W8: Reliability of Wikipedia / MINJEONG LEE

1. Summary

Wikipedia can be edited by anyone or anonymously. However, this advantage can be a drawback that threatens reliability of Wikipedia. This is because Wikipedia users may not have the expertise or qualifications for the documents they edit. Experts say Wikipedia is reliable compared to non-professionals, but it is not completely reliable because it contains errors. Political or ideologically biased information can also be used. Therefore, Wikipedia users must annotate reliable sources when contributing to editing. References, citations, and sources are the foundation of Wikipedia. Wikipedia solved the problem of reliability by thoroughly writing sources instead of allowing anonymous editing.


2. Interesting point

I felt proud to have my editorial record in history after editing Wikipedia. I didn't know there were people who wanted to contribute anonymously. Discussions among users increase the quality of Wikipedia, which cannot be discussed with anonymous editors. How much can we trust an anonymous editor?


3. Discussion

Are Wikipedia annotated sources and references reliable? Politically biased newspapers can be the source of information. Most people who acquire information through Wikipedia do not confirm the accuracy of the source.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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

w9: Its often said by teachers that “Wikipedia is a good place to start, but a bad place to finish” why? LiuXinlei

W10 : Can we think of some example of how Internet has changed our culture? / 박소민(SOMIN PARK)