Reading11 - 진심이 CHEN XINYI

  

 1. Summary 

Wikimedia Commons is a free online media repository that provides a large collection of image, audio, and video resources for people to use and share freely. However, since Wikimedia Commons is a platform that is co-edited and managed by users, there may be have some problems. Overall, I think Wikimedia Commons is a valuable repository of free media content for people. Although there are some problems, they can be continuously improved and perfected through the active participation and joint efforts of users.

2. Interesting point

Wikimedia Commons encourages users to upload freely licensed media content, but sometimes copyright disputes or infringement issues may arise. Certain users may have mistakenly uploaded copyrighted content or have not provided sufficient evidence to justify the free license of their content. This requires other users to actively participate in the review and correction to ensure that the uploaded content complies with copyright regulations.

Wikimedia Commons is an open editing platform where content quality and accuracy may vary. Sometimes there may be poor quality images or incorrect descriptions. This requires users to pay attention and actively participate in the review and improvement to ensure the accuracy and quality of the content.

I believe that when we encounter disputes or problems when using Wikipedia to share resources, we should remain calm and rational, and solve them through reasonable communication and discussion. We should respect the opinions and perspectives of others, and promote the common progress of the platform through mutual learning and understanding.

3. Discussion

When using Wikipedia Commons, we should ensure that the content we upload complies with copyright rules and the principles of free license. But do you think that intellectual property rights or other rules limit your ability to edit Wikimedia Commons content?

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