W11/ After reading "Commons:FAQ"/HARI KIM

Summary)

"Wikimedia Commons" serves as a central repository for free photos, pictures, animations, music, voice, video, and other media materials for all Wikimedia projects. Like the name "public", it is produced and operated by volunteers, not professionals who are paid for it, and the material stored on the site is a free license. The site is aimed at media storage, so it is not usually possible to post directly written articles or software.


New/Interesting things I learned)

It was interesting that the site's materials were also available outside of Wikipedia. In general, including author and licensing information, there was no problem with copyright. I first got to know the site called "Wikimedia Commons" through this lecture, and I think it will be useful for my articles not only on Wikimedia but also on other sites in the future.


Discussion Point)

Anyone can upload media data, so there is a possibility that the data that needs to be deleted will be shared. Copyright infringing or offending files should be deleted. Isn't there a possibility that the free sharing of this site could be abused? What do you think of these risks? I'm curious about your opinion.

Comments

  1. 박채정 Park ChaeJeongMay 14, 2021 at 9:38 PM

    Hi, Hari.
    I read your blog post well. I also think the site 'wikimedia commons' is very beneficial because it is something to consider not only when using Wikipedia but also other websites. And considering your point of discussion, I feel that concerns about free sharing are justified. But everyone will always be careful because other people feel the same way as we feel dangerous. In addition, other Wikipedia users may request deletion of incorrect files or request modification while participating in editing. I think this is Wikipedia's own way, but I think it's something special.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. HARI KIM 김하리May 16, 2021 at 10:42 AM

      Thank you for your opinion. I'm impressed by your saying that Wikipedia users will take risks by requesting the deletion and correction of the wrong files, and this is Wikipedia's unique way of doing it. If we believe in the power of collective intelligence, concerns about the dangers of occurring on the "Wikipedia Commons" site will be improved.

      Delete

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