W1. What do I know about Wikipedia and what do I want to learn about it? / Jina Park

Wikipedia was launched in 2001 and has evolved into one of the most influential sites in the world.
All data, including photos uploaded to Wikipedia, are available free of charge. However, when uploading a Wikipedia article, you can only upload photos that are my own, and you can upload the sources with reliable references.
Since Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia, only the content that is appropriate for the encyclopedia can be uploaded. The author's personal opinion should not be entered, and Wikipedia should not be used commercially.

One of the most impressive things I learned about Wikipedia over the first lecture was that "Everyone can write articles, from elementary school students to experts in the field." However, to create an article, you should refer to a reliable reference.

There was a discussion in the class that the world where everyone could freely share knowledge was realistic. I thought that securing a reliable reference was the first step in order for everyone to share knowledge freely. So I need the ability to judge what is a reliable reference in this class and I want to 
learn more about it.

What do you think 'what should be a priority for Wikipedia to be used ideally'?

Comments

  1. wnghksdlMarch 16, 2019 at 2:11 AM

    I think it should be a priority not to look at them as they are about modifications or additions.
    I think critical thinking is important, knowing where the content comes from and thinking about whether it's right or not.

    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