Deadline 2: ZENG WANTING

  1) Summarize of metirals Thought the metirals 

 I know about Wikipedia as a community is constituted by the practice or cooperation of the people who use it. Such cooperation happens in a culture, strive for to community acceptance principles as a guide and fight about it, and is defined by such actions. Until a few years ago, no one would have believed that Wikipedia's model could succeed. 

 At its core, Wikipedia is a collaborative community where it allows anyone to edit and correct it. It empowers people more broadly than any democracy. So more than anything else, it brings out the best in the amateur ethic for us: people working hard because they love, not for the money they needed. But it's not a perfect world, no utopia will be found in Wikipedia, either. Everything is flawed, but that's what makes it compelling: the human-ness of it. 

  2) Something interseting I learned 

 In editing Wikipedia, it's not just a process of editing things and correcting the mistake, it's also a process of communicating with other people. When we find an idea that is similar to our own, we will feel the joy just like finding a soulmate. This is not the way we normally think about encyclopedias. This is a very innovative approach. 

  3) My question 

 Wikipedia is a space completed by the collective intelligence. The completeness and the reference of it makes it become the most famous and reliable encyclopedia now. Will there ever be an online encyclopedia more authoritative than Wikipedia?

Comments

  1. 채효화March 18, 2023 at 6:57 AM

    I don't think so, because Wikipedia is a multilingual encyclopedia collaboration project based on Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia written in multiple languages, with sources that can be consulted and an open, free-edited community.So I don't think there's anything like that that so far.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Reading 3——CHENXINLEI

  1）  Summary   This article discusses the advantages and disadvantages of Wikipedia's "openness" features. The author gives a detailed description of these five open characteristics.( Open content 、 Transparency 、 Integrity 、 Nondiscrimination 、 Noninterference) “ A central aspiration in the pursuit of a universal encyclopedia is increased access to information: an opening of opportunity and capability to anyone with a desire to learn. ” Open communities allow everyone to learn or express their thoughts on Wikipedia.Open knowledge community is not only an important gathering place for knowledge innovation and sharing, but also a source of wisdom.In such an environment, users are content sharers, creators, and providers of wisdom. “ people don’t even agree about which is which. ”   However, the malicious controversy brought about by such an environment cannot ignore a problem. Everyone's ideas are different, and it is because of the open environment that it is easier...
Read more

Reading 4

 1. Summary The article argues that understanding Wikipedia requires appreciating its community and collaborative culture, but also recognizing the challenges it faces from personal differences and external threats. Despite its collaborative nature, Wikipedia has been shaped by authorial leadership, with an informal benevolent dictator guiding the community and mediating disputes. However, this leadership role can be challenging to balance, as new responsibilities and authority may arise. The article uses examples, such as Sanger's reflections on his departure from the community and discussions about Wales's role, to illustrate the delicate balance of leadership in the Wikipedia community. 2. Interesting As an AI language model, I do not have personal opinions, but I can identify some points that may be interesting to readers. One interesting point is how the author describes the culture and community of Wikipedia and how it has been shaped by authorial leadership. The idea of ...
Read more

Reading7——HE YUNONG

  1. Summary After reading this article, I understand that Wikipedia articles must have reliable sources, and the opinions in the sources should be neutral. Articles should be based on reliable, independent, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. This means that we publish only the analysis, views, and opinions of reliable authors, and not those of Wikipedians who have read and interpreted primary source material for themselves. 2. Interesting points News headlines—including subheadlines—are not a reliable source.  I think this is important because some news headlines are written to grab the reader's attention quickly and briefly; their news content may be exaggerated or lack context, and even sometimes contain sensational claims. 3. Discussion points Do you know how to test reliable sources?
Read more