Week6-Edited a Wikipedia Article （WU JIACHEN)


1️⃣ Summary: Editing Felt Like Joining a Quiet Conversation

At first, I assumed editing Wikipedia would feel like writing—but it actually felt more like joining a long, ongoing conversation. Everything I wanted to change or add had to align with existing style guidelines, sourcing policies, and community tone.

It’s not about inserting your voice, but matching the collective voice. And that makes the whole platform feel less like a website and more like a living document, one that’s being constantly groomed by people you’ll probably never meet.

2️⃣ Interesting Bits: The Talk Pages Are Where It All Happens

One of the most surprising discoveries was the “Talk” tab—the behind-the-scenes discussion page attached to every article. That’s where editors debate phrasing, sources, even whether a certain paragraph should exist at all.

Reading through those threads felt a bit like peeking into the editorial room of an open-source encyclopedia. People weren’t just correcting typos—they were negotiating meaning, context, and neutrality. It’s messy, but kind of beautiful.

Also, fun fact: even changing a single word sometimes requires a citation. Wikipedia takes sourcing very seriously.

3️⃣ A Question: Who Gets to Decide What “Neutral” Looks Like?

After making a few small edits, I couldn’t help but wonder:

Who defines neutrality—and is true neutrality even possible when humans are involved?

Comments

  1. ljhwaApril 9, 2025 at 9:49 PM

    On Wikipedia, true neutrality may not be found on the article pages themselves, but rather on the discussion pages. In my view, the way to achieve neutrality is to include all relevant opinions exactly as they are. In other words, it would involve creating a separate section within the article titled “Relevant Opinions.” Perhaps true neutrality could be possible even when humans are involved. However, I believe that such neutrality is not achievable at present, and only someone in the future may be able to adopt a truly neutral stance toward us.

    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

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

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