What is the future of Wikipedia? Will it exist in 20 years? 50? 100?

What is the future of Wikipedia? Will it exist in 20 years? 50? 100?

I think that the Wikipedia exists a long time when we don't count.
But I think it will take different kind of views.

First one is many people on Wikipedia.
Many people mean that it join the person who don't watch or listen and so on.
It means that Wikipedia for disabled person.
I think they will join the Wikipedia editors.

Maybe it's happening on Wikipedia.
I think that it will be in an advanced form.

Disabled person maybe uses on Wikipedia.
But they don't be reader. They are writer and editor on the future.

Second one is to translate language service on Wikipedia.
We know that Wikipedia has transformed's service.

But it is not to use the machine.
It is made by person who can translate into other language.
Computer is stupid. So people translate into other language.

Of course google can translate the language service.
But It can't translate the words on the image.

I think the transform about the language is better and better on the future.
If person can't translate language, it will translate on Wikipedia.

Maybe if the article updates on English Wikipedia,
it will update on Korea Wikipedia on the same time to translate.

Comments

  1. 방민현 minhyunJune 10, 2019 at 12:41 AM

    I like your view talking about disabled people. It is really a possible guess. I hope there would be more gender equal development on Wikipedia.

    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