Blogging through Wikipedia (2021)

W15: “What did I learn while editing Wikipedia? How is this assignment different from more traditional student assignments? Is it more fun?”   I initially enrolled in this class because I wanted to learn more about sociology through Wikipedia. Also, I wanted to think about how collective intelligence can be used in the field of advertising and public relations, which is my major. In conclusion, there are some differences between my initial determination and what I have now. First of all, if what I initially wanted was a little more academic and closer to value, what I actually got is a little more practical: How to use Wikipedia in practice. That is, things like how to participate in Wikipedia, what articles, and in what way. The series of processes of selecting a Wikipedia article topic, describing it, and publishing it was not really easy, but if it hadn't been for this class, I might not have done it in my life. Also, the 10 edits I did every week helped Wikipedia feel m...

1. Summary I learned how to write Wikipedia articles. This is Wikipedia's own style of writing articles called MoS. The reason for this format is to be a clearer and more sustainable Wikipedia. A Wikipedia article consists of a lead, which is the face of the article, and each section followed by headings. Sentences in the lead should not be taken from the article, but should be written in a way that is clear and arouses interest in the article. In the heading, definite and indefinite articles are omitted, and it is discouraged to use the title of the article as it is. Also, usually only the starting alphabet is written in uppercase. The first heading is the title of the article, encompassing the article itself. In principle, headings in articles are indented according to the hierarchical structure. In addition, photos, various links and citations inserted into articles can be used according to the rules. Naturally, duplicates should be avoided and controversial ones shoul...

  1. What is “Did you know?” Did you know is one of several sections posted on the main page that loads immediately upon access to Wikipedia, presenting new articles to readers. Picking up interesting points in the article, talk to people, “There is such a thing, did you know?” to stimulate interest in the article. This is not permanently posted, it is only exposed on the main page for a certain period of time. New articles are published on Wikipedia every day, and among them, those that meet certain criteria are selected as Did you know articles through a set review process. The designation of this Did you know article results in some pretty tricky discussions. If a Did you know article is nominated, it is prepared in the queue and uploaded to the main page. Articles past the upload period are stored elsewhere after publication.   2. Impressive There are two things that are impressive. One is about Hooks and the other is about how they are nominated as Did you know ...

Wikipedia: redirects The content related to the redirect mentioned in this lecture is interesting. A redirect page by itself does not function as a complete piece of content, but serves as a link for Wikipedia searchers to other articles related to the search keyword. In other words, there is no article on Wikipedia that exactly matches the keyword searched by the user, but it can be said to help users find the information they want by recommending pages related to it. I think redirects like this are an interesting feature. Because it can also help you discover information you never thought possible. For example, when searching for A, this is because it informs about 1,2,3 related to A, because after all, these 1,2,3 are also related to A, so that it fits the user's interest. In addition, I think that it provides an opportunity for users to think more extensively about certain information. In fact, I used to think these redirect pages were unnecessary because they didn't sh...

1. Categorization I learned that naming the articles is a very delicate process. For example, capitalization rules, singular plurals, uniqueness, modifiers, clarity, etc. should be considered. This is to effectively manage the numerous information and articles on Wikipedia. I think that strict categorization is essential in order to treat the same topic which have different names, the same topic which have similar articles, or related articles.   2. Redirection When publishing or editing wiki articles, and when searching for keywords, the phrase “redirection” and pages often appeared. I was curious as to why this was coming out, but it turned out that it was also category related. Also, the user page was impressive. It is interesting that Wikipedia can publish user pages in the form of any article in the encyclopedia. Naturally, user pages do not belong to any content category.   3. Discussion Points While processing our main Wikipedia projects working on these d...

1. Summary Learned how to elaborate and increase the credibility of Wikipedia articles. It can be said that it is time to combine what we have learned through collective intelligence lectures so far. In particular, the way to be recognized as a feature article was impressive. It is said that a quality article that satisfies various factors such as reliability is recognized as a special article by adding review and shining process. The article hits the front of Wikipedia, and acts as a representative article, or face, of the wiki. Through this, the effect of introducing new Wikipedians can be expected.   2. Impressive: stub The content about the stub was impressive. It's a stub that can be a very small article, but it's fun to be able to register even the most trivial topics on the wiki, with the possibility of development open. I don't know in detail, but it is meaningful that if you register it as a stub, it can be developed into a quality and elaborate article thr...

1. Summary: Uploading content to Wikimedia I was able to see the general information about the format and method of the content. In simple terms, Wikipedia Commons is one of several wiki series, and is a site where media contents are stored. Content uploaded here must follow a shareable license, and you cannot use other people's works without permission. This is because the materials uploaded here should be freely available to anyone, but bringing a work published by another person is an act of overtaking. In addition, I learned about details about the resolution of the image I uploaded, but as anyone can think, it is difficult to upload an image that is too large. Of course, the resources here are available on Wikipedia.   2. What helped It was interesting about categorization. The categories are subdivided deeper than I thought, so it's nice to be able to put them in detailed categories when uploading certain media content. As a huge amount of media has been upl...

I think internet addiction is real. In fact, it doesn't make sense to question whether internet addiction really is. Aren't we all addicted to the Internet world! The Internet has become our daily life with the advancement of technology, to be precise, the rapid development of smartphones. It is not an exaggeration to say that they have become Internet addicts by force. It has become a world where we do not live our daily lives without the Internet. We need to use internet-based applications to connect with people, and we also need to use the internet to check the weather before we leave the house. In order to use the Starbucks siren order and to check in the Corona QR, the internet has to be used. In addition, all of the entertainment things that are coming out these days are Internet-based. YouTube, Netflix, and even sports are accessible only through the Internet. Isn't the question “Is Internet addiction real” in such a world contradictory?

1) Wikipedia's unique characteristics, remix Copyright in Wikipedia is clearly different from the previous concept of copyright. Originally, copyright was meant to be used when manipulating or using someone's original creation, after seeking permission from the copyright holder. So, it means it was a bit more strict. However, copyright in Wikipedia is more of a concept of “sharing”. This is because it is allowed to create new creations by newly combining and developing existing materials. Of course, without the permission of the copyright holder! This remix culture is the basis of Wikipedia, and I think that this is what made Wikipedia so much better.   2) Impressive This remix culture is said to have originated from open source software, and it was expected how the shared creations in these various fields would change the paradigm for copyright in the future. The most interesting thing is that the original authors do not insist that their work is "my own....

There are so many things that the Internet has stolen. In fact, there are so many that I don't know where to start talking. The Internet is replacing the existing ones in a wide variety of fields, from goods, industries, jobs, and services. First, I would like to present an example that can be easily encountered close to our daily life. Internet-based orders are being received at various restaurants and restaurants such as KFC and BaskinRobbins. In the past, clerks served each customer to take orders and deliver orders to the kitchen, but nowadays you can see a smart machine standing tall in front of the store instead of them. Also, AI interviews are becoming quite an issue these days. In South Korea, it is no longer uncommon for AI to conduct job interviews for companies. In the past, corporate executives and employees checked for interviews in person, but nowadays the Internet, that is, AI is replacing all of them. There are also popular opinions that AI interviews are rather...

In fact, it is difficult to say with certainty about this question, but I personally think that Wikipedia is reliable. First of all, this is not a point of view of whether the Wikipedia article itself is true or not, but whether the article written is cited from a reliable source or not. It is a point of view of whether or not. In summary, I don't think that the content of a Wikipedia article itself is reliable, but I think it is 'reliable' in that it is possible to ‘check’ whether the content written in the article is reliable. In this regard, it is recommended that citations are added to all sentences described in Wikipedia, and Wikipedia articles with citations added to every sentence seem to be evaluated as "high quality". For example, if a sentence is written and no citations are added, we can judge the sentence as “unreliable” and search through a new reliable source. In another case, if a sentence is written on Wikipedia with a citation from a reliable sour...

1) The importance of citations in Wikipedia Citation is very important for Wikipedia's credibility and verifiability. Citations can be referenced from trusted sites, academic materials, news, and books. It is very important to find these “reliable” references well, as how reliable they are will determine the credibility of articles on the wiki. In fact, it can be said that citations are pretty much everything on Wikipedia. It is recommended that Wikipedia articles be quoted in every sentence. In addition, all these sentences should be described in an encyclopedic speaking manner that describes facts, not any opinions. In this way, it can be said that reliable reference materials are properly cited in every sentence as a high-quality and reliable article.   2) verifiability In this lecture, the explanation of 'verifiability' was impressive. This verifiability is described as being different from 'neutral', or 'unbiased', or 'objective'. So...

1) Various efforts to gather people's knowledge into one place For a very long time, like the Gutenberg Project, an attempt to archive all books, human knowledge, in one place, continued. Even the above project is in progress. It is very valuable to bring together the things that are scattered here and there in print. However, despite these attempts, technical problems and differences in values ​​of each person did not result in a successful completion. However, the launch of Wikipedia was successful because it was accompanied by the advent of the Internet, that is, technology and, according to some, "free time".   2) Why Wikipedia is the most efficient means Wikipedia wasn't the first attempt to unite people's knowledge. There have been so many attempts, but among them, Wikipedia is the most successful in "technology". In the past, there was a lack of technology to actually implement these attempts, and there was a limit to actually creating ideal...

1) summary It contains almost everything about Wikipedia. So, it's an encyclopedia of Wikipedia. The book focuses on the successful aspects of Wikipedia in particular. The author describes the form of an open platform encyclopedia called Wikipedia, which people have craved, and explains why Wikipedia has succeeded as a successful open encyclopedia by linking it to human intrinsic and ethnographic characteristics. It was a new approach for me to recognize Wikipedia as just encyclopedia.   2) What was interesting As mentioned in several reviews, it is impressive that this book focuses a lot on the successful aspects of Wikipedia. There are minor criticisms and concerns about Wikipedia, which seems to be because the author is taking a positive stance on Wikipedia. In particular, since Wikipedia is not financially addressing the insecurity, discussions on this part also seem to be needed. But overall, the author's not-so-difficult tone increased access to the book.   ...

1) Characteristics of Wikipedians This week, I literally got a general picture of the population participating in Wikipedia editing. In fact, Wikipedia is everyone's encyclopedia, so it's no exaggeration to say that participants, called Wikipedians, are all about Wikipedia. I could know about something very important. First of all, very general information. I could know about age, region, gender, etc., And I was not very surprised or that because it was almost in line with what I expected. For instance, I thought the participation rate would be high in the U.S. and Europe, and I thought It would participate a lot at an age familiar with the Internet and had some knowledge about internet, not too young and too old. And, in the case of gender, it was a little impressive because the male participation was overwhelmingly high. I want to know about this reason. It's quite interesting.   2) Topics that extend thanks to a big number of small contributions: the long-tailed ...

1) Leaders in Wikipedia Wikipedia has a “leader”, which means “administrator”, for the maintenance of high quality as an encyclopedia and for a more democratic and open platform. Often thought of as "managers" or "leaders," they are more likely to be thought of as beings of power and authority, but in Wikipedia, they are not those who seek power and power. It exists to protect Wikipedia's essential characteristics by preventing wheel wars, destroying encyclopedias, lying, and advertising. However, in Wikipedia's essential characteristics, there exists a need for everyone to participate in equal positions, which I think is paradoxical. Basically, managers should exist as a role that can respond quickly to disruptive editing. And it should be on par with other Wikipedia in editorial authority. 2) Unending Debate: Freedom and Regulation In fact, the main debate that we have felt so far in collective intelligence lectures is the balance between freedom a...

■ Wikipedia, the open content community ■ Contradiction: Even theoretically perfect openness leads to informal "structure." ■ Wikipedia's Openness vs. Limitations for Maintaining Quality   1) Wikipedia, the open content community I learned about various anguish related to “Openness”, the inevitable attribute of Wikipedia, a representative open content community. Most importantly, in Wikipedia, where openness and freedom must be guaranteed, that is, editing restrictions must be restricted, it relates to cases where the contents of Wikipedia are maliciously attacked. Opinions were made as to whether such restrictions undermined Wikipedia's openness, or whether it was a very small necessity for greater openness. Now, the quality of Wikipedia is maintained by restricting edits to specific pages for a certain period of time to trolls showing malicious edits.   2) Contradiction: Even theoretically perfect openness leads to informal "structure." T...

■ Wikipedia and Internet 2.0 ■ "Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow" ■ Why have people aspired to a knowledge-sharing platform?   1) Wikipedia and Internet 2.0 I could think about Web 2.0 and Wikipedia. I focused on the features of Web 2.0 and the Wikipedia’s features. First, Web 2.0 is a new type of Internet, different from the previous traditional Web 1.0. In the form of Web 1.0, ordinary Internet users could only "consume" content on the Internet as if they were reading books, not developers. However, with the advent of Web 2.0, the role of Internet users in the Internet world has been fully amplified and a new phase has taken place. And Wikipedia, as we've been learning for three weeks, is an open encyclopedia. In other words, it is collective intelligence itself, which anyone can describe, edit, add, and change knowledge on Wikipedia. In addition, Wikipedia takes the form of accumulating data, so we can access the history of how the...

■ 'Wikipedian Protester' ■ Wikipedia : A major influence on culture ■ Wikipedia's influence and protection from abuse   1) Wikipedian Protester This comic is a representation of how Wikipedia users resist within the Internet world, Wikipedia. It contains politicians making political remarks on the podium and people protesting against politicians' remarks with a placard saying "CITATION NEEDED." In addition, the tooltip of this comic mentions the sentence "SEMI-PROTECT THE CONSTRUCTION". This is a representative phrase of Wikipedia's semi-protection policy.   2) Wikipedia : A major influence on culture I think this comic shows the world of Wikipedia in a humorous way, which requires credibility by adding citation to every statement. In other words, If you can't agree with a particular sentence in the Wikipedia article, and it doesn't contain a citation , you will express opposition by tagging it "CITATION NEEDEDED...

● Why Wikipedia? ●  Problems : Wikipedia and alienation   1) Why Wikipedia has become more acceptable Through this week's lecture, I learned why Wikipedia has become acceptable and why I should get used to it. One of  Wikipedia's characteristics is that it does not guarantee any financial benefits. Many people are participating in these tasks simply for fun or just volunteering. Wikipedia suggests a new anthropological perspective in that it is an encyclopedia that participates not for financial gain but for pride. Secondly,  Wikipedia is a platform with excellent participation effectiveness. It is very attractive that participation in the work is immediately seen by many people. Also, it is more tempting that the process is not difficult. Personally, I think this is similar to today's social network, such as Instagram or Facebook. And I think that's one of the reasons why Wikipedia is becoming more popular nowadays. Finally,  Wikipedia is becomin...