Reading15-Lee Eunsuk

I first came across Wikipedia while listening to this class. The format I encountered for the first time was awkward, but the more I got used to it and became able to edit it well. I was wondering if I would ever use this, but now it was meaningful to me that I could contribute to increasing Wikipedia's expertise and reliability.

I learned various editing techniques. In addition to misinformation and footnote translation, I also learned details such as adding photos, classifying them, and writing new articles. Through Wikipedia, I was able to act as a communicator. So I tried to check the information again and write down the source as much as possible in order to deliver it more accurately. We now have an open environment where everyone writes articles and communicates information. In this environment, I think Wikipedia is the right site. Thanks to Wikipedia, we get information, but we also give it to someone. In other words, we can interact through online space.

Before taking the class, I felt that Wikipedia was a portal site such as Naver or Google, so I couldn't discuss it with anyone. However, through this "collective intelligence" class, I was able to discuss and talk with students on Wikipedia. It was strange as if I had encountered a new community space. If other classes are only for improving my skills, I think Wikipedia in this class is worth more than twice as much because I can grow while editing and the people who read the article can grow. I found out something new by looking for information I didn't know on the Internet and organizing it easily. It was also meaningful to adopt a good article. I don't know if I have anything to write about, but I want you to continue editing and contribute to the future of Wikipedia.

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