W2 : Why Wikipedia? / SeungJae Lee

 As I mentioned in the first blog post, NamuWiki is similar to the composition of Wikipedia, which can be called Korea's Wikipedia. The downside of NamuWiki is that its reliability is not guaranteed. Therefore, it seems desirable for NamuWiki to simply solve simple questions or approach them in a simple sense of fun. 

 However, Wikipedia is being used a lot by governments and companies. I realized that Wikipedia should not be seen lightly like NamuWiki. I think I am given a great responsibility in writing Wikipedia's documents in the future. On the other hand, I'm scared. However, the technology that deals with Wikipedia is becoming more useful in the modern work environment, and I want to work hard as much as I'm scared.

 And I felt a lot of pressure when deciding the topic. However, I gained confidence after hearing the professor's words that I should do anything else, such as my hobby, hometown, country, etc


Why do you think Wikipedia is becoming more accepted?

In my opinion, Wikipedia is free for everyone to participate. In addition, smartphones are much more developed than before. As a result, people are actively using SNS and their tendency to express their thoughts and opinions has increased compared to the past.
In summary, I think the reason why Wikipedia is becoming increasingly accepted is that there are no restrictions on participation and the development of media and various SNS.


why do you think people find editing Wikipedia fun?

Wikipedia's documentation is not done by someone, but by themselves. For now, I think that this reason alone can clearly distinguish the existence of fun. Also, Wikipedia's documents are a creation. The sense of accomplishment that comes from creating a work will also make editing Wikipedia documents feel fun. And intelligent growth will be achieved among people in the process of various people looking at and communicating with the document. For these reasons, I think people find editing Wikipedia articles interesting.


Comments

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