Reading2 - 진심이 CHEN XINYI

 

 1. Summary 

Through reading the article, we know the history of human beings wanting to build a free and universal encyclopedia of knowledge through computer science and technology. Mankind has never stopped trying to store human wisdom through science and technology.As early as the early 20th century, with the spread of international ideas and the creation of information science, scientists began to record the collection and statistics of the world information through the index CARDS and microfilms. People can trace the legacy of wiki pedia back to this period.

Among the most famous is the Belgian Paul Otlet (1868-1944). He proposed the three major idea items： the Repertory, the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC), and the “monographic principle.” The first two items are information gathering and classification. The "thematic principle" the main principle is to allow to "separate the merged content in the book, reduce all the complex content to its elements, and assign a page [or index card] to each element."

"The external composition of a book, the format, the personality of the author is not important, but the substance of the book, the source and the conclusion are preserved and can become an integral part of the organization of knowledge," said Otlet.

British novelist HG Wells, known for his science fiction. Also he was attracted by technological advances and the idea of a universal reference book, and proposed the concept of a "world brain". The "world brain" is an "encyclopedia that appeals to all humanity", so it must be open to corrective criticism, sceptical of myths and wary of" narrow propaganda ". This is similar to Wikipedia's goal of "neutral opinions", the idea of "fair, proportional, unbiased expression of important opinions".

At the end of the twentieth century, the new technology of computer networks opened up new possibilities and thus inspired new directions in encyclopedia creation. These range from Project Xanadu and Project Gutenberg through the application of hypertext system technology, to various "Web encyclopedias" using Internet Web technology. But because of its limitations, the Web has become a browser-only medium for many people unless they were savvy enough to know how to manually publish Web pages,. On January 15, 2001, Wikipedia was born. We know Wikipedia didn't come easy.


2. Interesting point

I think the interesting point is the early Paul Otlet and the Universal Bibliographic Repertory theory: the vision of using microfilm to make an encyclopedia of the world. As a new generation born in the 21st century, we have grown up under the Internet since childhood, and have no specific conceptual understanding of things outside the Internet. At a time when technology was underdeveloped,Paul Otlet ideal was so advanced. Their efforts are inspired by a new understanding of global interdependence.The early documentarians were in an era -- or even a "time" or "movement" -- where the efforts and ideas of one person really inspired and influenced many people in the future.


3. Discussion

Wikipedia is not an accident, it is a natural result of the efforts of many people, generation after generation. But Wikipedia's editing function, again, was born by accident, and the loss of editing power that Berners-Lee originally envisioned did not happen. Wikipedia is centralized, and Wikipedia remakes it possible for many people to edit web pages. So how did Wikipedia editors gain the public's trust?

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