Reading 2

 1. Summary

This chapter discusses the history of attempts to create a universal encyclopedia, from Otlet's documentalists to Wikipedia. The author notes that failed projects and erroneous predictions still offer insight into the people and their time, and that the persistence of the vision of a universal encyclopedia throughout the twentieth century is revealing. The chapter also explores the reasons why it took so long for this vision to be realized, and suggests that the alignment of vision, pragmatics, and happenstance played a role. Despite the potential for reference works to be conservative, the author argues that a sentiment of global accord is often present, as exemplified by a preface to a 1956 edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica. The author concludes by noting that a "good faith" culture is necessary for Wikipedia's production and can be an occasional consequence of participation.


2. Interesting

The most interesting part of this article is that when individual attempts and technological developments match, they seem to be able to work together to achieve greater results. Furthermore, although there are warnings that not all historical reference works need to be progressive, they indicate that they are an attempt to realize a global vision of global unity with global participation. Finally, it is also interesting to emphasize that the 'good' culture is an integral part of Wikipedia's production and participation, and is often the result of participation.


3. Discussion

When did the efficient collection and sharing of human knowledge begin, and what changes have occurred in the process?

What is the problem with technology prediction in history, and is it possible to predict current technology developments?

What are the problems that arise in all attempts to produce and disseminate knowledge, and what are necessary to overcome them?

How have collaborative knowledge production methods such as open source models developed, and how can they succeed?

What are the advantages and limitations of the concept of a community where collaboration is made based on good faith between participants?


Comments

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