W7 / Good Faith Collaboration: The culture of Wikipedia / Jeongyoon Oh 오정윤

 1. Summary

The Good Faith Collaboration is a book about Wikipedia written by Joseph Michael Reagle. There are a total of eight chapters, including Wikipedia's systematic functions (such as methods for creating sophisticated content), communities, Wikipedia's success, collaborative culture, leadership on open information websites, cultural acceptance, and interpretation. It does not talk about Wikipedia's history in a nutshell, but analyzes the cause of Wikipedia's success in detail and explains how it operates.


2. Interesting Point

The most interesting part of me was the “collaborative culture”. It is amazing that Wikipedia has been able to grow the most because of the collaboration of many people to achieve its goals with success. It was also interesting that Wikipedia's collaborative culture of volunteers was similar to voluntary organizations. Because Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, some critics expected Wikipedia to be ruined by intentional errors and jokes, but the collaboration of many groups who want to guide the site correctly created the current influential Wikipedia.


3. Learning Point

Reagle said, "Wikipedia is not the place to target about what's right and what's wrong, what's false," and "Wikipedia is just drawing to say what's out there." Through these two sentences, I learned anew that Wikipedia remains neutral. Even if everyone says that the importance of the media is "neutral," it is really hard to keep it. It is no longer surprising that the left and right sides are clearly divided between broadcasters and newspapers. Sometimes journalists seem to have completely forgotten how important media neutrality is. However, Wikipedia is a place that only delivers the truth. Amateur journalists (volunteers) from all over the world gather to write articles that are more neutral and fact-based than professionals. I also didn't remember reading a biased Wikipedia article.

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