Reading3_Park Yeji

1. Summary

Chapter 3 talks about good faith collaboration in Wiki. In this article, the core of Wikipedia collaboration is said to have two complementary attitudes: the position of "NPOV (neutral perspective)" and good faith.The article notes that the terms "collaborative culture" and "collaboration" can have varied interpretations and meanings, with different disciplines offering different approaches to understanding them. The article defines culture as the value-laden system of meaning-making through which a community understands and acts, while collaboration is described as a shared creation process involving individuals with complementary skills interacting to create a shared understanding that none had previously possessed or could have come to on their own. The article presents various groupings of Wikipedia norms, such as the "policy trifecta" and the "five pillars," which emphasize the importance of collaboration, neutrality, and good faith behavior.

Chapter 4 talks about the openness of the wiki. Wikipedia's initial rule of "ignore all rules" was clever, but it was said to have caused confusion about the concept of openness. The characteristics of the open content community mentioned in this article are 'Open content', 'Transparency', 'Integrity', 'Nondiscrimination', 'Noninterference'. It then described how the Wikipedia community thinks on its own and how to consider openness and value through various cases. The bottom line is that Wikipedia is an example of an open content community, and this conceptualization involves the core values and meanings of open content delivery.

 

2. Interesting point

It was interesting that the term collaboration culture and collaboration were interpreted differently. I thought collaborative culture was literally a culture of collaboration, but in the article, it was newly explained and touched.

And it is interesting that Wikipedia's early rules are 'Ignore All Rules'. Because I thought there would be rules where anyone could be open and voluntarily participate like Wikipedia.

 

3. Discussion point

Looking at the neutral perspective and the case of good, there is a case of 'hypertext link'. If you attach references such as hypertext links, it will feel like objective data as well as reliability. But if the link content is biased, how should we take it? Do you think it's just a reference and should be referenced?

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