Blogging through Wikipedia (2019)

<Can Wikipedia Disappear?>   Can Wikipedia disappear? No. Wikipedia will exist at least one hundred years I guess. Why? Because of the community characteristics of Wikipedia and the infinity expand of information. As there are information not wrote and people who are interested in editing it, soon would make a new community and that's how Wikipedia will survive.   First, Wikipedia is based of openness of editing information, and so this system gathers people to edit. People feel hard to adapt in the system first, but with some kind users and some help desks, they slowly suit in the system. They find it fun of editing information that they know, and sometimes being helpful for someone.    Second, they begin to know about the community system. We can make our own user page-kind of a mini home-, talk with other users by chat, and can also make a meet at offline by Wikipedia. And this system makes users to have loyalty in Wikipedia, being mixed with other ...

Can Wikipedia disappear? I think that Wikipedia can't disappear. Wikipedia has been in existence for 18 years. (Wikipedia stared in 2001) This time is long or short, if people think about Wikipedia's age. Wikipedia has grown faster than Nupedia that is first version of Wikipedia. I think Wiki's strength is that everybody can read and write the information freely. I think Wikipedia's mind is free. People want to know the information easy and free. If people want to find the information, it is the way that go to the library or buy the books and so on. That is so many times and pay the money. I mean it is not wrong the action. But it changes over the time. People want to know a lot of information, share their thinking and talking many others. I think that the best place to meet the conditions is Wikipedia. Of course, Wikipedia has a problem that prove the reference. I think the important things are fact and good reference. Peo...

Benevolent Dictators  The final decision-making authority depends on one person who is expected to use it wisely because of his personality and experience. In general, a benevolent dictator does not actually make all decisions and most of them do not. A person cannot have sufficient expertise to consistently make good decisions in all areas of the project, and a quality developer will not be far around unless it affects the direction of the project. So benevolent dictators generally don't dictate much. Instead, they allow themselves to work through discussions and experiments whenever possible.  Benevolent Dictators  requires a number of characteristics. Above all, projects require well-trained sensitivity to their own influence, which in turn brings self-restraint. Do not express opinions and conclusions too clearly in the early stages of the debate, and do not let others feel as if they were clear. People should come up with free ideas and even think foolish ones. ...

This sixth chapter, the benevolent dictator, was a very difficult and interesting subject. Especially, I became interested in 'Nupedia.' Nupedia was a free content encyclopedia based on the World Wide Web and where documents are written through expert validation. Nupedia is characterized by going through a peer-reviewed process of a wide-scale, and called for the production of documents comparable to other professional encyclopedias. Unlike Nupedia, Wikipedia is a little more accessible and easy to produce. Maybe the reason Nupedia was abolished since 2003 was to better express collective intelligence through the advanced format of Wikipedia? Of course, I think there is a certain portion of the dictator in Wikipedia. However, I think the effect is somewhat weak and different from noufidia in that it induces free editing. It is a valuable project in that Nupedia pursued professionalism while being perceived as a failed project. So what if we had a more specialized version of W...

This article taught me how important it is to work together in Wikipedia. Everything in Wikipedia is not just made. And all the information also needs the exact source. And each other's cooperation is really important to change little by little when entering information. The formation of these values was largely due to Larry Sanger and Jimmy Wales.  Nothing is just made. There is a great power that governs. It is built around it. No one knows what power is justified. And it changes with the times. So does Wikipedia. Even in Wikipedia, it is important to cooperate with the right values. And it will make Wikipedia better.

<Discuss Reagle's chapter 6>    Read chapter 6. At chapter 5, there was a slight hint of the 'benevolent dictator'. But it was hard to understand about it. But now, yes I can understand about it. It is all about the concept of leadership and the adapt to English Wikipedia.    As we all know, Wikipedia is an open, civil, deliberative community-not easily shown to us. Matching all the sources to one community-a perfect community- is very difficult. And it is the same at Wikipedia too. For the base, Wikipedia supports the openness to everyone and the even power to everyone. But it could cause several problems, and it naturally leads to a perform of a leader. And in Wikipedia, We can call it a 'benevolent dictator'. They try to take a balance through various people in Wikipedia, and make the queries right. Some could think then is this a perfect democracy? But there is a need for a leader in Wikipedia. Wales and Sanger discuss about the concept of leadershi...

This article made me feel more important the need for mutual respect and cooperation in Wikipedia. Also, I found out that these values were created by the great influence of Larry Sanger and Jimmy Wales. Not naturally formed, but some power, power, authority, etc. worked, conflicts and valuable values made at the expense of some people. Society is often confused whether it is the right leader or a bad dictator. It was perhaps natural and perhaps surprising that this was the same for Wikipedia. Furthermore, the keyword 'conscientious dictator' was fresh. I personally think this word is best suited to operate an ideal open community. What matters is that the right attitude based on morality and equity should be important, not swayed by personal values such as selfishness and altruism.

Discuss Reagle’s chapter 6 I read the Benevolent Dictator. I don't understand the word, Benevolent Dictator. I think the Dictator's mean is not good. I read this article and thought about why Nupedia went bankrupt. Nupedia was mainly edited by so-called professionals. There were so many dictators. Wikipedia is not a democracy, but it is in the form of democracy. I think it is wired thing. But many people used the Wikipedia. And there are so many agreements. There is many people who are many social classes on Wikipedia. That is interesting thing. I think people's interest is variety. So There will be a variety of directions that people want to lead on a subject. The voluntary and meritocratic character of open content communities it is not surprising that leaders are expected to lead by example as their very leadership is founded upon exemplary behavior; leadership emerges through action rather than appointment. In this article, I think the sentence expla...

Difficulty in decision making and it sheds light on the meaning and practice of cooperation in English Wikipedia. Removing Wikipedia's ambiguity is the process of resolving conflicts in article titles that occur when a title can be associated with more than one article.  In other words, ambiguity is a path that leads in principle to several articles that can have the same title. The "consensus" policy represents an agreement on "how the editor works with others." "Basic model for Wikipedia's editorial decisions."  Wikipedia should use verifiable sources, trust in good faith, discuss and deduce. The policy and guide lines document the common agreement rather than create it. In order to reach a consensus, one must reach an ideal place to put together the opinions of others. Therefore, opinions that can embrace the opinions of others as a whole should be presented. This is not an easy task, but once a match is formed, Wikipedia users can partici...

Jeong Seo Yoon Wikipedia relies on the preferences of consensus in assumptions and decisions of good faith. This may be hard to find in the neoliberal age. This attitude, in particular in the anonymity of the Internet community, is ultimately achieved by trust in people. This Wikipedia trait, which may be hasty in the background of Wikipedia's existence, could feel some form of humanity. Perhaps the process of making and developing determinations independently within any large community is ultimately for human beings. It is wonderful to believe in humanity for the sake of humanity. It is truly amazing that Wikipedia has the leadership of a "benevolent director", which is considered a practice of democracy. I'm looking forward to the next chapter. Q. Can we find another example of successful open content communities mentioned in the article in Korea?

Edits of this week This week, I added some information about my favorite foods to my Wikipedia assignment. I added information about Tonkatsu in English Wikipedia and Korean version of Wikipedia about egg roll and tteokbokki. Tonkatsu is one of my favorite Japanese food. Tonkatsu has been modified to suit the taste of Koreans as it enters Korea. As a result, people can enjoy various versions of Tonkatsu dishes such as Kimchi stew and Tonkatsu together. So I uploaded more information about Don God to the English version of Wikipedia. The most impressive thing about adding information about tteokbokki to the Korean version of Wikipedia was the fact that it is a Korean food, but more information about tteokbokki was added to the English version of Wikipedia. Usually, food and culture are common only when more information is posted on Wikipedia in the country concerned.   Here's the question: Tteokbokki is Korean food, but it has more information in English Wikipe...

# Discuss Reagle's Chapter 5 I think consensus is a basic prerequisite for Wikipedia, an open community. For agreement, a variety of devices are in place at Wikipedia, including discussions, co-editing, deleting and adding. Reading the article, the question of "agreements realize democracy, but are they always the right way?" In the past tribal life, there was a dictator by force. Democracy was realized as society began to flow through the dictator's words and problems began to emerge. With the advent of democracy, individuals began to express opinions about social problems and phenomena, and individual opinions were respected and the concept of voting or majority consent began to emerge. Among them, many conditions must be involved to achieve the concept of consensus.I looked at the concepts related to the agreement in the article and saw the following questions and answers in the conclusion section. "How many Wikipedians do it take to change a light bulb...

What is Consensus? A consensus is general agreement among a group of people. This is very important element to Wikipedia since Wikipedia articles can be changed by all Wikipedia users. In other words, Wikipedia might have a lot of various opinions so Wikipedia make all various opinions consensus. The easiest way to make one consensus idea form diversity opinions is vote. Vote is look like most efficient way to collect all opinions. It can be called democracy. However, Wikipedia prefer communication way not vote. People can show up their own idea or argue in Wikipedia. Through communication in article, the article can contain consensus information. This way of editing is not perfect way to make consensus information but this is best way to consist all argues and ideas from all people. Many hands make light work. Do you think agree with this proverb in Wikipedia? The proverb is that many hands make light work

<Discuss Reagle's Chapter 5>   The challenge of consensus. It was not so hard to catch what the chapter was going to speak about. As Wikipedia is an open community for all people and we can share our opinion rather it is not a major, naturally there exists an 'opinion diversity'.    And for that, people in Wikipedia respects the opinion and then they start to make an opinion consensus. It would be easy if we just use a one and only voting tool. But Wikipedia thinks it's not the right answer. For the consensus, the best way is 'communication'. People argue and write their thoughts by some communicate tools in Wikipedia, and they try to make a best way by consensus. The 'openness' of Wikipedia makes the communication harder, but people try to. Because it's worth for a new change or an wise defense. And this makes Wikipedia special with other open communities. Others just have simple comment functions usually, and when some conflict appears...

Consensus is a very important issue in Wikipedia. Consensus is an important keyword in defining a problem because we live in contact with so many people and their opinions vary. Consensus can only be made between sensible editors who strive to maintain good faith and work together to more accurately and appropriately express different views on the subject. A small number of editors can reach an consensus decision among themselves. However, when the document draws the attention of others, someone who disagrees can come out. The first editors should not prevent further changes because they have already made a decision. No one, as well as a few editors, can unilaterally declare that a community agreement has been changed or confirmed. An editor who believes there is a valid reason for the consensus decision to be reversed can discuss in the discussion column to find out what other editors think is important, and compare and review various perspectives and reasons. What ...

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...

In fact, I still have a hard time making and modifying words in Wikipedia. The biggest reason is that I'm worried about what word to modify and add. I have already added a lot of information to people who are smarter than me even if I search for words that I am interested in. So after searching for about 10 words, I can find a correction in one word. But nevertheless, what makes it easier for me to add words to Wikipedia is 'my interest in Korea.' I mainly edit Korean traditional culture or traditional food. It is because I have a desire to introduce my country to foreign countries and at the same time love our culture. That's why I'm using Wiki and I'm trying to work harder.

I've been using Wikipedia so far and I've never thought of editing it first. Because to me, Wikipedia felt like something big. When I first started editing, I even attached data or photos. Sometimes the data I attached was lost, but after I got used to Wikipedia editing, I could write and add content. You don't have to think for a long time about what to edit today. You can find it closer than you think. And not being afraid of editing would be one way. Challenge your editing with confidence. Editing is not as difficult as you think. The harder you think, the harder it is to edit.

What would make Writing on Wikipedia easier for me? When I first started editing Wikipedia after taking this class, I had a lot of worries about what topic to edit, what content to edit first. In fact, the editing was deleted when I first edited it because I did not add references. However, as I did many Wikipedia edits a week, I got a knack for editing.   If it's hard to decide which topic to edit first, I edit Wikipedia on a topic that I'm interested in and like. Because editing Wikipedia on my favorite subject also gives me a lot of information that I can share on it. For example, I, who likes Marvel movies, once edited Wikipedia about Marvel heoros based on the information I searched for about Marvel Heroes. Make me editing Wikipedia on this interesting and favorite topic. Secondly, I think editing about culture, or history, about my country is one of the good ways. In the English version of Wikipedia, there are many topics that lack explanations for Korean histor...

When I first came across Wikipedia, I was embarrassed. Because I didn't know how to edit Wikipedia. It's been about two months since I worked hard on Wikipedia and I couldn't write it for a while. It was because he wrote many writings whose source was not clear. I changed my mind that Wikipedia is something that everyone can write without limits. I thought you went through a lot of filtering.  I didn't know what to write when I wrote Wikipedia. It seems like your information is already in Wikipedia, and there's nothing new to look for. There were times when certain movies were blocked from editing themselves. So, I found dramas, food, etc., which are common in everyday life and edited them. In some cases, input was restricted by entering information that did not have an exact But I didn't know where to find any information, and it was hard. Also, I didn't know how to put a link in at first, so I wandered around.

While listening to collective intelligence lectures, I seem to have learned a little more about Wikipedia editing than usual. When I edit Wikipedia in another lecture, I could just write. But when editing Wikipedia, I felt that there was a lot of shortage in writing. When I wanted to attach a photo, I thought I could just copy and paste it from another site, but doing so was not the right way because of the copyright problem.  However, If I use creative commons, you can freely use unauthorized photographs to attach pictures. If I search for the photos you want there, I will get unauthorized pictures. If I download it and upload it to Wikipedia, I can do a little better wiki editing. Another way is. You do not have to type the title or the date of the article when you reference it, press edit, then cite, then copy and paste the site address and press generate to automatically create the title and date, It is convenient to work.

#What would make writing on Wikipedia easier for me? At the first time, writing on Wikipedia was very confusing to me. I thought that how can I edit Wikipedia. I don’t even know code things. After I changed “Source editing” to Visual editing, I could solve that problem. I remember my first edited Wikipedia is Dongchen station, which is name of subway station and I live in. Through first posting on Wikipedia, I learn that reference and copyright are very important. For now, I almost edit 19 articles on Wikipedia. There are two ways make me that 1.      Tutorial (The tutorial, which Wikipedia provided) 2.      Help Desk (I can ask everything) These two things make me writing on Wikipedia easily.

When I started editing, I did not understand well what sources I could use without other editors eliminating it, but as the classes continued and I continued editing it became easier and now I have more confidence in what I edit.    If it were not for the classes and the mini course that Piotr said we have to do to for edit in Wikipedia, I think I would still be afraid to edit or if I continued editing I think I would have thousands of errors every time, so I think it would be best if all the people who join as new members of Wikipedia have to do the mini course to better understand how this great community works, because even so, there are times when I still have many doubts about Wikipedia.  I think this would really help thousands of people and maybe even make the editors who deal with articles or Wikipedia doubts have less work.    Adding that when we start editing, sometimes we are not sure which article we can write, so I thought about to make se...

It's been 10 weeks since I first met Wikipedia. When I first encountered Wikipedia, I felt a lot less of a sense of desensiveness. I want to share my own tips on editing Wikipedia. The first difficulty I felt was that it was difficult to find a document to edit. There were times when I really felt vague about which documents to edit. But this difficulty was easily solved when I started searching Wikipedia for many of the things I encountered in everyday life. I started searching Wikipedia for news, street-viewing, conversation topics with friends, and so on, and it was easy to find things that needed to be edited or what I wanted to add. The second difficulty was that it was difficult to find a reference. I wanted to add more information that I knew, but it was difficult to find a suitable reference. First of all, I searched articles about Google. When editing English Wikipedia, it is easy to find more accurate references by changing the Google language settings to Englis...

Jeong Seo Yoon, 정서윤 It’s been 2 months while my first time to start Wikipedia. There are hard times during the middle test period, assignments from other classes and so on. This is the though point to editing articles. The depletion of materials. Sometimes I don’t know how can I find ‘new’ edit things? So, I read the news every day. And if there are awesome facts, I go to Wikipedia and start adds or recover the articles. The day of we first met the black hole’s picture, I was waiting for the time the NASA told us. And finally, I could watch the scene of the coolest thing in the universe. I immediately typed it on Wikipedia in blackhole article. Sometimes, these things like transcribe important things driven me. The second tips my own is participating in Wiki-project. Wiki-project is the online project team to join forces to the same goal. There are many projects like ‘Wiki-project Korea’, ‘Women in Red’ and so on. Wiki-project Korea's goal is editing Korean-related...

#10 What would make writing on Wikipedia easier for me? I think it's really fun to edit Wikipedia and modify it without warning. But sometimes the lack of knowledge I have makes editing difficult. To edit, you must have the ability to judge which information is correct and wrong. It is easy to edit information about my area of interest or objective. But I don't know everything about the world like Google. I don't even know what's going on in Korea, but I certainly don't know what's going on in other countries. There are two things that make Wikipedia easier to edit while performing multiple tasks. First, knowing a lot about current events. Second, to be interested in various areas as well as my interests. To make this a success, I recommend watching the news a lot. Ordinary people may think of paper newspapers as news, but with the advancement of technology, they can also see enough news on smartphones that they carry all the time. So I have a habit of...

<What would make writing on Wikipedia easier for me?>   Editing Wikipedia was always difficult for me. But not with the UI or language something, the difference of the culture and people was kinda confusing. So as I found how collaborative place Wikipedia is with Reagle's chapter 3-4, I understand this with my brain, but still sometimes don't get it very well.    For example, I had edited a brand's core value, and then someone in Wikipedia just reverted it and the reason was 'it's not important.'. WOW. As I am majoring in advertising and public relations, I think a brand's core value is a thing that makes the brand alive. But, I understand. Some would not think it as I think.    And another example, I had edited an idol members reward for brand power and also cited an credible news link, but someone reverted it and the reason was 'it is not a credible source. please don't use it.' I thought Korean Brand Power investigation was a po...

"What would make writing on Wikipedia easier for me?" I remember the first time I joined Wikipedia and edited it. I had prepared DGB Daegu Bank Park, the home of Daegu FC, a Korean professional soccer team. At that time, I wrote three to four sentences for Daegu FC's first home game and inserted related references. But some of my editorial sentences were deleted by another editor. That was my first Wikipedia start. Perhaps this is something that many Wikipedia editors are worried about. If there is a problem with my edited version, the other editors will delete it. It is largely attributed to copyright issues. For example, a voice or picture cannot be used without the consent of the copyright holder. Even, it is forbidden to cite sentences contained in other writings as they are. For us to use Wikipedia more easily and efficiently, it is good to ask questions through Help desk on the community portal. Other users answer within a day or two in areas I don't know or...

What would make writing on Wikipedia easier for me? When I wrote the word at first on Wikipedia, I was so afraid of writing and fixing the word on it. I thought If I wrote wrong thing, how should I do this? It is not easy to write on Wikipedia. I was warned by Wikipedia. The reason is that you were not to keep the rule. It is simple rule that external links should not be made in the text. I was surprised at that time. I gave the message that wrote “Vandalism” I was so scared of this word. (I was able to solve the problem with  Piotr' s help.) I think that the easy tutorial can make writing on Wikipedia easier for us. The beginner is hard to write on Wikipedia. I think that When the beginner writes on Wikipedia at first, the easy tutorial need to guide them. I mean the beginner needs to read this tutorial, and they know about this (problems of writing on Wikipedia, how to write on Wikipedia.) I  think Wikipedia needs to show the tutorial to the beginner. I think the types o...

Recently, I learned about copyright. How copyright works. Copyright recognizes the value of an idea and recognizes the person who came up with it. As a result, when ideas are used a lot, the provider benefits. But copyright was much more complicated than we knew. It was also surprising that Wikipedia was able to create content based on its demanding processes and strict standards. No matter how likely you are to write, you will be erased if you don't have a definite source. I've been working on Wikipedia recently, and I've actually been through it. Wikipedia gives anyone the opportunity to post posts, but it doesn't adopt everything. It also uses the system to display, warn, and delete screens. It is impressive to describe this as dictatorship. It is a democracy, but it seems to have an unknowable charm like communism. This sentence was impressive. It seemed to be free, but it was not free, and it was like a dictatorship. Discussion : Wouldn't the strict observance ...

I came to know about the definition of copyright. And during the lecture time, I had the chance to think about the advantages and disadvantages of copyright through video and discussion. The surface intent of copyright is reasonable and looks good to all. Copyright protects the rights of the creator and can contribute to the development of a specific culture. Protecting the creator's rights seems so good that the creators are motivated with safety and do not harm each other. Also, since copyright is a form of expression, it does not include the ideas and feelings of the work, and it seems to be somewhat free. However, copyright has a dual nature. Rather, it can be a means to limit cultural development. It is the people who have been inspired by the work of a person. They do not have the opportunity to develop new forms of culture by adding more creative elements to existing works. Therefore, our society needs to consider various aspects such as the intention and thought of...

I made a new compilation on Wikipedia this week. Jincheon National Training Center is a newly built sports training center in Korea. It is where about 350 sports elite athletes are trained and trained. Jincheon National Training Center exists in the Korean version, but not in the English version. So, I made a new version of Wikipedia English version of Jincheon National Training Center that I think is important. What's interesting about this Wikipedia editing is that I made my own info box and inserted my own photos. And the reference materials were also described. Not long after the Jincheon athletes' village was established, much information was included. But what I am curious and worried about is that Jincheon National Training Center is an important facility in Korea, but Americans don't think so, so I think they will delete my edited version. I also want to insert a map for the location of the facility, but I wonder what to do.  

For two weeks, I learned the concept of copyright and how it works. I thought of copyright only as a "right to protect his or her own creations." But much more complex understanding and value intertwined than I thought. Also, it was surprising that Wikipedia, which thought of itself as a simple open communication, was able to build content on a demanding process and strict criteria. The sentences left impressively in the article are as follows. A common feature of online communities operating under an ethos of open and egalitarian values is frustration with the coexistence of group decision making and seemingly contrary forms of autocratic authority. It seems to Wikipedia have the characteristics of duality, open but not open, closed but not closed. Wikipedia gives anyone the opportunity to post posts, but it doesn't adopt everything. It also uses the system to screen, warn, and delete. It is impressive to describe this as a dictatorship. It is a democracy, ...

From Reagle’s chapters 3-4, there are two impressions points. One impression thing is that trolls are the driving force of Wikipedia. The other impression point is that ignore all rules. These two thing really helps Wikipedia grow as much as now. First of all, trolls often spur the best editors into creating a brilliant article with watertight references. I think this is really true. I have a plan to change some Korean history article since I found some wrong information in Wikipedia. I can say invisible hand works. In addition, ignore all rules can make everything possible. Sometimes rules make people impossible or do nothing because of rules. Without rules, people can edit everything freely. It can help people do better and better. Discuss) I think Trolls can work like invisible hand. How do you think about?

My edits on Wekipedia for this week This week, I edited Wikipedia about Kim Sang-ok. The reason why I first posted an article about Kim Sang Ok is because in class, my professor gave me the task of uploading information about a person who is not yet listed on the English Wikipedia. So I added an article about Kim Sang-ok, a Korean independence activist, to Wikipedia. Later, to add more information about Kim Sang-ok, I reviewed records related to Kim Sang-ok this week and added hiss life to Wikipedia. Posting information about Kim Sang-ok meant a lot to me. This is because Kim Sang-ok is one of the proud figures who tried to resist and fight against it at the time when Korea was ruled by Japan. Therefore, posting information about Kim Sang-ok on the English Wikipedia will be an opportunity for people of various nationalities as well as Koreans to have access to him. I would like to post information about various Korean characters while carrying out my future Wikipedia editing assi...

2015048031 Jeong Seo Yoon In chapter 4, we finally think about Wikipedia's openness. There have been numerous discussions about how everything in Wikipedia is possible, but Wikipedia says 'Ignore All Rules,' "if rules prevent you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, you can ignore it." But it also says it does not mean that all actions can be justified. It is said that there is no alternative to good judgment, just to contribute freely, and to improve the encyclopedia. However, the concept of openness is still an important component of Wikipedia. The writer describes Wikipedia as the five features of the open contents community. The five concepts are as follows. <Open content, Transparity, Integrity, Nondiscrimination, Noninterference> Wikipedia is an example of a public content community, but when practicing openness, it is sometimes difficult to strike a balance with issues such as freedom of speech, public opinion, transparency, and a nondiscr...

W9. my edits on Wikipedia in this week The contents I translated this week are words about Korean tradition. Not all, but most of the words I added this week are things like the food used on traditional Korean days or the dance that day. The following is their list: "Dubu," "Jesa," "Yakgua," "Chuseok," "Kanggang-sullae". I added the word of food used for "Chuseok" and "Jesa," a traditional Korean day, and a description of traditional game. I can still see that the words I edit with interest are words related to Korean tradition. I hope that Korean food and dance will be added to Wikipedia. Also, there were many parts of Wikipedia in Korea that lacked explanation because it thought it was something we knew for granted. Maybe it's better to record our values on Korean Wikipedia than to promote it in English. x