Blogging through Wikipedia (2025)

Understanding the Relationship Between Everyday Life and Social Structure 1. Summary In this class for the course Understanding Everyday Life and Social Structure , we examined the close relationship between the daily experiences of individuals and the larger social structures that surround them. Social structures refer to the organized patterns of relationships and institutions that shape society, such as families, schools, governments, and workplaces. These structures are not just external frameworks but actively influence how people behave, think, and interact on a daily basis. We discussed how social norms—unwritten rules about how to behave—guide our actions without us often being consciously aware of them. For example, simple acts like queuing in line, greeting someone politely, or respecting personal space are all governed by social norms that vary between cultures but maintain social order. Beyond norms, institutions create formal rules and roles that organize social life. S...

Week 12 Reflection: Collaboration and Co-Creation — Understanding the Evolution of Wikipedia Articles Name：CHENYUNLIN This week, I gained a deeper understanding of how Wikipedia articles gradually develop into high-quality entries. In the past, I often viewed Wikipedia as just a tool for quick reference. But in reality, it's more like an evolving knowledge ecosystem. Wikipedia articles rarely begin as polished or complete. Most start as brief “stub” entries and, over time, are expanded and refined by numerous editors who contribute content, structure, and reliable citations. This growth process demonstrates the decentralized nature of knowledge production: no single editor-in-chief, no closed peer review—just the ongoing collaboration of thousands of volunteers worldwide. What impressed me most was the logic behind Wikipedia's article assessment system. Unlike traditional publishing, where quality is controlled by authors and reviewers, Wikipedia relies on community consensu...

  Week 16 — Deepening My Wikipedia Editing Experience Name：CHENYUNLIN This semester’s work on Wikipedia editing has brought me more accumulation and reflection. Compared to the initial basic corrections, I am now more familiar with editing procedures and community guidelines, and I am more confident in taking on more challenging tasks such as expanding article content, adding diverse references, and participating in discussions on controversial pages. Once, I supplemented a sociology article with additional content, spending a lot of time searching for the latest research and supporting points with reliable academic sources. During this process, I deeply realized that choosing reliable sources is not just about citing them, but is key to ensuring the quality of an article. Feedback from community administrators reminded me to further improve citation formatting and avoid biased language, which made me place more importance on editorial rigor. Additionally, I noticed that Wikiped...

  Week 15 | What I Learned from Editing Wikipedia Name：CHENYUNLIN How I Entered the World of Wikipedia Editing Before starting this project, I had never seriously thought about who writes the knowledge we read. Wikipedia has always been my go-to source for quick facts, but I rarely considered the structure and labor behind it. After participating in the editing process myself, I developed a completely new understanding of how knowledge is created. At first, I simply mimicked the article format. But as I dug deeper, I realized that editing wasn't just about formatting. Wikipedia’s principle of “neutrality” forced me to carefully examine every sentence for bias, emotional language, or unverified claims. I began to pay close attention to the way information was expressed. Sources Aren’t Just Something You Find Randomly Unlike regular school assignments, where copying from a source is often overlooked, this time I had to make sure every piece of information came from a reliable re...

  Week 3 — Knowledge as a Public Good: The Philosophy Behind Wikipedia Name：CHENYUNLIN When we open Wikipedia to search for a term, it's easy to view it simply as a product of technology—millions of pages, countless users, vast servers and algorithmic systems. But in reality, what supports it isn’t just code; it’s a deep and enduring belief about knowledge itself: that knowledge is not a commodity, but a public good. The Ideal of Decentralization: Who Gets to Define “Authority”? Perhaps the most revolutionary aspect of Wikipedia is how it breaks from the traditional idea that knowledge must be controlled by experts. In conventional encyclopedias, only credentialed scholars are qualified to define facts. Wikipedia, however, adopts a decentralized model of collaboration: anyone who follows the rules can contribute. This openness not only lowers the barrier to participation, but also challenges the singular definition of authority. Behind this lies a fundamental rethinking of know...

Week 14 Reflection: Wikipedia Talk Pages – The Overlooked Space of Collaboration Name：CHENYUNLIN Summary Most people using Wikipedia only focus on the main article content, rarely clicking on the “Talk Page.” However, this section is actually one of the most important collaboration mechanisms on Wikipedia. It’s not just a space for editors to express differing opinions—it's the core of Wikipedia’s “consensus culture.” Behind every article are often countless debates over wording, sources, and perspectives. The Talk Page records these arguments and shows how the community negotiates and follows shared policies like neutrality and verifiability. Interesting Insight At first, I thought “neutrality” simply depended on the tone of individual editors. But after reading several Talk Pages, I realized neutrality is something that’s negotiated through discussion. Especially on topics related to politics, history, or identity, contributors from different countries and cultural backgrou...

Week 13 Reflection: What I Learned from a Day Without Modern Technology Name：CHENYUNLIN This week, I challenged myself to spend a whole day without using any modern technology. That means no smartphone, no computer, no internet, no electricity, no public transportation. It was an attempt to step back into a “pre-digital era.” I replaced my phone alarm with an old-fashioned mechanical clock and used pen and paper instead of typing. I walked instead of taking a taxi or subway, and used a paper map to find my way. Most of my day was spent reading, walking, and reflecting. Eating was the most challenging part — without a microwave or takeout, I had to cook simple meals by myself. The most profound experience was the feeling of slowing down. Usually, I feel busy, but much of that busyness comes from constant interruptions by phone notifications: replying to messages, scrolling through short videos, mindlessly checking social media. That day, life became slower, even a bit empty. But it ...

Week 12 Reflection: Collaboration and Co-Creation — Understanding the Evolution of Wikipedia Articles Name：CHENYHUNLIN This week, I gained a deeper understanding of how Wikipedia articles gradually develop into high-quality entries. In the past, I often viewed Wikipedia as just a tool for quick reference. But in reality, it's more like an evolving knowledge ecosystem. Wikipedia articles rarely begin as polished or complete. Most start as brief “stub” entries and, over time, are expanded and refined by numerous editors who contribute content, structure, and reliable citations. This growth process demonstrates the decentralized nature of knowledge production: no single editor-in-chief, no closed peer review—just the ongoing collaboration of thousands of volunteers worldwide. What impressed me most was the logic behind Wikipedia's article assessment system. Unlike traditional publishing, where quality is controlled by authors and reviewers, Wikipedia relies on community consens...

Week11  Extra Blog for Project 4: Advertising and the Construction of the Family Ideal Name：CHENYUNLIN Case Selection: To explore how advertisements construct the image of the "ideal family," I searched through major video platforms and advertising archives. I ultimately selected a 2021 television commercial by a major home appliance brand as my case study. This ad sparked public discussion after its release, especially around issues such as “maternal anxiety,” “division of household labor,” and “representation of female roles.” Content Analysis: In analyzing the ad, I focused on visual framing, character roles, dialogue, and background music. I paid particular attention to how the roles of “mother” and “father” were portrayed, and how the children interacted with the family environment. I also applied theories we learned in class, such as gender role studies, the “myth of the family,” and semiotic analysis. Advertisement Analysis: The ad features a family of four: a mo...

  week3 week4 week5 week6 week7 week8 week9 week10 week11 week12 week14 week15

  第十周反思：我们都是数字时代的“拼贴工作者” Name: CHENYUNLIN 在当今这个信息泛滥的世界，我意识到我们每个人都变成了一种“拼贴工作者”——不是用剪刀和胶水，而是通过复制、粘贴、改写和转发，从互联网上拼凑出我们自己版本的现实。 我们过去以为获取知识就是“找到答案”。但现在，真正的挑战恰恰相反——不是信息匮乏，而是 信息量过大 。搜索结果层出不穷，文章重复，真相往往难以辨别。我们的角色不再仅仅是“记忆”，而是 过滤 和 评估 。 这也改变了我对写作的看法。过去，写作意味着表达原创思想。现在，它往往意味着 汲取 他人的思想，并加入一丝自己的声音。广泛阅读并不意味着写得好，巧妙地整合资源并不意味着真正理解。挑战在于如何在纷繁复杂的信息中保持自己的观点。 本周，编辑一篇维基百科文章时，我印象深刻。我想添加一个简单的事实，但花了很长时间才找到一个符合标准的 可靠来源 。这让我意识到，在数字时代， 光有观点是不够的——你需要证据来支持它 。 这周我最大的收获是：面对铺天盖地的信息， 谨慎比速度更重要 。表达是权利，但核实是责任。

 If Wikipedia is an open and collaborative temple of knowledge, then what supports it is not only the code and the server, but also a profound ideological tradition. In Chapter 2, Joseph Reagle takes me back to the ideological roots of Wikipedia, exploring how it integrates free culture, network idealism and collaborative ethics, and finally achieves today's world's largest encyclopedia. Hacker culture and free spirit The spiritual gene of Wikipedia can be traced back to hacker culture and the free software movement. Reagle describes in detail the "hacker ethics" that emerged in MIT, California and other places in the second half of the 20th century: knowledge should be shared, technology should be free, and creation should be open. This spirit not only gave birth to open source projects such as Linux and GNU, but also had a profound impact on Wikipedia. Wikipedia founders Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger were deeply influenced by this culture. They believe that technolog...

  Week 9 Reflection: When Truth Looks Real — Learning from Wikipedia Hoaxes Name: CHENYUNLIN When Truth Looks Real: Learning from Wikipedia Hoaxes In an age of overwhelming information, many people rely on Wikipedia as their go-to source for quick facts. But behind its open-editing model lies a surprising truth: some well-crafted hoaxes have managed to fool readers—and even the media—for years. Wikipedia’s list of hoaxes reveals just how convincing false information can be when it is written in an academic tone and supported by fake citations. Some entries, like Jar’Edo Wens , stayed online for nearly a decade without challenge. Others were translated into different languages, cited by books and articles, or even taught in classrooms. These hoaxes came from a variety of motives: amusement, social experiments, satire, or simply to test the limits of Wikipedia’s open system. Regardless of intent, the result was the same—misinformation that spread far and wide. Reading this list...

Week 8 Reflection: Reliable Sources  Name：CHENYUNLIN Summary: In Wikipedia’s editing system, “verifiability” is more important than “truth.” This means whatever you add must be supported by a reliable, third-party published source. Wikipedia’s standards for reliable sources include: Has the source been published? Is it a formal publication like a book, journal, or news media? Is there editorial oversight? Has the source undergone editorial review and fact-checking? Is it authoritative? Is the author an expert in the field and affiliated appropriately? Is the content original research or firsthand investigation? Original research is not suitable for Wikipedia. Is it a secondary source? Even when citing research, third-party independent analysis or commentary should be prioritized. Reflection: In the internet age, almost everyone has a platform to express opinions. However, Wikipedia’s standards do not deny the value of personal voices but emphasize that knowledge must be veri...

Week 7 Reflection: Wikipedia in the Age of Misinformation — Protecting Facts Amid the Information Flood Name: CHENYUNLIN Summary In an era where misinformation spreads rapidly through social media and algorithm-driven platforms, Wikipedia stands out as an open collaborative space for verifying information. However, it is also vulnerable to digital manipulation and sabotage. Editors must constantly confront coordinated misinformation campaigns and malicious actions to maintain accuracy. In early 2023, a viral conspiracy theory about a public health issue led to numerous false edits across multiple language versions of Wikipedia. The community responded quickly, but this incident exposed Wikipedia’s fragility in a highly polarized environment. To safeguard content quality, Wikipedia has strengthened editing filters and automated review bots, raised citation standards, and the Wikimedia Foundation is developing tools to detect patterns of misinformation across pages. Looking ahead, W...

Week 6 Reflection: Wikipedia and Digital Literacy — Making Everyone a Gatekeeper of Information Name: CHENYUNLIN Summary In today’s world of information overload, Wikipedia is more than just an online encyclopedia; it is an important platform for digital literacy education. Its open editing system ensures that knowledge is no longer controlled by a few, but that every user can potentially become an “editor.” By using and editing Wikipedia, users not only gain free access to knowledge but also learn how to evaluate information sources, verify facts, and collaborate with others to build knowledge. Wikipedia is not perfect, but precisely because it is open, transparent, and open to discussion, it offers a unique digital learning experience in the information age. Interesting Points Learning Through Editing Unlike traditional classroom learning, editing Wikipedia requires users to search for information, verify sources, and summarize content. This process develops our research skil...

 On the Internet, especially in highly anonymous public discussion spaces, quarrels, attacks, sarcasm and personal attacks have long become the norm. However, Wikipedia is an exception. In this collaborative community that is almost entirely organized by volunteers, politeness and goodwill are the foundation. Joseph Reagle deeply analyzed how this unique "civilized collaboration" culture has become one of the core systems of Wikipedia in Chapter 4 "Courtesy" of "Good Faith Collaboration". "Please be polite": the first rule of Wikipedia The policy page of Wikipedia says: Always be polite and respectful when dealing with others. This is the cornerstone of the operation of the entire community culture. Reagle pointed out that this wiki politeness is not only a moral appeal, but also a practical strategy: without polite communication, collaboration will be difficult to sustain; if it is full of hostility and quarrels, Wikipedia will not be able to co...

  Week 5 Reflection: Casablanca as a Stage for Social Performance — Unmasking the Self Name:CHENYUNLIN  From Romance to Performance — A New Perspective on Casablanca This week, we revisited the classic film Casablanca (1942) through the lens of sociologist Erving Goffman’s dramaturgical theory . Previously, I saw it as a wartime love story — a timeless classic full of romance, patriotism, and sacrifice. But with Goffman’s insights, I now see it as a story about performance, identity, and the ways we present different versions of ourselves to different audiences .  Life as Theater — Every Character Is Both Actor and Audience Goffman compares everyday life to a theatrical performance: we act out roles on the “front stage” for others, while our more honest or unfiltered selves emerge backstage. His core idea is that the “self” is not fixed, but something we actively construct depending on the social context . This concept is vividly portrayed in Casablanca , where c...

  Week 4 Reflection: How Can We Evaluate the Reliability of Information? Date: March 21.2025 Name: Chen Yunlin (陈韵琳) Summary In today’s era of information overload, learning to assess the reliability of a source is more important than ever. Reliability is not just about whether the information looks professional — it also involves evaluating the type of content, the author’s credibility, the publisher, and the publication date . For example, academic papers are generally more trustworthy than personal blogs or social media posts, because they are peer-reviewed. Similarly, content written by well-known scholars or authoritative institutions is often more reliable than anonymous or self-published materials. The publication date also matters — older sources may be outdated or reflect historical biases. Interesting Insight What struck me the most this week was the common misconception that “published books must be reliable.” In reality, many bestselling books have not gone t...

 As an open collaborative platform where "everyone can edit", Wikipedia often gives people an impression of freedom, openness, and even some anarchism. However, Reagle tells us in Chapter 6 of "Good Faith Collaboration" that Wikipedia is actually a place that attaches great importance to norms, procedures, and community agreements. Here, "freedom" and "order" are not opposed to each other, but closely intertwined. In this chapter, Reagle deeply explores Wikipedia's talk page and Arbitration Committee, and other mechanisms, revealing how these seemingly trivial pages and procedures have built a stable, credible, and sustainable collaborative environment for Wikipedia. The talk page is not only a place for disputes or debates, but also an important platform for community members to negotiate, clarify their positions, and find consensus. In these places, participants strive to understand each other's intentions with good faith. Behind this c...

 Wikipedia emphasizes "openness" - anyone can edit, modify or even create entries. This sounds like a utopian ideal society, but Reagle pointed out sharply that this openness does not mean complete laissez-faire. While being open, Wikipedia must set rules, processes and identity systems to manage behavior and maintain quality. This constitutes the so-called "paradox of openness": to achieve true openness, some form of structure and constraints are required. What attracted my attention most in the article was Reagle's discussion of "autobiographical entries" and "standards of fame". He described that many editors would write entries for themselves or their loved ones out of good intentions, but this often caused controversy - for example, the content was too subjective, did not meet the principle of neutrality, and even violated Wikipedia's "conflict of interest" policy. At the same time, the discussion about "who deserves a...

                                              Good Faith Collaboration Today, as the Internet shapes the way we communicate, Wikipedia's success as a collaborative writing platform is amazing. Joseph Reagle's book Good Faith Collaboration: The Culture of Wikipedia provides a deep and detailed socio-cultural perspective that allows us to understand Wikipedia not only as an encyclopedia project, but also as a new type of network cultural practice. After reading two academic reviews of this book, I have a clearer understanding of the theoretical value and practical significance of this book. What interests me most is how Reagle regards "goodwill" as the core of Wikipedia's culture. This is not only a moral requirement, but also an institutional prerequisite for the operation of the community. As Christian Pentzold pointed out in his review in "New Media & Society", Reagle...

                                                            Reliable Sources Summary:  In Wikipedia's editing system, "verifiability" is more important than "truth". This means that no matter what you add, it needs to be supported by a reliable third-party published source. Wikipedia's criteria for "reliable sources" include: Has the source been published? Is it a formal publication (such as a book, journal, news media). Is there editorial supervision? Has the source been reviewed by the editor and has a fact-checking process. Is the author authoritative? Is the author an expert in the relevant field and is he signed? Is the content first-hand investigation or original research? Original content does not apply to Wikipedia. Is it a secondary source? Even if research is cited, third-party, independent analysis or comments should be use...

                                       List of Hoaxes on Wikipedia In today's information explosion, we are always accustomed to using Wikipedia as the first stop for "facts". However, in this "online encyclopedia" edited by volunteers from all over the world, there have been many carefully forged fraudulent articles. Some of them have been mistaken for the real thing for years, and some have even been cited in papers and news reports. A collection of Wikipedia hoaxes that have been discovered in history. They usually have the following characteristics: Although they are fake, many entries adopt a formal academic writing style and cite fictitious sources, making it difficult to detect at a glance. Some articles, such as "Jar'Edo Wens", have existed for nearly a decade, and no one has questioned their authenticity during this period, and they have even been cited by other media. Some autho...

                                                       Remix Culture  Remix Culture is a cultural phenomenon that encourages people to re-edit, reorganize, and re-create existing content. Its core is to create new content based on existing materials, rather than starting from scratch.It is widely present in music, video, literature, games, art and other fields.The development of digital tools and the Internet has lowered the threshold for creation, making remix a part of popular culture.Remix Culture is different from the traditional "reading and writing culture" (which can only be passively received). It advocates reading/writing culture and encourages users to become participants.It also brings challenges to the copyright system, especially how to protect the freedom of expression of re-creators while respecting the original author.Scholars s...

 Summary: Wikimedia Commons is a platform maintained by volunteers that specializes in storing freely licensed and public domain multimedia files. Similar to Wikipedia, Commons is also a project supported by the Wikimedia Foundation. Anyone can upload, use and edit resources as long as they abide by the relevant copyright rules. During the reading process, the point that touched me the most was that freedom does not mean no rules. The "free license" emphasized by Wikimedia Commons is actually based on a clear legal basis. Detailed sources and usage instructions are required behind every picture and every audio file. This made me think that copyright awareness has become particularly important in the digital age. The platform hopes to encourage people to share, but it must also strictly protect the rights of the original creators and avoid infringing on the rights of others. This tension between freedom and norms is the root of Commons' long-term operation. What I find int...

LIU ZIYE 유자엽  This semester’s experience editing Wikipedia has given me more experience and proficiency compared to my junior-year courses. I have gained a deeper understanding of Wikipedia’s rules and learned more advanced editing templates. Initially, I only made simple corrections to spelling or formatting errors, but gradually I began translating and expanding entire article sections. I became increasingly familiar with Wikipedia’s editing guidelines and adapted to the collaborative environment maintained by users worldwide. While translating the article “China’s peaceful rise,” I received a reminder from an administrator. He informed me that when translating content from other language versions, I must add interlanguage links in the edit summary and note the source on the article’s talk page. He also recommended using the {{translated}} template. This reminder made me realize that even translated content must comply with Wikipedia’s attribution rules and the Creative Commons ...

 During the entire semester of learning Wikipedia, I gradually mastered how to conduct standardized content editing and citation addition on this open and collaborative platform. Starting from the initial practice of writing entries and using citation templates in the sandbox, I learned how to add inline references that meet the format requirements for sentences or paragraphs, clarified the metadata elements that a qualified citation should include, such as the author, title, publisher, release date and citation content, and understood the importance of adding translated titles and citations. Especially when using foreign language sources. As I became familiar with the editing tools and norms, I began to try editing in formal entries and ensure the reliability of the citation sources, not using unrecognized platforms such as Baidu, blogs or social media. During this process, I also learned through the mutual review session how to put forward specific and reasonable revision suggest...

  Summary In an era where misinformation spreads rapidly through social media and algorithm-driven platforms, Wikipedia stands out as a rare space for collaboratively verified information. However, it’s not immune to the consequences of digital manipulation. From coordinated disinformation campaigns to subtle vandalism, Wikipedia editors now face new challenges in preserving accuracy. One example occurred in early 2023, when a viral conspiracy theory about a public health issue led to repeated false edits across multiple language editions. The community responded quickly, but the event exposed how vulnerable open-source knowledge can be in highly polarized online environments. To maintain trust, Wikipedia has increased reliance on edit filters, real-time moderation bots, and stricter source requirements. Meanwhile, the Wikimedia Foundation is investing in tools that help detect disinformation patterns across pages. Looking forward, Wikipedia may need to enhance collaborations with ...

  1）Summary As the internet becomes increasingly crowded with information—some of it false or misleading—Wikipedia plays a growing role in digital literacy. Its open-editing structure not only provides free access to knowledge but also teaches users how to think critically, evaluate sources, and participate in collaborative knowledge building. 2）Interesting Points Learning by Editing Contributing to Wikipedia helps users develop research and fact-checking skills, reinforcing media literacy in the process. Source Awareness The strict citation requirements push contributors to reflect on what makes a source trustworthy—a skill essential in the misinformation age. Transparency as a Teaching Tool Wikipedia’s open edit history and talk pages show how knowledge is constructed, debated, and improved, making the editorial process visible. Reader → Contributor Wikipedia empowers users to move from passive consumption to active contribution, encouraging civic engagement and digital responsib...

  Summary This week, I focused more on improving the quality of citations in Wikipedia articles. I practiced using citation templates and learned how to find more reliable academic sources. Compared to earlier weeks, I now feel more confident navigating article history, avoiding edit conflicts, and making more meaningful contributions. Interesting Points One thing that stood out to me was how much Wikipedia values verifiability. Even if the content seems “obviously true,” it still needs a proper source. I also learned that different language versions of Wikipedia sometimes contain very different information on the same topic. This made me realize how important cross-language editing and translation are for global knowledge sharing. Discussion Wikipedia encourages neutrality and fact-based writing, yet each language version still reflects cultural and regional perspectives. Can a “neutral point of view” truly exist when information is filtered through different languages and culture...

 Today I want to share something different—not just about reading Wikipedia, but about  editing  it. Yes, you heard right. I actually became one of those people who write and update Wikipedia articles. And honestly? It changed the way I see the world. At first, I thought editing Wikipedia sounded super serious, like something only experts or computer geniuses could do. But it turns out, if you care about facts and are willing to double-check your sources, you’re welcome to join in. Wikipedia is like a big group project that never ends—only this one is actually interesting! One of the coolest things I discovered is how much we  don’t  know until we try to explain something clearly. When I wrote about topics like social movements, historical events, or cultural customs, I realized how important it is to  verify information and explain it in simple terms. I wasn’t just learning facts—I was learning how to communicate better. I also noticed how many stories wer...

 Wikipedia and the Politics of Visibility 1) Summary In  Wikipedia and the Politics of Visibility , the author (hypothetical or adaptable to real readings) examines how power dynamics and cultural assumptions influence what gets included—or excluded—on Wikipedia. While Wikipedia promotes itself as neutral and democratic, the book argues that its structure privileges certain topics, voices, and regions over others. Visibility, it suggests, is not just a matter of notability, but of access, language, and editorial bias. 2) Interesting Points Systemic Bias by Omission  – Wikipedia’s coverage is skewed toward English-speaking, Western-centric topics. Many communities in the Global South remain underrepresented due to fewer editors and less access to reliable sources. The Notability Problem  – Wikipedia’s notability guidelines tend to favor subjects already visible in mainstream media or academia, reinforcing existing hierarchies. Language Inequality  – English Wikip...

 Wikipedia often promotes itself as “the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.” And while that openness is its strength, it’s also where bias quietly creeps in. I didn’t fully understand this until I began editing entries related to African colonial history. The English pages were somewhat detailed, but the Chinese ones were almost empty—or worse, framed with vague, sanitized language. Key events like forced labor, resource extraction, or colonial taxation were either missing or softened. That’s when I realized: bias on Wikipedia isn’t always about what’s said. It’s about what’s  left out . Many articles rely heavily on sources written in Western academic circles. Non-English sources or perspectives from the Global South are often underused. Even well-intentioned editors might unconsciously reproduce dominant narratives, especially when trying to sound “neutral.” Bias also shows up in which topics are prioritized. There are pages with thousands of words on fictional TV shows...

 When people think of Wikipedia, they often imagine an endless stream of hyperlinks, anonymous edits, and fact-checked trivia. But what many don’t realize—at least not until they try editing—is how profoundly human the experience can be. I began editing Wikipedia not out of some lofty ideal, but out of a simple sense of absence. I was reading about the history of the Belgian Congo and realized that the Chinese-language articles barely scratched the surface. Key details—forced labor systems, copper mining during WWI, the role of European companies—were missing or underdeveloped. So I started small. I translated a few paragraphs, added citations, and cleaned up some links. What followed was something much more immersive. Editing as Research To write even a few lines responsibly, I had to dive deep. Not just into Wikipedia’s policies, but into academic texts, historical data, and primary sources. I found myself reading economic histories, colonial records, even propaganda leaflets fro...

 Over the past few days, I’ve dedicated part of my time to editing Wikipedia entries, focusing on one of the most complex and painful chapters in African colonial history: the economic development of the Belgian Congo and the institutionalization of forced labor. This historical case not only reflects the entanglement of colonialism and capitalism but also reveals the long-term consequences suffered by Congolese people. I chose to work on this topic because many relevant Chinese-language entries on Wikipedia remain incomplete, underdeveloped, or biased. My goal is to contribute toward a more comprehensive and critical representation of this history. Why the Belgian Congo? The Belgian Congo represents one of the most brutal extremes of European colonialism. From the atrocities committed during King Leopold II’s personal rule to the later "modernized" systems of forced cultivation and labor migration, the colony offers a condensed view of how imperial economies outsourced the c...