[2] My first edits

<My first edits. Describe why you made them.>

  It was my first time to edit 10 articles. it wasn't an easy trip, but a quite interesting work. In addition it was a time to know more information about other articles. I usually edited about Korean music artists information about the album since I really enjoy their music. 

  For the music category, I usually added more album information about the artists. For example the new single album or EP, or songs that the artist featured recently. Wikipedia was quite slow in these information, so I joyfully added it. I added these info because I really am interested in music entirely and the artists I edited. 
  And as I am in the pungmul club 'hanwuri', I edited some information about it for the accurateness and depth I can give to the article. Especially about the instrument that I am majoring at the club 'janggu'-an hourglass type drum instrument. As it is a traditional instrument in Korea, the lack of the information were big in that part. 
  And also added some info about Hanyang University, as I am the part of this college. There were some unexpected edits also like soju, and Adobe photoshop. Just the lightning in my head came up with Korean alcohol soju. I thought it would be less detailed as it is not from the western culture. And by chance, clicking my photoshop program made me think about editing the article related with it. I edited it in the thought to make the tool more easier to many people-in the practical use and accessibility. 

  In the process, I was concerned about the minority I'm giving to the article. Would my information be a help to others even if I edited just one sentence? How if my information I edited is reasonable but subjective or not accurate? The point that everyone can edit the articles could be the same with opening the opportunity to make the information quality lower. Even if the risk, is it worthy to keep the system? 

Comments

  1. mjphomeMarch 15, 2019 at 10:46 AM

    I think that's the important and interesting questions.
    It can happen enough that I misunderstand the information about the meaning of the word and write the uncertain and subjective things. That is both a weakness and a strength of Wikipedia. Openness that someone else can modify forever. What's more important than just modifying writings and improving accuracy is that not only are they written, but they are also to grow and develop together by searching the references for proving what's the truth(in other words, common).

    Maybe that's why Wikipedia can be more and more expanding?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Discuss Reagle’s chapters 3-4

Discuss Reagle’s chapters 3-4 I read the Reagle's chapters 3-4. I find two opinion. One thing is how to collaborate people on Wikipedia. Other is how to make open community on Wikipedia. How to collaborate people on Wikipedia. In the case of the English Wikipedia, there is a collaborative culture that asks its participants to assume two postures: a stance of neutral point of view on matters of knowledge, and a stance of good faith toward one’s fellow contributors. I think that people know the mood that must keep the rule on Wikipedia. If Wikipedia's mood is light, people write the light writing. Other is how to make open community on Wikipedia. I remember the discussion that Why the Women is smaller that the men on Wikipedia. I've heard from others the reason that women don't use it much because the community isn't friendly to women. I think that we try to create Wikipedia to use all the people no matter that the sex. I think it's a process ...
Read more

Discuss Reagle's Chapter3-4

In  the Reagle  Chapter 3-4, the troll and the ignore rules were impressive.  Troll is the one who destroys teamwork and leads the team to ruin.  Trolls, which are negative characters, help develop Wikipedia. Wikipedia finds the wrong information generated by the troll. And the information is modified by others. In that process, it results in more information production. There is an outlaw, similar to a troll. The lawless ignores all regulations, including copyright and reference. Like Trolls, they help develop Wikipedia. They are free to edit because they are out of regulation. The free edited content is modified by others, including attaching references and deleting content that is caught in copyright issues. Wikipedia develops as it takes care of these types of people.
Read more

Discuss Reagle’s chapter 5

Discuss Reagle’s chapter 5 It is hard to understand this chapter. When I used the Wikipedia, I thought I don't need to group communication. Because the communication space is hidden, so I don't find it. I'm hard to find the communication space on Wikipedia. I think that the Wikipedia communication is not good at working in Korea. There are not many advisers on Korea Wikipedia. The Wiktionary definitions for consensus speak of “general agreement,” “without active opposition to the proposed course of action. I found it important for members to reach an agreement on Wikipedia. It's not an easy task, but I think it can produce a good results. So I think that's why Wikipedia exists. It can appear in a chat window, and go and talk to the other person's chat room. Perhaps it ends up as a personal versus personal matter, but I think that's also an agreement. If conversation does not take place, I don't think an agreement is reached either. Wiki...
Read more