Blogging through Wikipedia (2021)

1. What did I learn while editing Wikipedia?   It was a detailed editing method that I expected to learn for a semester in a collective intelligence class. But knowing specific ways, I didn't learn from that much. There are many delicate and trivial rules. They are important, of course, but nothing is more important than participating in Wikipedia editing. Once you start editing, you're bound to continue even if you don't do it very often. Don't bite Newbie. That means that even if I make a few mistakes, others will definitely help me. In such a culture, mistakes are innocent. Blaming mistakes for mistakes makes people worry about making mistakes and increases anxiety and reduces participation. It is more fatal than a mistake as a whole. Participating in good faith involves believing in good faith.   In fact, even after learning many things, writing articles at no cost is a pain in the neck. The joy of sharing knowledge, how I wish I could live purely on that! A lot ...

  1. The DYK section of the main page shows new or expanded articles selected through the informal review process. What is the purpose of DYK? DYK provides new and improved content to Wikipedia users, provides insight into a variety of materials, and allows users to view various articles exposed to the main page. Four basic criteria are used to determine whether a nomination is eligible for DYK, together with a review requirement. New – A nominated article must be new (when nominated). Long enough – The article must be of sufficient length. Cited hook – The fact(s) mentioned in the hook must be cited in the article. Cited hook – The fact(s) mentioned in the hook must be cited in the article. Within policy – Articles for DYK must conform to the core policies of Verifiability , Living Person Biographies , and Copyright . 2.   It was the first time I knew that the DYK section had clear criteria, not random ones. Of course - there won't be a really bad article on the ...

  1. This article is a guide to the proper use of Wikipedia's classification features. When naming a category, one should be particularly careful and choose its name accurately. Note that in many instances a topic category and a set category have similar names, the topic category being singular and the set category plural. General rules were largely intuitively easy to understand. This is a really subtle classification criterion. In cases where, for technical reasons, administration categories appear directly on articles rather than talk pages, they should be made into hidden categories , so that they are not displayed to readers. 2.   I find it quite essential to create the appropriate category when writing a new article. And user pages don't belong to any category. At first, when I made the article, I didn't put the appropriate category so it was framed as a non-category article. I realized that I had to put a category after seeing it. And in another article, someo...

  1. This article explains how articles grow in Wikipedia. Articles begin with a small contribution from the contributor. If you want to write an article with good faith, you must first search for whether the article on the topic already exists. Redirection is appropriate if that article already exists. ‘If you see a red link that strikes your fancy, create an article!’ From the following list of documents, you can explore articles suitable for writing. Wikipedia:Requested articles Wikipedia:Most wanted articles Wikipedia:Articles for creation Template:Opentask Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English Wikipedia:Collaboration If you do not have the time to write a full article, consider writing a "stub( 토막글 )". Stubs are very short articles—generally just a few sentences. You can get a chance to visit a university or public library to find the best source. You don't have to leave the house, you can find a great source in "Google Scholar....

  1. “Wikimedia Commons" is a media repository. It provides a central repository for freely licensed photographs, diagrams, animations, music, spoken text, video clips, and media of all sorts that are useful for any Wikimedia project. This site is run by volunteers. Of course anyone, including you, can upload material. Any freely licensed media file (images, sound, video, etc.) that is useful for any Wikimedia project can be uploaded. But, Anything that you upload must be in the public domain , or under a free license such as GNU Free Documentation License or CC BY/BY-SA. 2. The criteria for files that can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons are quite clearly set. You should not take copyright-protected images from the Internet and upload them recklessly. The best way is to upload a picture taken by yourself. And Files should always be added to descriptive categories, since if they are only added to galleries, they can be easily removed from them and thus "lost". 3....

 1 What happens to Wikipedia's copyright problem? Remix culture is a society that allows new creation by combining or editing existing materials and encourages its publication. However, Wikipedia does so without the copyright holder's permission. In classical media, copyright holders' permission was strictly required when quoting. Remix Culture is what makes Wikipedia easier to write. 2 The way open-source software evolves often makes it unclear who contributes what. How to satisfy the need for recognition may become more important in the future for this structure to be maintained. On Wikipedia, copyright concepts are fairly free-spirited for public good, but you need to ask yourself if it's enough. Indeed, every contributor should think about what value is here beyond copyright. 3 There is a possibility that the quote will change the whole context or even distort the original text. How would you minimize that risk?

  Summary Aside from the question of absolute trustworthiness, Wikipedia is one of the most famous and popular websites in the world. So many people are already using it. And it means that people already believe Wikipedia. -- What is reliable? At this point, I'll tell you why Wikipedia is reliable, because it's already won a lot of people's trust. First of all, I want to emphasize that Wikipedia does not write any article in that anyone can write an article. Wikipedia has basic and essential rules, including the rule that sources must be specified. Therefore, documents that fail to comply with the rules will be deleted. But if you don't follow the rules once or twice, there won't be much disadvantage for you. As you may have noticed here, this site relies heavily on good faith contributions. After all, the question of whether Wikipedia is reliable or not becomes a question of what level of good will humans have. The most direct way to make Wikipedia reliable i...

1 A reliable source is a reliable or authoritative publication related to the subject. The assessment of reliability depends on the credibility of the authors and publications with consideration of its content. The document must rely on published evidence from a third party that is reliable, reputable for fact-checking and accuracy. This article also specifically describes aspects of reliability. -The independent study is not a reliable source. -Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for checking the facts or with no editorial oversight. Such sources include websites and publications expressing views that are widely acknowledged as extremist, that are promotional in nature, or that rely heavily on rumors and personal opinions. -Sponsored content is generally unacceptable as a source, because it is paid for by advertisers and bypasses the publication's editorial process. -Anyone can create a personal web page or publish their own book and claim to be an ex...

  1 The book has been described as a pioneering ethnographic study of the culture of Wikipedia. Reagle's main thesis has been summarized as the argument that "the success of Wikipedia may be less technological than a consequence of the community of Wikipedians and their cultural norms". The book focuses on the production, not consumption of Wikipedia and stressed the historical importance of the wiki technology which was necessary for the development of the Wikipedia project. 2 After watching several reviews, it was interesting that the book focused on the reasons for Wikipedia's success. Jeff Loveland wrote that the book has "one major weakness, namely in historical contextualization", but praised it as a de facto introduction to Wikipedia, exploring the "insightful and worthwhile" topic of ethnography of Wikipedia. What is 'historical contextualization' here? 3. It is true that Wikipedia has been a miracle success so far, but ...

  1. The problem with Wikipedia is that it only works in practice. In theory, it can never work. — Zeroeth Law it is also no more immune to human nature than any other utopian project. Pettiness, idiocy, and vulgarity are regular features of the site. Nothing about high-minded collaboration guarantees accuracy, and open editing invites abuse.” What Wikipedia’s collaborative culture does, what any culture with positive norms like “Don’t Bite the Newcomers” or “Assume Good Faith” can do, is dampen Godwin’s Law and call upon “the better angels of our nature.” Those pursuing the universal encyclopedia believe that while our better nature is not always present, it is at least latent. Wikipedia's technology is, of course, excellent. However, a culture that promotes people to contribute in good faith community plays a more important role in Wikipedia's operation. But, No doubt, the community will change, but change is inevitable. Almost a century ago the seminal sociologist Max W...

  1.Summary Wikipedia is not an anarchy, though it has anarchistic features. Wikipedia is not a democracy, though it has democratic features. Wikipedia is not an aristocracy, though it has aristocratic features. Wikipedia is not a monarchy, though it has monarchical features. Lack of structure is a kind of structure, and if it means concealment of structure, without a leader means confusion, not equality. Wikipedia's good faith culture undeniably has been shaped by Wales's own values and actions; while he did not write many articles, he did help establish many of Wikipedia's essential values and norms. 2. an interesting point It is impressive that it deals with humor as an important value than I thought. Humor seems empty at first glance due to its unique 'no point', but in reality it is very helpful for collaboration. Humor is to brighten things up, and only occasionally to make a point. By the strictest standards of truth, there is nothing in the world that ...

  Summary The central aspiration in pursuing a universal encyclopedia is to increase access to information. It opens up opportunities and abilities for everyone. Wikipedia users share common norms and rules. We also rely on each other and give friendly feedback. However, it can be difficult to balance the associated values of transparency, integrity, and nondiscrimination, as well as other concerns such as free speech and the safety of people and the project itself. Furthermore, boundaries are a fundamental feature of any community, even for those that aspire to openness because it is rarely a simple binary of open or closed. Ultimately, an important explanatory function of the open content community is a number of discussions on how to balance its value. Interesting Problematic users will drive good users away from Wikipedia far more often than good users will drive away problematic ones. — Extreme Unction’s Third Law It reminds me of a pretty sad reality that today has to...

   Summary Prior to Wikipedia, the pursuit of a Universal encyclopedia continued throughout history. It is not a website that suddenly appeared one day. It is the result of continuous technological development and conceptual development. Many people have contributed in good faith to better disseminate knowledge. Also, Wikipedia will not be the final version of Universal Encyclopedia. It is the nature of Wikipedia that it is constantly evolving, not simply printed results. Interesting Show me an admin who has never been called a nazi and I’ll show you an admin who is not doing their job. — J.S.’s Second Law One of the most famous aphorisms from earlier Internet discussion groups is Godwin's Law of Nazi Analogies: “As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.” This kind of ridicule of Wikipedia's debate culture is so famous that I've already seen it on other websites. It may be hard to trust each oth...

1.      Summary The intention and spirit of the discussion in Wikipedia. It is a collaboration with diversity and harmony. Wikipedia to be a compelling site for the study of collaboration and an endearing but unruly character in a longer historical tale. Rather than relying entirely on the individual competencies of a single author, Wikipedia is a document that begins with imperfect people gathering and continues to progress. “Wikipedia is not written by angels;~and the perfect is the enemy of the good.” 2.      Something new or interesting “Every serious soul must try to understand this impossibility.” 3.      In-depth perspective What if you know that historically there is no such thing as a perfect book, a perfect truth, in all time? If you know that continuous discovery of truth is the only form of scientific truth, Wikipedia shouldn't be blamed for it either. Only patient volunteers can decorate this treasure t...

  To be honest, the main reason I take this class is just for graduation. But, Wikipedia is a repository of knowledge that many people rely on. Even if they don't want to admit it. Today, most modern people don't look for things they don't know in libraries or books. Just Google. So, making high-quality articles exposed in Google's search results has now become an important task in spreading knowledge. I'm hoping that good faith participation in Wikipedia will help a lot of people(Especially for juniors majoring in sociology). During my leave of absence, I tried to contribute to various articles on my own, but it was too tiring and hard work to do it myself without receiving any money(I was busy working…). Maybe I'm feeling more tired because I'm not used to wiki editing. Anyway, I'm hoping to get used to and adapt with practice.