Week13- Wikipedia Edit-CHEN SIWEN 진사문

Summary

Wikipedia:Categoriation (Wikipedia: Classification) page is Wikipedia's official guidance document on how to classify entries. Classification not only helps readers browse relevant content, but also helps editors find content vacancies and improve the organizational structure of articles. The main purpose of classification is to establish a clear knowledge structure for entries, which is not only convenient for readers to consult, but also for editing and maintenance. Wikipedia's classification is divided into two types: one is content classification, such as "19th Century Philosopher", which is mainly aimed at readers; the other is maintenance classification, such as "articles that need to be cleaned up", which is mainly used for internal sorting. The article should be placed in the most specific and relevant classification, and the classification should be based on the content of the article itself and the support of reliable sources. The classification structure is usually tree-like, and "over-classification" should be avoided, that is, the same item should not be put in a classification and its superior classification at the same time to keep the system concise and clear.

Interesting points

Wikipedia's classification is different from social media tags. It is a hierarchical and standard structure system. Some articles can appear in both sub-categories and parent categories. For example, Japanese female writers are both "Japanese writers" and "female writers". Whether cross-classification (such as "African-American female mathematicians") is necessary is often controversial. In the classification work, robots are responsible for maintaining class classification, while content classification still requires manual judgment, which reflects the balance between algorithm and human collaboration.

Discussion

Although Wikipedia's classification rules seem cumbersome, does it reflect an effort to maintain the clarity and neutrality of the open knowledge architecture behind it?

Comments

  1. Lee JaehyunJune 1, 2025 at 10:24 PM

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Lee JaehyunJune 1, 2025 at 10:24 PM

    This is thinking of myself about your discussion in the end.
    Although Wikipedia’s classification rules may appear complex or even rigid at first glance, I believe they reflect a sincere effort to preserve both clarity and neutrality within its open knowledge architecture. In a collaborative environment where contributors come from diverse backgrounds and perspectives, having a structured classification system helps maintain consistency and prevents bias. The distinction between content and maintenance categories ensures that articles are organized not just for readers’ convenience but also for editorial integrity. While the system isn’t perfect and debates like cross-classification continue, these rules demonstrate Wikipedia’s commitment to transparency and long-term sustainability. In this way, the complexity is a necessary feature of an open platform striving for fairness, accessibility, and reliable knowledge sharing.

    ReplyDelete
  3. YU JIEJune 9, 2025 at 2:07 AM

    Although Wikipedia's classification rules are complex, they are designed to maintain a clear and neutral knowledge system. Strict classification helps readers more easily find information and prevents content confusion and duplication. Moreover, these norms ensure the objectivity of the content, prevent personal biases from affecting information quality, and make Wikipedia a trustworthy open knowledge platform.

    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

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