reading15_park yeji

It's a short period from March to June, but I could learn a lot from Wikipedia. First, I learned various editing skills. I learned not only misrepresentation, footnote translation, but also details such as adding photos, classification, and writing new articles. Through Wikipedia, I was able to act as an information carrier, not an information recipient. By learning how to use it in practice, I was able to edit Wikipedia even after this class. The most interesting edit was 'Add Image'. I can't believe I can help others with the pictures I took and made myself! So when I edit Wikipedia, I thought about what pictures I should put in, and I also thought about delivering good information to people. I thought only photos on the official site would be possible, but I think it's good that images that are owned by individuals are possible.

Second, I learned that anyone can be an informant. While editing Wikipedia, I felt proud that what I did was helpful to someone. So I tried to check the information one more time and fill in the source as much as I could in order to deliver the information more accurately. In the past, there was a strong sense of closure in which only journalists and professionals wrote and delivered information. But now we have an open environment where everyone writes articles and delivers information. I think Wikipedia is the right site for today. Thanks to Wikipedia, we get information, but we also give information to someone. In other words, you can interact through the online space.

The difference from other classes and assignments is that they require students to participate in self-directed activities. I was able to improve my skills by practically acting rather than just reading certain materials and writing papers. There were times when it was hard because I had a task every week, but I can get used to Wikipedia by repeating it every week. As time went by, I found it interesting to perform the assignment. Through this, I thought about what information people need and how to deliver this information efficiently.

Before taking the class, I thought that Wikipedia was not an environment where I could discuss with someone because it was a portal site such as NAVER or Google. However, through this 'collective intelligence' class, I was able to discuss and talk with students on Wikipedia. It was amazing because it felt like I met a new community space. I think Wikipedia will probably be a site that will follow Google and NAVER. What's unfortunate is that you have to insert too much detailed reference. There was a time when I avoided delivering information, thinking, "Do I have to do this?" because I had to refer to it when writing natural facts. I think it would be good if this part was defined as limited. If we accept some feedback, we expect more users.

Comments

  1. Lee EunsukJune 15, 2023 at 7:17 PM

    It seems that special measures should be taken on Wikipedia to attract many people.

    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

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

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