W12: Wikipedia - Article development

1. Summary

Learned how to elaborate and increase the credibility of Wikipedia articles. It can be said that it is time to combine what we have learned through collective intelligence lectures so far. In particular, the way to be recognized as a feature article was impressive. It is said that a quality article that satisfies various factors such as reliability is recognized as a special article by adding review and shining process. The article hits the front of Wikipedia, and acts as a representative article, or face, of the wiki. Through this, the effect of introducing new Wikipedians can be expected.

 

2. Impressive: stub

The content about the stub was impressive. It's a stub that can be a very small article, but it's fun to be able to register even the most trivial topics on the wiki, with the possibility of development open. I don't know in detail, but it is meaningful that if you register it as a stub, it can be developed into a quality and elaborate article through collective intelligence. I think it is a function that shows the pure function of Wikipedia well. When one person throws the beginning of a very trivial piece of idea, several people go head-to-head to develop it.

 

3. Discussion topics

What's a good stub you think? What do you need to keep in mind when registering as a stub, and what topics would you like? What are some of the topics that come to your mind right now? When it comes to this stub, do you think of the Wikipedia characteristic that it's easy to start but hard to end?

Comments

  1. SOMIN PARK (박소민)May 22, 2021 at 3:22 PM

    I enjoyed reading your post. I think a good stub is an easy one for others to understand. That way, many people will continue the small stub and eventually grow in size.

    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