Reading1--LUAN QIANYUE

1)Summary 

Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia. What makes it different from the encyclopedias we usually know is that encyclopedias are written by experts and scholars in related fields, edited and processed by specialized editorial staff, and finally finalized for publication, and their scholarship and authority are widely recognized and acknowledged. Wikipedia, on the other hand, as an emerging and open online resource, allows anyone to create entries and write articles. Most of the writers are interested in the relevant issues, and of course there are many experts and scholars among them. However, because it can be accessed and rewritten at any time, Wikipedia entries and articles are, in theory, in a constant state of flux, revision, modification, and re-modification.

2) Interesting point

When Wikipedia was first created, it was considered inaccurate and lacking in authority because it could be edited by anyone. However, after 17 years of development, Wikipedia has now raised the bar for people to write entries and articles, ensuring the accuracy and authority of important entries and topics. Many entries and articles now also provide sources of information that can be used for further argumentation. As the most basic source of information, Wikipedia is trusted for its accuracy and credibility.

3) Discussion point

How do we get more scholars or sociologists to join Wikipedia as it continues to grow and the articles become more and more informative?

Comments

  1. caiyayuMarch 11, 2023 at 7:20 AM

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. caiyayuMarch 11, 2023 at 7:21 AM

    I see the editing of the wiki as a volunteer act because he is unpaid and can only edit by some voluntary acts. How to get more people to join the wiki requires a wider outreach, such as teaching in schools and other places.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Geonwoo Lee(이건우)June 15, 2023 at 11:02 PM

    Personally, I think the policy that Wikipedia is running now is okay. As it is now, the quality of articles and the exchange of knowledge with academic articles will make sociologists and other scholars more focused on Wikipedia.

    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

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

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