Week7 - KIM JUHEE (김주희) : Reading

  1. Summary
    This article on Wikipedia talks about the reliability of Wikipedia itself. It informs us that Wikipedia's reliability has been questioned by many people in the past, but it has gradually improved over time. The article explains Wikipedia's editing model, which ensures anonymity, and while this could be a point of concern, it also mentions that Wikipedia's edit history and records make it possible to trust the information. It details the criteria used to evaluate trustworthiness, as well as presenting comparative studies and opinions from experts such as librarians, associations, and journals. There is also a discussion about the reliability of sources, which is similar to what I read in previous blog posts. The article provides examples of several incidents where misinformation was shared, showing the issues that arise when information is not accurate.

  2. Interesting Points
    I think the most concerning aspect of Wikipedia is the issue of misinformation. The fact that anyone can edit Wikipedia is both an advantage and a disadvantage. I was surprised to learn how common misinformation can be, and how serious it can get in some cases. It’s fascinating, but also troubling, to find that some people edit Wikipedia for political or financial reasons. While Wikipedia is supposed to be a place for sharing knowledge with good intentions, the reality is that there are unavoidable negative aspects, which leaves me with a bitter feeling.

  3. Questions and Discussion Points
    How can we maintain the trustworthiness of Wikipedia? Is it possible to punish people who post false information? How can we stop people from hiding behind anonymity to spread false information? Do you think the anonymity on Wikipedia is a benefit or a disadvantage?

Comments

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