W6 : Who do you think edits Wikipedia? / 박소민(SOMIN PARK)

 1. Summary

According to Wikipedia, the editor age ratio was 13% for those under 17, 14% for those aged 18 to 21, 26% for those aged 22 to 29, 19% for those aged 30 to 39, and 28% for those aged 40 or older. Except for those in their 20s, the higher the age group, the higher the proportion of Wikipedia editors.

2. Interesting point

It was amazing that Wiki editors in their 40s and older accounted for the largest percentage. I expected a lot of young people to use Wikipedia because its editors have to know how to use the Internet, but it was my stereotype. These statistical results made me realize that it is true that 'Wisdom comes with age'.

3. Discussion point

So, on the contrary, why does Wikipedia have the smallest percentage of youth users even though there is no age limit?

Comments

  1. 박채정 Park ChaeJeongApril 10, 2021 at 1:11 AM

    Hi, Somin.
    I thought about your discussion point. Wikipedia is the main source of information provision/editing, so I think it may be a little unfamiliar to teenagers(youth users) who enjoy social network platforms such as Instagram and Facebook. I also started using Wikipedia for the first time through this 'collective intelligence' lecture. Of course, I got to know Wikipedia and now I'm using it a lot, but I've never been to Wikipedia before. No matter how old there is no age limit, I think people may not know Wikipedia well. Just as another "sharing culture,"(SNS, TikTok.. etc) unfamiliar to the older age group, is familiar to teenagers.

    ReplyDelete
  2. HARI KIM 김하리April 10, 2021 at 5:25 AM

    I read your article well. I think there are two main reasons why the proportion of youth users is the lowest. First, they are not used to searching and editing information through Wikipedia. Teenagers are not familiar with platforms that directly find information and produce information because they use platforms that focus on "fun" and "communication." Next, they don't know much about Wikipedia. Wikipedia has detailed rules and regulations. Therefore, education is necessary to use Wikipedia. And education on the importance of Wikipedia is also needed. As such, teenagers do not know about Wikipedia and do not know the importance of Wikipedia, so I think the utilization rate is low.

    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