W11. Discuss Reagle’s chapter 5 - Irma KOUM


This Chapter is about consensus on different articles on Wikipedia, and how Wikipedia find a way to resolve the conflicts and to manage those you happens between the different people of the community. As we have read in the article, Wikipedia has found many ways to solve conflicts and to have a final decision on one article : you can vote or talk about the article; and Wikipedia has also found a way to distinguish different articles which has the same name.

The point that I have found interesting is that even with all that ways to make consensus on a decision making for an article, Wikipedia has facilitators. For me it’s really important because we saw that some people can be really rude on Wikipedia while discussing about an article, so it’s really good to have a facilitator to make the discussion easier.

But I wonder if some discussions and votes about some articles are neutral and objective. I explain myself : we know that on Wikipedia you can’t and you don’t have the right to create articles or take decisions by following of your personal beliefs because Wikipedia spread informations without choosing any camp in any subject. But does some opinions and discussions about an article consistency and importance for exemple on  are not personal ? It’s really hard to distinguish and to know that. Do Wikipedia have to choose for every different subject people you can discuss about the relevance of an article objectively to avoid personal beliefs ? 

Comments

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