Why do you think people use Wikipedia? Why do others write for it?

Why do you think people use Wikipedia? Why do others write for it?

So many people use Wikipedia. Including me, I often use Wikipedia to get information.
There are two reasons for it. We can get a lot of information even new information through Wikipedia easily without fee. As much as Wikipedia information, we can get a lot of reference from Wikipedia. For these reasons, many people still use Wikipedia.

First of all, Wikipedia is very famous and popular website in the world. In other words, Wikipedia is useful and easy to most of people. There is no permission fee and weird advertisement. Even now people upload new information on online and ask some questions on it. Through Wikipedia, I can get a lot of information even new information. Also, it is easy to share information because there is no license fee and copyright, which I use for knowledge.

In addition, so many reference is classified well in Wikipedia. Getting a good source or reference is very hard. However, I can get a lot of source from Wikipedia. Many note is beside information sentence and section. I don't need to read a book or find a essay to prove my sentence or reference.

For these reasons make people use Wikipedia. Wikipedia give not only useful information but also permission to edit and write a article to us. It ignites us to give our knowledge or fix wrong information on Wikipedia as far as I know. That's because it might help other people to get information.

As a result, many people use Wikipedia to get information and give information. I hope Wikipedia contains all information and reference.

Comments

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