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


Just like the ever-changing knowledge, the future of Wikipedia is whether it can be upgraded quickly.
One of the toughest tasks of Wikipedia is to find and retain item contributors, and there is information showing that the number of editors in the English version is gradually decreasing. One of the great things about Wikipedia when it was created was that people could see the updated version instantly; nowadays, any young person on Facebook can easily appreciate this excitement. At the same time, how volunteers allocate time online also brings more challenges to Wikipedia.
Wikipedia also needs more writers in different fields. There are more males in the current editorial staff, and most of them come from rich countries. As a result, the scientific and technical reports on the website are quite comprehensive, and there are few reports on poor areas and social situations.
Wikipedia also needs more readers, especially those from areas where information is scarce. Wikipedia is almost the only reference tool for some languages, and it is also a valuable "literature library”.
Wikipedia is working hard to make it easier for people to edit articles on mobile devices to keep up with the trend of the PC era. When information can be spread through wearable devices such as voice or Google Glass, how will Wikipedia respond?

From the above points, I think that Wikipedia will still exist in the future, but how long it will last depends on whether Wikipedia can make better countermeasures.



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