Reading 6 -CAI XIAOHUA

 (1) Summary

The Wikipedia community casts Wikipedia. They are the builders, souls, and masters of Wikipedia. They are willing to spend a long time writing every entry, checking every change, and helping every new editor on Wikipedia. When Jimmy Wales Cye created this website, he certainly didn't expect that when he go online every day，a bunch of online administrators from every country told him what the status of Wikipedia's server is like. Every year, people are willing to donate their income to Wikipedia to support the operation of this website. What is it that makes them gather in a website that doesn't get any points, titles, benefits? Treat them like 「participants」, not 「consumers」.  Wikipedia is clear about its philosophy and essential purpose, and ensures that its words and deeds are sincerely in line with this philosophy. What makes a product powerful is not its size and strength, but its culture, a solid value and belief, and  This kind of thing goes up to the designer of this product, down to everyone who participates in it agrees with it and can clearly pass it on to everyone. The culture of Wikipedia is all in their policies and guidelines.  If you want to be an editor, after reading these things, you will feel the kindness and vision of this community, and you can't help but want to participate in this great thing.


（2）Interesting point 

A good product is like a person. Some products are nominal leaders, while others are real leaders. Those leaders have influence or power, but real leaders inspire us.  Whether these true leaders are individuals or organizations, we follow them not because we have to, but because we want to. We follow true leaders not for their sake but for ourselves.

A great cause always inspires, inspires, and awakens our enthusiasm, and every participant can expect to do something about it. It may be to undo an incorrect edit, to write an article, to modify a punctuation, to  Donate 5 dollars and so on, these people are the soul of Wikipedia, they are the ones who built [Wikipedia].


 (3)Discussion

How can so many languages ​​ensure the scientificity and rationality of its encyclopedia entries? Does Wikipedia have enough personnel to check the rationality of the entries and maintain the immediacy of the entries?

Comments

  1. caiyayuApril 14, 2023 at 12:47 AM

    To ensure that entries are scientifically sound and reasonable, Wikipedia takes a variety of measures. Firstly, Wikipedia has a strict set of editorial guidelines and guidelines that include requirements for principle, neutrality, reliability and verifiability to ensure that all entries are written based on reliable sources and facts.
    Secondly, Wikipedia also has a number of automated tools and review processes for checking and fixing possible errors or vandalism. For example, Wikipedia's bots can automatically check for spelling errors and formatting issues, while volunteers in the community can review and fix more complex issues.
    In addition, Wikipedia has a number of dedicated volunteers and administrators who review and manage entries and fix possible problems. These volunteers and administrators often have higher levels of authority and expertise to deal with more complex issues, such as entries involving copyright, technical or political issues.

    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