Week14 -- My Wikipedia Editing Experience This Week --WU WENHAO
The page in question was related to urban policy in China, and I had proposed adding a section on recent zoning reforms. While my edit was well-sourced and neutral in tone, another editor promptly reverted it, claiming it was "undue weight" for a single policy change. At first, I felt frustrated—especially since I had spent hours reviewing academic literature to frame the paragraph objectively.
Instead of re-editing the page impulsively, I decided to bring the matter to the article’s Talk page, outlining my rationale and asking for feedback. To my surprise, the response was not hostile but constructive. The other editor explained that while the content itself was valid, placing it in the “History” section may have disrupted the article’s structural flow. They even suggested adding it instead under a new subsection titled “Recent Developments.”
This small interaction taught me two valuable lessons. First, Wikipedia is not just a platform for writing—it's a space for negotiating meaning. Edits aren't simply accepted or rejected; they are discussed, reworked, and integrated through a collaborative lens. Second, I realized that humility and willingness to communicate can turn disagreement into co-authorship.
Eventually, we co-edited a version of the content that both of us found appropriate, and I saw it stay on the page—this time, not as “my” edit, but as a shared contribution. That shift in mindset—from ownership to collaboration—is something I’ll carry into all future edits.
Through this experience, I gained a deeper appreciation for Wikipedia’s ethos: not just building knowledge, but doing so together. Going forward, I hope to engage more actively in Talk pages, especially when addressing sensitive or controversial topics. After all, encyclopedic writing is not just about what we know—but how we arrive at agreement on what’s worth knowing.
Comments
Post a Comment