W7: GFC book notes By 'William S. Kowinski' , 'Cory Doctorow','Piotr Konieczny' and 'Paul Youngquist'/ 진신

Summary-William S. Kowinski:

The true exception is the innovative success of a collaborative effort that has prime online reference work called Wikipedia. This book is not meant to be biography or reportage, but contemporary ethnography or study of a culture.
What this book does well is describe how Wikipedia works and what issues have arisen.  It's short on drama and personality，and so it's probably destined to be a source document. Since that seems unlikely, this may remain the best opportunity for learning about this remarkable project.

Summary-Cory Doctorow:

Reagle makes an excellent case that this assumption of good faith is particularly powerful when it comes to dealing with those who lack good faith — it creates positive outcomes for arguments with everyone from neo-Nazis to political hacks who're whitewashing their boss's entries.
Wikipedia's most fascinating and unprecedented aspect isn't the encyclopedia itself — rather, it's the collaborative culture that underpins it: brawling, self-reflexive, funny, serious, and full-tilt committed to the project, even if it means setting aside personal differences.

Summary-Piotr Konieczny:

The book contains Reagle observations and analysis up to the events of 2010. 
Reagle has immersed himself in the Wikipedia's open content community. Because of the inherent blurriness of the boundaries in the history of science and philosophy, through such attempt to trace the history of an idea can never be perfect.
Where the book's major strengths lie is in Reagle's ethnographic description of Wikipedia's collaborative culture.Reagle shines light on issues that are key in understanding the Wikipedia's culture and community.
Reagle's understanding of Wikipedia's culture is open to further debate, elaboration and criticism. Reagle undeniably shows that Wikipedia is much more than just an encyclopedia, and that the project thrives on its volunteer-generated and constantly evolving culture. 

Summary-Paul Youngquist:

Wikipedia is more than an online reference work. It’s a dream, an instinct. It’s a place to begin, not to end, the pursuit of general or specialized knowledge.
Reagle’s “historically informed ethnography” of the culture of Wikipedia provides a wonderful account of the beliefs, practices, and controversies that sustain its dream of making all human knowledge accessible to all humans. It might come as a surprise that something like an encyclopedia can have a culture all its own.Wikipedia is this multitude, a community of mostly mutually unknown believers working together to, well, change the world. One entry at a time.
A “collaborative culture” unites them . Reagle describes it, or tries to, in ethnographic detail, showing how Wikipedia and Wikipedias share a distinct history and set of values. 

Interesting:

Reagle focuses on the openness of Wikipedia in this book. Even though Wikipedia is opened, most of the volunteers can still achieve a culture of integrity. This kind of self-consciousness, which depends on self-consciousness, is quite rare.

Discussion：

To comply with Wikipedia’s culture of integrity is to comply with Wikipedia’s culture. But Wikipedia’s integrity culture does not get too many rules, in order to provide volunteers with more freedom.This has resulted in compliance with Wikipedia’s culture of honesty, which relies mainly on volunteers’ consciousness. While editing Wikipedia, what got you consciously abide by the culture of integrity?

Comments

  1. Yang Ruixin 양서영April 17, 2021 at 3:01 AM

    In my opinion, the most fundamental reason is that Wikipedia treats users like "participants ", not" consumers ". Wiki's mission is to pass all the knowledge of the world to everyone on the planet in local languages. The only purpose of the Wiki community is to work together to create this free, free and best quality encyclopedia.For the purpose and purpose of Wiki, Wiki people have high requirements and standards for the civilization of Wiki community, so they respect each other's honesty, communication and fraternity to create this pluralistic, free, tolerant and honest Wiki community and encyclopedia.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hyeonsu jeongApril 17, 2021 at 9:38 AM

    When I edit Wikipedia, I followed the rules because the information I edited can be that someone first encountered. I didn't want to spread false information. And if my editing is wrong, someone can delete it. So I kept the rules. I didn't want the time-consuming contribution to be deleted.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

W4: What are the pros and cons of using Naver vs Google for research purposes?

Google Scholar: In terms of academic research, Google Scholar is a web search engine that can search academic articles for free. Its source of information is also professional and rich. For example, articles from academic publishers, etc. There are also most of the published academic journals in the world. It also supports advanced search functions such as keywords, classification and filtering, and you can find the most relevant research documents in the entire academic field in a few seconds. Every search result on Google Scholar will show citations. This provides a good extended search clue, which is convenient for users to directly view related papers. As a Chinese student, even in mainland China, Google Scholar cannot directly access and use it. We will still use VPN and other methods for reference when conducting research. NAVER: And naver is more like an interactive community. There are more academic websites in Korea.  As a Chinese student, I think Naver rarely uses for acade
Read more

W2 : After watching Mitch Resnick’s TED video

 Through this video, I realized that programming education is not only as deep and professional as I know it, but also more flat and interesting. With the change of the times and the advancement of technology, the times we experience are indeed constantly changing. I believe that programming is just a way of learning like reading. It does not depend on any subjective intentions but exercises people’s logical thinking and creativity. China There is a common saying that “giving others fish is better than fishing for others.” I believe that programming does not exist as a short-lived technology, but behind it is that people need to keep learning with the times and have an open attitude. The purpose of early childhood education is different from the professional education we receive now. Early childhood education is more inclined to teach children the way of thinking, rather than the part of applying knowledge or technology in a professional subject as we are now learning. Therefore, addin
Read more

W13/After reading “Categorization”/HARI KIM

Summary) Categorization is a kind of list for dividing topics, and it helps users find information easily. All documents must be in at least one category. Therefore, categories must be well chosen. How are the numerous articles on Wikipedia categorized? First, the category should be chosen as the most helpful topic when someone reads the article. And usually an article doesn't exist in both the top and the subcategories at the same time. If there are few documents in the category you have in mind, you should check to see if they belong to a subcategory. It is also important to maintain a "neutral" perspective when categorizing. New/Interesting things I learned) I learned that usually one document does not exist in both the upper and subcategories at the same time. Before I knew this information, I had made a mistake in categorizing documents. In categorizing articles about rivers, the article was already part of a subcategory, but I have made mistakes by adding a top cate
Read more