Week2: thoughts on Wikipedia-GUO YING

 1. Summary

After two weeks of coursework and watching the instructional videos, I have gained an understanding of the basic concepts of Wikipedia and practiced basic editing through the training course. Before I officially began editing Wikipedia, I thought of it as an open platform for knowledge sharing, where users could freely edit and contribute content. However, as I gradually engaged in the editing process, I realized that editing Wikipedia typically involves creating an account, selecting an article, making modifications, and submitting them for review, which is closely tied to Wikipedia’s strict guidelines, emphasizing neutrality, verifiability, and reliable sources. Therefore, in order to produce high-quality content and edits, it is essential to have extensive editing experience. This further requires that we are well-versed in Wikipedia’s various editing requirements before modifying articles. Additionally, each article has a “Discussion” page where contributors can discuss edits and explain their reasoning, allowing us to quickly recognize and correct our editing mistakes.

2. Interesting Points

As I continued practicing, I realized the importance of editing experience in improving the quality of content. During my first editing attempts, I often made small mistakes or wasn’t careful enough when selecting reference sources. Through continuous revisions and interactions with other editors, I gradually accumulated more experience and understood how Wikipedia ensures content reliability through its strict editing requirements. At the same time, I discovered something interesting: Wikipedia assigns a mentor to each new editor to help them with the various challenges they may face during the editing process, allowing novice editors to complete their edits more effectively. I believe this feature is very personalized.

3.Discussion
Is there editor bias? While Wikipedia strictly requires neutrality in its content, considering the differences in editors’ backgrounds, could these differences introduce bias in certain topics? If so, how does Wikipedia prevent such bias from affecting the objectivity of its articles?


Comments

  1. CHEN SIYUApril 24, 2025 at 9:22 PM

    1. Community Moderation

    Thousands of editors constantly review, revert, and debate changes. Disagreements happen, and they’re often resolved through talk pages and consensus-building. It’s messy — but it’s transparent.

    2. Citing Reliable Sources

    Personal opinion has no place on Wikipedia. Every fact must be supported by a verifiable, reliable source, which helps anchor articles in shared standards, not just individual viewpoints.

    3. Neutral Point of View Policy

    If bias is spotted — even subtle bias — it can be flagged. Editors are encouraged to:

    Use balanced language
    Represent all significant viewpoints fairly
    Avoid editorializing
    Disputes over neutrality are taken seriously and often involve multiple editors or even arbitration.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Introduction to the blog

This blog is a digital forum where students from Collective Intelligence in Practice: Understanding Wikipedia at the Hanyang University in Korea (2025) will discuss their weekly readings and activities. Each week you are expected to post a blog post on our blog and make a comment on another student's post. You can do so on one of the following three topics: a) You can blog about the readings for the next week. As you are expected to do the assigned readings FOR the lectures they are assigned to, you are expected to post your blog and comments BEFORE that lecture. An ideal commentary should be about half a page in length (~200 words), divided into three clearly labeled sections in which you: 1) summarize in your own words of materials you read; 2) mention any new, interesting, or unusual items learned; 3) identify at least one question, concern, or discussion angle that is either problematic in some respect or could have been elaborated more. This question is likely to be incor...
Read more

Week 1. My Recent Wikipedia Edits - Jeong seolah (정설아)

I made several edits to the Wikipedia page for 'Daegu'.  Daegu, located in the southeastern part of South Korea, is the third-largest urban area in the country, following Seoul and Busan. With a population exceeding 2.3 million, it is the fourth-largest metropolitan city in South Korea and the second-largest in the Yeongnam region after Busan. Often referred to together with the surrounding North Gyeongsang Province as Daegu-Gyeongbuk, this region is home to over 5 million residents. Known for its rich history and vibrant economy, Daegu stands as a key player in South Korea's cultural and industrial landscape. Below is a summary of the changes I contributed. 1) Summarize and link Sights Section:  - Improved clarity by changing “mountains keep many traditional temples” to “the mountains keep many traditional temples.” Mosque Controversy Section:  - Simplified a sentence by removing “and of the authorities.” Festivals Section:  - Made phrasing smoother by changing “tho...
Read more

Week4 - Review about the readings for the next week. - Jo HyeonSeong (조현성)

 1. Summarize in my own words of materials. The book is primarily about the openness of Wikipedia. Openness means that anyone can participate in the creation and editing of articles without any qualifications. Openness can be a double-edged sword. While it means that you can edit without having expert knowledge of a topic, it also means that you can participate even if you have expert knowledge. For experts, articles written by non-experts can come across as inaccurate knowledge, which can anger experts. This anger can also be a catalyst for Wikipedia to continue to improve. However, articles edited only by non-experts can cause misunderstandings and convey incorrect information, so openness can be considered a double-edged sword. In fact, it sometimes causes some conflict, such as Wales' negative stance. Openness also means freedom from copyright, which means anyone can take it and use it anywhere. That is why the knowledge of non-experts can have greater impact. That is why appro...
Read more