W13: After reading "Categorization"

 

 ■ After reading "Categorization"


1.

On Wikipedia, documents can be categorized using 'category'. We can easily recognize documents in this category. You can also use the Search tool to locate specific documents in a particular category, or click the category name added at the bottom of the Documents page to view a category page that lists other documents added to the category. Categories should be added by adhering to general and special rules.


2.

We must have a clear reason when placing in each category. It must also maintain a neutral view.


3.
As I read the category, I remembered the hashtag on Instagram. Hashtags also function as showing characteristics and types of posts. We add as many hashtags as we can, hoping that many people will come to their posts. What do you think about Wikipedia categories and hashtags on Instagram? How about adding as many categories of Wikipedia as possible like the hashtag on Instagram?


Comments

  1. Shinhee Kim, 김신희May 29, 2021 at 1:01 AM

    I think hashtags on Instagram and categories on Wikipedia are different types. Instagram is a place where very subjective content is gathered, and Wikipedia is a platform that must maintain objectivity. Therefore, if people add as many categories as possible like Instagram, content that is not close to the topic will be included, and the quality of the page will eventually deteriorate. I think the purpose of Wikipedia is not to attract a lot of people, but to show more accurate and necessary content.

    ReplyDelete
  2. 박채정 Park ChaeJeongMay 29, 2021 at 2:19 AM

    Hi, Young-sil.
    When I first read about categories, I thought of a hashtag on Instagram like you. But the two have slightly different personalities. Both, of course, are the same as being used to find any information, or as a means necessary to convey information. However, in contrast to Wikipedia's categorization work from a neutral perspective, Instagram has more articles written from a subjective perspective (experience, reviews, etc.). Therefore, the more hashtags on Instagram are, the better, but I think adding more categories on Wikipedia can interfere with the reliability and neutrality.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

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

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