W8.1 Reliability of Wikipedia / Kim Yoon(김윤)

Summary

This article deals with the credibility of Wikipedia. Since the majority of Wikipedia users are anonymous and they can edit freely, Wikipedia's content from the past and its reliability have been the subject of criticism and concern. At Harvard University in 2014, several articles on Wikipedia claimed to be highly biased. In addition, the "revenge editing" function has been added, and since then, there have been more cases of weak objectivity or conflicting interests on Wikipedia. Additionally, Wikipedia's value standards have existed in the editing and article generation process, including whether they are reliable and poorly edited. Academics consider Wikipedia an unreliable space and criticize it. Therefore, Wikipedia is not considered a useful website for writing papers in many universities. There are many areas where Wikipedia is considered unreliable, but at the same time, Wikipedia is used in legal lawsuits such as the Federal Court of Appeals. Wikipedia is still controversial, but it's true that many people gather here as a window of collective intelligence.

Interesting

I knew Wikipedia was controversial, but it was particularly helpful for me to know exactly what areas of society this article viewed Wikipedia critically or usefully used.

Discussion

Which positive function of Wikipedia do you think is greater or negative?

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)