#2 My first edits.

All of my edits can be put in to the category of 'Traditionality of Korea'.
Like these. 'Traditional Playing', 'Traditional Food', 'Traditional Anniversary', 'The Past person who is famous for Independent Fighter of Korea'.
The reason of editing these sections is just what I really like.

At first time to try, I was scared and was confused because I never modify or expand the encyclopedia. As I've known before, Encyclopedia is precise and collective of knowledge that could only be used by some elites. In Wiki, there was a detailed description of almost every world I've known. So I decided to start with what I knew well, what I liked. At least, I'm a little more confident on that. In my case, it was a traditional Korean playing called 'Pungmul'.

Surprisingly, Expanding 'Pungmul' and then my favorite food, activity, people and so on, I began to become more and more interested. Looking for the reference, literature of the subject that I have choose, I can learn more about them and it was so exciting to me.

As I know about Wiki, I find that there was a lot that wasn't there. But I want to learn more by constantly focusing on things that I really like, rather than just editing anything. That's the reason why I choose my edits.

However, I saw people modifying my writing.
I search the references and thought what I had written was on the objective side, but they're restore or delete it. Who's the standard of Wikipedia? and What is the criterion of defining these word's meaning?

Comments

  1. Kim ju hwan 김주환March 16, 2019 at 11:43 PM

    It would be disappointing if the data you looked for and thought to be objective were modified or deleted.But I think Wikipedia is a place where collective intelligence respects everyone's opinions. Therefore, it would be better to compare and analyze what you think and what others think.
    I don't know the objective standard of Wikipedia, but I think it's also a matter of collective intelligence to solve.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. mjphomeMarch 17, 2019 at 6:22 PM

      First of all, thank you for tour answer to my discussion.
      After I wrote on this blog, I looked for other words on Wiki, and found a reference to them. I found that much more references are existed, reviewed and modified than I thought, added on the basis of the most objective evidence at various perspective. And when I look back at my deleted sentences, maybe it have been modified because there is no additional reference attached to them.(I just look for references and no tagging) From now on, I will ad reliability to my data and attach some references. And it will be checked by someone else. Like your opinion, that's the power of collective intelligence.

      Delete

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