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

1)

I don't think there's anything 100% in the world. Wikipedia is also trying to be reliable. By adding citations and everyone has the authority to revise it. Citation can contribute to the reliability of the information. Also, anyone with Wikipedia membership has the right to modify it to increase credibility by allowing for the variability of information. It is reliable because they want to avoid monopoly and make better results through cooperation.


2)

I have experience that my editing was modified by another partner. People who are highly involved in the information or writing are closely watching the editing. On the other hand, there may be articles and information that do not. It can be a reliable Wikipedia when many people cooperate.

3)

Do you have any experience that your editing has been modified by others?

Comments

  1. First of all, I very much agree with your point of view. Of course I also have the experience of edited articles. I created an article entry before, and then others edited it (for example, adding citations, modifying the correct words), and that entry became more perfect. I think that the power of a person is limited, but the power of each person is unlimited. Therefore, the source of Wikipedia that anyone can modify is very reliable.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

W10 : Can we think of some example of how Internet has changed our culture? / 박소민(SOMIN PARK)

W7: Review of Good Faith Collaboration / Suyoung Han

w9: Its often said by teachers that “Wikipedia is a good place to start, but a bad place to finish” why? LiuXinlei