W9. Do you think Wikipedia is reliable? why or why not? / Jung Jisoo

 1. Summary

Whenever I edit Wikipedia, take a class, or read Wikipedia-related resources in Syllabus, I often think about whether Wikipedia is reliable. First of all, my thoughts seem to be different depending on what kind of article it is. The reason is the reliability of the cited data. If the cited material is reliable, I think the Wikipedia material is reliable. However, I think it is difficult to trust if the source is unclear or if it is biased to one side. So, if the source is clear, I can trust it and use it as a reference for my assignments.

And I think an article like 'Wikipedia: List of hoaxes on Wikipedia' will help to improve the credibility of Wikipedia. This is because I think that more hoaxes data can be found by organizing hoaxes and analyzing their characteristics.


2. Interesting point & Question _Wikipedia: List of hoaxes on Wikipedia

I read the 'Wikipedia: List of hoaxes on Wikipedia' in the attached material. This list was written to document the hoaxes on Wikipedia. This article also says one thing about how to identify hoaxes. It examines the structure and content of the article, mentions in other articles on Wikipedia, and the characteristics of the editor who created the page. In addition to this, I am curious about how to find hoaxes with accuracy. What is another way? Also, the article said that the system is better than human beings investigated. the accuracy of the system was higher and I think this is great. Finally, this list does not contain all the hoaxes, and many have not yet been discovered. It's not revealed, but how many hoaxes exist? 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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

W7: Review of Good Faith Collaboration / Suyoung Han

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