Blogging through Wikipedia (2023)

 1.Summary Wikipedia plays a culturally important role, but as an open platform, not only verified documents but also false documents with the intention of deceiving others are produced in large quantities. This movement started with Stephen Colbert, who used the neologism "Wikiality," which is a term that ridicules the idea that the truth of a Wikipedia document is established by consensus rather than factual accuracy. Following this, as many users created false information in Wikipedia documents, the operators took measures to restrict editing by new accounts. Such deception continues to exist to the point where "List of hoaxes on Wikipedia" exists, and if false documents are not caught early on, they can persist for a long time. 2.Interesting It's very interesting to form and archive a list of false documents, not just delete them. and  The meaning of "wikiality" used by critics of Wikipedia is interesting. Colbert criticized Wikipedia users for bel...

[Summary] Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia that allows anyone to edit its articles. The reliability of Wikipedia has been a subject of debate since its inception. While Wikipedia has strict guidelines for editing and citing sources, errors and biases can still occur. Various studies have shown that the accuracy of Wikipedia articles is generally high, but there are also concerns about vandalism, deliberate misinformation, and systemic biases in the editorial process. To address these concerns, Wikipedia has implemented measures such as flagging controversial articles and restricting editing permissions for certain pages. Despite these efforts, the reliability of Wikipedia remains a matter of ongoing discussion and scrutiny. Wikipedia relies on reliable sources to ensure the accuracy and verifiability of its content. Reliable sources are those that have a reputation for accuracy and have been peer-reviewed, edited, or fact-checked by experts in the relevant field. Prima...

1. SUMMARY The biggest feature of Wikipedia is that anyone can freely publish and edit a topic. As a result, the knowledge of various people is gathered in one place, and discussions are freely possible based on it. However, there is not only such a bright side. If you want to gain knowledge of a particular subject through Wikipedia, you will have one question. Can you believe what this article says? The reliability of articles written by a large number of publishers and editors is one of the parts Wikipedia should focus on the most. There is a need for sources that are not biased to either side on a particular subject, but are logical and professional. If articles are written based on such reliable sources, Wikipedia can properly play the role of a special encyclopedia with no scope of knowledge. 2. INTERESTING POINT One of the parts that Wikipedia needs to focus on the most is securing reliability. The most interesting thing about securing credibility is that Wikipedia doesn't fu...

1.Summary Wikipedia does not consider itself a reliable source. However, the reliable sources used in documents within Wikipedia are usually considered valuable as a reasonable source for additional in-depth information and allocated documents. There are standards for reliable sources. The document must rely on published evidence from a third party that has a reputation for reliable fact checking and accuracy. And the source must conform to the claim. 2.Interesting point I usually distrusted Wikipedia's credibility, but I thought I could trust it if I used a reliable verified document as my source. That broke my stereotype. 3.Discussion Can Wikipedia's credibility improve when collective intelligence is used?

  1： Summary Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published sources, ensuring coverage of all majority and significant minority views that appear in those sources, and be known for fact-checking and accuracy. Source reliability falls within a range: no source is "always reliable" or "always unreliable" for everything. A source is a source of the material. For example, a source could be a book or a web page. There are three sources in the Wikipedia encyclopedia: the work itself, the creator, and the work's publisher. Any one of the three can affect reliability.   2： Interesting point Wikipedia articles need to present a neutral point of view. However, reliable sources do not need to be neutral impartial or objective. Sometimes, non-neutral sources are the best sources of information to support a different viewpoint on a subject. Common biased sources include political, financial, religious, philosophical or other beliefs. Although sources may be biased...

  1）Summarize of metirals The reliability of Wikipedia relates to the validity, verifiability, and veracity   of Wikipedia and its user-generated editing model, especially the English version. Wikipedia is written and edited by volunteer editors, who produce content under the editorial supervision of other volunteer editors in accordance with policies and guidelines set by the community. Wikipedia can be edited by anyone at any time and maintains verifiability, not authenticity, as a threshold for inclusion. As a result, Wikipedia's content is often biased. But Wikipedia's popularity, large readership and free access have given the encyclopedia a great deal of second-hand cognitive authority around the world. 2 ） Something interseting I learned Wikipedia's volunteer editing model fosters a variety of systemic biases: most of the encyclopedia is written by male editors, leading to gender bias in reporting, and the composition of the editorial community raises concerns about ...

Summary As we all know, Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia. What makes it different from the encyclopedia we usually know is that Wikipedia, as an emerging and public online resource, allows anyone to create entries and write articles. Most of the writers are interested in related issues, of course, there are also experts and scholars among them. However, because it can be rewritten by people logging in at any time, the articles on Wikipedia are theoretically in constant change and modification. Therefore, people naturally doubt its academicity and authority.  “ Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published sources, making sure that all majority and significant minority views that have appeared in those sources are covered. If no reliable sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it. ” This is what this article wants to tell us. Wikipedia entries should rely on reliable, third-party, publicly available sources. These sources should ha...