Blogging through Wikipedia (2021)

What did I learn while editing Wikipedia? While editing Wikipedia, I thought I wanted the spirit of Wikipedia to spread widely. In my opinion, Wikipedia is a spirit in which people solve problems together, share opinions with each other, contribute, participate, and supplement what they have. It is similar to the definition of collective intelligence. Currently, Korean society is divided and each other is angry and fighting to find their own interests. For himself, he is slandering others and spreading fake news without hesitation. In this modern society, I hope that the spirit of sharing useful information to others or strengthening human relationships will become a social culture beyond the Internet.  Sometimes Koreans use the term "lost humanity" as a meme. I hope Wikipedia will be a warm encyclopedia where you can feel connected to each other without losing humanity. The reason Wikipedia is so precious is that it made others realize the truth of life that "the more y...

Do you Know summary  Dyk is a feature that recommends new content. A set of criteria is applied to article selection, which provides Wikipedia users with insight into new information. Wikipedia can emphasize the diversity of information by sharing information that can be missed if not exposed to the main page. DYK generally shows new and improved content and does not require really good and complete information to be published.  interesting point  I think this function is an opportunity for people to participate in Wikipedia more and more. The fact that people see the article I recommended, get information, and find it interesting increases participation rate. The goal is to encourage users to continue to participate in expanding and improving Wikipedia. Watching the new content, users will realize that Wikipedia has a variety of information. Also, it is an opportunity to gain knowledge that we have forgotten in our daily lives. In fact, people are drawn to controversial ...

After reading "Categorization" summary This is a description of Wikipedia's use of classification features. The category name must be clearly specified to obtain the desired information. Classification features help users quickly find related topics and increase user satisfaction. Categorization is also structured for easy use.  interesting point I think the reason for dividing categories is to manage information efficiently. Categories can be categorized to analyze how many people are interested in the category and what information they want to get. It is convenient to use on the user side, but can distinguish what is important on the provider side. For example, if people are interested in health care laws these days, they can increase users' loyalty by providing additional services to health and information pages. Even now, if you search Wikipedia for information, you can see related pages. It is to keep users who will go out after seeing only one piece of informati...

What is “quality” for our societies? I think our quality of life is food, clothing and shelter. And additionally, aspects of inequality. The quality of our society is determined by the extent to which people live in food, clothing and shelter. It can be said that it is a food, clothing, and shelter, but in detail, there are a wide variety of key indicators, such as living satisfaction, employment rate, suicide rate, and civic participation rate. Once the issue of food, clothing and shelter is resolved, it needs to be moved on to other indicators.   Why inequality is an indicator of quality of life. It is whether there is a social safety net that can lead a life no matter how poor it is. In other words, a society where people can eat three meals a day and sleep at home without being homeless even if they are poor seems to be a society with a certain quality of life guaranteed. To evaluate the quality of life of our society as an extreme example, averaging the total value is the easi...

Is quality subjective or objective? I think quality can be both subjective and objective. It depends on what criteria the quality is assessed. For example, high-quality products designated by the state have clear standards. They are scores that are objectively graded on any measurement element. As we learn in major classes, we use various measures such as the Likert scale to convert subjective evaluations into objective evaluations. In this respect, quality can be called objective.   However, the results differ, for example, depending on whether you get a Likert scale or a subjective answer to how bbq chicken tastes these days. When measured on a Likert scale, we can determine the reliability of the measurement element by obtaining the mean and standard deviation. However, it is hard to say that the answer, which is subjective, was "previously delicious, but not good now," is objective.   Like this, I think that subjective or objective depends on what measurement criteria the...

  The two sides of Internet development. The Internet has changed our lives 180 degrees. Our lives now are made up of the Internet. In the past, I had to read books or open dictionaries if I needed information. But now, if you just turn on the portal window on your phone and search for it, it tells us more deeply than we need. This has led us to the democratization of information. In the past, only vested interests had access to information. Ordinary people like us had no medium for access to quality information. Currently, anyone can access the Internet from anywhere to share opinions and get information with many people. But the overdeveloped Internet is also creating information inequality. Older people or information vulnerable people can't easily access to the Internet. For example, the poorest people who have difficulty accessing the Internet or those who do not know how to use smart devices cannot get information. Internet breeds opportunity for some and inequality for other...

Do you think Wikipedia is reliable?  Wikipedia, which has entrusted netizens with the right to choose, update and edit materials, has been able to collect vast amounts of data in a short period of time, but is suffering from information distortions, an inevitable result. In the past, fake information circulated that Steve Jobs and other world-class celebrities were killed by Wikipedia. Wikipedia is especially politically abused. In Korea, Wikipedia often falsifies information from people with different political tendencies or writes fake information. I think this needs to be improved. According to the news, Wikipedia currently exposes an average of 100,000 error pages per hour. Without censoring fake information, Wikipedia's credibility will be diminished and users will naturally be reduced. Wikipedia is an open, participatory Internet encyclopedia where anyone can edit and write, so there is as much fake information as there is a lot of good information. Users believe that the pro...

What do you find difficult? The difficulty was the concern that arose from what I might have done wrong with my information. Until now, information had always been searched and censored whether it was the right information, but now it has become the opposite. I wondered if my interpretation or edited information was correct.   What do you find enjoyable? What was fun was that there were information like this, and there were information that I didn't know normally, so I had fun searching. For example, there was also speculation that one of the Egyptian princes might be gay, so I felt as if I had seen a secret information.

Good Faith Collaboration This book analyzes the culture of cooperation in good faith on Wikipedia. All participants in Wikipedia are prepared to maintain an open perspective and cooperate. Wikipedia has a lot of quality information because of the good faith in the interaction of these participants.   OPINION  We can make good results by cooperating with each other by supplementing insufficient information and correcting wrong information. It is literally good faith cooperation. What I can do is I can do it and what I lack is a mutual result that others make up for. In fact, it is not until modern times that access to information has improved for anyone. In the past, only those in power could gain access to information. Currently, information can be obtained easily and quickly through Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not only a marketplace for so-called cooperation of ordinary people but also a place where information democratization has been achieved.

  How important are contributions of a single individual in the sea of "collective intelligence"? Individual contributions as a whole would be imperfect. However, individuals and individuals combine to form a group and the information they share is enormous. The impact of one person in the group will not be so great. If one person has enormous influence in the generation of information, can we call it collective intelligence? I think what is important in collective intelligence is mutual cooperative participation and communication created by multiple people rather than one individual. Many people's knowledge is created, accumulated, complemented, and mixed to create synergy to create greater intelligence. However, it is also significant in that it begins with the participation of one by one. If that one does not exist, collective intelligence will not exist. Paradoxically, one by one doesn't have much influence, but the root is that one.

Do you think Wikipedia is right to reject censorship?  No, I think censorship is essential. I think censorship is an inevitable process to provide quality information. If censorship is not done, it will be a world of fake news. There is a high possibility that fake information can be registered with malicious feelings or possibly abused in politics. But honest censorship is important in censorship. Standards of censorship should not benefit anyone. It's censoring whether you really have the information as it is. Especially, Korea's Internet culture has a lot of witch hunts and malicious comments. If censorship is not carried out, there will be many celebrities who commit suicide due to malicious comments. Wikipedia is a space for sharing information, not an open source of information for anyone's feelings and use. I think censorship is essential by strict standards to sustain Wikipedia's pure purpose.

Naver versus Google for research purposes Naver and Google have differences. Naver is a function of the portal, but Google has a strong search engine. Naver's search results are sectioned. Naver search results are close to the concept of a portal that provides various information such as blogs, advertisements, and cafes. Google, on the other hand, offers much more basic search results than Naver. Google has a strong nature of a search platform to deliver useful information. In that regard, people get different information through Google and Naver. I use Naver when I want to get content information in most situations. For example, when you want to see a review of a good restaurant or a substantial review of a product, you can get a variety of information. On the other hand, Google can get a lot of information really quickly through what it calls Googling. From papers to books can be found at once. Google is much more useful when doing assignments. Google and Naver have their own str...

  Q. Why Wikipedia less popular in South Korea than in most other developed countries? Why don't Koreans use Wikipedia?  We can think about our daily lives. What portal site do we use first when we have any questions? It's Naver. As such, Naver is symbolic to Koreans as a portal site. And based on this popularity, Naver provides many configurations and services that people will like. In this regard, Wikipedia's influence over Naver is insignificant. Of course, Wikipedia has more information than Naver, but the application We actually use is the Naver app. Wikipedia's current web/app is a bit of an old look in design. If we improve this, we thought we could attract more users. Also, I think this could be an opportunity for Wikipedia because Google is catching up with Naver fiercely. Wouldn't more people use Google give them access to Wikipedia?

  1. Summarize - Why do you think Wikipedia is becoming more accepted? People are no longer waiting for information. If there is any information you don't know, you can find information anywhere without any space-time It is easy to access information that you don't know and can determine it. Many people seem to use Wikipedia in that it is a huge encyclopedia over the Internet. So, why is Wikipedia becoming more accepted? The great advantage of Wikipedia is "participation". All modern services emphasize customer engagement. Wikipedia is far ahead of other information sites in this regard. For example, if we open a paper dictionary, how boring it is. But it's interesting happen to think that we can see what we've written and edited and that others can get information from what I've written.   2. An interesting point I learned – Example of Wikipedia use It's about increasing Wikipedia reliability. In fact, most Koreans have come through Naver ...

  - Why are you taking this class? Currently, collective intelligence has a tremendous influence in modern society as access to information becomes easier. A prime example is Wikipedia. We can get curious information through Wikipedia, share information I know, and further form a forum for discussion. Studying and participating in Wikipedia, which is democratization of information, has great significance in that it can be edited and written by anyone. Therefore, I would like to study how to share information as an editor of Wikipedia through this class.   - What practical skills do you expect to gain from attending it? Until now, I had only searched and searched for information on Wikipedia, but never participated in editing or wrote it myself. I want to learn how to edit Wikipedia!