Blogging through Wikipedia (2021)

What did I learn while editing Wikipedia? I think students majoring in in information sociology should be close friends with Wikipedia. After working hard on writing and editing articles, I feel proud to have contributed to the world. Then I lose confidence when I get a message that the source is wrong. If I overcome difficulties and correct them properly, I feel more proud. Throughout this class, editing Wikipedia gave me the opportunity to explore a topic widely and deeply. In 2019, I wrote articles such as "Seocho-dong public toilet murder case" and "Hello Jadoo", and this year, I wrote articles such as "Welcome to Video case", "Slime", and "Unnatural". After contributing greatly to a total of five articles, I got to know those five topics better than anyone else. When looking at other articles on Wikipedia for reference to style and writing rules, I could get new information and practice logical writing. Wikipedia editing allows me ...

1. Summary Wikipedia's "Did you know (DYK)" is a section on the main page that introduces less publicized content among newly created documents. It operates to provide users with access to a wide range of topics and facts and the driving force for re-generating other information. Four criteria must be met for the article to be posted on DYK. The article should be new and long enough. A reliable source must be supported. The article should be newly written within seven days. More than 1,500 characters are needed. Finally, it must be written within the Wikipedia policy. 2. Interesting point Looking at the history of DYK, DYK first appeared in 2004 for users' needs. This gives users access to the latest trends and new information. Also, I think the advertising effect will be great because it can be seen on the main page. 3. Discussion Was there any case of abusing DYK? I think it's been used well so far because the selection criteria are tricky. However, on other pla...

  1. Summary  'Categorization' of Wikipedia is a list of topics that allows users to easily find information. All documents must be included in at least one category, and one does not exist simultaneously in the upper and lower categories. In order to maintain a neutral view even when classifying, it is recommended to secure a basis to guarantee that the categorization is correct. It's okay to say that you don't know how to classify because someone else can do the right categorization instead. This is the unrivaled collective intelligence power of Wikipedia. 2. Interesting point It was newly discovered that all documents should be included in at least one categorization. Come to think of it, I've never been in a category while editing Wikipedia. Then, have other users sorted it out correctly instead? I was experiencing collective intelligence without even realizing it! 3. Discussion I wonder how to set the criteria for the appropriate category. What criteria and...

1. Summary Quality is largely subjective and relative. It doesn't always measure by the same standards, it depends on the times and society. In particular, the faster society develops, the faster the standards of quality change. I bought a MacBook Pro in 2019 and it was the best new laptop ever. However, now that the MacBook with the M1 chip has been released, my MacBook has become relatively low quality. 2. Interesting point Recently, there has been a movement in Korea that values "quality of life." People have various hobbies or pursue 'work life balance' to improve their quality of life. I think this phenomenon is also because standards of quality have changed as society has developed. 3. Discussion Most Koreans pursue a 'work life balance', but it is difficult to actually realize it due to overtime work. South Korea has long working hours in the world. Can't our society keep up with the times yet? I wonder if making a lot of money by working hard w...

1. Summary Wikipedia Commons is a repository of multimedia files available within Wikipedia. It offers all kinds of free licensed photos, animations, sounds, music and videos. Any free licensed media file can upload data. Because it is one of the Wikimedia Foundation's projects, it is available on Wikimedia projects such as Wikipedia, Wikibooks, and Wikinews. 2. Interesting point Despite the fact that "Wikimedia Commons" stores a wide variety of media, when I read Wikipedia articles, it usually contained only photos, pictures, and videos. I wonder why other media are not used well.
 3. Discussion Whenever I tried to put images or videos in articles on Wikipedia, the media I wanted was often not in Wikipedia Commons. Do I have to upload my own photos to avoid copyright issues? If so, how is the quality of media uploaded directly managed?

 The Internet has already become a part of our lives and has completely changed our culture. Until 2011, the penetration rate of smartphones was low, so most Koreans accessed the Internet only when they could use computers. However, since 2012, more and more people have smartphones, the Internet has changed the lives and culture of Koreans as many people watch the Internet all day. A few weeks ago, a Korean college student lost his footing under the influence of alcohol in the Han River. However, YouTubers blinded by profits and the father of the deceased framed his friend who was drinking with the deceased as the culprit who killed the deceased. YouTubers incited people with videos that were as provocative as possible to earn a lot of money because they earn money from views and advertisements. In fact, many people were deceived by the YouTuber's incitement and distributed his personal information on the Internet and forced him to turn himself in. Seocho Police Station had to focu...

 I think Wikipedia articles are mostly reliable, if not all. Korea's online wiki "NamuWiki" has as much data as Wikipedia, but I get information from Wikipedia rather than "NamuWiki" when I have questions or do class assignments. "NamuWiki" is entirely biased, sourceless or unclear. Wikipedia, on the other hand, is mostly written in reference to reliable sources and edited together by many users around the world. As a representative example of collective intelligence, many people try to create Wikipedia as accurate, unbiased and reliable as possible by writing articles together.  Nevertheless, Wikipedia is not always accurate and unbiased. Still, the majority of Wikipedia users are white males, and as in real society, the voice of the socially disadvantaged is small. And relatively little subject matter is not actively edited and debated. I think Wikipedia's reliability will be higher if various kinds of people contribute as much as possible to Wik...

1. Summary Wikipedia can be edited by anyone or anonymously. However, this advantage can be a drawback that threatens reliability of Wikipedia. This is because Wikipedia users may not have the expertise or qualifications for the documents they edit. Experts say Wikipedia is reliable compared to non-professionals, but it is not completely reliable because it contains errors. Political or ideologically biased information can also be used. Therefore, Wikipedia users must annotate reliable sources when contributing to editing. References, citations, and sources are the foundation of Wikipedia. Wikipedia solved the problem of reliability by thoroughly writing sources instead of allowing anonymous editing. 2. Interesting point I felt proud to have my editorial record in history after editing Wikipedia. I didn't know there were people who wanted to contribute anonymously. Discussions among users increase the quality of Wikipedia, which cannot be discussed with anonymous editors. How much ...

1. Summary The book covers Wikipedia and the Wikipedia community, and also describes the history and characteristics of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is a success story of an open community governed by good faith norms. Wikipedia has applied a collaborative culture to practice, and Wikipedia's system is becoming increasingly powerful. However, there are also criticisms raised on Wikipedia. Issues such as bureaucracy concerns and gender bias issues must be continuously debated in the face of it. 2. Interesting point The author assumes that ultimately Wikipedia is not a perfectly open community, so that individual users can discuss how to balance community values. It is interesting that this discussion has made Wikipedia a successful open community. Is Wikipedia at the heart of the discussion in the document editing process? 3. Discussion Wikipedia's most powerful function that Wikipedia readers feel is information provision. However, Wikipedia's most powerful function that Wikipedia ...

Wikipedia is free for anyone to read, anyone to write, and does not pay for contributions. In other words, even if you work hard on Wikipedia, you won't be rewarded. Nevertheless, the reason why people contribute to Wikipedia is that many people get various information from Wikipedia. And in the process of discussing and documenting with others, we can feel a greater sense of accomplishment than we expect. I think the difference between Wikipedia and other information media is the structure of information. Media such as blogs and 'knowledge-in' are not hierarchically clustered in one place, but scattered chronologically. Wikipedia's documents are structured, making them harder to write than other media, but they are highly utilized. Wikipedia has a history of all records, making it easy to see what has been added or changed at any point in time. If someone makes a mistake, it can be restored through previous records. Therefore, it relieves the burden of mistakes and act...

 I don't think Wikipedia is right to refuse censorship. Due to Wikipedia's characteristic that anyone can participate freely, an appropriate level of censorship is needed. Wikipedia is the most accessible and open online encyclopedia in the world. As such, various people are gathering to read and edit documents, and if there are no sanctions, discrimination or prejudice can be involved. In other words, objective information cannot be provided because it is not censored. Some censorship is needed as a community that provides information to people. I think Wikipedia is already self-purifying through user-to-user discussions. Minimum censorship to prevent Wikipedia bias will have a positive impact. Therefore, I think Wikipedia should not unconditionally reject censorship.

 Usually, I use Naver to collect information needed for life and Google to collect information needed for academic research. From the main page, the characteristics of each portal site are revealed, and Naver mainly provides information about lifestyle with advertisements, while Google is focused only on search. One of Naver's most useful search functions is a language dictionary. Chinese characters are still frequently used in Korea, and if you draw Chinese characters directly on the screen in Naver's language dictionary, you can search for Chinese characters that do not know the meaning.However, they provide information within Naver before other sites, so there is less information, and there are too many advertisements on every page. And Google's search function using various codes is very powerful. It is no exaggeration to say that you can see all the information in the world, and Google can search a huge amount of information. The downside is that Naver, Korea's lar...

1. Summary Wikipedia's motto, "Free encyclopedia for anyone to edit," shows that Wikipedia seeks openness. Openness and anonymous editing are important identities for Wikipedia. Wikipedia is one of the open content communities where anyone can access and edit and share the results of collaboration with everyone. This has the following characteristics: open content, transparency, integrity, non-discrimination, non-interference. 2. Interesting point Open-source software can be judged by objective criteria such as speed or efficiency, leading to practical mass collaboration. On the other hand, knowledge has no objective criteria for judgment, so misinformation can remain unchanged on Wikipedia, where non-experts participate in editing. The comparison between the two was interesting because open source software and Wikipedia were similar and different. In fact, wrong information is often known because open content communities such as Wikipedia can participate by anyone. Fortu...

  Why is Wikipedia less popular in South Korea? Korean Wikipedia lacks Korean speakers. Also, the number of Korean documents is small and the contents are poor. I think the cause of this is Koreans' preference for snack knowledge. Most Koreans are passive in expressing because Korea mainly conducts cramming education. Therefore, Koreans are used to using information made by others, but they are reluctant to be the main agents of producing professional information. Also, like the phrase "Please summarize more than three lines of writing," which is frequently used by Korean netizens, people tend to enjoy short and light snack knowledge rather than expertise. Due to these characteristics, Naver's 'knowledge-iN' services and 'Namuwiki' are the most active in Korea than Wikipedia. Naver's 'knowledge-iN' is a service that solves small questions in everyday life rather than logically sharing one's expertise. It is easily used by all generation...

After watching Mitch Resnick's TED Talk Mitch Resnick thought that coding education was needed for children, so he created 'Scratch.' Scratch is a computer programming tool that allows children to easily create fairy tales, games, and animations. Projects created by Scratch can be shared over the Web. While we are used to using new technologies, we are not good at creating new technologies or expressing ourselves with them. Resnick said we should be able to create new technologies, not just "read them." In fact, children have become proficient in new ways of expression by creating their own programs. Children learned new skills by expressing their thoughts directly in code. Resnick says coding is essential for everyone because it is like writing. I agree with him a lot because I want to work as a web publisher in the IT industry. When working in the field, planners and designers should know how to code to work with developers, even if coding and their work are not...

Why are you taking this class? I often took Professor Piotr's class, so I know how the class goes. In 2019, when I took Globalization classes, I created and edited 'Hello Jadoo' documents on Wikipedia. I received feedback from the professor and revised the document and shared my thoughts with other Wikipedia users. In this process, I learned the high efficiency of collective intelligence. I want to feel the power of collective intelligence like last time by creating documents related to Korean culture on Wikipedia. What practical skills do you expect to gain from attending it? Professor Piotr's class always makes me think a lot. I think in a broader field and organize my opinions through questions during class. I expect to develop communication skills by writing it on the Blogger and discussing it with other students. I also think I will have a deep understanding of the collective intelligence that is drawing attention in the era of the Fourth Industrial Revolution.