week15: reflexive report

 

1) What Did I Learn While Editing Wikipedia?

When the professor first told us that we’d be editing Wikipedia as a course assignment, I was honestly a bit confused. I use Wikipedia all the time — to quickly look up something, check a date, or understand a concept — but I never really thought about who actually writes it, or that someone like me could be part of that process. At first, I assumed it would just be another “trendy” classroom activity, but once I got started, I realized this experience was much more meaningful and much more challenging than I had expected.

  - Turns Out Editing Wikipedia Isn’t “Just Writing”

Before I actually started, I thought editing Wikipedia would be pretty simple — just fixing a few lines, adding some sources, maybe copy-pasting a few facts. But as I dug into it, I discovered that Wikipedia follows a very strict set of standards and an established editing culture. Every claim needs to be backed by a reliable source, the tone must be completely neutral, and even the formatting, citations, and templates have to follow specific rules. What surprised me the most was Wikipedia’s neutral point of view (NPOV) policy. I’m used to writing with my own voice or argument, but on Wikipedia, even a single word like “obviously” might be flagged as biased and removed.

I also learned that defining what counts as a “reliable source” is trickier than it sounds. Some sites that “seem fine” to me can’t be used at all, while databases and formal press releases are preferred. This really made me think more deeply about information literacy — it’s not just about trusting a source, but understanding how publicly verifiable and widely accepted that information is.

One of the moments that made me happiest during this Wikipedia editing assignment was when the article I created received positive feedback from a New Page Reviewer, who commented: “Great article!” This wasn’t just a polite compliment — it was the first time I’d been recognized by a stranger, a fellow contributor, on a global and public platform. Before submitting the article, I had carefully checked my sources, formatting, and tone. The process was detailed and at times a bit tedious, but when I saw that short, encouraging note, I truly felt that all the effort had paid off.

What made it even more meaningful was that the feedback wasn’t sent privately — it was publicly recorded in the article’s history. That means this recognition was transparent and documented. Unlike traditional assignments that are only seen by a teacher and end with a grade, this public comment made me feel like I was genuinely part of something bigger, a real contributor to a shared knowledge base.

What’s more, I noticed that my article had been placed into several specific categories, such as “C-Class United States articles” and “WikiProject Taiwan articles.” That’s when I realized my article didn’t just exist in isolation — it had become part of Wikipedia’s larger system, occupying a place in a global web of knowledge. That sense of contribution and belonging is something I’ve never experienced through ordinary schoolwork.

2) How Is This Assignment Different from Traditional Ones?

This assignment was completely different from the usual essays or presentations I’ve done in other classes. First, it’s public-facing — not something that just gets submitted to the professor and forgotten. What I wrote actually got published online, visible to anyone in the world. That realization — that what I write might be read by thousands of people — made me much more careful and thoughtful. In a regular assignment, if you mess up, you just lose points. But on Wikipedia, a mistake could actually mislead someone. That responsibility pushed me to be more precise and more ethical with my research.

Second, this wasn’t about “checking the boxes.” Most school assignments are about completing a task to meet a rubric. But editing Wikipedia felt more like participating in something real. I wasn’t just writing an assignment for a grade — I was contributing to public knowledge, however small. That sense of real-world impact is something I rarely feel in regular coursework.

3) Was It More Fun? Yes, I Think So

Even though this assignment wasn’t exactly easy — especially when it came to finding proper sources or rephrasing things in neutral tone — I honestly found it more fun and meaningful than a typical school assignment. It challenged me to shift my mindset from “writing for a grade” to “writing for a public audience.”

What really surprised me was how rewarding it felt when my edits were kept, improved, or even thanked by other users. That kind of feedback — being acknowledged by a real community — felt more satisfying than getting a number on a rubric. It even got me hooked. After finishing my assigned edits, I found myself browsing Wikipedia to fix more articles just for fun.

4）From “Assignment” to “Contributor”

Through this project, I didn’t just learn how to edit Wikipedia. I learned how to handle information with care, how to write with a public mindset, and how to collaborate in an open, global space. This wasn’t just an academic task — it was an experience of real-world engagement. And I think that’s why it felt so different from traditional assignments: it didn’t treat us as students completing tasks, but as contributors creating knowledge, public writers with a role to play.

So if you asked me, “How was this Wikipedia editing assignment?” I’d say: it was one of the most unique, challenging, and rewarding projects I’ve done in university.