W9: Do you think wikipedia is reliable? why or why not?/진신

I think:

Relating to the credibility of Wikipedia, Wikipedia thought of this question when Wikipedia was founded. Wikipedia culture stipulates that entries must be ready for verification and have reference sources.This reference source can be papers, books, periodicals, newspapers, TV news, and even online media, etc. BBS posts, blogs, and Weibo are not reliable sources. Probably because the former is responsible for editors to check, and will not make mistakes easily. Even if they make mistakes, their colleagues will correct them, which greatly reduces errors. 

However, the threshold of Wikipedia content is for verification, not true and correct. In Wikipedia, I often see editors accusing others of “just trying to cover up the truth”. But the accusers may not know that the content added to Wikipedia needs to be published in a reliable source and can be checked by readers, and it cannot be established by us alone to be true. Wikipedia editor PhiLiP once said, "Don't try to change the public through Wikipedia, but change Wikipedia by changing the public."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

W4: What are the pros and cons of using Naver vs Google for research purposes?

W2 : After watching Mitch Resnick’s TED video

W13/After reading “Categorization”/HARI KIM