Week3: Nazis and Norms

 1. Summarize

Wikipedia is not only the encyclopedia but also one of community. To be honestly, the encyclopedia page of Wikipedia what we can see is snap-shot of community's conversation. So, Wikipedia is affected by faith. The good faith preserves and develops Wikipedia. The bad faith-for example, Neo-Nazi-ruins Wikipedia.
The gender distribution of wikipedian is worthly to note. According to the preliminary report of a Wikipedian survey(in April 2009), respondents were predominantly young males.
The NPOV means Neutral point of view. This policy takes an epistemological stance that recognizes all different perspectives even it is right or wrong.
 

2. Interesting items what I learned

In this text, I am interested the Neo-Nazi’s attack in 2005. It is not surprising that such an attack existed. But during Wikipedia discussion by prompted by them, no one compared anybody to Nazi or Hitler. It is surprising. Everyday, I see someone comparing their opponent to the Nazis. Even today.
 

3. Discussion point

Does really NPOV help everyone contribute for Wikipedia?
NPOV looks great and fair on the exterior. In fact, it interrupt minority’s activity in Wikipedia. It really means silence about hate speech and bias that accepting all opinion-whether it is right or wrong. Even though this may not be direct, certainly exist.

For example, I searched a woman politician in Korean Wikipedia. There are many controversy over her. But her's political movement and achievement is just a few line. Even if her was youngest candidate for mayor of Seoul and the famous person in this election.

Although Wikipedia is a virtual space, minority feels hate and discrimination like real space. Who would want to be active in there? I have no choice but to think that Wikipedia’s founder and those who set the rules are ALMOST WHITE-SISGENDER-HETERO-MALE. Therefore, It is not surprise that most of the respondents in the survey(mentioned in summarize) were male. it is a foreseen result.

Comments

  1. LEE MINJEONGMarch 22, 2021 at 12:25 AM

    I agree because I think your opinion is a new way of looking at Wikipedia. In Wikipedia, which seems to be the center of collective intelligence, social minorities are being alienated just like reality. This will be a stumbling block for Wikipedia to develop.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

W10 : Can we think of some example of how Internet has changed our culture? / 박소민(SOMIN PARK)

 1. Summary  The Internet has changed our culture so much. First, through the Internet, we can meet people regardless of distance. People in each country communicated over the Internet and reduced the barriers to distance by creating relationships. Also, the Internet has let us stay away from books. When we want to find expertise, we can get it from Wikipedia or Google. Even information in books can be obtained through e-books, reducing access to libraries and paper books. 2. Interesting point Further to the above, our brains are gradually degenerating because we don't have to remember information. We are constantly interrupted by SNS notifications ringing on our phones when we do something, so our concentration and attention are being reduced. Furthermore, the ease of obtaining information online is causing our short-term memory to decline. 3. Discussion point I think the Internet has made it easy to sever a relationship with a person because we can meet another person simply...
Read more

W7: Review of Good Faith Collaboration / Suyoung Han

  Review of Good Faith Collaboration 1) Summary – Wikipedia from an ethnographic perspective: focusing on collaboration within the community Wikipedia, which is called the world's largest encyclopedia, is an open community and is becoming more and more solid with the participation of various people, conflict, and resolution. In this respect, Joseph M. Reagle Jr. attempted to explain the culture that takes place within Wikipedia. The book describes how Wikipedia was created and what it values. In particular, he described Wikipedia in a book from an ethnographic point of view, and focused on cooperation within the community. 2) Interesting Point – Wikipedia is simple, but not I realized that Wikipedia is not just a site made up of community activities, but rather a collaborative activity that is carried out concretely for the goal. Before I read the book, Wikipedia was an encyclopedia site that only gave me information (even I didn't trust the information), and I thought ...
Read more

w9: Its often said by teachers that “Wikipedia is a good place to start, but a bad place to finish” why? LiuXinlei

 Its often said by teachers that “Wikipedia is a good place to start, but a bad place to finish” why? In terms of the comprehensiveness of the content, we have to admit the advantages of Wikipedia. For example, Wikipedia is undoubtedly my first choice when I don't understand an event at all. It is convenient, fast and comprehensive, and I can spend the least time to understand the whole content of this fact as comprehensively and neutrally as possible. But in the process of in-depth learning, Wikipedia can only be used as an introductory content, because in learning we need to understand this fact as much as possible, and we need to understand the different views of scholars in different regions on the same event. There will be different theories. Some theories seem to be not neutral or even discriminatory or ethnographic at present (such as Marxism and Marxism in China), and it is not suitable for Wikipedia. Be shown. In short, Wikipedia has a very low threshold for users. It assu...
Read more