Reading7：LI XINWEI

1. Summary

  Wikipedia's reliability encompasses data from the editorial process of Wikipedia and its users, and reliability is particularly responsible for the validity, verifiability and authenticity of its English version. Wikipedia volunteers (belike me) generate online content under the editorial supervision of other volunteer editors, in accordance with the policies and guidelines set by the community. Wikipedia comes with a general disclaimer that it can be edited by "anyone at any time" and maintains a threshold of "verifiability, not authenticity" for inclusion. This is because most people choose to remain anonymous. Wikipedia's reliability was often criticised in the 2000s. However, it improved over time and was generally well-received in the late 2010s and early 2020s. Part of the assessment of its reliability examined vandalism, i.e. the speed at which false information was removed. In 2003 through an IBM study it was found that "intentional vandalism is usually repaired very quickly - so quickly that most users never see its effects".

2. Interesting point

  "Wikipedia is like a wacky old uncle." He can be funny - he's seen a lot over the years - and he can tell a great story. He's no dummy either; he's amassed a lot of information and has some strong opinions about the information he's gathered. You could learn a lot from him. But take everything he says with a pinch of salt. Many of the things he thinks he must know are not entirely correct or have been taken out of context. Ultimately, sometimes he believes things that are a bit crazy.

  

3. Discussion

For the average user, it is difficult to tell whether the content of Wikipedia is correct or not, as most people would choose to believe it outright. So what can be done to improve the rigour of the articles for the average person in this situation?


Comments

  1. AnonymousApril 20, 2023 at 10:19 PM

    Finally, the references within the document will ensure the accuracy of the document. Therefore, I think it is important to create as many references as possible.

    ReplyDelete
  2. YEJI PARKApril 21, 2023 at 12:07 AM

    I think it is important to clarify the source. Users also need to acquire information through various sites, not just Wikipedia.

    ReplyDelete
  3. YE SIQIApril 21, 2023 at 5:09 AM

    Wikipedia entries should use neutral language and opinions to avoid misleading content.Ensure the reliability of the content source.

    ReplyDelete
  4. XU RUOCIApril 22, 2023 at 5:51 AM

    When citing sources, cite more official sources. For example, reports from official media, information from government platforms, etc.

    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