W5) The Challenges of Consensus /박채정, PARK CHAEJEONG

 

Summary

 Collaboration through Wikipedia can lead to numerous disagreements. And talk about some solutions.

  • The case of Disambiguation (collision I've experienced)

 I made a mistake while editing Wikipedia yesterday. I wrote a new article by translating the title of my favorite drama into English. However, it was later discovered that there was already an article related to the drama, and now it has been solved with the help of the professor. Wikipedia has a process called "disambiguation" to resolve a conflict of article titles that occur when a title can be associated with more than one article.

  • Consensus

 Sometimes there are disputes that cannot be resolved by both joint discussions, managers, and arbitration. Not everyone agrees with the application of the policy of use as necessary. At this time, an agreement may be reached during the discussion depending on the majority's opinion.

 However, if an agreement is not reached easily, everyone who is not part of the agreement should express their opinions and listen with an open mind. In other words, as Wikipedia has always said, "equality" should be kept in mind and "facts" should be focused. This process of consensus is not just a means of solving problems, but a basic attitude of communication on open source websites such as Wikipedia. 

  • Voting

 Wikipedia often uses the proverb 'voting is evil.' Wikipedia operates on a debate-oriented agreement because voting can run counter to this conclusion. 

 However, Voting is one of the best ways to quantify opinions in large groups. Online communities with common goals will constantly collide, agree, and make decisions. Therefore, voting will not necessarily be evil. There must be a situation in which there is no choice but to vote. 

 

Enlightened Point

 In the event of a conflict, we will have to find the best way to properly resolve the situation. Democratic methods such as majority rule are not always right. Dichotomous thinking like 'yes or no' is not right either. In the process of writing a good article, we will have to find a balance and find a reasonable way out of each other.


Discussion

 Is there another good way to resolve disputes in the open community? Or what do you think about my opinion?




Comments

  1. WANG XIAOLINGApril 2, 2021 at 8:42 PM

    Another good method: If there is a dispute about the neutrality of an item, add a controversial template for this item and set up a cooling-off period. During the cooling-off period, use the item's discussion page and then resolve all neutral issues within the item to resolve the dispute.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

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

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