Reading 14-CAI XIAOHUA

 (1) Summary  

Wikipedia is a free, free and open encyclopedia collaboration program involving participants from all over the world.Wikipedia itself has three striking features that distinguish it from traditional encyclopedias. First, Wikipedia has always positioned itself as an encyclopedia of all areas of human knowledge, not a dictionary, an online forum, or anything else.Second, Wikipedia was the first collaborative program to use the Wiki system to compile encyclopedias, allowing broad public participation.Another important feature is that Wikipedia is an open-ended encyclopedia.Materials with open content allow any third party to reproduce, modify and reprint any or all parts of the materials without restriction.

Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia created by many people.In traditional encyclopedias, the average person can only be a reader, but in Wikipedia, we can be both readers and authors.Anyone can modify, annotate, dispute, vote on an article… In short, Wiki is a model: create an open web site filled with content that can be created, edited, or modified by a large number of netizens.A, for example, created an entry called "Game" that explains "Game".B saw this entry and thought it was insufficient, so he made some additions to it.Then C saw the "game", found several errors, and made corrections.Then D finds a few more typos and corrects them, so that by the time the 5th person E reads the "game" entry, it is perfect.This is the process by which a wiki content is born.

Wikipedia's front page says, "You" is the author of Wikipedia.The Wiki model is about getting everyone involved in the compilation, but if you think of it as a national movement, you're mistaken.If you compare Wiki to a BBS, it is a BBS with only a few elite speakers and the vast majority of people diving.In the case of Chinese Wikipedia, for example, most users are not registered at all. Even among the 920,000 registered users, only more than 90,000 have participated in editing.Maybe it's a little disappointing?It's a small percentage of users, but 5000 editors are still quite large, and it's just Chinese Wikipedia, with more than 200, 000 active editors from all walks of life.The amount of information Wikipedia has today stems from the accumulation of the wisdom of so many "Wikis".

"Neutrality" is one of Wikipedia's most important principles since its inception. It requires Wikipedia to edit an entry from an objective perspective rather than personal preference.For example, when editing World of Warcraft, you write that "World of Warcraft is the most fun online game in the world," it's subjective; if it's "Home Computer and Games magazine says "World of Warcraft is the most fun online game in the world," it's fine.Of course, there are some non-controversial claims that can be written directly, such as "World of Warcraft was developed by Blizzard, a world-renowned game company, " which has no objection.

Even if everyone is neutral, there may still be differences of opinion about the same thing, as is often the case - so who is right?On Wikipedia, some entries are blamed on Elsholtz models, a large proportion of which are the result of "war" between "wikis".For example, if you find something wrong in an entry, you edit it and change A to B.Then another Wikipedian sees it, thinks it should still be A, and uses the "backoff" function (as we said earlier, to restore the page to the pre-editing state of someone), B becomes A again.If you don't like it, change it right away, he'll change it again…This kind of war is called "editing war".Wikipedia is a non-profit organization run by the Wikimedia Foundation, driven by volunteers and supported mainly by donations from a large global community.Most of the money comes from small donations from the public, not from the rich.You can read it for free, but donate if you like, and it's the spirit that pays for a clean, powerful, up-to-date encyclopedia.

（2）Interesting point 

Why do "Wikipedians" write Wikipedia for free?

I think their main reasons are: to share civilization and spread knowledge. Wikipedia founder Wells said in response to this question: "As for why they don't ask for compensation, I think there are two reasons-first, many people are inspired by the ideal of sharing encyclopedias, especially in some developing countries, wise people often do not have the conditions to do what they want to do, Wikipedia just provides the possibility; another reason is that it is very interesting to do Wikipedia, if you are a Geek like me (people who are very interested in a specific field and good at studying ), I like to communicate and discuss with smart people, and write together, which is a lot of fun.”

(3)Discussion

Do you identify with Wikipedia's culture? Would you like to contribute to Wikipedia for free?

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