Reading 7. GeonwooLee

1. SUMMARY

The biggest feature of Wikipedia is that anyone can freely publish and edit a topic. As a result, the knowledge of various people is gathered in one place, and discussions are freely possible based on it. However, there is not only such a bright side. If you want to gain knowledge of a particular subject through Wikipedia, you will have one question. Can you believe what this article says? The reliability of articles written by a large number of publishers and editors is one of the parts Wikipedia should focus on the most. There is a need for sources that are not biased to either side on a particular subject, but are logical and professional. If articles are written based on such reliable sources, Wikipedia can properly play the role of a special encyclopedia with no scope of knowledge.



2. INTERESTING POINT


One of the parts that Wikipedia needs to focus on the most is securing reliability. The most interesting thing about securing credibility is that Wikipedia doesn't fully believe in itself either. This can be seen from Wikipedia's general veto of "edited by anyone at any time" and its maintenance of the inclusion criteria of "verifiability, not truth." It was also quite interesting that Wikipedia's own fact checking process and platforms like YouTube use Wikipedia to check the accuracy of information.



3. DISCUSSION


So how can it be checked if someone posts maliciously wrong content from the source to the content of the article as if it were true?

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