Week15 -- the edits I have made -- CUI ZAN

LINK

 1) Summary

This week I worked on the Wikipedia page for Pingdu City. I focused on the history, economy, and cultural tourism sections. The original version was okay but kind of bare—missing some details and, more importantly, missing citations. I added some references (mostly from official sources and local records) and expanded the text a bit to make things more complete.

2) Editing Thoughts 

At first, I only meant to add a few references—but once I started reading, I realized some of the content felt way too vague. Stuff like “rich in tourism resources” sounds nice, but without examples or details, it’s just a filler line. So I ended up rewriting some of the descriptions while I was at it. I used the visual editor, which lagged a little but worked fine overall. Weirdly enough, when I finished, I felt like I had helped explain the city a bit better.

3) A Quick Thought

Pages like Pingdu aren’t exactly famous, so they tend to sit on Wikipedia kind of half-finished. But that doesn’t mean they don’t deserve decent information. There are a lot of “just enough” articles out there—and if no one steps in, they just stay like that. Editing this page made me realize that you don’t have to be an expert to improve something. Sometimes, just spending a bit of time and effort makes the page noticeably better. It’s not a big deal, but it feels good to leave a mark that shows you actually cared. 

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