W7: Good Faith Collaboration Book

 

1. Summary

Good Faith Collaboration: The Culture of Wikipedia is a book about Wikipedia community and Wikipedia. The main point of GFC book is that Wikipedia is a community which is based on good faith collaboration. Wikipedia is maintained by a great number of anonymous people’s good faith. The concept ‘Good Faith’ seems vague and difficult to realize. Therefore, Wikipedians make some rules and guidelines. This book deals with them(for example, NPOV) and how it actually works.

2. Interesting&Useful Point

It is difficult to create an encyclopedia based on good faith(in fact, it’s hard to even write a single article). As the author mentioned, it will be surprising if Wikipedia and Wikipedian community has disappeared and  there were only traces left. However, Wikipedia and its community are still alive, even this book was written 11 years ago. This miracle shows good faith’s power. Moreover it tells that some restrictions are needed to make a great result based on trust for other people. Wikipedia’s rules and guidelines can be felt to strict. But after reading GFC book, I think it is reasonable.

3. Discussion Point

It is true that Wikipedia is community. Although the founders aimed to make an encyclopedia, most of Wikipedians use Wikipedia for sharing information and hangout with other people. compared to Wikipedia’s beginning to its heyday, there are many other communities in the internet. People seems to want to share information within their group. How can solve this problem and promote knowledge sharing in Wikipedia?

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