Reading 13 -- GAO PEIYUN

 --Summary

Every Wikipedia page should belong to at least one category, with the exception of discussion pages, redirects, and user pages, which can be placed in categories as appropriate. Each category page should be placed in all the most specific categories to which it logically belongs. While it should usually be clear from the name of an existing category which pages it should contain, the text of the category page may sometimes provide additional information about the content of the underlying category. One way to determine if a suitable category already exists for a particular page is to examine page categories for similar or related topics. Because all categories are part of a hierarchy, do not add categories to a page as if they were tags.

The classification of articles must be verifiable. It should be clear from the verifiable information in the article why it falls into each category. Classification must also maintain a neutral perspective. Categories appear on the article page without notes or citations to justify or explain their addition; Editors should be aware of the need to maintain a neutral perspective when creating categories or adding them to articles. Classifications should generally be uncontroversial. The defining characteristics of the topic of an article are the core of the article classification. A defining feature is one that reliable sources often refer to when describing the topic.

--Interesting point

No matter how you classify it, you need to pay attention to neutrality. If, by chance, a category is controversial, do not include it in the end, or state that the category is controversial on the entry discussion page.

Don't leave future editors guessing what or who should be included in the category heading. Even if the selection criteria seem obvious to you, clear criteria can be helpful to others, especially if they are less familiar with the subject.

--Discussion point

If Wikipedia didn't have categories, would it get messy?

Comments

  1. 이서윤(Seoyoon Lee)June 7, 2023 at 10:20 AM

    Of course, the absence of categories is not just a messy problem, but an important factor that will raise questions about the sustainability of the project.

    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