Reading 2. GeonwooLee

 1. SUMMARY

Humans have sought to create a free and universal encyclopedia of knowledge through science and technology. In the early 20th century, there were attempts to collect and classify world information using index CARDS and microfilm. Paul Otlet of Belgium proposed the concept for information collection and classification, and H.G. Wells proposed the concept of "World Brain." The advent of computer networks opened up a new direction for encyclopedias, and subsequent technological advances led to the emergence of various "web encyclopedias" using the Internet web. However, due to the limitations of the web, for many people, it has been restricted to media where only web browsers are available. After that, Wikipedia was born in 2001 and it has developed into its current form.


2. INTERESTING POINT


Personally, I was interested in H.G. Wells' concept of World Brain. As technology advanced, it was a concept for a new type of giant encyclopedia. It seems that knowledge does not exist in a solid state, but rather in a fluid form that can be modified and deleted. I think Wikipedia was born because of this perspective.


3. DISCUSSION


What would have happened if Wikipedia had made a policy that only a small number of operators could use it, rather than giving everyone the right to edit and write articles?

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