week-WikiEdit  LYU YANGCHENG  여양승2021008895

Summary of this week

This week I continued to edit the entry "Political Cartoons" that I built in the Wikipedia Sandbox. I mainly completed the "Historical Origins" section, focusing on the contributions of 18th-century British cartoonists such as William Hogarth and James Gillray to the rise of political cartoons. I referred to several art history and visual culture materials to sort out the relationship between media evolution from newspaper printing to social criticism. This history not only shows that political cartoons are a medium for dialogue between art and power, but also highlights the role of images in the early public sphere.


2. Interesting Point

I think the most interesting thing is Gillray's cartoon "Napoleon carving up the world", in which he used exaggerated dramatic images to satirize the geopolitical agreements of the time. This shows that in the era when imaging technology was not yet developed, political cartoons were already a tool for information dissemination and mass mobilization, with clear political positions and views. They are not "neutral" works of art, but media that participate in public discussion and ideological construction.


3. Discussion

What I want to explore further is: In today's highly developed social media context, are political cartoons still effective? From Charlie Hebdo to protest images of the Hong Kong demonstrations, to AI-generated memes, can we also regard these contemporary images as a "new type of political cartoon"? In addition, when political cartoons may involve sensitive topics or cross-cultural misunderstandings, how should Wikipedia deal with the neutrality and interpretation of these visual materials? These questions made me rethink the boundaries between images and public knowledge.

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