of Wikipedia, has had difficulty obtaining volunteer commitments for complex editing. Wikipedia is designed to complement and solve the problem. "Wiki Wiki" stands for "super fast" in the Hawaiian language. As its name suggests, Wikipedia can easily and quickly edit web pages. While Nupedia was crashing, Wikipedia remained healthy.

    Wikipedia has three core policies: 'Neutral Point of View', 'No Original Research' and 'Verifiability.' NPOV reduces conflicts and debates in the development of encyclopedias. All material on Wikipedia should have a reliable source. The author said these three principles are another aspect of the same. He also said that people should follow all three principles.

    Chapter 1 and 2 emphasize 'collaboration'. Wikipedia began with the need for "collaboration," and what is now being emphasized in Wikipedia is "collaboration." This collaboration requires good faith. Wikipedia has a wealth of information and excellent self-reflection. All are willing to accept Wikipedia's attempt to realize a universal vision with common goodwill. Like puzzles, they are completing Wikipedia on their own.
 
 

2. Interesting things

    I realized that there are sites that are the root of Wikipedia. Both Nupedia and Wikipedia were 'free encyclopedias'. Nupedia was trying to create an encyclopedia through a rigorous review by experts. By contrast, Wikipedia was trying to create an encyclopedia through the free participation of users. Nupedia's course moved slowly but Wikipedia moved very fast. It was interesting that it made the results of both very different. Since Wikipedia articles are made with the participation of general users, I think there was a risk that their expertise and credibility could be lower than Nupedia's articles made by expert reviews. But Wikipedia has solved this problem by using reliable sources for its editors. I think this was a smart way to get everyone involved, speed and trust.
 

3. Discussion

    In this article, we talked about the need for "good faith collaboration" in Wikipedia. If so, is "good faith collaboration" well done in Wikipedia? Wikipedia requires collaboration and many articles are written by collaboration. But sometimes I saw people editing articles competitively. They delete articles written by others and leave only their edits. They have enough space to talk and discuss with each other but they don’t. Why are they? How do you solve this problem?

Comments

  1. 안지영April 1, 2018 at 5:50 AM

    I agree with your opinion that some people edit articles competitively. But I think there is no perfect solution to stop or prevent them. But also there are people who participate discussion very well in way of good faith collaboration. So if those people keep doing a good discussion, the number of competitive editors could decrease.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

W5. Can we trust Wikipedia? - Seron Kim

Wikipedia is a large site used by people all over the world. People get information through Wikipedia and edit article directly when needed. Through the action of collective intelligence, Wikipedia is becoming more and more developed and growing. Can we trust Wikipedia? I think "We can trust Wikipedia but we should not trust it unconditionally.“   Obviously Wikipedia is reliable. Wikipedia itself has an implicit framework for editing, and people follow it and use it. It is also possible to increase the trust of the article by leaving a source for the information, and to delete the edited information through a predetermined process. So there will be more and more reliable information in Wikipedia.   But you should not trust Wikipedia unconditionally. Because there may be misinformation in Wikipedia. Of course, there is a high possibility that it will be fixed through the deletion function of Wikipedia and the collective intelligence of people. But it will be a ...
Read more

W1. What do I know about Wikipedia and what do I want to learn about it? - Yong il, Seon.

We learned another idea, we want an easy explanation.          Many people used Wikipedia. Why people visited Wikipedia? I have much thought about the answer to this question. Everyone will be editor in Wikipedia. So, several people’s opinions can be confirmed on one issue. It is also an important characteristic of democracy. Democracy is the recognition of the other’s ideas. And already in France, there were ‘Tolerance’. It means that As I am right in my opinion, and so you are right in your opinion. I think Wikipedia is making ‘Tolerance idea’ work very well. So, you can not force your own ideas on Wikipedia. Depending on the situation, users may be students, teachers, or even completely different third parties. From these points of view, Wikipedia is the modern version of Greece’s Agora.            And it is not over. Always people want an easy expanation, the more complex the case. Wikipedia has a structured form...
Read more

W2. My first edits. Describe why you made them. - Seron Kim

I rarely had access to Wikipedia before this class. Because there is a service called 'Knowledge in' operated by Naver in Korea. I've been used to the 'Knowledge in' for a long time, so I've always used it if there's something I don't know. However, I got to know Wikipedia in this class. Wikipedia has a much larger volume of data than I thought, and it is being used by people all over the world. Also, anyone could edit information. I want to search and edit my favorite soccer information. So I decided to do the editing on my idols, Ko Jong-soo and Nadson.   What was interesting about editing was that although the Korean Wikipedia was detailed by the players who played in the Korean league, the English Wikipedia had little or no information. So I want to edit more. Because I want to add their information to English Wikipedia to let people around the world know.   Different countries have Wikipedia sites and the amount and quality of informati...
Read more