Reading 7--CHEN XINLEI

Summary

As we all know, Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia. What makes it different from the encyclopedia we usually know is that Wikipedia, as an emerging and public online resource, allows anyone to create entries and write articles. Most of the writers are interested in related issues, of course, there are also experts and scholars among them. However, because it can be rewritten by people logging in at any time, the articles on Wikipedia are theoretically in constant change and modification. Therefore, people naturally doubt its academicity and authority. 

“Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published sources, making sure that all majority and significant minority views that have appeared in those sources are covered. If no reliable sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it.”This is what this article wants to tell us.

Wikipedia entries should rely on reliable, third-party, publicly available sources. These sources should have a reputation for fact-checking and correctness. But in fact, it is impossible for people to check all the sources, so those items with high attention or controversy will be checked by more people, and the referenceability of these items will be much higher. Conversely, sources in articles that receive little attention may be flawed or unreliable.

In today's network age, Wikipedia has demonstrated its great power and wide social influence. Now, Wikipedia has raised the bar for people to write entries and articles. But what we can see from this article is that in order to ensure its accuracy and authority, Wikipedia is taking more measures.

Interesting point

Headlines are written to grab readers' attention quickly and briefly; they may be overstated or lack context, and sometimes contain exaggerations or sensationalized claims with the intention of attracting readers to an otherwise reliable article. They are often written by copy editors instead of the researchers and journalists who wrote the articles.

Discussion

The accuracy of quoted material is paramount and the accuracy of quotations from living persons is especially sensitive. How can editors ensure the accuracy and neutrality of secondary sources when there are no original sources to cite? 

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