W12： What is "quality" for our societies?WANG XIAOLING/왕효령

 1) Summary

Quality, also known as quality. Indicates the qualities or attributes of a product. There are advantages and disadvantages of quality, also can be said to have high and low. People tend to regard high quality products (or services) as "good quality" and low quality products (or services) as "poor quality".


2) Interesting point

For Wikipedia, then, quality is what separates good articles from bad: high quality articles and low quality articles. I think in terms of format, Wikipedia stays the same. In terms of content, Wikipedia is written by volunteers, and it is not always possible to write with complete quality without subjectivity. But the way to ensure objectivity and neutrality is that Wikipedia requires all information to be sourced, so if you disagree with the content on Wikipedia, you can edit it, but you need to cite the source. In this way it prevents, to a certain extent, fabrication and fabrication, and therefore it also eliminates the compulsion of thought. Moreover, it is convincing in that it is open, that is, nothing is considered unquestionable. Wikipedia has an internal quality rating system, with featured items at the top, followed by A, B, and C items. I think low-quality articles have no reference sources and are not sufficient in content.


3) Discussion point

What do you think is a high quality article in Wikipedia? What is a low-quality article?



Comments

  1. JeongYoon OhMay 21, 2021 at 5:16 AM

    I totally agree that articles without reference materials are of low quality. Without reference, it would be an essay, not an article. However, I don't think there is a high quality article just because there are a lot of reference materials. It is also important to summarize the necessary references neatly.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

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

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