W12/ After reading "Article development"/HARI KIM

Summary)

This article contains how articles generally grow on Wikipedia. Every article begins with the contributor's idea. When you want to write an article, you should first search to find out if an article on the topic already exists or not. Redirection is appropriate if the article already exists.

Then how do you develop an article if it doesn't exist? If you don't have time for the whole article, there's a way to write a very short article, "stub." I can find a stub article and grow it, or other editors can grow my stub article. The "stub" article consists of only a few sentences, but I think it's a good attempt at writing an article because it's the beginning of an idea.

How do you develop a great Wikipedia article that deserves to be included in the 'feature article'? First of all, further research is usually needed to write a good article. You may be well aware of the need to cite reliable sources that can be verified. If you visit a university or public library, you can get a chance to find the best source. You can find a great source in "Google Scholar" without having to leave the house. After sufficient research, the writing process is needed. When writing an article, you should start with a concise introduction that makes it easier for readers to recognize. It is also important to write objectively. Finally, if you finish the article with good related images and graphics, you can make a great article.

New/Interesting things I learned)

I once had difficulty finding academic research on relevant content when writing an article. This article was good to learn more about various ways to find related academic research and articles. "Google Scholar" makes it easy to find and search articles online. And I learned that Wikipedians can apply for access to paid research databases through the Wikipedia Library Card Platform. Wikipedia library partners were many, including EBSCO, JSTOR, Infotrac, ProQuest, and others. The above academic libraries had thousands or millions of academic sources.


Discussion Point)

There are numerous articles on Wikipedia. There are also many great articles made from reliable sources. But having a good source can guarantee that it's a good article? What do you think is a good article to be included in the 'feature article' on Wikipedia?  I wonder what it would be like to be a good article only by your standards, not by Wikipedia standards.

Comments

  1. Jung jisoo, 정지수May 22, 2021 at 10:17 PM

    I read your post well. I think 'feature article' is very important not only for articles written from good sources but also for article neutrality. The articles of my main project are related to history because I think neutrality is particularly important in historical documents. In the process of finding data, Wikipedia can be used, and at that time, I think it will be important to show data from a neutral perspective, rather than one-sided data. And when looking for articles to be edited to proceed with the weekly assignments, many things were too lacking in explanation. So I think both quality and quantity are important.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. HARI KIM 김하리June 12, 2021 at 12:25 AM

      I appreciate your opinion on what good articles can be included in the 'feature article'. I agree with the opinion that article neutrality is very important. When writing articles on Wikipedia, it's important to be careful not to put biased opinions on either side. I agree that quality and quantity are also important factors in judging good articles. Thank you for your good opinion.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

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

Summary- William S. Kowinski: The true exception is the innovative success of a collaborative effort that has prime online reference work called Wikipedia. This book is not meant to be biography or reportage, but contemporary ethnography or study of a culture. What this book does well is describe how Wikipedia works and what issues have arisen.  It's short on drama and personality，and so it's probably destined to be a source document. Since that seems unlikely, this may remain the best opportunity for learning about this remarkable project. Summary- Cory Doctorow: Reagle makes an excellent case that this assumption of good faith is particularly powerful when it comes to dealing with those who lack good faith — it creates positive outcomes for arguments with everyone from neo-Nazis to political hacks who're whitewashing their boss's entries. Wikipedia's most fascinating and unprecedented aspect isn't the encyclopedia itself — rather, it's the collaborative cu...
Read more

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