W4 About my Wekipedia edits



W4 About my Wekipedia edits(Byeori Kim)



The Wikipedia theme I edited this week is information about Korean independence activist Lee Dong-nyeong. He was active during Japanese occupation.He served in the Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea and also built a school called 'Shinheung Military Academy.' What made me edit about this person is that one of the themes of my team play project is "independent activist Nam Sung-hyun." While searching for information about her, I also contacted on the Internet page about Lee Dong-nyeong, but the information about Lee Dong-nyeong was not detailed in the English Wikipedia.


 The information I have added to Wikipedia is directly related to the end of Yi Dong-nyeong's life. He was active in Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea for half of his life and died of overwork on March 13, 1940. I added this information to the English version of Wikipedia.

  I had an concern when I edited Wikipedia this week. Lee Dong-nyeong, which I edited this time, is a historical figure. This time, I had to edit historical figures so that I only had to fill out realistic information about this person, but in cases like historical events, individual views and interpretations can vary depending on the position in which the events clashed. Not only history but also politics. It is an area where individual opinions are likely to be reflected, depending on which position they look at political events. So I wonder. For topics like history and politics that are likely to reflect individual views, how should we edit them to remain neutral?


Comments

  1. Jeong Seo YoonMarch 31, 2019 at 7:54 AM

    I read your article about Lee Dong Young. He is certainly a figure who has made a great contribution to Korean independence. However, as with all things, we seem to have to look at some facts in a variety of ways. Unlike Koreans who have been learning about "independent activists" since childhood, some Japanese think of Korea's independence movement as a 'terror' targeting their own people. At first, I was angry at these facts.(Of course I can't help getting angry now.) But when we write an encyclopedia, we have to be cool. Everything is relative, so readers can understand the context with their own background and feel it accordingly. Therefore, when describing an incident or a person, I think the reader should approach it with an objective view and make his or her own judgment. Describing lopsided arguments on certain topics is not the value Wikipedia is aiming for. I think we need to use 'neutral words' to do neutral write.

    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